Angela’s green belt grab: How area the size of SURREY is due to be snatched from local communities, local species could be forced out and roads could be brought to a grinding halt as Labour plan new housing projects across the country_Nhy
Before the general election, Labour claimed they were committed to ‘preserving’ the green belt after 14 years of being ‘haphazardly’ managed by the Tories.
But not even a year on, and there are worrying signs the party is already backtracking on this pledge.
In December, Housing Secretary Angela Rayner announced a major planning overhaul as part of plans to build 1.5 million homes in the next five years.
The Deputy PM has sought to reduce the amount of red tape in certain green belt areas and allow building on more than 640 square miles of land, similar to the area of Surrey, Greater London or Hertfordshire.
But according to Labour, this land is no longer part of the UK green belt, rather it belongs to a new classification of land altogether.
Instead these houses will be built on lower quality ‘grey belt’ land – defined as parts of the green belt that have already been developed on – such as disused car parks and wasteland.
The imposition of mandatory housing targets reverses the decision by the last Tory government to drop them altogether after deciding they were counterproductive.
Shadow Housing Minister Kevin Hollinrake accused Labour of waging a ‘war on rural England’, claiming the policy could see huge swathes England’s 6,300 square miles of green belt land reduced.
Countryside charity CPRE’s planning policy manager Lizzie Bundred Woodward told MailOnline many ‘grey belt’ areas will not be easily accessible or well connected to local services – which would only create further problems for homeowners.
She added there are already ‘enough shovel-ready brownfield sites in England alone for well over 1.2 million new homes’ and urged the government ‘to regenerate run-down town centres’ with more affordable housing.
In December, Housing Secretary Angela Rayner announced a major planning overhaul as part of plans to build 1.5 million homes in the next five years
Ms Woodward said: ‘People in this country are crying out for genuinely affordable new homes. We fully support the government’s ambition to build them. However, this does not need to come at the expense of the environment.’
‘The broken housebuilding market, not environmental legislation that protects the environment, is to blame for the painfully slow delivery of much-needed new homes.’
‘When big housebuilders deliberately limit the supply of new homes to maximise their profits, supercharging the current system will not lead to the change the government is looking for.’
Even environmentalist Chris Packham has taken aim at the plans, urging Labour to ‘think more creatively’ about how they might achieve its housing goals.
He told the Times: ‘The Green Belt is incredibly important, it was designed to stop urban sprawl and enhance the quality of people’s lives.
‘We need to think more creatively about how we can design and build good quality, affordable housing with communities and nature in mind.’
Councils that fail to submit detailed plans for achieving their steep targets, with some facing demands for a 2,000 per cent increase in building, could have developments imposed on them by Whitehall.
Housing minister Matthew Pennycook warned that the Government ‘won’t hesitate to use the full range of ministerial intervention powers at our disposal’ to ram through developments if councils fail to play ball.
There are around 6,300 square miles of green belt land in England, which is designed to prevent urban sprawl into the countryside (Stock image)
Environmentalist Chris Packham (pictured) has taken aim at Labour’s plans, urging Labour to ‘think more creatively’ about how they might achieve its housing goals
Locals in one of England’s oldest market towns are among dozens of communities faced with the loss of their nearby green belt.
St Albans Council is planning to build 15,000 homes by 2041 and sent it proposals to Labour’s Planning Inspectorate at the end of 2024.
Homeowners in the area slammed the ‘diabolical’ plan – which includes the use of 800 hectares of green belt – by developers who ‘don’t give a s***’ to destroy the countryside.
Although the council has promised £750million of infrastructure as part of the plan the council is £200million in debt from a previous housing scheme and locals fear developers would simply pull out of providing services.
Gee Smedley, 47, a finance trainer from St Albans who runs local action group in her spare time told MailOnline: ‘It’s an absolutely diabolical mess. We’ve had a lot of stress. Residents are spending thousands yearly fighting it.
