A new planning mechanism could change how some environmental impacts of development are dealt with. It does not, however, remove the wider planning tests facing Murrell Green or other strategic sites in Hart.
On 17 September 2026 the Government announced the first draft Environmental Delivery Plan under the new Nature Restoration Fund (NRF). The first scheme is in Norfolk and is aimed at addressing nutrient pollution while enabling housing development. The announcement has attracted attention because it illustrates a wider change in planning: in areas covered by an approved Environmental Delivery Plan, developers may be able to pay a levy so that specified environmental mitigation is delivered strategically rather than project by project.
What is the Nature Restoration Fund?
The Nature Restoration Fund was established under Part 3 of the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025. Natural England can prepare an Environmental Delivery Plan (EDP) for a defined area, type and amount of development and specified environmental impacts. An EDP sets out the conservation measures to be delivered and the Nature Restoration Levy that participating development must pay.
Government guidance says that where a development is covered by an EDP and has a valid levy commitment, the local planning authority does not need to assess the particular environmental impact that the EDP covers through the usual project-level route. Importantly, the authority must still consider all environmental effects not covered by the EDP and all other relevant planning and environmental requirements.
An EDP is not a general licence to buy planning permission. It can only deal with the specific environmental impact or impacts identified in that plan. Highways, schools, healthcare, landscape, drainage, flood risk, utilities, design, settlement pattern and any ecological effects outside the EDP remain matters for the normal planning process.
Does this change the current Murrell Green application?
Not at present. We have found no published Environmental Delivery Plan currently covering Hart or Murrell Green. The first plans being brought forward are focused on areas where nutrient pollution has been holding up development. The present Murrell Green application therefore continues to be assessed under the environmental and planning requirements that currently apply to it.
That means the proposal cannot simply replace its present ecological, habitats or other mitigation requirements with a national flat-rate payment. The figure of about £2,000 per dwelling reported in the press relates to the first Norfolk scheme; the legislation and guidance provide for each EDP to define its own scope and charging schedule.
Why could it matter to Hart later?
The strategic significance is that an environmental constraint which presently requires bespoke assessment, land or mitigation could, if a future EDP covered that exact impact, become a more predictable levy-funded obligation. For long-term plan-making and strategic site selection, that may change how the cost, risk and deliverability of some sites are assessed.
That is particularly relevant when comparing large sites. A constraint that is uncertain, dependent on third-party land or difficult to mitigate can affect whether a site appears deliverable. If a future EDP provides a lawful strategic solution, that particular issue could become more predictable. It would not make the site automatically acceptable; it would simply alter one part of the planning balance.
Why the Thames Basin Heaths are worth watching
Hart already operates within the established strategic mitigation system for the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, including Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) and Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM). This is not the same legal mechanism as an EDP, and there is currently no published proposal to replace Hart’s existing Thames Basin Heaths arrangements with an NRF scheme.
However, the existing approach is relevant because it demonstrates that environmental effects associated with many individual housing developments can sometimes be addressed through coordinated, area-wide mitigation. Natural England’s 15-year evaluation of the Thames Basin Heaths SAMM project, published on 16 September 2026, reported that the scheme is delivering its core aims and that protected bird populations have remained stable or increased in some cases despite housing growth and increased visitor numbers.
That makes any future Government or Natural England proposals affecting the Thames Basin Heaths important to monitor, but it would be premature to assume that the current SANG/SAMM regime will be replaced or materially reduced.
Could this affect the amount of land available for development?
Potentially, but only in particular circumstances. Large strategic sites often use open land for several purposes at once: habitat mitigation, recreational space, drainage, landscape separation and public open space. If a future EDP lawfully moved one specific mitigation requirement to a strategic off-site solution, a developer might seek to revisit how much land needs to be reserved for that particular purpose.
That does not mean that land automatically becomes developable. Other functions may still require it to remain open, and any change would still have to pass the relevant planning, landscape, drainage, biodiversity, design and infrastructure tests. For Murrell Green, this should therefore be treated as a future scenario to monitor rather than a present change in capacity.
What does not change?
For Murrell Green and other potential Hart strategic sites, the NRF does not remove the need to assess matters such as:
- highway access, local road capacity and cumulative traffic;
- M3 Junction 5 and wider strategic transport effects;
- public transport and railway capacity;
- schools, healthcare and other community infrastructure;
- foul-water and water-supply infrastructure;
- flood risk, drainage and climate resilience;
- landscape character and settlement separation;
- agricultural land and other land-use considerations;
- major utilities and their delivery constraints;
- phasing, funding, legal obligations and enforceable delivery; and
- environmental effects which are not expressly covered by an applicable EDP.
Implications for Hart’s emerging development strategy
Hart’s next Local Plan will have to compare potential development locations over a long period. The NRF means that it may be unsafe to assume that every environmental constraint identified today will operate in exactly the same way throughout that plan period. Some may eventually be addressed strategically; others may remain site-specific.
The practical consequence is that Hart’s site assessment should remain transparent about which constraints are fixed, which depend on mitigation, which are subject to emerging national mechanisms, and which cannot readily be resolved through a financial contribution.
In that context, transport capacity, strategic infrastructure, landscape, settlement pattern, flood resilience, accessibility and the timing of delivery may become even more important when comparing major sites if some environmental obligations become more predictable through EDPs.
What we will watch
For Murrell Green and the wider Hart Local Plan, the relevant future developments include:
- any notification by Natural England that it intends to prepare an EDP covering Hampshire, Hart or the Thames Basin Heaths;
- the environmental impact or protected feature that any such EDP would cover;
- whether participation would be voluntary or mandatory;
- the development types and maximum development capacity covered;
- the levy charging schedule and how it compares with existing mitigation costs;
- the conservation measures proposed and where they would be delivered; and
- the implications, if any, for existing SANG, SAMM or other mitigation arrangements.
The Nature Restoration Fund does not presently remove a substantive obstacle from the Murrell Green application. Its importance is longer-term: it could change the way some environmental constraints are mitigated and costed when Hart considers future strategic housing sites. Any such effect will depend on the precise content of an Environmental Delivery Plan that actually covers Hart and the relevant impact.
Primary sources
- Government guidance: Understanding the Nature Restoration Fund.
- Government collection: Environmental Delivery Plans.
- Government announcement, 17 September 2026: first draft EDP in Norfolk.
- Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, Part 3 — Development and nature recovery.
- Natural England, 16 September 2026: Thames Basin Heaths SAMM evaluation.
- Hart District Council planning guidance, including Thames Basin Heaths mitigation.
Evidence note updated 17 September 2026. This article distinguishes established current requirements from possible future effects. It will be updated if Natural England publishes an EDP relevant to Hart.