Government to Further ‘Liberalise Planning’ on Brownfield Sites, and Restrict Green Belt Loss

Daily Mail – suggest CoU rules to be extended to B2 and B8 not just B1.  Will of course force noisy businesses to close down because of EPA complaints. A zoning policy that would be laughed out of court in even the most poorly developed planning system in the third world. What is interesting is that it appears that Pickles has prevailed over Boles and that Green Belt will be truly ‘inviolate’ from Green Belt reviews.  Perhaps Alex Morton has done another back of the envelope calculation and come up with another half baked plan.  One that in this case would see the wiping put of Englands Industrial base and see the kind of low rent, interminably poor housing in the middle of industrial areas you see here in the middle east.

Ministers are to sweep away planning restrictions on disused urban sites in a bid to reduce the impact of new house building on the countryside.

Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles yesterday said that the Government planned to ‘augment’ its controversial planning reforms with the introduction of ‘practical ways of removing red tape’.

These will include a ‘relaxation’ of the rules that make it difficult to convert warehouses and industrial premises into flats and housing estates. This could lead to the construction of a string of new housing developments on edge-of-town sites, reducing the need for house building in open countryside.

Chancellor George Osborne (left) will unveil further details of the proposals in his annual Mansion House speech while Eric Pickles (right) believes that he has extracted firm commitments that the Green Belt should be protected from development in most circumstances

Plans also include a package of measures to ‘regenerate’ so-called brownfield sites, which have been developed before.

Chancellor George Osborne will unveil further details of the proposals in his annual Mansion House speech in the City tonight.

The plans are expected to include a new presumption in favour of development on virtually all brownfield sites.

Developers claim that brownfield sites are often too difficult and expensive to bring back into use.

This stance has led to massive pressure on councils to free up green field sites for development – to the anger of many rural communities.

 Eric Pickles believes that he has extracted firm commitments that the Green Belt such as this area in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, should be protected from development

Tory MPs, under pressure from local residents, have been urging ministers to shift the focus for development from green field sites to urban locations.

A Government source said the new proposals would make it easier for developers to build new homes on brownfield sites.

‘Our intention is quite clear that we want to see more development on brownfield,’ the source said.

Ministers believe the changes could help balance the need for new housing development against the resistance to new housing estates in many Tory constituencies.

Mr Pickles believes that he has extracted firm commitments that the Green Belt should be protected from development in most circumstances as part of the deal.

Ministers are also bringing forward proposals to help regenerate Britain’s high streets, including planning reforms to make it easier to change disused shops into restaurants and leisure facilities.

7 thoughts on “Government to Further ‘Liberalise Planning’ on Brownfield Sites, and Restrict Green Belt Loss

  1. I have just written to CPRE who have objected to our proposals to build housing on a former conference centre site in St Albans. They claimed the site was not sustainable and the development would impact on the openness of the Green Belt as some of our proposed houses were taller than some of the single storey buildings currently on site (despite our our general heights being lower than those currently on site). The alternative is Green Belt release – how does that impact upon openness??!! I didn’t realise the CPRE only supported replacement footprint, floor area and volume, nor maximising development on brownfield sites because this will reduce development pressures on green field sites.

    • All CPRE are doing in this case is ensuring Government policy on maintaining openness of Green Belt is kept to. They might be applying too close to teh old PPG2 annex a policy though rather than the lightly more relaxed test in the NPPF.

  2. We have a 40 acre brownfield site situated in a green belt area with 12 houses less than 100 metres from the edge of the site. Does this mean with tne Chancellor’s speech regarding 90 percent of brown field now pre appoved for development we have a real chance of developing the site for a large housing estate?

  3. Hi Andrew, do you think the site could come up for development with the Chancellor’s speech regarding pre approved brownfield sites?

  4. Hi Andrew, as Tony mentioned, would it be possible to develop on a brownfield site (current dwelling and 1/2 an acre garden) within a green belt area?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s