Infrastructure Planning Blog

It's the infrastructure foxtrot in this week's Infrastructure Planning Blog. We look at a go-slow by planning inspectors, the slow emergence of Environmental Outcomes Reports, a quick-off-the-blocks data centre and a second development consent order (DCO) revocation.

Go slow

The Planning Inspectorate is currently undertaking industrial action over pay and job evaluations, until 23 May. They are still working, but no overtime. This statement made at the start of a Norwich to Tilbury hearing is typical:

"As was explained at the preliminary meeting, the majority of planning inspectors are members of Prospect Union and currently participating in a period of industrial action short of a strike. This essentially means we are not working over and above our contracted hours. This has been accounted for in our timetabling this week and for this reason, and also to allow participants to travel home and for wellbeing reasons. Today's hearing will be closed on time and not continue beyond 1pm. Thank you for your understanding."

So no late hearings, shorter ones particularly later in the week, and possibly things will be a bit slower generally.

EORs are back

You might have thought, as had I, that the proposals to reform environmental impact assessment (EIA) by means of Environmental Delivery Plans provided for in the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 had put the previous government's more comprehensive proposals to reform EIA on the back burner. Those proposals are to replace Environmental Statements with what are to be known as 'Environmental Outcomes Reports' (EORs – the pronunciation of which I am encouraging to be 'Eeyores', and note the plural 'Outcomes').

Well think again: on 13 March the Government published a 'roadmap to reform' for EORs, pledging to introduce them by the end of next year - see here. This seems to be linked to the work of the Nuclear Taskforce, and their recommendations particularly on enabling new environmental assessment ‘zones’ and further proportionality which the Government says will be implemented via the new EOR regime. This will apply to nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) just as much as other consenting regimes - more so, probably, since nearly every NSIP requires EIA.  We must all therefore reacquaint ourselves with these new beasts.

As a brief recap, the idea is that, instead of measuring a project's environmental impacts against the existing baseline, they are measured for their impact on the ability to achieve government-declared environmental improvement targets – the 'outcomes' in question. While this is an attractive concept in theory, I think it is going to be difficult to implement.  If the outcomes are too general (e.g. a national target) then no project will have much impact on such a large figure and they'll all get consented; if they are too granular (e.g. an impact on a particular receptor) then every project in the area will interfere with them and none will get consented. Where to set the dial will be the key.

Ultimately, the main question for EORs is whether they will, in fact, be any different to the existing EIA regime, or if they're just EIA with a Union Jack on them. It walks, talks and smells like EIA, but with added provisions relating to adaptive management. It’s worth stating that the EOR regulations are subject to their own standalone ‘non-regression’ obligation (i.e., they should not weaken the overall level of environmental protection) so there are questions (not necessarily insurmountable!) about whether this route can deliver fundamental changes.

I, and/or one or more colleagues will update an EORs webinar that was given about 18 months ago with the latest thinking, watch this space.

First data centre to enter the DCO regime

On 16 March, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government issued a section 35 direction to bring the first proposed data centre into the Planning Act 2008 regime, since that became available on 8 January this year.

You might have thought that data centres would be measured in gigabytes, or some higher prefix like quettabytes, but in fact they are measured in megawatts, because it is their power consumption that is their most significant feature.  But fear not in this case as it is incorporating its own gas-fired power station (which would already need a DCO).  The project is called the SDC M40 Data Campus and as the name suggests it is off the M40 to the east of junction 2 between Beaconsfield and Gerrards Cross.  AI tells me SDC probably stands for Sentinel Data Centers.

The application for a direction can be found here and the direction can be found here.  The application was originally made on 21 January, a mere 13 days after it was possible, but the Secretary of State requested further information, so it took more than 28 days to decide. Remember this isn't consent for the project – merely permission to use the Planning Act regime to apply for consent at a later date.

For the record, a proposal for a new passenger terminal and satellite pier at Heathrow also received a section 35 direction last week, applied for by a subsidiary of the Arora Group. The application is here and the direction is here.

No go

The Stonehenge DCO was formally revoked on 18 March. Officially known as the A303 (Amesbury to Berwick Down) Development Consent Order 2023, it was originally granted, then successfully challenged in the courts, re-decided, unsuccessfully challenged and finally revoked. The revocation order can be found here.

This is the second DCO to be revoked, with a third on the cards as previously reported, all highway DCOs so far.  It even merited a story in the Guardian.

This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at March 2026. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions.