New HSF infrastructure planning blog – Energy and Infrastructure Consenting Notes

The London planning team at Herbert Smith Freehills has a new blog focused on infrastructure planning, Energy and Infrastructure Consenting Notes.

The team has promoted some of the biggest and most high-profile nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) applications to go through the Planning Act 2008 process, from the Hinkley Point and Sizewell new nuclear power stations to the expansion of Gatwick Airport and the Aquind Interconnector between the UK and France. We are promoting DCOs for solar projects, energy from waste plants, and advising on carbon capture and storage in the North Sea.

What is the new blog?

Through Energy and Infrastructure Consenting Notes, we will be publishing regular updates on what we consider to be the most interesting and topical developments, together with our opinions on key issues that matter to our clients.

We hope that everyone who is involved in the NSIP world or keen to learn more about it will find our new blog helpful. If you have any questions on anything mentioned in the blog or have any feedback, please do get in touch using the contact details below.

What are the monthly updates?

To ensure that we are always up to date with the latest developments, our team prepares a monthly update highlighting the key events from the previous month within the NSIP world. We have now decided to share this update more widely as newsletter to be published each month on Energy and Infrastructure Consenting Notes.

Please subscribe to the blog to be notified of new blog posts and to receive our monthly infrastructure update when published. To subscribe, click here.

For further information please contact:

Catherine Howard
Catherine Howard
Partner, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2858
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of Counsel, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275
Ian Mack
Ian Mack
Senior Associate, Planning, London
+44 20 3692 9622
Fiona Sawyer
Fiona Sawyer
Professional Support Lawyer, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2674

Monthly Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects Update – January 2022

Hot on the heels of our December 2021 update (see here), our January 2022 Monthly Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects Update is now available, highlighting what we consider to be the most interesting and topical events from last month within the NSIP world, together with our opinions on key issues that matter to our clients.

The January 2022 update includes comment and analysis on:

  • the biodiversity net gain consultation;
  • the cumulative assessment of climate impacts;
  • NSIP reforms;
  • the Able Marine Energy Park Material Change 2;
  • Keadby 3’s request for a name change;
  • the AQUIND Interconnector; and
  • the London Resort.

Our January 2022 update is available here.

If you would like to receive this update directly from us on a regular basis, or have any questions on anything mentioned in the update or feedback to share on what you would find useful, please get in touch.

For further information please contact:

Catherine Howard
Catherine Howard
Partner, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2858
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of Counsel, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275
Ian Mack
Ian Mack
Senior Associate, Planning, London
+44 20 3692 9622
Fiona Sawyer
Fiona Sawyer
Professional Support Lawyer, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2674

Monthly Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects Update

The London planning team at Herbert Smith Freehills has been heavily involved in the infrastructure planning world for many years. We have acted on some of the biggest and most high-profile nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) applications to go through the Planning Act 2008 process, from the Hinkley Point and Sizewell new nuclear power stations to the expansion of Gatwick Airport and the Aquind Interconnector between the UK and France.

Our monthly update highlights what we consider to be the most interesting and topical events from the previous month within the NSIP world, together with our opinions on key issues that matter to our clients. Our latest update for December 2021 is available here.

We hope that everyone who is involved in the NSIP world or keen to learn more about it will find this update helpful. If you would like to receive this update directly from us on a regular basis, or have any questions on anything mentioned in the update or feedback to share on what you would find useful, please get in touch.

For further information please contact:

Catherine Howard
Catherine Howard
Partner, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2858
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of Counsel, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275
Ian Mack
Ian Mack
Senior Associate, Planning, London
+44 20 3692 9622
Fiona Sawyer
Fiona Sawyer
Professional Support Lawyer, Planning, London
+44 20 7466 2674

The Environment Act 2021 – Biodiversity net gain and its implementation

On 9 November 2021, after two years as a Bill and a final period of ping pong between the Houses of Parliament, the Environment Bill received Royal Assent and became the Environment Act 2021 (EA 2021). The majority of the EA 2021 is not yet in force – only the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has been brought into effect, although it is yet to receive its enforcement powers. However, a consultation was opened today (11 January 2022) by Defra on biodiversity net gain regulations, consulting on how biodiversity net gain will work in practice including how and when it will be applied to Town and Country Planning Act development, and, at a higher level, Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs).

