The Government's grey belt policy, announced in July 2024 in its
draft revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), has been
rushed and not properly thought through.
The House of Lords Built Environment Committee has concluded its
inquiry into the grey belt policy and has today written to the
Deputy Prime Minister. It finds that the policy is unlikely to
make any significant difference to the number of new homes that
can be built.
The introduction of the grey belt policy had the potential to
expand rural settlements and unlock sites on the boundaries of
existing communities. By making grey belt land a distinct
category and highlighting that this is land that makes a limited
contribution to the original Green Belt principles, it might have
been possible to mitigate local opposition to such development.
In December, however, the Government published the final NPPF,
including a requirement for local authorities to review Green
Belt boundaries and propose alterations if they are not able to
satisfy their identified need for homes, commercial or other
development through other means. These changes, coupled with
other ongoing policy developments, are likely to render the
concept of grey belt land largely redundant.
Even before the final NPPF was published, there was significant
uncertainty about how many dwellings could actually be built on
grey belt land: estimates ranged from as low as 50,000, to as
high as 4 million. This uncertainty is compounded by the fact
that the Government does not have a clear plan to track the
progress and assess the effectiveness of its new policies.
The Government appears to lack a sufficient understanding of the
implications of introducing multiple intersecting planning
policies at the same time, and this compromises its ability to
deliver any of its policies in a coherent way.
Even if new homes are built as a result of the grey belt
designation, access to public transport infrastructure and social
infrastructure, in tandem with environmental considerations, will
be crucial in determining the long-term sustainability and
viability of such developments. It is not clear how far these
considerations have been properly taken into account.
, Chair of the Built
Environment Committee, said:
“Last autumn our committee launched this inquiry into ‘grey belt
land' because the committee believed that this new category could
make a positive contribution to meeting housing targets.
“The Government's policy been implemented in a somewhat rushed
and incoherent manner. The committee does not believe that it is
likely to have any significant or lasting impact on planning
decision-making or helping the Government achieve its target of
building 1.5 million new homes by the end of this Parliament.
“In December the Government published the final NPPF and the
revisions it has made to the framework have now made the concept
of grey belt land largely redundant as land will now be more
likely to be released from the Green Belt through existing
channels instead.
“The Government also does not seem to have any plan to measure
progress or determine the success of this policy. Effective
policy must be evidence based and be able to demonstrate its
efficacy. Sadly, this is not the case here.”
Other findings and conclusions include:
- Grey belt sites have the potential to support SME
housebuilders as the smaller size of some grey belt sites would
be less economically attractive to larger builders. However, the
affordable housing requirement, although less rigid than the
original proposal, still make it financially difficult for
smaller firms.
- The committee is concerned that, with the far-reaching
changes detailed in the latest draft of the NPPF, local authority
planning departments will lack sufficient resourcing and
expertise to be able to deliver change at the pace demanded of
them. The committee welcomed the extra money announced in the
Autumn Budget for local authorities to recruit 300 additional
planners, but this will not be enough to make a meaningful
impact.
- The introduction of the concept of grey belt land could have
the undesirable effect of encouraging ad hoc and speculative
applications for development on land within the Green Belt,
contrary to the Government's intention that such land should be
released in a planned and strategic manner.
