Nutrient neutrality is described as a way of ensuring that developments do not add to existing burdens of nutrients such as nitrates and phosphorous in the area.
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
The CLC said that Natural England’s advice, based on European case law, is that developers achieve nutrient neutrality to avoid an adverse impact on wetland habitats, but that this has led to several stopping orders imposed by local planning authorities on the determination of new planning applications. The CLC argued that farming was a greater contributor to the problem.
CLC co-chair Andy Mitchell said in the letter: “The ramifications for the areas affected by this problem impact more than home builders. Delays to development are also holding up essential infrastructure. For example, there is significant strain on the nation’s logistics sector, with very little available space at present, and a pipeline of new space that is not being delivered in those areas affected.
“Ideally the guidance issued by Natural England should be adjusted to weigh up the costs associated with the small release of nutrients in the short term against the wider public-interest benefits of housebuilding and other development.”
Andy Mitchell, CLC
“If housing projects cannot proceed because of the difficulties of meeting nutrient neutrality requirements it affects all forms of housing, including the supply of affordable housing and rural housing programmes, which are much needed locally at a time of growing pressure on living costs.”
Mitchell argued that the rules were disproportionately affecting new housing and other developments “even though they contribute only a very small part of the nutrients pollution threat to habitats”.
He explained that land requirements for mitigation were also “considerable” with the construction of each house requiring an equivalent area of land to be set aside as mitigation. The Home Builders Federation (HBF) has estimated that mitigation could cost in the region of £5,000 per dwelling and some costs could be as high as £15,000 to £24,000 per dwelling, it claimed.
Mitchell added: “The delays associated with the nutrients issue risk driving many SMEs out of business, so a more rapid and effective way needs to be found to remove this threat. Ideally the guidance issued by Natural England should be adjusted to weigh up the costs associated with the small release of nutrients in the short term against the wider public-interest benefits of housebuilding and other development.
“But a longer-term solution also needs to be found. This should recognise the negligible amounts of nutrient pollution arising from new housing and commercial projects and find effective means of reducing the significant nutrient pollution arising from other sources, including farming.”