Here we look at the requirement for the delivery of a mandatory biodiversity net gain under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) and the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), and when it is anticipated this mandatory requirement will come into force for each, as well as consider what steps developers / promoters should be taking now.

What are the biodiversity net gain requirements?

We discussed the requirements for mandatory biodiversity net gain in respect of developments requiring planning permission in a series of podcasts in summer 2020. The relevant provisions are now contained in Part 6 (Nature and biodiversity) and Schedule 14 of the EA 2021 which insert a new section 90A and Schedule 7A into the TCPA 1990.

With one key exception, the requirements discussed in our podcast series have not changed since the previous iteration of the Bill. The exception to this is that nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) are now also to be subject to a minimum 10% mandatory biodiversity net gain requirement.

Biodiversity net gain and NSIPs

Section 99 and Schedule 15 to the EA 2021 introduce the requirement for biodiversity net gain in relation to NSIPs via the amendment of Section 103 to 105 and the insertion of a new Schedule 2A to the PA 2008.

The amendments to the PA 2008 provide that if a project is subject to a National Policy Statement (NPS) and that NPS includes a “biodiversity gain statement” or if such a “biodiversity gain statement” otherwise applies to the project, the Secretary of State (SoS) must decide the application in accordance with the biodiversity gain statement. The minimum biodiversity net gain to be required is 10%.

When will the biodiversity net gain requirements come into force?

The Part of the Act which contains the provisions in relation to biodiversity net gain is not currently in force. The consultation launched by Defra provides some clarity on when it is intended those provisions will come into force.

For non-exempt TCPA 1990 development the stated intention is for the mandatory biodiversity net gain requirement to commence in November 2023 for new applications, providing a transitional period of two years from the EA 2021 receiving Royal Assent.

For terrestrial development to be consented under the PA 2008, the consultation states that the UK Government intends to commence the mandatory biodiversity net gain requirement by not later than 2025 and that it wants to use the consultation to test whether this provides the right length of time for projects in the pipeline to transition to the new approach. A shorter transitional period may yet be provided for. Projects which have been accepted for examination by the Planning Inspectorate before the specified commencement date are proposed to not be required to deliver mandatory biodiversity net gain, ensuring projects which are at a sufficiently advanced stage do not need to then identify scheme amendments (and potentially additional land) to meet the mandatory net gain requirement.

There is also an important distinction to note in relation to development in the marine environment, which is that projects, or components of projects, in the marine environment beyond the intertidal zone are not included within the scope of the mandatory requirements for biodiversity net gain. However, the EA 2021 does provide options for introducing such a requirement when a suitable approach has been developed and consulted upon, and it is stated in the Defra consultation that Defra are currently working with a wide range of stakeholders towards a consultation on the principles for marine net gain later this year. With this being the case, these timescales for the commencement of mandatory net gain are expressly stated not to apply to development, or components of development, in the marine environment below the low water mark, with any requirement or transition arrangements for marine net gain to follow after the consultation on principles for marine net gain.

What can applicants be doing now?

Depending on what stage a project is at and which regime it is subject to, applicants should be considering how their schemes can achieve the mandatory 10% biodiversity net gain, noting that this is the minimum future requirement. Ideally the gain should be achieved on-site. However, if this is not possible, work should start now to identify other locations which can serve as biodiversity gain sites because the option of buying biodiversity credits is only to be available to applicants as a last resort where they can demonstrate that they are unable to achieve biodiversity net gain through the available on-site and off-site options.

For NSIPs it may also be possible to include additional land within the proposed Order limits to provide the biodiversity net gains required and for such land to be the subject to compulsory acquisition pursuant to the relevant DCO where the relevant statutory tests for this can be shown to be satisfied. Where this approach is taken it will be important that such land is identified as early as is possible in the development of a project, ideally before statutory consultation on proposals commences.

It is also the case that the relevant development plan or national policy may already encourage biodiversity net gains in connection with development proposals and it is apparent that in many cases planning policy is ahead of planning law. The delivery of biodiversity net gains (or the non-delivery of them) is also a politically sensitive topic and will likely be relevant to the determination of many planning applications, particularly for major developments and projects consented through the PA 2008 regime. It is therefore advisable for applicants to already be identifying how they can maximise biodiversity net gains in their development proposals prior to the transitional periods expiring and the legal requirement for mandatory net gains coming into effect.

