'Infrastructure 2026' report part one

Image: View of Anglesey, where LDA Design is working at Wylfa on GBE - N's first small modular reactor (SMR) pathfinder project, joining a team with Arup, TÜV SÜD Nuclear Technologies, Mace and Gleeds - courtesy Great British Energy - Nuclear / GBE - N.

Introduction

Following the King's Speech on 13th May, Future Cities Forum is releasing its 'Infrastructure 2026' report part one, with contributions from the National Infrastructure & Service Transformation Authority, Grimshaw, The Northern Powerhouse Partnership and LDA Design.

The insights are drawn from a discussion held by Future Cities Forum and hosted by architects, Grimshaw, at their London studios, where the issues of public-private financing of infrastructure, place-making, nuclear related projects and transport were debated.

Grimshaw is well known for its well-received infrastructure projects both in the UK and around the world, having worked on HS2 Colne Valley Viaduct, London's Elizabeth Line (as part of the line-wide consortium of Atkins, Grimshaw, GIA Equation and Maynard, interfacing with different design teams across the 10 central stations, playing a unique role: developing a line-wide strategy that conceptually and functionally binds together the distinct stations along the network). and EcoPark North London Heat and Power Project. Partner Kirsten Lees spoke about its appointment to design the redevelopment of Cringle Dock Waste Transfer Station which sits in the Nine Elms Regeneration Area, adjacent to the newly developed Battersea Power Station and Grimshaw's Chris Patience, described the issues around place-making of data centres.

A key announcement in the King's Speech, is the introduction of a Highways (Financing) Bill, with a new model of finance for major road infrastructure, enabling greater private sector investment with the aim to avoid long-standing funding gaps and reducing risk for investors. NISTA's Director of Infrastructure, Enterprise and Growth, Jon Loveday commented at our forum:

'Quite often investors say that they want to do more. I think that genuinely the positive thing that I've seen over the last few years is a change in how we look at the long term. So the first thing that NISTA was asked to publish altogether in a very short space of time was a 10 year infrastructure strategy and the purpose of that was the first step in giving certainty across a number of different sectors to the market, both from a supply chain, from employment and from an investor point of view.'

The UK government has also proposed a 'Energy Independence Bill' to support the transitioning away from fossil fuels to alternative forms of energy including nuclear. LDA Design joined Future Cities Forum's debate to talk about its work with Arup, TÜV SÜD Nuclear Technologies, Mace and Gleeds in support of Great British Energy – Nuclear’s first small modular reactor (SMR), a pathfinder project destined for Wylfa on Anglesey.

The Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) Bill was also announced last week. It has been known as the High-Speed Rail Bill, and has a budget of up to £45 billion.

The Northern Powerhouse Partnership's CEO Henri Murison told Future Cities Forum at its discussion event:

'NISTA has worked with us and the NIC before on our investment projects in our city regions and on Northern Powerhouse Rail and on some of the significant road investments. And I think that clearly the North of England has a prioritised list of projects broadly, both at the city region level and across the north of England. Based on the NISTA's advice, government has taken a three-stage approach to delivering NPR alongside working with Department of Transport.

'That's the main thing the NISTA has done since it was created in its new form in the last year. And I would say that broadly everyone in the north of England supports the approach that's been taken. Of course, we would want to deliver some of the links across the Pennines, perhaps, and be a bit more ambitious. But the framework and the scope for doing that is still there, but within a kind of a framework that enables for that discussion to happen. So I'm broadly very positive about the role of the infrastructure policy and how it's playing out here.'

Image: Lower Thames Crossing and A2 / M2 junction - courtesy Highways UK / Department for Transport

New models of financing infrastructure

NISTA's Jon Loveday began the discussion by talking about how it has been looking at the 'long term' for managing infrastructure projects:

'Look, it's not perfect by a long shot, It spans two parliaments, but when we're talking about infrastructure, we probably want to have a 50, 60 year plan. So this was tying government policy up to longer than just the normal political cycle.

