Re-energising the planning regime for renewables

The Labour Party manifesto sought to “Cut bills, create jobs and deliver security with cheaper, zero-carbon electricity by 2030, accelerating to net zero.” And its new Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has already made progress in doing so.

Planning and Development InSite sought the views on these recent changes from renewables specialists in Carter Jonas’ Energy team – London-based Head of Consents David Walker and Associate Partners Hannah McGinn and Jamie Baxter, both in Leeds.

Three changes

We discussed the impact of three significant changes of direction: changes which are, while welcome, conflicting in some respects.

The first is the commitment to bring about more energy production through renewables, with the intention of decarbonising the electricity grid by 2030.

The second is the significant change whereby, under proposed revisions to the NPPF (to be finalised in late 2024 / early 2025), planning applications for solar schemes of up to 150MW can be determined by local planning authorities, rather by the Secretary of State under the NSIP regime.

And thirdly, the government, in the introduction to its imminent Planning and Infrastructure Bill, has reinvigorated its commitment to community engagement, stating that it will prioritise ‘enabling democratic engagement’.

Each of these three aspirations is admirable its intent. But combined, are they realistic? Will the removal of planning applications for 150MW solar farms from the NSIP regime increase the number of planning permissions? Does the Town & Country Planning Act (TCPA) regime allow for more democratic engagement? And does increased engagement enable more development?

The impact of streamlining

“Essentially the government wants to streamline planning applications,” says David, “Which of course they do – which government doesn’t? Every government has set about trying to rationalise the planning regime but, in the UK at least, none has succeeded.

“Moving certain projects out of the NSIP framework should technically enable streamlining. Certainly planning applications at a local level tend to be determined faster and cheaper, but they’re also much more prone to local politics.”

Local involvement

And so, as David explains, enabling these decisions to be determined locally won’t necessary benefit streamlining: “The DCO process front-loads consultation before the planning application goes in, which is an advantage to developers who can then submit a planning application in the knowledge that the difficult local politics is over and planning application will be determined solely on policy grounds. It also provides a very clearly defined process of consultation.

“Under the TCPA process, you can carry out a full consultation and hold lengthy (and expensive) pre-app meetings with officers, but they won’t pin their colours to the mast and when it goes in front of a committee, you’ve lost control of the process. There’s much greater risk because the decision-makers are not only embedded in, but representative of, the community, and exposed to more considerations than planning matters alone.”

New approaches to onshore wind

Further change will be brought about by the government’s commitment to onshore wind. Hannah explains, “We’re seeing a considerable increase in onshore wind clients since the general election. Since the days of the Coalition Government, onshore wind had all but ceased in England, and there is considerable pent-up demand, which is a positive sign.”

Local objections

There are already indications that the drive for energy infrastructure is unpopular within communities. And, in many cases, these are the same rural, wealthy and vociferous communities that strongly resisted (housing) development previously. When proposals for new ‘energy motorways’ are announced, local residents are quick to object, citing severe harm to their house prices and mental health – and that was before the general election and plans for significantly more solar and onshore wind schemes.

“Local residents are very aware of strong potential for both solar and wind energy to be located near to their homes,” says Jamie. “Our previous experience of these communities suggests that, even where they are sparce geographically, they are tight when it comes to campaigning – and they are already mobilised to respond to unwelcome development. Social media plays an increasing role in these campaigns and their co-ordination.”

“Here and elsewhere, we are seeing perceived and actual tensions over energy provision and food security. The NFU has generally been supportive of solar as a means of diversification for struggling farms, but that’s sometimes at odds with the communities who perceive that prime agricultural land is being taken over by solar farms.”

Local authority resources

So, who sets to benefit from the change in the way in which schemes are determined, and who will lose out? David comments, “The policy change is good news for the less controversial applications which fall beneath the 150MW threshold. These schemes will benefit from faster determination and hopefully few problems at the community engagement stage.”

“Where I see the problems lying,” said Hannah, “Is in local authority planning departments. They are so under-resourced that they won’t have the capacity to process the additional planning applications. Even with more funding, the planners just aren’t available, and it takes a decade or more for someone to train, qualify, and gain senior experience. Without the resources to meet the statutory timescales, the developers will also lose out, and so will the consumers, many of whom are particularly conscious of the energy costs.”

The need for policy revisions

“Part of the problem, specifically regarding consultation, is the lack of a strong policy commitment,” adds Jamie. “We have a government statement of intent but no specific targets, and the statement may not be enough to provide officers with the legal grounds to recommend support for new energy infrastructure.”

Local engagement impacting on location

Could overly vociferous communities, those unlikely to be deterred by the economic benefits brought about by renewable energy (essentially the Tory heartlands which rejected development under the previous government) influence the location of renewables schemes, forcing suppliers to look elsewhere? David explains, “Primarily development location is determined by National Grid connections. Developers have lists of potential sites – but they may now re-prioritise those sites on the likelihood of a scheme gaining planning consent at a local level. So yes, the threat of community opposition could have an impact.”

Changing working practices

So, finally, what advice can Carter Jonas offer to clients facing an entirely new regime and an under-resourced and, in some cases, unhelpful determining body?

Jamie advises looking at examples of schemes that have achieved planning consent, in the specific or similar local authorities – there can be much to learn from consultations and planning applications which have succeeded.

"Reporting is essential," says Hannah – "applications need to be supported by the appropriate technical and environmental reports."

“Build and promote your scheme on a bedrock of sound compliance with policy, logical and justifiable site selection and be confident in your proposals,” says David. “Work with stakeholders in a constructive manner. Keep engagement and information transparent, concise and meaningful. Otherwise, campaigners will fill a vacuum with their own stories and speculation as to what is proposed, and at that point it becomes much more difficult to engage positively."

Carter Jonas’ extensive experience of gaining planning consent through the TCPA regime combined with the strength of its energy team, can provide more detailed, project-specific advice in relation to these significant changes.