The Assistant Director of Planning has decided to award a contract for project management consultancy for the Mansfield District Local Plan review to ensure timely delivery and soundness of the plan.

URL: https://mansfield.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=2018

Decision Maker: Assistant Director of Planning (Chief Planning Officer)

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose: To procure a suitably qualified and experienced project management consultant (Keith Keeley) through the direct award route to support the development of Mansfield District Council’s emerging Local Plan as it reaches the regulation 19 Publication Consultation Stage during September 2026 and then submission of the plan (regulation 22 stage) by no later than the end of December 2026.

Content: Project Management Consultancy for Mansfield District Local Plan Review   That the contract for project management consultancy for the Mansfield District Local Plan review is awarded to the successful contractor via a direct award as detailed in the attached exempt appendix, noting that a contract exemption form has been completed by the relevant Assistant Director. The Legal Services Manager be authorised to negotiate, finalise and complete all necessary legal agreements and other documents to give effect to the above   The key requirement of the commission is to provide a Critical Friend Project Manager to: ·       Sense check the Mansfield Local Plan review programme of tasks established to date. ·       Review the evidence collection tasks in the Smartsheet software programme for timeliness and critical path / sequence programming ·       Identify gaps, risks and additional actions in respect of tasks and evidence collection for timely delivery of the plan ·       Provide a mentoring role based on past and present experience with other Local Authorities to assist the plan being found sound ·       Free up planning policy officers to undertake the tasks required to complete the timely delivery of the plan.    The contractor has extensive experience in regeneration and local plan work for local authorities and provided a similar role in the preparation of the now adopted Mansfield Local Plan. The contractor is currently working on a consultancy basis for a number of other local authorities seeking to submit their Local Plans by December 2026 giving a wide range of experience and insights. It is considered the contractor’s input is required for up to 2 days a week initially, before moving a to a one day a week support approach as the work progresses. The Council is close to finalising preparation of the Regulation 19 stage of plan preparationunder the current plan making regulations. This version of the Local Plan should be the Council’s final version before it is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) acting for the Secretary of State (regulation 22 stage) for an Examination in Public (EIP). The government has made clear that the transitional plan making arrangements under the Levelling Up & Regeneration Act (LURA) will come to an end on the 31st December 2026. Plans prepared after that date will need to follow the new plan making procedure. It is anticipated based on advice from the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) that it’s possible an approximately 2-year delay could ensue should the deadline for submission by 31 December 2026 be missed and the new procedure followed. Such a delay could cause a range of other evidence collected to date, to go out of date with additional costs to then update. The Adopted Local Plan 2013 - 2033 will also continue to lose relevance as it becomes further out of date resulting in a loss of weight in decision making and consequently the higher risk of decisions being made on a national policy basis rather than at the local level. In order to submit to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) the emerging Mansfield Local Plan by 31st December 2026, it is estimated that the regulation 19 plan needs to be in draft form by mid-July and published by 18th August in order to go through the appropriate committee processes for consideration by Overview & Scrutiny, Portfolio Holder and then by Full Council by the 15th September 2026 for consultation commencement on the week commencing 21st September 2026. It is proposed subsequent submission of the plan is by the week commencing 21st December 2026. It is considered that in order to meet this challenging timescale and to prepare a local plan that is considered sound at the Examination in Public (EIP), good project management and critical friend assessment is essential for delivery. Part of the reasoning is that a wide range of tasks and evidence collection is coming together at approximately the same time to inform the plan. The freeing up of planning policy officers to deliver the necessary local plan content by drafting and refining the local plan polices and strategy based on the various studies is therefore now at a critical stage. It is considered by appointing the contractor to the role, the planning policy officers will be able to the complete the content of the plan to the timetable indicated in a sound as way as possible for Examination. Having regard to the above timelines, a direct award approach is considered necessary in order for the work to be done in time and for the contractor’s input to be meaningful in terms of achieving delivery. i)               For an officer (s) to undertake the work. However, it has been identified through project management programming and a review of risks in delivering the plan to timetable that there would be a very significant risk of officers being diverted off their other plan preparation tasks by this work and then failing to deliver the plan within the prescribed regulatory deadline and government deadline under the ‘legacy’ transitional plan making arrangements.   ii)             Not to do the necessary project management or receive critical friend assessment in respect of delivery. It is considered that the risk would be high of project failure in terms of delivery with this approach. With so many tasks and evidential areas to pull together in a short period of time, matters such as critical path analysis and sense checking of realistic delivery times for tasks needed sequentially will be critical to successful delivery.    iii)           To do further soft market testing with other companies able to offer project management services. Consideration has been given to this option but the capability of other businesses to be able to do this specific task at the time required is not known and so would potentially require soft market testing via a framework approach or by officers undertaking detailed research with companies in the wider planning and or project management field. This work would lead to potentially significant delays in commencement of the work with the risk of no better outcome than the position established to date. This is particularly the case given that the contractor was used by the Council some 11 years ago when a plan was prepared successfully and it is known the contractor has a respected track record with the work done with a number of other authorities preparing their Local Plans. iv)            For an officer (s) to undertake the work. However, it has been identified through project management programming and a review of risks in delivering the plan to timetable that there would be a very significant risk of officers being diverted off their other plan preparation tasks by this work and then failing to deliver the plan within the prescribed regulatory deadline and government deadline under the ‘legacy’ transitional plan making arrangements.   v)             Not to do the necessary project management or receive critical friend assessment in respect of delivery. It is considered that the risk would be high of project failure in terms of delivery with this approach. With so many tasks and evidential areas to pull together in a short period of time, matters such as critical path analysis and sense checking of realistic delivery times for tasks needed sequentially will be critical to successful delivery.    vi)           To do further soft market testing with other companies able to offer project management services. Consideration has been given to this option but the capability of other businesses to be able to do this specific task at the time required is not known and so would potentially require soft market testing via a framework approach or by officers undertaking detailed research with companies in the wider planning and or project management field. This work would lead to potentially significant delays in commencement of the work with the risk of no better outcome than the position established to date. This is particularly the case given that the contractor was used by the Council some 11 years ago when a plan was prepared successfully and it is known the contractor has a respected track record with the work done with a number of other authorities preparing their Local Plans.  

Date of Decision: July 16, 2026