'The second step that we've undertaken is the pipeline. July last year we published the first iteration of the infrastructure pipeline. Government has produced pipelines in the past. They haven't been very good. There have been two years of pretty accurate data and then eight years of guesses and algorithms to work out what we think will be spent. The new pipeline that was issued in July, we published the update to that on the 9th of March this year, and we'll publish every six months a continual pipeline update. It is very different.

'Every project that is on there is not guaranteed to go, but we are confident if it's going, that it's not a wish list, and that's why the value of the projects that are on the pipeline never equates to the £725 billion - that's in the 10 year infrastructure strategy. If we can't see the funding, if we can't see that project is legitimate and it's a hope or a wish of somebody, then we won't put it on. The pipeline has grown from £525 billion in July to now 718 billion in this release. But it's not just public funded project. It's got all of the utility spend in there, a number of major privately financed schemes.

'What it doesn't do is answer the question around where is public finance, where is the public and private finance. It does identify where are the opportunities. The government is looking at private finance policy at the moment and looking at areas where with private finance it makes sense to be used, but also where it is cheaper and better value for money for the public sector.'

Jon was asked about the issue of handing back on the cost of energy infrastructure to the public, through higher charges to their bills.

Jon replied:

'I think it's a live debate, and it's not just energy, it's all utilities, it's water as well. It's how do we fund, how do we most efficiently fund the infrastructure demand that is needed. So I think the 10-year infrastructure strategy is very clear around what is needed. And the idea with the strategy is it's refreshed every two years, it's not rewritten, but it's always got that 10-year outlook. But there are significant funding, well not funding actually, affordability challenges.

'Across energy, across water, across infrastructure generally. If we look at social infrastructure, which again the 10-year infrastructure strategy covers, it's looking at not just capital investment in economic and social infrastructure, but also the operational and maintenance and renewal spend that is needed. Because we tend to go to the new shiny, how are we going to pay for these things, but actually with a whole system that most sectors we deal with has had an element of underfunding for a considerable period of time.'

Jon was then asked to comment on the issue of ageing infrastructure. He said:

'It is ageing infrastructure, but some of the models that we know today on how we pay for things possibly won't be fit for purpose going forward. So I'll give one example. We've got nine reservoirs to build in the UK, and we haven't built a reservoir for 30 odd years. Current model is that local customers have to pay for those reservoirs. So that works when Thames Water are building a nice big shiny one in Abingdon because they've got 15 million customers to help pay for that. It works on Thames Tideway very well. It doesn't work in Cambridge.'

The issue about abandoning the Hartree project in Cambridge, because of the lack of water facility, and how that has potentially affected the growth of life sciences in the city, was then put to Jon: He commented:

'There is a significant shift in the behaviour of how the government is looking at infrastructure and looking at supporting growth projects. And there are a number of different forums that are now in train. There's the Home and Economic Affairs Committee, which is a subcommittee of the Cabinet and it's a Prime Minister initiative where half of the big delivery departments come together. But we look every month at the major growth projects and how is government coming together to unlock the challenges of things like Heathrow and OxCam and New Towns, a major infrastructure investment. How is that process being looked at and unblocked? And perhaps one of the good examples was Universal Studios because that was pushed through the planning cycle at an incredibly fast pace for government. There was lots of intervention, lots of different departments working very closely together because there was an opportunity to get significant investment into the UK.'

The problem that the Leader of Milton Keynes City Council, Cllr Marland, has had with providing a proper bus service to the Universal site was raised with Jon:

'I think with things like Universal, but there's going to be phased how that is developed in the infrastructure because there are plans for the road infrastructure, for the rail infrastructure that will support the 8 to 9 million visitors that are expected on that. My understanding is a lot of the initial transportation will be via Milton Keynes through bus and coach terminals but I think that's a live discussion. But there are absolutely plans to support the rail infrastructure.'

Alister Kratt, Director, LDA Design who joined the debate asked Jon whether a change of government over the next few years might put a stop to these projects. Jon stated:

'In part. So one of the biggest challenges we had a few years ago was the cancellation of Phase 2 of HS2, the cancellation of the A303 and there was another road project that slipped my mind. But there was a whole spate of major cancellations. That spooked not only the infrastructure market but also the investor market, the uncertainty around Thames Water there. So a lot of effort has been invested in how do we get longer term sectoral plans to give the market certainty, give investors as much certainty as is available. Wars start, there are always things that happen.

