The Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 (PIA 25), which received Royal Assent in December 2025, underpins two core objectives of the Labour government’s Plan for Change (PfC), namely:
- becoming a clean‑energy superpower (Clean Power 2030); and
- kickstarting economic growth by delivering 1.5 million new homes and fast‑tracking 150 major infrastructure consents.
The government’s ambition to meet these targets by the end of the current Parliament depends heavily on the effective implementation of PIA 25.
This article considers PIA 25’s impact on housing development. For housing developers, PIA 25 represents a renewed commitment to supporting growth by streamlining administrative processes and reducing pre‑application uncertainty. At the same time, reforms to the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime, coupled with more frequent updates to National Policy Statements, reflect the government’s view that accelerating strategic infrastructure is essential if the housing pipeline is to expand at the pace intended.
A system in need of reform
The UK’s long‑acknowledged housing shortage has until now collided with an inefficient and often overly bureaucratic planning system. Under the previous regime, developers faced high up‑front costs, inconsistent planning decisions and lengthy determination periods. These issues frequently made large housing schemes commercially unattractive and contributed to slowing economic growth in the sector.
A new framework for environmental mitigation
Environmental policy and development are deeply intertwined, but the existing system has often proved costly and inconsistent for developers, while delivering uneven environmental outcomes. PIA 25 seeks to address this by introducing a more streamlined structure centred on the Nature Restoration Fund (NRF) and Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs).
The Nature Restoration Fund (NRF)
The NRF, administered by Natural England (NE), is intended to replace the current patchwork of localised mitigation schemes with a cohesive, nationwide fund for environmental recovery. Its purpose is to provide a more predictable and standardised approach, reducing the complexity developers face when navigating bespoke catchment‑level requirements.
Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs)
EDPs sit alongside the NRF and establish predetermined levy amounts for specified environmental impacts within a given area. They are voluntary: developers may “opt in” by paying the levy into the NRF instead of designing their own bespoke mitigation strategy. This offers the potential for significantly lower administrative costs and reduced pre‑application risk.
However, because the NRF aims to deliver a higher level of environmental protection than many existing local schemes, EDP levies will not always be the cheapest option. While the upfront cost may be higher, the risk of wasted expenditure, particularly where environmental requirements shift late in the process, should be considerably reduced.
Concerns about fund distribution
Environmental groups have raised concerns that NRF spending might occur far from the site generating the impact, potentially leaving some areas underserved. These concerns focus mainly on NE’s ability to manage a nationwide fund effectively.
NE will be subject to strict reporting obligations, which should ensure transparency and help developers monitor how the fund is operating throughout 2026 and beyond.
Scope and limitations of EDPs
EDPs apply only to the environmental matters they expressly cover. Developers may still need to provide additional bespoke mitigation for issues outside the relevant EDP.
The Government is rolling out EDPs in phases, beginning with water quality, to minimise the risk of administrative error or unnecessary over‑application. This phased approach reflects foresight in the design of PIA 25, particularly given that the new water quality provisions have already attracted criticism from environmental groups, who argue that the previous nutrient‑neutrality regime offered stronger protections. A non‑gradual rollout would therefore have risked PIA 25 overreaching before the framework had properly bedded in.
Practical considerations for developers
Developers should consider the long‑term implications of opting into an EDP. Some plans may impose ongoing obligations on future landowners, which could influence disposal strategies or affect future transactions.
Because EDPs are expected to vary considerably in their practical effect, market clarity will develop only after they are more widely used and the sector has had time to adjust.
LPA reform: rebalancing decision‑making
PIA 25 also contains developer‑friendly reforms to LPA decision processes. One of the biggest barriers to housing delivery has been inconsistent decisions by local planning committees, often composed of untrained local representatives who can be inclined to oppose large developments due to concerns about local infrastructure or perceived impacts. While understandable, this has contributed to a growth in NIMBYism (“Not In My Back Yard”).
Professional planning officers typically provide more balanced assessments, but applications often only reach them at the discretion of local committees. This previously allowed committees to block or delay proposals based on local considerations - even where broader national housing need would support approval - leading to significant losses for developers who had already invested heavily in pre‑application work.
To address this, PIA 25 introduces:
- mandatory training for planning committee members; and
- provisions requiring certain decisions to be determined by planning officers, reducing reliance on committee discretion.
Critics argue that these changes reduce local influence, but this overlooks the purpose of the reforms: the previous system disproportionately weighted local objections at the expense of national housing needs. PIA 25 seeks to restore balance and support delivery at scale.
CPO reform
PIA 25 also reforms CPO procedures. The removal of hope value is intended to reduce the cost of acquiring land through CPOs, though it may make negotiations more difficult where landowners had expected development‑related uplift.
New access rights
Developers will benefit from new powers enabling access to sites for preliminary surveys via a judicial process. This includes the ability to use reasonable force where access is unlawfully restricted, providing a more reliable route to securing essential site information at an early stage.
Conclusion
The next 12 months will be critical in determining how successfully PIA 25 delivers on its ambitions. The roll‑out of the first EDPs, the establishment of the NRF and the operationalisation of LPA reforms will be areas of close scrutiny for developers.
If delivered effectively, PIA 25 has the potential to unlock stalled projects, reduce wasted expenditure, accelerate delivery pipelines and support the construction of much‑needed homes across the UK. Ultimately, the question is whether PIA 25 can succeed where earlier reforms fell short.
