Plea for the government to get real while helping small to medium size developers

Although the final draft is not yet available, the government’s proposals to amend the NPPF, National Planning Policy Framework, are part of a broader effort by Labour to address the housing crisis whilst balancing sustainable development with the natural environment.

A key feature of this framework is what to do with the green belt which is generally considered sacrosanct to prevent urban sprawl.

A new term coined by the government is “grey belt”, which it says could be built on and refers to underutilised or neglected areas often on the urban fringe.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The main aim of the NPPF is to speed up the delivery of new homes particularly affordable housing and to this end the government intend to introduce a “brownfield site first" policy.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer visits a Leyland housing development with Deputy Leader Angela Raynor.  Photo: Kelvin StuttardLabour leader Sir Keir Starmer visits a Leyland housing development with Deputy Leader Angela Raynor.  Photo: Kelvin Stuttard
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer visits a Leyland housing development with Deputy Leader Angela Raynor. Photo: Kelvin Stuttard

Sites that are derelict or contaminated, they say, should be given priority over green field or greenbelt land. In additionLabour plans to increase the flexibility in green belt use as there are sites which, whilst technically green belt, could be redundant industrial sites.

Critics counter that even limited development in the green belt could lead to the erosion of protected spaces.

There is also a proposal to empower local authorities to dictate land use in consultation with communities and this will not be an easy task. The green belt has long been a mainstay of the English planning policy.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Labour’s proposed reforms represent a significant shift in land use. The use of brownfield and pragmatic use of chosen sections of green belt which could help alleviate the housing shortage.

However these changes will require careful implementation to achieve the intended goals. The debate around these proposals will no doubt continue to evolve.

A prime example of what will most likely happen is a current massive war of words over plans to develop a new town at an airfield, derelict for 50 years, at Wisley on the M25 .

Whilst radical the proposals all appear sensible, but I have particular areas of concern in how this can all be achieved in an acceptable timescale.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Ideally, I believe, they should be adopted tomorrow but we all know that it is going to be like wading in treacle to make these changes happen quickly enough.

Firstly, communities will have to accept policy changes if these houses are to be provided. This will no doubt face considerable opposition.

The new builds will create the need for schools, doctors, hospitals, shops, transport links etc. so how are planning authorities are going to meet the needs.

They are not renowned for their alacrity and then can you imagine what ward councillors are going to have to cope with from objectors.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Worthy while most of these changes to NPPF are, I do not expect to see anything approaching the numbers of houses expected.

Where will more planning officers, bricklayers, carpenters come from? Who will provide the hospitals, schools and GP surgeries?

Realism is required. I head a group of over 80 Small to Medium Size developers locally. The large national housebuilders hoover up the large easy sites leaving slim pickings and difficult sites for the SMEs.

Yet we source all our land, labour and materials locally and invest in the local community. The consultation has ended so “watch this space”.

James Wimpenny , CEO Wimpenny Land & Homes and Chair of Kirklees Development Consortium.

Related topics:
News you can trust since 1754
Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice