A Practical Guide to Highway Authority Street Lighting Approval

If you’ve ever delivered a development that includes new roads, upgraded junctions or alterations to the public highway, you’ll know that street lighting approval can become one of the last obstacles before construction can progress.

It’s rarely because the lighting itself is particularly complicated.

More often, delays occur because the approval process is misunderstood.

Drawings are submitted without supporting calculations, local authority standards haven’t been considered, electrical information is incomplete, or the lighting design has been left until the final stages of the project. Before long, review comments begin to arrive, revisions are requested and programmes begin to slip.

At Designs for Lighting (DFL), we’ve worked with developers, consultants, contractors and local authorities across the UK for more than two decades. While every authority has its own preferences, the principles behind successful S38 and S278 lighting approvals are remarkably consistent.

This guide explains what highway authorities expect, the standards that underpin every design and, most importantly, how you can improve the chances of achieving approval first time.

Understanding the Difference Between S38 and S278

One of the biggest misconceptions is that Section 38 and Section 278 agreements require completely different lighting designs.

In reality, the engineering principles are largely the same. What changes is the design intent, S38 designs are more of a blank canvas where as S278 design is all about integrating and amending the existing. Done right, both can be very cost effective when designed properly.

A Section 38 Highway Agreement is generally used where a developer is constructing new roads that will eventually become part of the adopted highway network. Once complete, responsibility transfers to the local highway authority, meaning every element of the lighting installation must meet its technical and maintenance requirements.

A Section 278 Road Agreement, on the other hand, relates to works carried out on the existing public highway. This might include a new junction, a signalised crossing, an access road into a development, active travel improvements or alterations to an existing carriageway. Because these works directly affect existing highway assets, authorities understandably apply a rigorous technical approval process.

Whether you’re delivering an S38 or S278 scheme, the objective is exactly the same: to provide a safe, compliant and maintainable lighting installation that can be confidently adopted and operated for decades.

Street Lighting Approval Starts Long Before the Submission

One of the biggest lessons we’ve learnt over the years is that successful approvals rarely begin with the lighting calculations.

They begin much earlier.

By the time a lighting designer receives a completed highway layout, drainage design, utilities information, landscape proposals and retaining walls, many of the best lighting positions have already disappeared.

Columns suddenly clash with services.

Trees obstruct lighting distributions.

Visibility splays become compromised.

Ecological constraints limit lighting in sensitive areas.

Cycle routes require different lighting classes.

The result is often a compromise that nobody is entirely happy with.

The projects that progress most smoothly are those where lighting is considered alongside highways, drainage, landscape architecture and utilities from the very beginning. Good coordination almost always results in better designs, fewer technical queries and quicker approvals.

National Standards Provide the Foundation

Every highway authority has its own requirements, but almost all of them begin with the same technical standards.

Road lighting is typically designed in accordance with BS 5489 and BS EN 13201, which determine the appropriate lighting class and performance requirements for different types of roads, footways and public spaces. Electrical infrastructure must comply with BS 7671, while considerations such as obtrusive light, ecology and environmental impact are commonly assessed against guidance published by the Institution of Lighting Professionals (ILP).

These standards establish the engineering principles, but they are only part of the picture.

Most highway authorities publish their own specifications covering approved equipment, preferred manufacturers, column types, central management systems, feeder pillar requirements, electrical arrangements and submission procedures. A design that is perfectly acceptable in one authority area may require significant amendments in another.

What Highway Authorities Are Really Looking For

Many people assume that highway authorities simply want to see a compliant lighting calculation.

In reality, they are assessing something much broader.

They want confidence that the installation can be safely constructed, efficiently maintained and reliably operated throughout its entire life.

That confidence comes from the quality of the overall submission rather than a single drawing. Less AI design and more Engineering knowledge and design skill.

A well-prepared package will normally include coordinated lighting layouts, calculation reports, equipment schedules, electrical information where required, design assumptions and sufficient supporting information to demonstrate compliance with both national standards and local authority specifications.

Perhaps more importantly, the submission should tell a coherent engineering story. Reviewing engineers should be able to understand why design decisions have been made, how constraints have been managed and why the proposed solution represents the most appropriate outcome for the site.

Why Some Lighting Designs Are Rejected

Over the years we’ve reviewed countless designs prepared by others, and the reasons for rejection are surprisingly consistent.

Sometimes the lighting levels simply don’t meet the required class.

Sometimes columns have been positioned without considering drainage, utilities or visibility requirements.

Occasionally the electrical design doesn’t align with the proposed lighting layout.

Increasingly, ecological considerations, biodiversity requirements and planning conditions also influence whether a scheme can progress without further revision.

However, one of the most common issues isn’t a technical failure at all.

Its competency. Lighting design is a specialist discipline. Like any other discipline. The people delivering the work should be competent trained and qualified. The simple acid test is, Under CDM are they taking responsibility for the designs they are providing?

Every Highway Authority Does Things Slightly Differently

One of the questions we’re often asked is why a design accepted in one county requires changes somewhere else.

The answer is simple.

Highway authorities are responsible for maintaining their assets for decades after adoption.

Each authority has developed its own preferred equipment, maintenance strategies, asset management systems and operational standards based on its own experience.

That means the approval process isn’t simply about complying with BS 5489.

It’s about demonstrating compliance with the authority’s own design guide and engineering requirements as well.

This local knowledge is often what separates a straightforward approval from several rounds of technical comments.

Understanding those local expectations is often just as important as understanding the national standards. With over 150 different Local Authority lighting specifications to know this is were DFLs value really comes in. We know many of the specifications and how to get the approvals needed.

 

How to Improve Your Chances of First-Time Approval

The most successful projects all have one thing in common.

Lighting is treated as an integral part of the highway design rather than an item to be completed at the end of the programme.

Early coordination, regular communication between disciplines and a thorough understanding of the adopting authority’s requirements consistently produce better outcomes.

It’s also worth remembering that highway authorities aren’t trying to make projects more difficult. Their role is to ensure that the infrastructure they will eventually own is safe, maintainable and compliant. When submissions demonstrate those qualities clearly, the approval process becomes significantly more straightforward.

How DFL Supports S38 and S278 Approvals

At DFL, we don’t see street lighting design as simply producing drawings and calculations.

Our role is to help clients navigate the approval process from concept through to adoption.

Having delivered schemes for developers, contractors, consultants and local authorities across the UK, we understand that technical compliance is only one part of achieving approval. Successful projects require coordination, clear communication and an understanding of how different authorities interpret their own standards.

By engaging early, identifying potential issues before submission and producing coordinated design packages, we help reduce unnecessary review comments, minimise programme delays and improve the likelihood of first-time approval.

Final Thoughts

The approval process for S38 and S278 street lighting isn’t becoming more complicated because the standards are changing. It’s becoming more demanding because today’s developments are more complex, expectations are higher and authorities need confidence that the assets they adopt will perform safely for many years to come.

For developers and project teams, the message is straightforward. Treat lighting as a critical part of the design process rather than a final technical exercise. Engage with experienced designers early, understand the requirements of the adopting authority and submit a coordinated package that demonstrates not only compliance but engineering quality.

That’s the approach that consistently delivers successful approvals and it’s the approach DFL has been helping clients achieve across the UK for more than 25 years.

 

Richard Jackson