________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

NSIPs later , or are they ?

For Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects ( NSIPs ) requiring consent under the Planning Act 2008 , the expected date of introduction is not until November 2025 , when many of the teething problems with the introduction to the town and country planning system should have been ironed out .

In fact , though , applications for consent for NSIPs are already being asked to set out what impact they are having on biodiversity using the official metric and are coming under criticism if they do not provide at least ten per cent net gain under each of the three different area , hedgerow , and watercourse metrics . While the rules about trading between them ( you can ’ t offset a bigger gain under one metric against a smaller one under another ) are being generally enforced , so far consideration doesn ’ t go any deeper than that , such that the full set of detailed rules surrounding BNG are not being examined , rather just the ten per cent gain is all that is needed .

Is BNG on the plus side of a planning decision ?

There was an interesting court case ( Saredon Aggregates ) about a solar farm where a planning refusal was overturned because an inspector wrongly referred to the future requirement for BNG when it was not yet mandatory . However , in doing so the judgment implies that once a minimum of ten per cent BNG becomes mandatory , that will be the baseline and will not be considered a benefit of a project . It remains to be seen whether that position will actually be the case once BNG really is mandatory . Anything over ten per cent would be an additional benefit ( unless the local planning authority ’ s policies required it – see further below ).

Help for developers

While the government is providing some funding to local authorities to cope with the new regime ( although inevitably not enough ), its assistance to developers is fairly scanty , consisting of no money and a fairly limited amount of guidance only a couple of months before the regime comes into force . In my view there are still some unanswered questions about ‘ significant ’ and ‘ nonsignificant ’ onsite habitat improvements ( only the former of which count towards the metric ) and how deliberate degradation of habitat to lower the score for the effects of the development is to be handled . Probably the most comprehensive explanatory document for those affected by BNG is the draft additional ‘ planning practice guidance ’.

Unlevelling the playing field

While ten per cent BNG is the legal minimum that must be provided , local authorities can have additional policies on top . For example , Cambridge City Council already has a policy of 20 per cent BNG and others , such as the London Boroughs of Kingston-upon-Thames and Tower Hamlets are considering 30 per cent . Another policy that adds a gloss to the statutory regime is requiring any offsite BNG

16