If you have any questions of this or would like receive our briefing on mandatory biodiversity net gain, please contact us.

Martyn Jarvis
Martyn Jarvis
Senior associate, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2680

Back to basics: the Development Consent Order regime podcast series – EP5

The Planning White Paper published in August 2020 proposed a number of radical reforms aimed at streamlining and modernising the planning regime. One of those proposals was the potential for major housing developments to be brought into the development consent regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) (see here for our blog on this subject). This consent route, which results in the grant of a development consent order (DCO), has to date only been used for infrastructure projects such as large power stations, major roads, waste management facilities, etc. Many housing developers who are used to the town and country planning consent regime may not be familiar with the development consent process. However, if the White Paper proposals are taken forward, this route offers huge potential benefits that could see major housing development being brought forward more quickly and efficiently.

In this series of “Back to basics” podcasts (see here), we provide a bite-sized introduction to the development consent regime under the Planning Act 2008, drawing on our extensive experience advising on all key aspects of DCO projects. Each of the five episodes in this series focuses on a different stage in the development consent process, summarising the requirements for each stage, pitfalls to watch out for and the roles of the consultant and legal team, the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.

Episode 5: DCO decisions, challenges to decisions and post-grant changes

In the last of a series on the development consent regime, Lisa Bazalo (Senior Associate (New Zealand)) and Alistair Paul (Associate) discuss the decision stage of the DCO application. This episode can be found on SoundCloud here.

In previous episodes, we discussed the pre-application stage of the development consent process, the preparation, submission and acceptance of the DCO application, the pre-examination stage and the examination stage. All episodes can be found here.

For further information please contact:

Lisa Bazalo
Lisa Bazalo
Senior Associate (New Zealand), planning, London
+44 20 7466 2957
Alistair Paul
Alistair Paul
Associate, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2252
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275

Back to basics: the Development Consent Order regime podcast series – EP4

The Planning White Paper published in August 2020 proposed a number of radical reforms aimed at streamlining and modernising the planning regime. One of those proposals was the potential for major housing developments to be brought into the development consent regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) (see here for our blog on this subject). This consent route, which results in the grant of a development consent order (DCO), has to date only been used for infrastructure projects such as large power stations, major roads, waste management facilities, etc. Many housing developers who are used to the town and country planning consent regime may not be familiar with the development consent process. However, if the White Paper proposals are taken forward, this route offers huge potential benefits that could see major housing development being brought forward more quickly and efficiently.

In this series of “Back to basics” podcasts (see here), we provide a bite-sized introduction to the development consent regime under the Planning Act 2008, drawing on our extensive experience advising on all key aspects of DCO projects. Each of the five episodes in this series focuses on a different stage in the development consent process, summarising the requirements for each stage, pitfalls to watch out for and the roles of the consultant and legal team, the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.

Episode 4: Examination stage of the DCO application

In this fourth episode of a series on the development consent regime, Julia McKeown (Associate (New Zealand)) and Lisa Bazalo (Senior Associate (New Zealand)) discuss the examination stage of the DCO application. This episode can be found on SoundCloud here.

In previous episodes, we discussed the pre-application stage of the development consent process, the preparation, submission and acceptance of the DCO application, and the pre-examination stage. These episodes can be found here. The fifth and final episode will consider DCO decisions, challenges to decisions and post-grant changes.

For further information please contact:

Lisa Bazalo
Lisa Bazalo
Senior Associate (New Zealand), planning, London
+44 20 7466 2957
Julia McKeown
Julia McKeown
Associate (New Zealand), planning, London
+44 20 7466 2321
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275

Back to basics: the Development Consent Order regime podcast series – EP3

The Planning White Paper published in August 2020 proposed a number of radical reforms aimed at streamlining and modernising the planning regime. One of those proposals was the potential for major housing developments to be brought into the development consent regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) (see here for our blog on this subject). This consent route, which results in the grant of a development consent order (DCO), has to date only been used for infrastructure projects such as large power stations, major roads, waste management facilities, etc. Many housing developers who are used to the town and country planning consent regime may not be familiar with the development consent process. However, if the White Paper proposals are taken forward, this route offers huge potential benefits that could see major housing development being brought forward more quickly and efficiently.