'But the intent of the 10 year infrastructure strategy and the pipeline working in combination is that this is what is committed to over a longer period of time and always with a 10 year horizon. So it is looking to provide that certainty. I get lots of organisations wanting to put projects in there because they think if they can get the project into the pipeline they'll get funded. And that's not the way it works. So we have got a high bar for getting both public and private sector projects in there. Because if we don't think it's going to happen we won't put it in. Or on things like Sizewell, we knew at one point it had £7 billion of funding so we put £7 billion in. We hadn't put the full £38-40 billion. But now that full funding is in there because that point is reached.'

Alister commented:

'It's like local authority in terms of what we have got, the recycling plant at Teddington and the local council where their main vote for us is we are against this, we will put a stop to this, we will make it as hard as possible for Thames to develop. This is like a major infrastructure drought sort of project. But that's whether it goes through a DCO process or local.

'I think one of the changes really with the ten year strategy, the pipeline used to be a list of projects that had no relationship to anything or each other. I think the ten year strategy starts to assemble the benefits of aggregation of activity so that there is a momentum building that leads to wider outcomes and hopefully project behaviours that allow things to be joined up.

'So I think the drive towards increased spatial planning, resurgence of spatial planning has a really critical role to actually get the flywheel turning in areas and you don't just have a stand-alone project by a private sector promoter but actually the benefits of that associated with heating a hospital, growing a community or improving road junctions or rail transport connected with new towns. It's encouraging joined up thinking and that does require behavioural change at all levels and I think the local government reorganisation and the work that NISTA are doing in support of that is mission critical because it hopefully will release those opportunities and lead to joined up thinking.

Image: HS2 Colne Valley Viaduct - Grimshaw for ALIGN JV

Infrastructure and higher leadership skills

Alister was asked when he is working on such projects whether he had to 'coach' people into taking a better leadership outlook? He said:

'I think as time goes on you realise that actually much of what we're involved with is about behaviour and if people do go into a project without a collaborative mindset and that's from a client sponsor all the way through to consultants playing their part, the project will never fully fly unless it's a truly collaborative endeavour and people are prepared to listen to each other. We all have different things to share and learn from and the lessons learnt on any major project, whether it's HS2 or Sizewell or whatever, there does need to be a transfer of that knowledge to allow betterment to occur. So yes, there is behaviour. I think we all owe it to each other to mind our behaviour and it certainly is, as far as I'm concerned, a critical part of how we move forward. Collaboration is a critical part of making a success of this.'

Suez UK's Chief Technical Development and Innovation Officer Stuart Hayward-Higham commented on the need to help local authorities minimise costs to taxpayers via projects and incentives that get people to be more collaborative:

'We have to do a lot of coaching. I think the test is different for significant infrastructure because I think there's a minded approach that everyone needs to get going. Universal Studios as well has to pull together because it's so big. A lot of our infrastructure is like Google Docs, it's embedded, it's incremental, it's other principles. So therefore you have to have a different social licence in the process. You have to work with the authority about facing it, making it human a little bit and then trying to work a way of, I forget how many times I've done it, on some of the infrastructure where you're relying on other steps.

'The best example on that is electrification of our fleet. So our collection trucks do small trips, relatively small trips, but they're local trips in the journey and we have to park them up for 45 minutes in the middle of their round for the driver to charge them. But there is nothing in infrastructure for that last mile charging. We don't go on motorways so therefore when I've talked to the affiliate head of the charging infrastructure it's either with car chargers where you can't fit a truck in a car charger or it's not a national infrastructure.

'So we sit always in intermediate and that's where the local authority can bring it in. If we've got a charging outlet where we can park our trucks up mid-round and do their driver hours and get 45 minute charge, which means we accelerate our adoption, it takes away the depot, the selfish power bit. So we can energise our depot, well in theory we can do, but then we can't make it available to other people because we need to secure and other bits and bobs. It's a very private asset. If you take capacity of the grid where actually our trucks are out, they're either parked up or they're out. They spend very little time doing anything different. So when they're out could other people use it so you don't go well actually all the other last mile delivery companies etc could use that infrastructure.

