~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~10~RS~)
Green belt development 'not path to economic growth'
The CPRE claims about 1,000 hectares of green space is earmarked for new housing and industrial areas
Building on green belt land "is not the path to lasting economic prosperity", countryside campaigners have warned the government.
The Campaign to Protect Rural England has claimed countryside around English towns and cities is threatened by bids to build about 81,000 homes.
Recent changes to the planning system have prompted concerns that protection for the green belt will be weakened.
A government spokesman said it was committed to protecting green spaces.
The CPRE has suggested that current proposals, which are either out for consultation, submitted for planning permission or have been approved, would cover an area of unspoilt countryside the size of Slough in Berkshire.
“Start Quote
End Quote Paul Milner Senior planning officer for the CPREMinisters have consistently maintained that they value the green belt - now is the time to put these words into action”
These plans include the expansion of Birmingham Airport, proposals for three freight terminals, an open cast coal mine in Nottinghamshire and a hotel and golf course in Surrey.
'False promise'The campaign group added that about 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres) of land was earmarked for business parks and housing developments.
CPRE senior planning officer Paul Miner said the government should look to regenerate urban areas rather than build on unspoilt green space.
"It [the green belt] helps regenerate our cities and stops them sprawling into rural areas. As a result no-one is ever too far from true, green English countryside.
"In times of economic slowdown, politicians can sometimes be tempted by the false promise of an easy construction boom. But destroying the countryside is not the path to lasting economic prosperity."
Mr Miner said that "sustainable economic improvement" was only possible by "the sort of urban regeneration that has already done much to rejuvenate many of our largest cities."
"Ministers have consistently maintained that they value the green belt and want to see it protected. Now is the time to put these words into action," he added.
In March 2012, the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) published a new planning framework which included a section ensuring green belt land is protected.
A draft version of the framework was amended to encourage greater development of brownfield sites, following pressure from the CPRE and other countryside campaign groups.
'Green lung'Ministers said the policy, along with the Localism Act, gave communities a greater say on planning and scrapped "top-down targets".
However, the CPRE warned that the document puts pressure on local authorities to allow building in the green belt to meet housing and expansion targets.
A DCLG spokesman said: "The green belt is an important protection against urban sprawl, providing a 'green lung' around towns and cities.
"The coalition agreement commits the government to safeguarding green belt and other environmental designations, which they have been in the new National Planning Policy Framework.
"The Localism Act allows for the abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies which sought to bulldoze the green belt around 30 towns and cities across the country."
PM 'losing control of party over EU'
Pakistani politician is shot dead
Teutonic Texans
Tweets of the week
Clocking out
The real Sir Alex
Story of the S-Class
Fast Track
Comment number 232.
chrisk5027th August 2012 - 12:50
My local area has over 2000 empty homes, not ones for sale, just empty and unused. There is enough derelict commercial property that will house the whole of the county homeless. It's about time this government got to grips with rebuilding the towns and not expanding outwards.
Link to this (Comment number 232)
Comment number 189.
In Gold I Trust27th August 2012 - 11:42
So many more things could be done before considering building on any green belt land. Especially since we'll need it for the new era of rising food prices to become more self-sufficient again.
- deal with empty houses, by repossession if necessary
- brownfield developments / building reuse
- let the house price crash happen so people become more realistic about living expectations again
Link to this (Comment number 189)
Comment number 187.
Under-Used27th August 2012 - 11:39
There is plenty of land. I say again: There is plenty of land. Stop claiming it needs to be protected for this (crops) that (aesthetics) or the other (greed) when it isn't at risk. Population, prices, and vested interests are the cause not an eroding countryside that simply isn't being eroded as there is so much of it unused.
Link to this (Comment number 187)
Comment number 182.
dilman27th August 2012 - 11:32
A planning officer once told me "A developer is someone who wants to build a house in the countryside, a conservationist is someone who's already got one".
However, we'll destroy our crop producing land at our peril. Surely new development should be close to jobs, transport, shops etc otherwise fuel usage and resource depletion will continue to grow.
Link to this (Comment number 182)
Comment number 108.
nutgone27th August 2012 - 10:30
The green belt keeps housing high priced. At this time when the nation is on its knees we need to relax planning and get house building back on the menu. This would stimulate the economy and get people back to work. First time buyers need housing they can afford without punitive income multiples to pay back. This is why France and Germany do well they have affordable housing for all.
Link to this (Comment number 108)
Comments 5 of 9