In this series of “Back to basics” podcasts (see here), we provide a bite-sized introduction to the development consent regime under the Planning Act 2008, drawing on our extensive experience advising on all key aspects of DCO projects. Each of the five episodes in this series focuses on a different stage in the development consent process, summarising the requirements for each stage, pitfalls to watch out for and the roles of the consultant and legal team, the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.

Episode 3: Pre-examination stage of the DCO application

In this third episode of a series on the development consent regime, Rebecca Butterworth (Associate) and Julia McKeown (Associate (New Zealand)) discuss the pre-examination stage of the DCO application. This episode can be found on SoundCloud here.

In previous episodes, we discussed the pre-application stage of the development consent process, and the preparation, submission and acceptance of the DCO application. These episodes can be found here. Future episodes will cover: the examination stage (Episode 4); and DCO decisions, challenges to decisions and post-grant changes (Episode 5).

For further information please contact:

Julia McKeown
Julia McKeown
Associate (New Zealand), planning, London
+44 20 7466 2321
Rebecca Butterworth
Rebecca Butterworth
Associate, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2437
Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275

Back to basics: the Development Consent Order regime podcast series – EP2

The Planning White Paper published in August 2020 proposed a number of radical reforms aimed at streamlining and modernising the planning regime. One of those proposals was the potential for major housing developments to be brought into the development consent regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) (see here for our blog on this subject). This consent route, which results in the grant of a development consent order (DCO), has to date only been used for infrastructure projects such as large power stations, major roads, waste management facilities, etc. Many housing developers who are used to the town and country planning consent regime may not be familiar with the development consent process. However, if the White Paper proposals are taken forward, this route offers huge potential benefits that could see major housing development being brought forward more quickly and efficiently.

In this series of “Back to basics” podcasts (see here), we provide a bite-sized introduction to the development consent regime under the Planning Act 2008, drawing on our extensive experience advising on all key aspects of DCO projects. Each of the five episodes in this series focuses on a different stage in the development consent process, summarising the requirements for each stage, pitfalls to watch out for and the roles of the consultant and legal team, the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.

Episode 2: Preparation, submission and acceptance of the DCO application

In this second episode of a series on the development consent regime, Charlotte Dyer (Of Counsel) and Rebecca Butterworth (Associate) discuss the preparation of the DCO application, as well as the submission of the application to the Planning Inspectorate and the acceptance process. This episode can be found on SoundCloud here.

In the first episode in the series, we discussed the pre-application stage of the development consent process. Future episodes will cover: the pre-examination stage (Episode 3); the examination stage (Episode 4); and DCO decisions, challenges to decisions and post-grant changes (Episode 5).

For further information please contact:

Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275
Rebecca Butterworth
Rebecca Butterworth
Associate, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2437

Back to basics: the Development Consent Order regime podcast series – EP1

The Planning White Paper published in August 2020 proposed a number of radical reforms aimed at streamlining and modernising the planning regime. One of those proposals was the potential for major housing developments to be brought into the development consent regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) (see here for our blog on this subject). This consent route, which results in the grant of a development consent order (DCO), has to date only been used for infrastructure projects such as large power stations, major roads, waste management facilities, etc. Many housing developers who are used to the town and country planning consent regime may not be familiar with the development consent process. However, if the White Paper proposals are taken forward, this route offers huge potential benefits that could see major housing development being brought forward more quickly and efficiently.

In this series of “Back to basics” podcasts (see here), we provide a bite-sized introduction to the development consent regime under the Planning Act 2008, drawing on our extensive experience advising on all key aspects of DCO projects. Each of the five episodes in this series focuses on a different stage in the development consent process, summarising the requirements for each stage, pitfalls to watch out for and the roles of the consultant and legal team, the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.

Episode 1: Introduction to DCOs and the pre-application stage

In this first episode in the series, Charlotte Dyer (Of Counsel) and Alistair Paul (Associate) discuss the pre-application stage of the development consent process. This episode can be found on SoundCloud here.

Future episodes will cover: preparation, submission and acceptance of the DCO application (Episode 2); the pre-examination stage (Episode 3); the examination stage (Episode 4); and DCO decisions, challenges to decisions and post-grant changes (Episode 5).