'There isn't a kind of a government integration department that goes okay well how do we bring all these people together. Okay let's have something here that fits, makes space for, that can do caravans, it can do whatever else it does to drive it. And then with the authority of income there's a route to growth. Because if you've got a set of drivers parked up for 45 minutes, what are they going to need? Toilets? Drinks? So you think all the associated infrastructure that comes with that becomes a centre. Same with the caravans. So you start to then look beyond our core infrastructure into something else. It was interesting that I think Eupen made a point on people love kit. So we send three big rail transfer operations we do. So London to Bristol, Manchester, Manchester, Manchester and then Merseyside to Newcastle.

'The thing that people most love is the trains and the containers. There's containers of waste coming by. So what are you doing that engages, whereas a truck goes by I'm not interested particularly in that journey. So I think there is an inherent interest of humanising that part. I think the other thing we do, and I was over in Australia last year helping them, they're really interested in social licence attitudes that you have to get the local population to sign up to. And the human face of that is often things like reuse. They love their reuse shops, they want to come in, they want to do that process. So actually if you face your facility with something that's engaging that they can come in, demystifies it and embeds locally.

'There's often a why us again attitude, certainly for waste. But if you give them something back then actually it's not just money. I think the money helps but the money is expected now so it's not a bonus. And you only see it if your playground's been ejected or something like that. But if you can get last mile charging, if you can get a reuse centre where they're selling and trading and we get loads of traders. We've added nine shops this year so far so we'll be 50 by the year end. You get a whole infrastructure of people that are coming in to buy stuff, to upgrade and then trade so you become part of the local economy. And that drives all the other activities that the authority wants which is driving other incomes and other jobs and other processes. So there is an investment where you can take it and build it into something that's more integrated I think. But there's a struggle that it's not big enough to be big and it's not small enough to be small. So it's that really weird point.'

Image: Henri Murison, CEO of The Northern Powerhouse Partnership on screen at Future Cities Forum's discussion.

Infrastructure and serving The North

Henri Murison was asked about the announcement of the third road investment strategy including upgrades to the A66 northern trans-Pennine route, critical for freight and links to international ports and whether the investment was appropriate for the ambitions of politicians in the North of England. He stated:

'I mean I would say I think that the role and advice that NISTA provides based on the former role of the NIC, I was sat in Leeds, one of NISTA's homes outside London, obviously they have a presence also in Birmingham. I don't think that the NISTA and the work it builds on from the NIC has been anything but helpful to the north of England. I think if you're trying to take a place-based approach to investment then clearly having an up-to-date and well-maintained infrastructure pipeline, bringing together some of the functions of the infrastructure projects authority probably wasn't performing as well as it could have done. Bringing them together with the functions of the NIC and some new functions from government can only be a good thing and I think in practice it will take time for that institution to bed in.

'But what is still in flight clearly is lots of work that has been based in government on the previous recommendations of the NIC. So the NIC had made recommendations about the case for northern powerhouse rails for the former government which very much have influenced that project. And I think that if you were to look at road investment, clearly the north of England and other parts of the country will not get every particular piece of infrastructure they could ever want at any time. But have we now got a better way of rationally allocating monies both to significant upgrades but also to key maintenance schemes within the Department of Transport? I would think that probably is a better approach than the one we've had in the past. Is the quantum of investment if you only rely on central government funding and traditional borrowing going to be enough to meet all of our infrastructure needs across the country? No it isn't. That's why it's so positive that for Lower Thames Crossing, which is particularly important for the wider Thames Estuary region and the greater South East in particular, that that funding is being delivered through a different mechanism. And that's really positive.

'I just don't think if we relied only on central government funding in the traditional way we could deliver that or we could deliver Euston. So I'm really positive about not only the NISTA's role in helping to prioritise and to give key advice to Treasury, but I can point to lots of examples of things that the NIC have done over the years that are only now being shown to have benefit. Because these things take a long time. It's not like the government's approach to infrastructure policy is something you can remake in the years since the NISTA was created. So I think based on the work that Becky and the team are doing, I've got nothing but confidence that working together we can achieve significant things for this country.'

