Weekly planning news
Planning news - 1 August 2024
Grey belt defined
Draft updates to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1, released on 30 July, provide a formal definition of the long-referenced ‘grey belt’ – previously loosely understood to mean ‘undesirable’ areas of the greenbelt which could be released for development.
Grey belt, the formal definition that the industry has been waiting for:
‘For the purposes of Plan-making and decision-making, grey belt is defined as land in the Green Belt comprising Previously Developed Land and any other parcels and/or areas of Green Belt land that make a limited contribution to the five Green Belt purposes (as defined in para 140 of this Framework) but excluding those areas or assets of particular importance listed in footnote 7 of this Framework (other than land designated as Green Belt).’
Given the government’s focus on dramatically increasing housebuilding, and the fact that in the run-up to the election ‘grey belt’ was positioned as a key factor in addressing the housing crisis, it’s no surprise to see it given such extensive attention in the draft NPPF.
The draft explicitly clarifies that release of grey belt land will be ‘strategic’ and relatively strict – any development on grey belt land must bring tangible benefits, including mandatory biodiversity net gain, improved access to quality greenspace, affordable housing and infrastructure upgrades that support community needs.
Local planning authorities, after exhausting all brownfield opportunities, will be tasked with reviewing and identifying grey belt land for release and development.
Brownfield development
The draft reaffirms the government’s ongoing commitment to developing brownfield land, underlining that the default answer for brownfield development is ‘yes’, a sentiment which is strengthened through an amendment to paragraph 124c of the NPPF.
The draft also introduces the concept of ‘brownfield passports’ – aiming to further streamline the process of developing on brownfield.
Ongoing safeguards
The draft NPPF also makes clear that land of significant cultural and environmental value, such as National Parks and Areas of Outstanding National Beauty, will remain protected.
The government consultation on the draft NPPF is now open, with several key questions around grey belt policy open for opinion. They are also looking for feedback on expanding the definition of ‘previously developed land’. You can read the full draft and find out how to respond by visiting the government website.
Are you looking to identify brownfield or grey belt land? TerraQuest’s land finding services can help you to find appropriate land. Our expert team leverage market-leading GIS technology to identify and assess land – and given the updated parameters around development in the draft NPPF, now is the perfect time to find out what is available, and what you need. Our specialist team offer a tailored consultancy service to meet specific criteria, helping you identify sites for any purpose or project.
New Towns Taskforce announced
Sir Michael Lyons has been appointed to lead an independent New Towns Taskforce, supported by Deputy Chair Dame Kate Barker, with a mandate to identify suitable locations for these developments within the next year. As you know, the UK government has launched an ambitious plan to develop a new generation of new towns, aiming to stimulate economic growth and address the housing shortage. The initiative will focus on creating large scale communities, each with at least 10,000 new homes, and emphasises sustainable and well-designed homes.
These new towns are part of a broader strategy to revitalise urban areas and meet the housing needs of local families, with a target of 40% affordable housing. The plan includes significant infrastructure and public services to support these communities. The initiative aligns with the government's updated planning framework, which promotes the use of brownfield and grey belt land for development. The project underscores the government's commitment to economic growth, housing supply, and the devolution of planning powers to local authorities.
Our colleagues at TerraQuest will be working closely with the sector to analyse and assess land for development: find out more here.3
Government abandons Infrastructure Levy plans after industry pushback
The UK government has decided to scrap the proposed Infrastructure Levy, initially introduced under the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023, following strong opposition from key stakeholders in the planning and housing sectors. The decision comes after Mayor of London Sadiq Khan and various organisations, including the RTPI and London Councils, argued that the new Levy would complicate and undermine current efforts to deliver affordable housing and necessary community infrastructure.
The now-abandoned Infrastructure Levy aimed to replace the existing Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Section 106 agreements by calculating developer contributions post-project completion. Critics contended that this system would delay funding for vital infrastructure improvements and potentially reduce the number of affordable homes. According to City Hall research, London could have seen a loss of between 4,500 and 10,000 affordable homes over the past five years had the Levy been implemented.
