New planning rules put mining risk back in the spotlight – and it goes well beyond coal
England’s updated National Planning Policy Framework, published in August, replaces the December 2024 version and places mining, minerals and ground stability under sharper scrutiny for anyone involved in development or land acquisition.
The new NPPF requires decision-makers to take account of instability linked to current and former mining. It also expects adequate site information to be prepared by a competent person.
Mineral Safeguarding and Consultation Areas are retained, and the Framework continues to support the extraction of minerals before development where they would otherwise be sterilised.
Importantly, this is a planning-policy update. It does not change conveyancing law or create a new search requirement. What it does do is reinforce a practical point that is easily overlooked: mining risk does not begin and end with coal.
Coal mining is relatively well documented. Information is held centrally by the Mining Remediation Authority and is available through its reports and private providers. A coal report remains an essential first step in understanding the legacy of former workings. However, it will not reveal the full picture where other minerals have been extracted.
Stone, gypsum, tin and a range of other minerals have been worked across different parts of the country over many decades. Historic non-coal mining can leave voids or unstable ground, and extraction continues in some areas today. Where non-coal minerals are relevant, a specialist minerals report is needed alongside the coal search.
The new Framework also states that development plans should not identify new sites or extensions for coal extraction, and that proposals for coal working should generally be refused. Limited exceptions remain – for example where coal needs to be removed for public safety, ground stabilisation, or to enable another form of development.
Restricting new coal extraction does not, of course, remove the need to investigate the legacy of historic mining. In some cases the presence of shallow coal can still influence how a site is developed.
The practical takeaway is straightforward. When land is being acquired, developed or refinanced, the question should not stop at coal. A full understanding of mining and minerals risk – both coal and non-coal – remains essential.
For the full National Planning Policy Framework, see:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a8334c03bd75b81e2329ac4/National_Planning_Policy_Framework.pdf