Greenbelt Land
The media and press often talk about Greenbelt and Greenfield sites in the same breath. These terms, however, are not interchangeable as now commonly believed and a Greenbelt and Greenfield site are not the same thing.
What is the difference between Greenfield and Greenbelt?
A Greenfield site is simply one that has not previously developed, so this covers farmland, agricultural land, parks etc.
Greenbelt is a specifically defined area of land around and existing developed area (usually a town or city), with a specific purpose. It is always identified in a Council's Structure plan and its precise boundaries will be defined in their local plan.
So what is Greenbelt?
The first official proposal to establish a Greenbelt or 'girdle of open space was made in 1935 by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee in 1935. They wanted to reserve a supply of public open space and recreational areas.
In 1947, the Town and Country Planning Act allowed local authorities to include Greenbelts in their development plan. But Greenbelt was really established in 1955 when an historic circular from the Government invited local planning authorities outside of London to consider the creation of Greenbelts.
Greenbelts are now approved through local planning authorities' Structure Plans. It now covers approximately 1,556,000 hectares, about 12 per cent of England. There are 14 separate Green Belts, varying in size from 486,000 hectares around London to just 700 hectares at Burton-on-Trent.
Purposes of including land in Green Belts
There are five purposes of including land in Green Belts:
- to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas
- to prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another
- to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
- to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns
- to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green belts
PPG2 is the Government Policy Regulation that controls the use of greenbelt. It allows local authorities to redefine Greenbelt if necessary. It recommends that authorities take a long-term prospective when defining the Greenbelt and consider sustainable development issues.
Fighting For The Green Belt
thisisLocalLondon.co.uk (UK), Sec. features 05-15-2005
By Steve Holland
Borehamwood Times
Although local politicians and campaigners vow to stop developers building on Green Belt land, ultimately it is not up to them. STEVE HOLLAND reports on the fight to save our green and pleasant land
Catering for Britain's rising population is one of the issues at the forefront of Government policy — and Hertfordshire has been marked as an area set to undergo major growth.
However, many in Hertsmere fear that the East of England Plan will be accompanied by a host of negative factors, including building on Green Belt land and insufficient infrastructure — tranport links, schools, hospitals, etc — to cope with the influx of new residents.
Although the Government has not stipulated its intention to build on Green Belt land around London, property developers are already eyeing up the green space.
Last week the Borehamwood & Elstree Times reported an example of developers attempting to exploit Green Belt land for the sake of profit.
The company, UK Land Investments International, advertised the sale of Green Belt land in Hertsmere, implying that would-be buyers could build residential dwellings on the plots of land.
Approximately 80 per cent of Hertsmere is covered by Green Belt land, providing the area with an attractive natural setting.
For many residents the idea of living in close proximity to green fields and woods was a key factor in deciding to settle in Hertsmere.
Dr Ann Goddard, press secretary of Elstree and Borehamwood Green Belt Society, said the green spaces need to be protected at all costs. She vowed to do all she can to ensure the sanctuary of the precious land.
"We want to keep the green spaces between us and outer London so that all the community in the area can have some green space. It's our mission to do that,"she said.
"I think this land is essential as part of our heritage. We like to be seen as the green and pleasant land'. It's open for exercise, sport, leisure and the site of green fields and trees is soothing and pleasant. The sound of rushing traffic is not.
"Our Green Belt is so important because we are so overcrowded. The more space we take up for building, the less space there is for animals and fauna."
Although anyone, including property developers, is allowed to buy Green Belt land, they must seek planning permission to do any building work.
However, Hertsmere Borough Council's Green Belt policy states: "Within the Green Belt... there is a general presumption against inappropriate development and such development will not be permitted unless very special circumstances exist."
While the council is committed to protecting the Green Belt, any decisions they make could be overruled by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
The council's Hertsmere Local Plan states that some specific Green Belt land is reserved to meet long-term possible development needs, post 2011'. It lists six sites, including land off Watford Road, Radlett, and Byron Avenue/Vale Avenue in Borehamwood.
And with 79,600 new homes planned to be built in Hertfordshire by 2021, the future of the Green Belt could be further compromised.
Dr Goddard is not alone in her crusade to preserve Hertsmere's Green Belt.
Hertsmere's re-elected MP James Clappison cites the Green Belt as one of the area's greatest assets, but he too is fearful for the future of the green spaces.
"There are threats to the Green Belt all the time from developers coming up with various ideas," he said.
"I'm generally opposed to them because Green Belt policy says there could only be development if there was benefits to the local community.
"If we allowed all the requests for development on the Green Belt then there would not be any Green Belt left."
The Green Belt boundaries were defined more than 40 years ago and have remained largely unchanged. It was a post-war initiative set up to enhance the quality of life, promote the conservation of the natural environment and stop the London suburbs from spreading any further.
The Government wants to see the thousands of new homes built on brownfield sites land that has previously been built on, but has not ruled out possible greenfield development.
"The biggest long-term threat is the housing policies coming from the Government," said Mr Clappison. "There are not that many brownfield sites in the area."
"If we are required to build that many houses there is a strong risk that they will be in the Green Belt.
"While I've been the member for Hertsmere I've always made it my priority to ensure the protection of Green Belt land and I will continue to do so."