For further information please contact:

Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275
Alistair Paul
Alistair Paul
Associate, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2252

 

Planning White Paper lays foundations for a new route to housing

The Planning White Paper published this month proposes a major overhaul of the planning regime in England, yet includes just one reference to the development consent regime. This is despite the fact that the introduction of that regime in 2008 was, in my view, one of the most successful changes made to the English planning system for decades.

The White Paper suggests that one of the ways in which full planning permission could be obtained for very large sites within Growth Areas under the new system is through a development consent order pursuant to the Planning Act 2008 (though technically a development consent order (DCO) cannot grant planning permission, and instead actually disapplies the need for planning permission). The example given in the White Paper of the type of scheme that could use this route is a new town. Despite the absence of details, the idea of allowing a housing scheme to be consented through the development consent regime has caused great excitement within the industry.

The development consent regime was developed to create a fast track, streamlined route to obtaining consent for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs). The main benefits include: greater certainty over timescales; the ability to wrap in other consents including compulsory acquisition powers; the principle of development being established up front (for schemes falling within the scope of a National Policy Statement (NPS)); elevating the decision-making to the national level (particularly helpful for locally unpopular but nationally needed schemes); and better quality decisions that are far less likely to be quashed by the court.

Given the major housing shortage in England and the government’s 2017 pledge to fix our broken housing market, it seems obvious that housing should be the type of project that should benefit from this regime. However, not only does housing not fall within the definition of an NSIP but the 2008 Act expressly prohibits the grant of consent for associated development comprising “the construction or extension of one or more dwellings”. Consistent with the government’s emerging localism agenda when the Planning Act 2008 came into force, it was considered that local authorities were better placed to decide on matters such as housing need and that decisions on the siting of housing should therefore only be taken at the local level.

This approach, however, overlooked the fact that major infrastructure schemes require lots of construction workers, not all of whom will live locally and thus must be found temporary local accommodation, often in areas that would suffer severe impacts were they to be temporarily flooded by workers. To address this, some developers have sought to include temporary accommodation as part of their development consent schemes. In R (on the application of Innovia Cellophane Ltd) v Infrastructure Planning Commission (2011), in which Herbert Smith Freehills acted for the interested party, the Court held that the dwellings exclusion in the 2008 Act did not preclude granting consent for temporary accommodation.

That was clearly the right decision, both as a matter of law and principle. Yet temporary accommodation is just that, temporary, meaning that at the end of the project it must be removed. In areas suffering from significant housing shortages, there may be merits in allowing more permanent housing to be granted through the development consent regime, allowing a legacy benefit for the affected communities.

The government finally saw sense in 2016 when it brought forward the Housing and Planning Act which allowed housing that is “related” to a NSIP to be authorised by a development consent order. Yet there are strict rules in place for what related means in this context by reference, for example, to the size and location of the proposed housing, which has significantly constrained its use.

This month’s White Paper seems to be proposing that major housing sites could be treated as NSIPs in their own right, which would represent a major step forward for the consenting of housing in England. If implemented (and it would require new legislation) this could pave the way for major new housing sites to come forward without being held back by local politics, under-resourced councils and difficulty in securing separate compulsory acquisition and other required powers.

The government should ensure that clear guidance is provided (potentially through a new Housing NPS) to applicants on how to assess their proposals at the application stage to minimise duplication or gaps and ensure consistency with the analysis undertaken at the local plan stage. In due course the government will also need to publish details of the applicable thresholds (eg will this be defined by reference to minimum housing numbers?) and whether this will be a voluntary “opt in” process by virtue of a section 35 direction under the 2008 Act or compulsory (meaning it would be a criminal offence to fail to obtain development consent).

I applaud the government in making this proposal, which in my view is long overdue, and eagerly look forward to the publication of more details in due course.

Charlotte is Of Counsel within the planning team at Herbert Smith Freehills. She has extensive experience of the development consent regime and in particular for the last 12 years she has advised EDF on obtaining development consent for its new nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point C and now Sizewell C. She is also experienced in advising on major housing schemes, such as a proposed 10,000 home settlement near Stansted Airport and a 2,000 home scheme in the Green Belt in Surrey.

For more information please contact:

Charlotte Dyer
Charlotte Dyer
Of counsel, planning, London
+44 20 7466 2275