50 Shades of Grey: Will Unshackling the Greenbelt Make Way for 1.5 Million New Homes?
The UK faces an acute housing crisis, with an ambitious government pledge to deliver 1.5 million homes over the current parliamentary period. To achieve this, a major shift in planning policy has been introduced, including the new concept of the "grey belt." This was the focal point of our recent roundtable discussion, which began with an insightful presentation by Mark Batchelor of 4TY Planning.
Understanding the Legislative Changes
At the heart of the discussion was the recent overhaul of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which now prioritizes development in the following order: brownfield land, grey belt, green belt, and finally, countryside. This represents a significant change, as previously, green belt land was largely untouchable.
The grey belt is defined as land within the green belt that has either been previously developed or does not strongly contribute to key green belt purposes. These purposes include preventing urban sprawl, avoiding town coalescence, and preserving the setting of historic towns.
Under the revised framework, grey belt land is now open for potential development, provided it meets certain criteria. Paragraph 155 of the NPPF states that development on grey belt land is not deemed inappropriate if it does not fundamentally undermine the wider green belt objectives within a local authority's plan area. The introduction of this concept aims to unlock land for housing and infrastructure projects, addressing the pressing shortage of homes.
Interpretation of the Grey Belt Policy
One of the key discussion points at our roundtable was the subjective nature of the grey belt classification. While the framework provides a definition, the interpretation of what constitutes "strong contribution" to green belt purposes is likely to become a contentious issue between developers, planners, and local authorities. Some councils may embrace the policy, using it to meet housing targets, while others may resist it, citing local opposition or environmental concerns.
Mark Batchelor highlighted examples of local authorities already taking a pragmatic approach. Councils such as South Hams and St Albans have started granting permission for housing projects in the grey belt, acknowledging the need for land supply. However, many other councils remain cautious, fearing legal challenges or political backlash.
The question of Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) was also raised. Unlike green belt land, MOL is often located in highly sustainable urban locations, close to transport links and amenities. However, it has been excluded from the grey belt classification. Given the pressing need for housing, some participants argued that including MOL within the grey belt framework could be a logical next step.
Capacity for Delivering 1.5 Million Homes
Even with a more permissive planning framework, the feasibility of delivering 1.5 million homes was met with skepticism. To achieve this target, an average of 300,000 homes per year must be built—something not seen since the 1970s when local authorities were heavily involved in housebuilding.
Several key challenges were identified:
Planning Resources: The government has committed to funding 300 new planning officers, roughly one per council. However, there is already a shortage of skilled professionals in the public sector, with many being drawn to private practice. Without sufficient planners, the system may continue to slow development approvals.
Viability of Development: Land availability does not automatically translate to viable development. Rising construction costs, supply chain disruptions, and economic uncertainties mean that many proposed projects may not stack up financially.
Local Authority Targets: While councils are now required to meet housing targets in full, those with an up-to-date local plan (less than five years old) and a five-year land supply are not affected by the new methodology. This creates disparities, with some authorities facing significantly increased targets while others maintain previous requirements.
Infrastructure and Public Services: Unlocking land for housing is only part of the equation. Roads, schools, healthcare facilities, and public transport must also be expanded to accommodate new communities. Without substantial government investment in infrastructure, large-scale development may prove unsustainable.
Likelihood of Success
The new planning framework undeniably creates opportunities for housing delivery, particularly in areas with significant grey belt land. However, the success of the policy depends on how proactively councils engage with it, whether developers can navigate the evolving landscape, and if the government provides adequate support.
Some key takeaways from the discussion included:
Increased legal challenges: Given the ambiguous nature of what constitutes a "strong contribution" to green belt purposes, planning appeals and legal disputes are inevitable. This could slow the process rather than accelerate it.
Political resistance: Many local politicians remain opposed to any form of green belt release, even under the new grey belt designation. Councils with strong anti-development sentiment may still find ways to block applications.
Potential policy refinement: As the framework is tested through real-world applications and appeals, further clarifications or adjustments may be necessary to ensure consistent implementation across different regions.
Long-term housing strategy: The grey belt policy is one mechanism to boost housing supply, but it is not a silver bullet. A broader strategy, including investment in social housing, modular construction, and brownfield regeneration, is essential for long-term success.
Conclusion
Our roundtable discussion reinforced that while the introduction of the grey belt is a significant shift in planning policy, its success remains uncertain. The potential to unlock land for housing exists, but its effectiveness will depend on interpretation, local authority cooperation, and broader economic conditions.
While some councils are already taking advantage of the policy, others are likely to resist. Additionally, questions remain about whether the planning system has the capacity to process applications efficiently and whether developers can deliver viable projects at the scale required.
Ultimately, while unshackling the green belt may remove some planning barriers, it is only one piece of the puzzle in solving the UK’s housing crisis. Continued policy evolution, investment in infrastructure, and a collaborative approach between the public and private sectors will be needed to turn this ambitious vision into reality.
Around the table with iB Architects were;
Katie Hogendoorn Walsingham Planning
Josepha Horne - Penningtons Manches Cooper
D- avid Fletcher - Evoke Transport Planning
Fiona Sullivan - Savills
Richard Brooks - Brooks & Allen
Marcus Clarke - Satao Group
Emma Gelling - Greencore Homes
Mark Batchelor - 4TY Planning
Penny Dixon - iB Architects
Ian Blake - iB Architects