Ministers are set to introduce measures that cap the profits landowners can earn from the sale of green belt land, a pivotal part of the government’s strategy to deliver 1.5 million new homes by 2030.
The proposed reforms will empower councils to compulsorily purchase green belt land at a reduced “benchmark” value, limiting the ability for landowners to profit from areas previously ineligible for development. As Labour confronts the UK’s housing crisis, experts indicate that meeting this ambitious target will necessitate development on both “grey belt” and greenfield sites. The green belt, spanning over 6,300 square miles and covering around 13 per cent of England, was originally designated to curb urban sprawl; nevertheless, some of these areas have already undergone development.
Consultations are ongoing regarding amendments to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), compelling councils to earmark sufficient land to fulfil their housing requirements. Under the proposed system, if landowners in high-demand regions decline to sell, councils could acquire their property at a value lower than the market rate of comparable non-green belt lands. This mechanism would be accomplished through a “benchmark” value approach to avoid inflated prices associated with future planning permissions. Moreover, ministers aim to utilise compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) to secure land when necessary, with compensation based on the land’s existing use rather than its potential for development. This is intended to ensure land is obtained at a fair price, preventing landowners from holding out for higher offers or delaying the release of crucial development sites.
Critics, including campaign groups and planning experts, contend that such measures might result in the development of greenfield lands rather than prioritising brownfield areas. While the government stresses a “brownfield-first” strategy, concerns persist over the ambiguous definitions of “grey belt,” which could potentially lead to broader greenfield development. Matthew Spry, a senior director at the planning consultancy Lichfields, cautioned that many local authorities could struggle to meet their housing targets without resorting to greenfield development in the green belt. “The reality is that in order to meet the targets, this will require building on land that many will regard as greenfield, not just the areas of brownfield land in the green belt that have been commonly talked about,” Spry stated.
Industry insiders have voiced apprehensions about potential resistance from landowners. A senior figure suggested that imposing caps on land prices below market value could dissuade landowners from selling, which might impede the development process. They argued that although CPOs could be utilised, these orders are often time-intensive and intricate, potentially thwarting the government’s ability to achieve its housing objectives within the specified timeframe.
Further concerns were highlighted by the countryside charity CPRE, which suggested that some landowners might intentionally degrade their green belt sites to render them eligible for development under the new regulations. “We have got concerns about the wording and that so-called grey belt could ultimately end up including greenfield land,” remarked Lizzie Bundred Woodward, a planning policy manager at CPRE.
In response, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government reaffirmed its commitment to preserving the green belt and prioritising brownfield land for development. A representative stated, “We will reform the outdated compulsory purchase process to remove inflated values of land and ensure compensation paid to landowners is fair but not excessive. We will also use lower quality ‘grey belt’ land, like wasteland or old car parks, and introduce ‘golden rules’ to ensure that development benefits both communities and nature.”
As the government grapples with the intricate task of balancing housing demands with land conservation, the proposed reforms may herald a significant transformation in the management and development of green belt land in the upcoming years.
