Labour asked to “come clean” on so called “grey belt”

York’s Liberal Democrats have called on Labour’s Council bosses to come clean on which part of York’s green belt will be reassessed as “grey belt” and built on.

The Government’s new National Planning Policy Framework outlines that green belt land will be allowed to be built on if it does “not strongly perform against any Green Belt purpose”: 

a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;

b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;

c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;

d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and

e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. 

and has “at least one of the following features:

i. Land containing substantial built development or which is fully enclosed by built form

ii. Land which makes no or very little contribution to preventing neighbouring towns from merging into one another

iii. Land which is dominated by urban land uses, including physical developments

iv. Land which contributes little to preserving the setting and special character of historic towns.”

It is set to be left to individual councils to decide if sections of land do or don’t comply with this definition of the “grey belt”.

Councillor Keith Orrell, York Liberal Democrat Councillor for Huntington and New Earswick said:

“Council bosses should come clean about which sites in York meet their definition of “grey belt”. Residents and developers deserve some clarity on this important issue.

“We have a Local Plan that is in the final stages of being approved. This change from Government risks throwing that Plan out of the window and creating a ‘free for all’ whereby development will be approved regardless of whether or not a site is in the Local Plan. 

“The whole point of having a Local Plan is to ensure that much-needed new homes can be built on sites that have been informed by local consultation, within a framework designed to ensure that the necessary transport, health and education facilities can be provided for new and existing residents. If Labour now wants to unpick all of that, it will create a vacuum in which there will a real risk of inappropriate development with local residents and councillors shut out from the decision-making process.”