Mayor Khan and others highlighted the success of the current system, noting a significant increase in affordable housing in new developments under his administration. The proportion of affordable housing in projects assessed by the Mayor rose from 22% in 2016 to 41% in 2022. The proposed Levy, they argued, could have jeopardised these achievements and made many developments financially unviable.
Despite late amendments to the legislation intended to safeguard affordable housing levels, the government has concluded that enhancing the existing framework is a more effective way to meet the housing needs of local communities and support sustainable urban growth.
Fee consultation on the potential for cost recovery, localisation, and the funding of wider planning functions
While many areas of Labour’s first planning consultation were heavily trailed and received wide media attention, reform of planning application fees was not one of them.
Having worked to deliver and maintain a national fee calculation tool as part of our online application service, ensuring fees are correct and paid at the point of submission, we feel this is a critical area that government needs to get right in order to fulfil its mission of getting Britain building.
The consultation covers several areas that could significantly reshape the cost of applications, and how planning departments can be sustainably funded.
Ensuring cost recovery is a key tenet, and is addressed by a number of proposed measures:
- More than doubling the current fee for householder applications to better meet the cost of determining them, evidenced by the volume submitted (around half of all planning applications) and the estimated shortfall created by its current fee level.
- Reviewing the fees for prior approval applications, and applications related to conditions placed on planning permissions. These generally have fixed fees or ‘per unit’ values well below that of a full application. This one-size-fits-all approach does not mirror the level of work required for some of these applications. For example, the range of conditions covered by a single fee range from simple matters to detailed reviews requiring expert specialisms.
- Looking at application types that are currently not subject to fees, but still require significant effort to determine and can also require technical expert resources.
Other proposals go further than simply reviewing the level of nationally set fees for the purposes of cost recovery.
Localisation of fees to account for the individual circumstances of each local authority has been investigated by previous governments and is once again included, either as a mandatory or optional activity that would allow councils to ‘fill in’ their own fees against a national schedule of categories.
However, the requirement for local authorities to justify their fees against costs would remain.
In addition to this, the consultation seeks views on the principle of widening the ‘cost recovery’ from application fees to cover other planning functions, such as plan-making, that are currently funded from other council budgets.
This raises more fundamental questions about how such functions are paid for, which applications should contribute, and if applicants may be deterred from making them.
The consultation is open until the 24th September, and can be read and responded to online.4
National Infrastructure in the NPPF
The draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was released on 30 July – you can read the full thing and respond online, by visiting the government’s website.
Following the emphasis placed on the importance of National Infrastructure in the build up to the election, it’s no surprise to see it heavily addressed in the draft NPPF, particularly with regards to key science and technology focused infrastructure, such as data centres, gigafactories, and laboratories.
Proposed changes seek to prioritise and streamline planning for these facilities, with updates ensuring they are integrated into local plans and receive necessary support. The draft asks for consideration around classing these kinds of facilities as Nationally Significant Infrastructure.
These sentiments highlight the government’s commitment to adapting the planning system to meet the demands of our modern and evolving economy.
After reviewing the infrastructure aspect of the draft, TerraQuest Land Referencing Consultant Peter King told us –
“Testing whether the government should enable digital infrastructure projects to opt into the NSIP regime makes sense, as these gigafactories and other projects could be considered of significant importance in the plan to grow the economy. Technological advancements mean that the generating capacity of solar sites is also increasing, and wind turbines are more powerful, so it’s the question about raising the threshold from 50MW to 150MW for solar is also valid.
It’s also good to see the requirement for necessary improvement to local/national infrastructure in regard to housing developments; however, questions remain on the utility connections (for example for water and electricity) which will be needed.
There is a clear benefit of consistency when going through the DCO regime, compared to the potential inconsistency across local authorities, but The Planning Inspectorate will also need to ensure they’re suitably resourced to handle the potential influx of projects through the DCO process."
You can find out more about TerraQuest’s land referencing services by visiting our website.5
- https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-reforms-to-the-national-planning-policy-framework-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system
- https://www.terraquest.co.uk/products-services/land-finding-services
- https://www.terraquest.co.uk/products-services/land-finding-services
- https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-reforms-to-the-national-planning-policy-framework-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system
- https://www.terraquest.co.uk/products-services/land-finding-services