‘The wider concern is a lack of infrastructure. Nobody is adverse to building. St Albans does have brownfield but the greenbelt is the easy option.
‘It doesn’t stack up and the evidence doesn’t support it.
‘This is some of the most valuable greenbelt there is. All the surveys say St Albans is the best place to live so it pushes up the value of the land.’
Gee Medley, 47, (pictured) told MailOnline the plans for new builds on green belt near her home were ‘diabolical’
These rolling green belt fields near St Albans would be turned into a huge housing estate under the plans
Addressing Housing Minister Angela Rayner directly, she said: ‘Build houses where there’s already infrastructure. Green belt rarely has that.
‘Don’t call in applications over local communities when you’re trying to devolve power anyway. It makes no sense.
‘There’s a lot of hypocritical statements. You’re not delivering what you said you would deliver.’
Innovation consultant Emma, in her 40s and her partner Alistair, 52, have lived together in St Albans for around eight years.
Emma told MailOnline: ‘What’s nice about here is that you can go into the city but feel like you also have a foot in the countryside so you can go for a long run and walks.
‘This completely messes that up. My concern is the trees. I don’t trust the council and developers to be thoughtful.
‘I voted Labour and I get that we need more housing. It brings to mind Lord of The Rings type imagery – massive bulldozing down of things and is it actually improving the community and in harmony with nature?
‘I don’t get a feeling that it is. [The developers] don’t give a s***.’
Each light brown area surrounded by a purple line will be green belt used for homes under the plan, amounting to more than 800 hectares of countryside
Pictured: Green belt farmland that will be used as the site for thousands of homes if the plans go ahead
Elsewhere, the Greater Manchester combined authority’s ‘controversial’ housing scheme has not only sparked angst among locals, but also between local authorities themselves.
The Places for Everyone (PfE) scheme – a joint enterprise between the region’s nine boroughs – is seeking to build over 170,000 homes in nine of the region’s boroughs.
The plans seek to make ‘the best use’ of brownfield sites, while ‘protecting’ the green belt from the risk of ‘unplanned development’.
But, despite this pledge, the councils have proposed a 4.1% reduction – equivalent to over 2,000 hectares – in the size of the Greater Manchester green belt.
Campaigners claim such a reduction of ‘environmentally-precious, ecologically-rich green spaces’ will ultimately jeopardise ‘nature’s recovery, climate mitigation and our health and well-being’.
Save Greater Manchester’s Greenbelt have since launched a legal challenge against the plans, which is due to heard in the High Court.
Explaining its decision to take legal action against the plans, the group said: ‘We did everything possible to challenge the inclusion of green belt allocations in this plan.
‘It was unnecessary, inappropriate and is a complete betrayal of future generations, given the impact on land that should be supporting climate mitigation, nature’s recovery and future food security.’
The red outlines show where parts of Greater Manchester will be developed on – resulting in a proposed a 4.1% reduction in the size of the green belt
The plans hit another hurdle earlier this year when Oldham council, where over 11,500 houses were due to be built, pulled out.
Oldham council Lib Dem group leader Howard Sykes, was one of several councillors who voted for the withdrawal. The vote was won by 31 votes to 29.
He told councillors: ‘Expensive luxury housing on the greenbelt is not the answer to the housing crisis.
‘This will be a developer and profit-led plan, not a people and need based plan.
‘Is Labour really suggesting that the best Oldham can do is back a plan that was designed in Manchester ten years ago, with no idea about the local challenges we face? I think we can do better.’
Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham has meanwhile defended the plans, saying that it was not in Oldham’s interest ‘to rip everything up’.
Oldham council leader for Labour Arooj Shah also said at the time: ‘It shocks me how brazen some people are about misleading our residents.
‘It would be a mistake for Oldham, for the greenbelt and for our residents who desperately need housing. It would lead to further developments on the greenbelt.’
Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham has meanwhile defended the plans, saying that it was not in Oldham’s interest ‘to rip everything up’
Oldham council leader for Labour Arooj Shah said she was shocked that Oldham Council pulled out of the plans
Epsom and Ewell Borough council is also moving forward with its plans to build almost 5,000 homes by 2040.
The plans, which aim to create 4,916 new homes, will also see some green belt land, including Horton Farm and Hook Road Arena, released by the council.
The council has argued that ‘pursuing a brownfield only approach’ would not allow them to meet the scale of housing that is required for the area, claiming this provides ‘justification’ for development on the green belt.
Although, campaigners disagree, arguing that ‘all of Epsom and Ewell’s housing needs can be accommodated on brownfield sites’.
The Save Epsom Green Belt group has instead urged the council to adopt an alternative plan that would ‘remove all high performing green belt sites at risk’.
Councillor Peter O’Donovan, who is chair of the licensing and planning policy committee for Epsom and Ewell Borough council, has defended the plans.
He said: ‘It is challenging to find a path that meets the many different needs of all our communities, and not everyone may agree with every aspect of this plan.
‘However, having listened to all the feedback, and examined the comprehensive evidence base, we feel strongly that this plan ensures that everyone in our borough, both now and in the future, is given the chance to thrive in Epsom and Ewell.’
This image shows the areas (circled in red) where Epsom and Ewell council are looking to develop on
The areas outlined in red are the proposed development areas for Epsom and Ewell Borough council’s plans to build almost 5,000 homes by 2040
One of the areas earmarked for development include Horton Farm – which is currently classified as green belt land
Locals living in Billericay and Wickford are also battling to prevent almost 17,000 houses being built on the green belt surrounding their homes.
Basildon Council is planning to build 27,111 houses around the towns, a whopping 16,928 houses – 62 per cent of the total – would be built on green belt countryside under the current plans.
Retired plumbing and heating contractor Roy Gutteridge, 78, has lived on the outskirts of Billericay with his wife Sheila for 40 years.
The couple’s home has amazing views of the countryside that they, their children and grandchildren have enjoyed for years.
But now the fields surrounding them are dotted with surveyors’ posts. If Basildon Council gets its way, Roy’s countryside paradise will be turned into a sea of newbuilds.
He told MailOnline: ‘It’s going to be dreadful if it does go ahead. To lose that view is the last thing we want.
‘You get the feeling though that if that’s what they want to do, that’s what they’re going to do. They won’t listen.
‘In earlier years I would have packed my bags and gone. But where would we go and find another place that’s got views such as that?’
Retired plumber and grandfather Roy Gutteridge, 78, (pictured) has lived in Billericay with his wife Sheila for 40 years
His house looks out on stunning countryside view – but the fields next to his home are earmarked for development
Multiple sites have been confirmed as sites to build more than 27,000 homes over the next 20 years
Pictured: Planned areas of housing around Billericay, where thousands of houses could be built
Roy added that his two sons are both thinking of moving away from Billericay with their families because of the planned development.
More than just destroying the countryside, he said the lack of infrastructure was shocking.
Despite the tens of thousands of new homes planned for the area, there are no plans for new GP surgeries, schools, bus stops or other such key infrastructure to service the newcomers.
Erika Poole, 49, lives on the London Road opposite Roy. Her home also looks out on a gorgeous countryside view under threat from developers.
She said: ‘Everyone loves the view. We’d love to keep the countryside beautiful. We’re losing arable farmland as well.
‘There will not be any break between here and Chelmsford. It will be one big town.’
The mother-of-one added that while the destruction of the green belt was a key issue, equally as important was the strain it would put on the road to London, which is outside her house.
She said: ‘It’s just not feasible. It’s being done to meet a target but they’re trying to shoehorn it into areas that can’t sustain.’
Mother-of-one Erika Poole, 49, (pictured) lives on the London Road in Billericay, which already struggles with traffic
She believes that without new infrastructure, schools and local services will suffer
Erika’s stunning countryside view is also at risk and she fears an influx of newcomers will put a strain on the road by her house
It is not only Angela Rayner’s house building drive that is seemingly threatening the destruction of the UK’s green belt.
