The Government’s plan to make it easier to build on green belt is likely to have limited impact on North East housebuilding in the short term.
Under changes introduced by Labour shortly after the election, lower quality green belt land will be designated so called ‘grey belt’ and released for construction as the Government seeks to build 1.5 million homes by 2029 to help tackle the chronic housing shortage.
A creation of the current Labour Government, grey belt is defined as land which makes a ‘limited contribution’ to green belt objectives. This may include land that contains substantial built development or is enclosed by built form, does little to prevent the coalescence of settlements, is dominated by urban land uses, or does not protect a historic setting.
The aim is to deliver more opportunities for development in rural areas and should open the door for residential, commercial and tourism development within the green belt that would otherwise have been prevented.
However, the grey belt plan in its current format will have limited impact on housebuilding in the North East in the short term. This is due in part to the fact that most regional councils have a 5-year housing land supply or are already meeting their housing delivery test, which is one of the requirements for grey belt.
There are one or two exceptions such as South Tyneside and Gateshead but on the whole the picture is fairly similar region-wide.
While it was initially felt that the grey belt policy could make a positive contribution to meeting sustainable housing long term, now that detailed guidance has been published it is not quite as golden as hoped. Planning experts now consider that the subsequent changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other parts of planning policy mean any impact is at best likely to be marginal in the short term.
You can argue that the policy is not fit for purpose, with the changes to the NPPF making the concept of grey belt land largely redundant with land more likely be released from the green belt through existing channels instead. Those changes include a new requirement for councils to review green belt boundaries and propose changes if they cannot meet demand for housing or commercial land through other means.
Tracking the effectiveness of grey belt policy amid uncertainty about the number of homes that could be built on such land is also difficult – media reports estimate ranges from 50,000 to four million, which suggests that the potential impact of the policy had not been adequately assessed before it was announced.
In addition, housing within the grey belt will have to deliver a greater proportion of affordable housing than sites outside the green belt. Originally, one of the ‘golden rules’ linked to grey belt development was that 50% of the housing must be affordable. While this provision has been watered down to be 15% above the local authority’s policy position, and capped at 50% and subject to viability, the combination of more affordable housing and better household incomes will undoubtedly see positive outcomes as we push for growth.
However, it’s not all doom and gloom. A properly thought through and executed grey belt policy could deliver more opportunities in rural North East areas, opening the door for residential, commercial and tourism development within the green belt that would otherwise have been prevented.
Growth can be unlocked; new opportunities created. With the roll out of new superfast digital services in rural communities, increased flexible working practices with more people working online, and planning approvals in all the right places, the commercial opportunities for development within the grey belt could be highly significant with new jobs strengthening the rural economy and boosting household incomes.
Building, Design & Construction Magazine | The Choice of Industry Professionals
