Over the last week or so there has been more from a government keen to demonstrate its commitment to growth.  Last weekend Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a zoning scheme around commuter transport hubs.  We have since heard support for a third runway at Heathrow and a European Silicon Valley in the Oxford – Cambridge Arc and other schemes including new reservoirs and redevelopment of Old Trafford.  A working paper “10 Year Infrastructure Structure” was published on the 27th, seeking to cut costs and provide certainty.  We were also given a timescale for the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, key to implementation of the government’s growth commitments.

The zones around commuter transport hubs will benefit from a presumption in favour of development, aiming to quickly secure housing growth in areas easily accessible to workplaces.  It is not yet clear how local input into design and density of development will be incorporated.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill will be introduced in Spring.  In the meantime “Streamlining Infrastructure Planning” a working paper, was published on 26 January.  It provides additional information on the Bill content: streamlining decisions on nationally significant infrastructure projects; reducing consultation requirements; increasing clarity within statutory guidance and National Policy Statements.

On Thursday Rachel Reeves invited an application for a “badly needed” third runway at Heathrow, and attracted criticism from various environmental bodies and from her own party.  The controversial scheme clearly fits with the current growth agenda and, it is argued, can be delivered in a decade with climate commitments met.  I cannot help but feel sceptical about any application taking a smooth course allowing for such speedy delivery, despite the new restrictions to judicial review of nationally significant infrastructure scheme decisions announced in December! 

Other changes to the treatment of environmental factors are also attracting criticism.  A pre-Christmas working paper explored ways to discharge environmental obligations more effectively and efficiently, pooling funds to take strategic interventions in line with a delivery plan.  The responsibility for implementing the actions will shift to the state, paid for through developer contributions, with developers addressing site level residual harms.  We will find out the detail of the “clear and simple” Environmental Outcome Reports, replacing environmental impact assessments, when a roadmap is published in the coming months.

If you'd like assistance in relation to the issues raised please do contact Janine Shaw at jshaw@ortolan.com