Rather, Energy secretary Ed Miliband’s drive to reach net zero by the end of 2030 has also given developers greater incentive to construct new renewable energy projects on sites across the country’s rural landscape.
This includes the countryside view that Sir Winston Churchill once cherished, which faces being destroyed by the development of the UK’s largest solar panel farm.
Lord Edward Spencer-Churchill, who runs Blenheim Estate, has agreed to lease 2,000 acres of his land to a German company that will cover the land with two million solar panels – with 75 per cent being on the green belt.
Locals have branded the plans an outrage and suggested the name Botley West Solar Farm was chosen to distance Unesco world heritage site and national treasure Blenheim Palace from the vast project.
Large swathes of Oxfordshire would be covered in eyesore navy-coloured solar panels if the plans, which have been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, are approved.
More than 11,000 homes across 15 villages within a mile of the panels will be affected, with the panels visible from most of the land in the 60 square miles surrounding the massive solar farm.
Homeowners in one of the most affected villages, Church Hanborough, revealed how they were overcome with ‘grief’, ‘horror’ and ‘absolute disbelief’ when they were first told about plans for the ginormous solar park just before Christmas in 2022.
The Unesco world heritage site of Blenheim Palace is set to be surrounded by Britain’s largest solar panel park
Blenheim Palace draws 750,000 tourists a year to walk its grounds and visit the grand country estate
The area in red denotes where solar panels will be placed on the massive solar project
People living in the area said they loved walking in the countryside through open fields and meadows
Now, two years later, they are ebbing closer to a time that the nationally beloved land surrounding Blenheim Palace, Churchill’s ancestral home, will be covered in a sea of ugly dark solar panels.
Former Church Hanborough parish councillor Penelope Marcus, 50, told MailOnline: ‘It’s going to absolutely destroy this ancient agricultural landscape.
‘It’s just outside the Unesco world heritage site. Who’s going to come? It’s going to be surrounded by panels for the next 40 years.
‘Blenheim is going to really suffer in terms of visitors. The two world heritage sites nearest to London for a day’s trip are this one and Canterbury.
‘What would you see? Blenheim bathed in a lake of solar panels. This is crazy.
‘This is the setting for this village. This is where we live. We are a very close community.
‘The countryside is part of what makes England and that’s so important. England consists of landscape but this is shared by all of us.
‘The countryside is ours. We’re losing national land and national views.’
Left: The view from Purwell Farm over the Evenlode valley towards Church Hanborough. Right: An artist’s impression of the view once the solar farm is built
Locals fear their beloved fields could be overrun with solar panels, as an artist’s impression shows here
There will be three sites, with 2,000 acres covered in solar panels, PVDP said
The yellow sections are areas from which solar panels will be visible under the plan – a swathe of land approximately 60 square miles to the north and west of Oxford
Another local said: ‘There are beautiful views that we want to keep. You’ll see from one horizon to the other, they’ll be covered in these bl***y panels, millions of the sodding things.’
Their neighbour Karin Brown lives next to a field that would be covered in solar panels under the plans.
At the moment, she has stunning views to the horizon of the rolling English countryside. But that could all be ruined, she said.
Karin told MailOnline: ‘I live just over there. Every room has beautiful views.
‘Can you imagine looking out and it’s just all black?’
If the Blenheim Palace plan goes ahead, protesters said children being born now will be middle-aged before they see the green fields surrounding their homes.
A Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: ‘This government inherited the worst housing crisis in living memory, which is why all areas must play their part to deliver 1.5 million homes as part of our Plan for Change.
‘We are committed to a brownfield-first approach, but in some areas this will not be enough.
‘We are asking local authorities to review their Green Belt and identify opportunities to create affordable and sustainable developments, which will help to build new homes where they are most needed – but not at the expense of the environment.’