Henri was then asked that considering there is a need to unlock the economy up in the north and create some 850,000 jobs, whether he had a wish list for NISTA?

'I think you could say that there's things we could think about. Our response is not to argue with a prioritised list but to say, well, around the fringes, could private funding and finance help you move some of these things up the list slightly, but the broad principle that we have a list and that it's broadly funded and there's a development pipeline. We're spending currently a billion pounds in this spending review period on delivering the early stages of Northern Powerhouse Rail.

'There's an £11 billion TRU project. It's still being finished off across the Pennines. I'm not really sure what I should whinge about because it makes sense. I'm happy to talk about it, but I think broadly that's a sensible approach.'

'We would say that some of the investment that's being made in the wider energy transition is obviously having huge benefits here in the north of England because of a lot of the grid reinforcement by national grids, a lot of the other projects that are underway are huge employers and drivers of value in the northern economy and are helping connect projects to the grids that have themselves significantly coming benefits. I think on buses, I mean, we recently, alongside Oliver Poppard, supported the launch of the People's Network in South Yorkshire. I'm sitting in West Yorkshire where we have the Weaver Network. Whatever my views on the branding that's chosen, I agree with the principle of that decision. And this builds on areas like Greater Manchester who have already rolled out bus franchising.

'So, I mean, for the first time, we now have big northern cities taking control of their public transport systems and, importantly, integrating bus with other major... So, in the case of Greater Manchester, we have rail devolution on the Hope Valley lines into the High Peak that will significantly improve the connectedness of journeys across rail and bus, as well as integration with tram. So, I think I would broadly say, of course, we need to find the money to subsidise buses because we don't necessarily have a sustainable method for doing that in this country. But the principle that we're giving control of our bus networks back to the public transport system, to city regions, to be able to maximise the value of them, I'd say that that's broadly the right policy. So, I think there's a challenge about how we pay for it all, but the policy context is probably the right one.'

Jon brought up the important topic of the spatial planning approach:

'What's driving a lot of the discussion and the strategy and the planning is the spatial planning approach. And it's more than just an approach now because we have a real live spatial planning team. Effectively, we've modelled all of the demand scenario, let's say a number of demand scenarios on water between now and 2050. And then it's got a national map and that is driving the decisions on prioritisation, where industrial sites are going.

'So, we're looking at data centre locations, we're looking at new town locations. Rather than decisions previously that have been made on political grounds, they've been based on information on where are they likely to be delivered over a realistic short-term time frame. So, I'm really encouraged by just a year of doing this. It's the benefit of being able to see the social infrastructure, the economic infrastructure, the energy infrastructure to identify the needs that are required to deliver place-based solutions. It really is fantastic. It's a fantastic tool and it is driving so much now in government decision-making. I think that's the one single thing that will have the biggest impact of everything that currently is being done.'

Image: Data centres and the city: Grimshaw unveils civic infrastructure installation at the Architettura Biennale 2025 (photography by Peter Bennetts)

Data centre infrastructure and planning needs:

Chris Patience, Principal at Grimshaw was brought into the conversation to talk about planning and the place-based approach around data centres. He said:

'Historically, I think data centres are generally seen on individual sites. They are very much isolated developments. They're becoming much more campus-based, multi-site sort of developments. So, I think that's moving in the right direction. But I think most data centres you see in the news, online, are broadly sort of very much black, grey boxes, sitting in the outskirts of cities or rural areas. I think they're starting to gravitate slightly nearer to urban centres, which I believe will require, better design.

'A greater understanding of how they integrate with sort of communities is coming along. But I think understanding how they weave into sort of those infrastructure loops is also helpful. So, you know, you've got the amount of heat that they export, you know, energy. In fact, actually, a lot of operators are now starting to look at whether or not they generate their own energy as opposed to depending fully on sort of power connections. And then, obviously, water integration. I think it's starting to move very slowly in the right direction in terms of thinking about them as sort of as part of the system.'

Chris was asked about the complexities of the planning system and how that needed to change:

'I really sympathise with planners because, you know, consenting a data centre is not like consenting a commercial development or another use. It's so fundamental to this location. As soon as a data centre moves in, it can change the fabric of the location, you know, whether that's jobs, whether that's all of those resources that I mentioned. And now the scale of them are so enormous, they're really transforming locations. It's a multi-faceted decision. I don't think planners on their own can make these decisions. You know, a lot of it's about infrastructure. Connectivity, you know, futures, modelling of scenarios. And also it hasn't even got a use class. It's designated as sort of logistics, but fundamentally, data centres are the new utility for our country.

'But I suppose at local authority level, it's about trying to sort of converge a lot of departments together in that decision-making process. It's now critical national infrastructure. I don't think at the moment what that means is super clear, other than the fact that, you know, if the local authority opposes the development, it can then get passed up the chain for national approval. But I think a clear understanding of what a data centre should be providing, you know, going back to the discussion about community value, the fact that actually, as a minimum, your data centre should be providing other things other than just an operational hub. So I think, it is trying to define what good design is and what these buildings can offer.'

Henri commented:

'I'm listening with real interest, because clearly we have got a number of significant data centres in particular that are coming forward, some of them with grid connections, because of the particular issue of grid capacity, and it appears it is more of a southern problem. We have plenty of places with pretty chunky grid connections where you don't have to build any new infrastructure. Thinking of particularly Drax Power Station, for example, and some other former power station sites in that kind of northern growth corridor, do you mean where grid connection is just not an issue? And in fact, you've probably got existing power stations, you don't have to build a new gas-fired one. So I think there is a huge opportunity. I think the government's broader approach is kind of thinking about having AI growth zones, obviously we've already had one designated in the northeast, and this is very sensible because it thinks about the role that data centres can play as economic enablers.

'If data centres are simply displacing other more productive uses of sites, because obviously these are not massive employment centres, then there would be an economic disbenefit to developing them in certain locations. And one challenge is if you are, thinking about the very significant power requirements, putting them in the wrong places can also be very disruptive in terms of requiring grid infrastructure that could be better deployed to meet other priorities. So I think my view would be that data centres are a potentially significant opportunity for the UK economy, but you only have to look at Ireland to see how to do it wrong. So there is a mechanism where data centres can underpin wider, you know, regeneration. You can think about the opportunities for them to support potential innovation activity. For example, the Northern, the North Yorkshire proposition for data centres is supported by, not only by York University, but by Sheffield and Hull. Huge opportunities to capitalise more widely on the development of these if it is done right.

'But my cautionary tale would be that if we take a market led approach and allow people to put these anywhere they want, and let them, and then sort of skew all of our grid development to meet their requirements rather than the wider needs of the economy, then I think that would be a missed opportunity. And I think that certainly the big examples we've already got in the north of England, there are some good examples of where these have been put in the right places and developed in ways that have locked wider growth. But it's not just a universal good that someone wants to deploy one of these somewhere. If it's in the wrong place with the wrong technology choice around it, then it could end up being quite unhelpful. So I think those would be my cautionary points, really, about the old CapEx is good CapEx.

'The UK needs to be quite discerning about how it directs the investment to both give investors what they need, but also to get maximum value. For example, the heat that you produce from these data centres could and should be very positively used. I think in the North Yorkshire case I mentioned, we've got some old greenhouses that used to grow tomatoes, for example. If you could use the heat for that, that's all the better. But if you don't think through the opportunities and the risks of where you put these and simply do it based on where it might make, be the easiest for the developer, I think that could end up not being particularly helpful, particularly because these can help, the use class is able to snap up pretty much any site it wants based on valuations because the developers of these projects, can afford more than anyone else can for industrial logistics sites. Well, you then need to be really purposeful and don't displace other important industrial logistics uses that might be more suitable for certain locations.'

