Infrastructure Planning Blog

Today's entry looks at the newly updated National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

The NPPF Strikes Back

We covered the draft NPPF, put out for consultation before Christmas last year, in Blog 32. We now have the final NPPF. At 130-plus pages, a new policy structure and a wholesale reorganisation of national planning policy, this is more than a routine update. Whilst much of the coverage has focused on housing delivery, railway stations and density, there is plenty here for infrastructure promoters too.

The new provisions on strategic planning require spatial development strategies to identify "the type, extent and broad location of strategic infrastructure needed to enable development and serve existing communities", and importantly that expressly includes "renewable and low carbon energy, electricity network, telecommunications and water and wastewater infrastructure". The draft NPPF changing the weight given to renewable energy benefits from "significant" to "substantial". That change has survived.

One particularly welcome feature is the expanded definition of renewable and low carbon energy. Historically, some technologies have enjoyed a more comfortable relationship with planning policy than others. The new NPPF adopts a far broader approach. The definition now expressly includes: "nuclear power and supporting infrastructure" alongside: "low carbon fuels such as biomethane, hydrogen". Even more intriguingly, the definition extends to "heat from recoverable sources, such as heat recovered from data centres".

The new NPPF continues the move towards a more permissive approach for essential infrastructure. Under the decision-making policies, additional categories of development are now treated as not inappropriate in the Green Belt. Importantly, this now includes: "transport, electricity network and water infrastructure" provided that "the impact on the openness of the Green Belt is minimised, and there would not be a significant conflict with the purposes of including land within it".

In a very welcome confirmation, the NPPF now also confirms that "very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources". You will sometimes hear risk averse claims that taking into account the wider benefits is somehow impermissible, or unlawful.

All in all, not much has changed in the infrastructure context compared with the points we made in our previous blog. On the wider changes, I would recommend reading this thoughtful blog from Sam Dumtiriu.

Advisers advise, promoters decide

Scanning through recent section 51 advice notes, as any normal person would, there are a few interesting points:

• For data centres directed into the Planning Act 2008 regime, one advice note records "prior to designation of the National Policy Statement, the applicant should continue to engage with MHCLG, should they need to until further notice". That makes sense given the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (may it rest in peace) has been amalgamated into the newly named Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade (which would preferably have been called the Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Office so we could all make "Ah, BISTO" jokes).
• On the need for re-scoping (i.e., after a Scoping Opinion has been adopted), one advice note sets out that this can be done through either the "provision of a new standalone scoping report or a scoping report addendum." The Inspectorate's advice is that "the preferred approach to re scoping will depend on the extent and complexity of changes in the proposed development and implications for the scope of assessment" and provides some practical advice on how those documents should be structured.
• How do you prove you have had due regard to section 51 advice (something which is more important in the post-Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 world)? This advice note suggests "the applicant’s completion of column 3 of the advice log provides an evidence base for the acceptance test and that it is encouraged, where possible, the applicant should respond to each record of s51 advice throughout the pre-application stage and submit a completed advice log as part of their application."
• Could this be an early example of a third party (not the promoter) being given advice under section 51? "The Inspectorate acknowledged that [you, the third party] may hold information relevant to the production of the Environmental Statement (ES) and we recommend you send comments on the scope of the ES directly to the applicant."

The Beacon Fen Solar DCO is due to be decided by tomorrow, which is a Saturday so it may well be decided today. That will be covered in the next blog. (Interestingly, John Maynard Keynes used to travel to Cambridge every weekend, at least partially because it used to be normal for civil servants to work on Saturdays).

This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at August 2026.  For more information see our terms & conditions.