Before examining specific material considerations, it’s important to understand that planning consultees participate at different stages of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and planning process. Their feedback plays a crucial role in identifying risks, shaping assessments, and informing final decisions — just as specialist doctors and technicians inform each stage of a health diagnosis and treatment plan. A good planning decision, like a safe medical procedure, depends on thorough checks, qualified input, and a clear understanding of the patient — in this case, the community and its environment.
Currently, it appears EHDC does not publish a formal methodology or checklist to determine which consultees should be engaged at which stage. Selection is made on a case-by-case basis by planning officers, guided by statutory requirements, experience, internal guidance, and discretionary judgment. While this allows for professional flexibility, it also introduces risk of inconsistency. (As of writing, it appears no formal EHDC framework has been published online for how ‘relevance to the development’ is determined — source: EHDC planning portal and policy pages, April 2025.)
🧭 Types of Consultees by Stage:
📊 Why EHDC Should Adopt a Transparent Consultee Relevance Policy
Currently, it appears EHDC relies on officer judgment and internal precedent to decide whether a consultee is “relevant to the development.” Without clear criteria, this creates inconsistencies, potential unfairness, and missed environmental or infrastructure risks. To strengthen this process, EHDC should adopt a formal Consultee Relevance Scoring Matrix, aligned with both legal obligations and site-specific impact.
This scoring model would:
- ✅ Standardise when non-statutory consultees are triggered
- ✅ Improve public transparency and trust
- ✅ Reduce legal vulnerability (e.g. Judicial Review)
- ✅ Ensure consistent consideration of cumulative and sensitive site pressures
| Impact Trigger | Example Criteria | Suggested Score | Relevant Consultee(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flood Risk or Surface Water Drainage | Site falls in Flood Zone or shows surface runoff risk | 3 (automatic) | Environment Agency, LLFA |
| Highways Access or Safety | Adjacent to classified road, access concerns raised by Highways Officer | 2–3 | Local Highways Authority, National Highways |
| Heritage or Archaeology | Near listed building, conservation area, or archaeology site | 3 (automatic) | Historic England |
| Biodiversity or Habitat Impact | Within/adjacent to SSSI, SAC, ancient woodland, green infrastructure | 3 (automatic) | Natural England, EHDC Ecologist |
| Health Service Capacity | 50+ dwellings or catchment near full-capacity GP practices | 2–3 | NHS / ICB |
| Education Pressure | 30+ dwellings or known school place shortage | 2 | HCC Education |
| Cumulative Growth Pressure (5 years) | Area exceeds EHDC-defined % housing/population growth thresholds | 3 (automatic) | Multiple consultees (triggered via EIA or validation) |
| Wastewater, Sewage, Utilities Capacity | New discharge point, off-grid, or recent complaints in area | 2–3 | Southern Water / utility provider |
| Parish or Public Comment on Technical Risk | Credible concerns raised in formal representations | 1–2 | Relevant technical consultee (varies) |
Scoring Thresholds:
- 3 points = mandatory consultation
- 2 points = expected unless clearly justified otherwise
- 1 point = discretionary but should be documented if omitted
This would complement, not replace, the legal obligations already mapped in the following table:
To clarify how different consultees engage throughout the development process, the following matrix shows when each consultee typically participates — at EIA Screening, EIA Scoping, Full EIA (Environmental Statement), or the Planning Application stage.
A ✅ indicates statutory participation, ◻️ represents non-statutory but commonly expected practice, and ❌ shows no formal involvement at that stage. Notes clarify statutory duties, best practice roles, and site-sensitive involvement.
| Consultee | EIA Screening | EIA Scoping | Full EIA (ES) | Planning Application | Notes |
| Environment Agency (EA) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | Statutory where flood risk or water quality is involved |
| Natural England | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | Required where biodiversity or designated sites affected |
| Historic England | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | Statutory for heritage settings and archaeological impacts |
| Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | Statutory consultee for surface water/flooding |
| National Highways | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | ✅ (statutory) | Statutory for proposals affecting strategic roads |
| Local Highways Authority | ◻️ (non-statutory) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | Non-statutory but standard practice at all stages |
| EHDC Environmental Health | ◻️ (non-statutory) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | Assesses air, noise, amenity impacts |
| EHDC Ecologist / Wildlife Trust | ◻️ (non-statutory) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | ✅ (expected) | Local non-statutory consultees for biodiversity |
| Southern Water / Utility Providers | ◻️ (non-statutory) | ✅ (site-dependent) | ✅ (site-dependent) | ✅ (frequently engaged) | Non-statutory, often essential for capacity input |
| NHS / ICB | ◻️ (non-statutory) | ◻️ (best practice) | ◻️ (best practice) | ◻️ (routinely consulted) | Non-statutory at all stages; increasingly involved due to population growth and health service strain |
| HCC Education | ❌ (discretionary) | ◻️ (context-sensitive) | ◻️ (expected) | ◻️ (expected) | Non-statutory; engaged where school capacity is affected |
| EHDC Planning Policy / Urban Design | ❌ (internal) | ◻️ (required input) | ◻️ (required input) | ◻️ (required for compliance) | Internal consultee for policy/design compliance |
| Parish Councils | ❌ (not statutory) | ❌ (not statutory) | ◻️ (public comment) | ✅ (consulted by law) | Required to be consulted on applications; may comment on ES if published |
| General Public | ❌ (not included) | ❌ (not included) | ✅ (consultation required) | ✅ (consultation required) | Legal right to comment on ES and planning applications |
These stages build upon one another. For example, concerns raised at screening may lead to scoping input, which influences the depth of the Environmental Statement. Later, feedback on the full planning application must reflect and incorporate the evidence and conditions shaped through earlier stages.
When deciding whether to approve a development or request a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) must consider whether the proposal will cause significant impacts. These impacts must be understood through the lens of material planning considerations — legally recognised issues that affect the use and development of land in the public interest.
This table maps material considerations to the planning consultees who inform them, using a health check analogy to help clarify each role. Statutory and non-statutory consultee designations are also indicated, as well as their relevance to the screening and assessment process.
| Material Consideration | Relevant Consultee(s) | Mandatory Status | Health Analogy |
| 🚗 Traffic and Access | National Highways, Local Highways Authority | ✅ / ❌ (depending on road type) | 🦴 Orthopaedic / 💪 Musculoskeletal – ensure the body’s transport systems can move safely |
| 🌧️ Flood Risk | Environment Agency, Lead Local Flood Authority | ✅ Statutory | 💧 Vascular / 🩺 Kidney – prevent flooding and ensure water balance |
| 🌬️ Air and Water Quality | EA, Environmental Health, Natural England | ✅ / ❌ (depending on scope) | 🫁 Pulmonologist / Nephrologist – clean air and filtered water support systemic health |
| 🌿 Environmental Impact | Natural England, EHDC Ecologist, Wildlife Trust | ✅ / ❌ (varies by case and designation) | 🌬️ Respiratory / 🧬 Immune – detect environmental stress and defend against long-term harm |
| 🏥 Infrastructure and Services | NHS / ICB, HCC Education, Utility Providers | ❌ Non-statutory (best practice) | 🏥 Capacity planner / 🧒 Paediatrician – checks system load and growth readiness |
| 🧱 Heritage and Conservation | Historic England | ✅ Statutory | 🧠 Memory care specialist – protects long-term cultural identity |
| 🧍 Residential Amenity | EHDC Case Officer, Environmental Health | ❌ Non-statutory | 🛏️ Quality of life check – light, noise, smell, overbearing effects |
| 💼 Economic Impact | Economic Development Officer, Applicant | ❌ Non-statutory | 📈 Health economics – benefit vs risk analysis |
| 🏘️ Land Use (Site Suitability) | EHDC Planning Policy | ✅ (Development Plan must be used) | 🧾 Eligibility check – confirms if the land is suitable for this form of treatment |
| ⚖️ Local & National Planning Policy | EHDC Planning Officer | ✅ Required by law | 📋 Treatment protocol – ensures the surgery follows national health guidelines |
| 🎨 Design and Appearance | EHDC Urban Design / Planning Officer | ❌ Non-statutory | 👁️ Cosmetic specialist – ensures the development integrates aesthetically and functionally |
| 🔄 Sustainability | Planning Policy, Environment, Transport Teams | ❌ Emerging standard | 🧬 Preventative medicine – ensures long-term recovery, not just survival |
| 📣 Public Opinion | Public / Parish Councils | ✅ Publicity and participation required by law; material comments must be considered | 👪 Carers / family – provide lived experience and flag risks otherwise missed |
📣 Clarifying Public Involvement: Notification vs Consultation on EIA
For the General Public, it’s important to distinguish between two types of legal engagement:
- ✅ Must be notified (Planning Application Stage): This is a legal requirement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The local authority must publish or issue notices to inform residents of planning applications. The public then has a right to comment, and any material concerns must be considered.
- ✅ Must be consulted on the Environmental Statement (Full EIA): Under the EIA Regulations 2017, when a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required, the developer submits an Environmental Statement (ES). The public must be given at least 30 days to read and respond to the ES. These comments must be formally reviewed before a planning decision is made.
🔍 In short: Notification gives the public the right to speak; consultation on the ES gives them the right to respond to technical findings — both are legally required, but serve different purposes.
📘 Clarifying Terms: “Statutory” vs “Required by Law”
In planning and EIA contexts, both terms imply legal obligations, but they differ in scope:
- ✅ Statutory means the consultee is specifically named in legislation or regulations and must be consulted when relevant (e.g. Environment Agency, Historic England).
- ✅ Required by law refers more broadly to legally mandated processes (like public consultation or publication), not tied to any specific named consultee. It covers duties such as notifying the public of planning applications or consulting them on Environmental Statements.
In short: Statutory = a named organisation must be consulted.
Required by law = a process or outcome must happen under legal duty.
📚 Glossary of Acronyms
- EA – Environment Agency
- LLFA – Lead Local Flood Authority
- ICB – Integrated Care Board (NHS)
- SSSI – Site of Special Scientific Interest
- SAC – Special Area of Conservation
- HCC – Hampshire County Council
- EHDC – East Hampshire District Council
- LPA – Local Planning Authority
- EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
- ES – Environmental Statement
⚠️ Notes on Materiality and Legal Weight
- Public comments are only relevant if they relate to material considerations
- LPAs must publish reasoning when rejecting or accepting input that raises these issues
- Many consultees provide input under multiple headings, and the final judgment rests with the LPA
- While not all consultees are statutory, they often raise issues that have legal weight if ignored
This framework helps EHDC and other LPAs ensure that decisions are:
- ✅ Legally defensible
- ✅ Environmentally and socially responsible
- ✅ Aligned with both planning policy and real-world service capacity