A Changing Emphasis For Greenfield Protection Against Housing Development

D
Deloitte
Contributor
Cheshire East Council is understandably pleased with the three very recent decisions from central Government that have rejected housing schemes on green-field sites in the Borough.
UK Real Estate and Construction
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Cheshire East Council is understandably pleased with the three very recent decisions from central Government that have rejected housing schemes on green-field sites in the Borough. These come after the raft of 2014 decisions where Permissions were granted for just this type of proposal.

The constant across the decisions - both rejections and approvals – is that the Borough hasn't been able to prove that it has the required five years supply of housing land.

So why the variation in outcome? Isn't just the case that everyone agrees that Britain needs more houses, and where a Council can't show it has enough land the default answer to new proposals is 'yes'? Well, the answer to that is obviously 'no'.

Those in the development industry might say 'there just aren't any rules' – there's reams of planning policy, both national (even after the slim down of national guidance a couple of years ago) and local (including that which is now a good number of years old) – but perhaps this doesn't provide for the consistency that could reasonably be expected by all sides.

The one rule we all know and understand is Green Belt – but that doesn't apply to many of the sites around the very towns where developers are keen to build.

The step down from Green Belt is 'Green Gap' and on recent form the Minister thinks that this land should be protected (at least in Cheshire East until its new Local Plan is more advanced).

In the meantime, 'Countryside' essentially covers the other fields: and the test here often (but not always) comes down to where development is 'sustainable': a phrase that can mean different things to different people, hence the possible perception of 'no rules' in these locations.

In the past we've had formal 'sustainability' checklists, with quantified measures of numbers of schools, bus stops, pubs and the like. While such an approach had its detractors, at least it provided some measureable benchmarks. Perhaps a return to such an approach would bring some rules to guide everyone?

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

A Changing Emphasis For Greenfield Protection Against Housing Development

UK Real Estate and Construction
Contributor
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More