‘Four million homes to be built on green belt’ under Rayner’s planning revolution

As many as 4m homes could be built on the green belt under Angela Rayner’s planning revolution, analysis shows.

The Housing Secretary’s radical definition of so-called grey belt land could unlock sites for nearly 800,000 new homes across London and the South East alone, according to property data company LandTech.

Hotspots in London’s commuter belt include the Tory constituencies of East Surrey and Orpington, which have potential grey belt sites for up to 115,000 and 89,000 homes respectively.

Ms Rayner is driving a massive shake-up of the planning system in order to achieve Labour’s promise to build 1.5m homes over the next five years.

This includes releasing grey belt land – which Labour previously suggested would be made up of “disused car parks, dreary wasteland” – for development in the green belt.

But her proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) may go far further in unlocking green belt development than anyone had expected.

Based on an assumption that grey belt land would be limited to so-called brownfield sites where there had been past development, LandTech had previously identified space for 316,000 green belt homes.

But Harry Quartermain, LandTech’s head of research, said the actual figure could in fact be more than 10 times this based on the actual definition of grey belt land published by Labour in the draft NPPF, which is under consultation.

Mr Quartermain said Labour’s new definition of grey belt land could unlock 150,000 hectares of land for development, roughly 10pc of the total green belt, with scope to build between 2.5m and 4m homes.

Mr Quartermain said: “It’s radical because they have made it clear that there are circumstances in which development on the green belt is no longer inappropriate.”

The draft NPPF states that grey belt land will be not only previously developed land but also land that makes “a limited contribution to the five green belt purposes”, which are primarily to stop urban sprawl.

The draft NPPF also states that building on the green belt should not be considered inappropriate if it can be done sustainably on grey belt land.

Building on the green belt can also be considered if local authorities are unable to demonstrate that they have a pipeline of sites for development in line with their targets.

Based on this definition, LandTech found the North West is the region with the largest amount of potential grey belt land, with the capacity for up to 801,000 new green belt homes, while 275,000 and 523,000 could be built on green belt land in London and the South East respectively.

The Labour constituency of Hexham in Northumberland has capacity for up to 156,000 new green belt homes, the largest of any in the country.

To identify potential sites, LandTech looked at all green belt land and discounted sites that are affected by other constraints, such as flood zones and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Within the remaining areas, LandTech then found the sites that are within 100-metres of an existing built-up area and would therefore be considered sustainable places to build.

LandTech also ranked these sites by a series of metrics including transport links and affordability, and found there are 14,000 hectares that would be particularly optimal for development, with scope for up to 400,000 homes.

The property industry has warned that Labour’s target of building 1.5m homes over five years will be impossible to achieve, but Ms Rayner’s grey belt reforms are designed to unlock land for development for many years beyond this parliament.

Simon Coop, senior director at Lichfield planning consultants, said: “It is the next and subsequent parliamentary terms that are of particular interest. Certainly what we are seeing is the foundations being laid for long-term growth. The housing crisis will not be fixed in five years, it needs a long-term strategy.”

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesman said: “We do not recognise these figures. We remain committed to the protection of the Green Belt, and while we must build homes to deal with the housing crisis, development on the Green Belt will only be allowed where there is a real need and will not come at the expense of the environment.”