Image: Sizewell C nuclear power station Suffolk - LDA Design

The place-based approach to nuclear

The dicussion moved on to Alister being asked to comment on the Great British Energy nuclear project in Anglesey that LDA Design is carrying out and the value of that master plan. He suggested:

'I think with all change, it needs to be paced and technology needs to be understood. And I think most of the designers around the table cherish the opportunity to work on first of its kind opportunity. I think the small nuclear reactor programme is, in its infancy, there is something really elegant about plug and play and offsite fabrication and conceptually shipping something in that's 95% ready, putting a big plug in the ground and saying go and actually preparing a site to allow that to happen with potentially multiple operators. Certainly there's a commitment, as I currently understand it, for three Rolls-Royce reactors to come to Wylfa, but actually the site has been enabled for more than that. And they may not necessarily be Rolls-Royce.

'They may well be other technology providers, as I understand it at the moment. I think the culture of Wales is really interesting. I think the kind of development of culture in the UK, in terms of understanding what these types of changes mean, society is ever on the increase, which I think is great, places greater demands on government in the way they plan, hence the benefits, I think, of regional spatial planning and doing what my 30-year-old sons would say, why on earth isn't this stuff joined up? It's illogical. Why has it all happened so chaotically and by market rather than sort of centralised thinking? I think the peculiarities of Wales are maybe two or threefold, if I may.

'Firstly, there's a very, very strong sense of identity in Wales, which needs to be understood. And an empathy associated with how you engage with bringing new things in. A lot of that really is predicated on legacy, positive and negative. Wales, as I've written before on the matter, has a legacy of relatively rapacious activity. Forests being planted for shipbuilding reservoirs, for water supply for England, not for Wales. And I think Wales has taken a view on renewable energy more generally, that if the sun shines in Wales and it's going to be captured by solar panels in Wales, then that energy belongs to Wales. And there is something very lovely about that conceptually. How you make national infrastructure local is really important. I think Anglesey, and we were talking earlier about Leicester and Sizewell and that relationship, Anglesey is, broadly speaking, pleased to receive nuclear technology and the link's legacy. Because it provides employment, it identifies itself as energy island, and it has an identified role that it believes that it can perform. And there is a local policy that reinforces that, that's been a lot of early pilot work to actually inform an understanding of what is the community's expectation.

'So my hope is, in terms of the master planning, that it's not only integrating it into the natural environment, which is going to be critical. But actually, more often than not, it's the associated development surrounding these projects, actually how you build it, for how long, and actually what are all the other bits and pieces that actually allow it to be built. And we were looking a little bit earlier about, you know, the train line coming into Sizewell, you know, bringing all the loads of goods in. But the footprint of these projects, whilst the footprint of the SMR projects are about two football pitches each, so we're talking about, you know, six football pitches, but the actual footprint of everything around it is many, many times greater than that in terms of the ancillary functions. And it's actually the control of the totality of the project, not just the beautiful shiny thing that is so important.

'And going back to the collaboration point, that in an engineering environment where there may be disproportionate levels of focus on the shiny thing, because it's a very complex piece of engineering, it's a very complex piece of technology that needs huge amounts of security and provision, a lot of the other stuff could be considered ancillary, but in actual fact, it's likely to be that that would destroy a placemaking outcome and actually cause many of the delays and problems. I often say, we do a lot of work on offshore wind, stuff that's 15 kilometres offshore and experiences the bend of the curvature of the earth, and you can hardly see it once, you know, you're standing on the shore. The thumbprint of substation landing gear in local communities is the thing that really hurts. And I think that's where the master planning process for Wilfa will become so important. It's actually how we manage all of the associated pieces rather than the siting of the buildings, which is going to be important. And there's a contextual relationship with the magnificence, call it what you may, of the Magnox installation there.

Finally, Alister was asked to comment on whether the right kind of collaboration and at the right level was taking place with communities. Whether they are being given sufficient information to make informed decisions about accepting infrastructure in their areas? He said:

'We've yet really to understand the level of engagement that's already happened with GB Energy. They're already up and running. There is always the imposition of consultants coming and thinking they know best, and we have to be mindful of that.'

Future Cities Forum's 'Infrastructure 2026' report part two will be published shortly.

Image: exterior of Grimshaw's London studio on the Clerkenwell Road, near Farringdon Station