The current Government has a clear agenda for growth, but has in some respects left us reeling with reforms, consultations and changes to planning law and policy since taking office.
Arguably, one of the most exciting topics for the industry is the new type of green belt: the grey belt. In this briefing, legal director Joanna Crow explains what grey belt is and what it means for developers, including key considerations for those planning a scheme in grey belt land.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was updated in December 2024, less than six months after Labour took over No. 10. This ushered in a number of key changes, including a revised method for assessing housing need, changes to the titled balance test, and revisions to green belt policy – the latter of which is covered in this article. The term ‘grey belt’ was an instantly seen as an improvement, moving away from the emotive, seemingly lush name of ‘green belt’. That was followed by Practice Guidance (PPG) on the role of the green belt including how to identify it (issued in 27 February 2025).
There are two ways in which the NPPF deals with green belt policy. Firstly, in respect of plan-making and how to justify green belt release via local plans. The second is in the context of decision-making and how planning applications within the green belt must be considered and ultimately determined. It is in this latter category that categorisation of grey belt land has a big part to play in schemes that may not previously have been approved. Categorisation land as grey belt changes the application policy for determining whether the proposed development is considered appropriate.
This can be unpacked in a series of questions and answers:
Q. What is grey belt?
A. Grey belt is defined in the NPPF as land within the green belt which has been previously developed and/or any other land that does not strongly contribute to any of the purposes in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) or (d) of paragraph 143. It excludes land where policies relating to assets such as SSSIs, Local Green Spaces, National Parks etc, would provide a strong reason for refusing development.
Q. How does grey belt not contribute strongly to purposes (a), (b) and (d)?
A. There are five purposes in total that the green belt serves (as set out in paragraph 143 of the NPPF) numbered (a) to (e). To be grey belt, the land in question must not contribute strongly to three of those purposes: (a) the purpose of checking unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas, (b) the prevention of neighbouring towns merging into each other and (d) preservation of the setting and special character of historic towns. The planning practice guidance (PPG) has set out what illustrative features are to be considered for informing judgments on these relevant purposes.
Taking purpose (a), for example, land that is not adjacent to a built-up area, but enclosed by significant existing development would be weak/have no contribution to this green belt purpose. The PPG is useful in signposting what features to assess, but importantly, each site will turn on its facts and the assessment will be a matter of judgment based on these facts.
Q. Are there any other requirements when considering a scheme in grey belt land?
- the proposed development would utilise grey belt land and not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the remaining green belt
- there is demonstrable unmet need for the type of development proposed (for example, in the case of housing, a lack of five-year supply)
- the development would be in a sustainable location (applying paragraphs 110 and 115 of the NPPF)
- a scheme that is major development will also need to satisfy the requirements of the Golden Rules (being above policy affordable housing capped at 50%, necessary improvements to local or national infrastructure, and provision of new/improvements to existing publicly accessible green spaces).
Q. Is viability a consideration in the context of the Golden Rules?
A. The PPG states that a site-specific viability assessment should not be undertaken/taken into account for the purpose of reducing developer contributions (including affordable housing). If the scheme is major development, the Golden Rule for affordable housing will apply regardless of the impact of this on viability. Therefore, if the affordable housing is not in line with the Golden Rule requirement, then the assessment of the scheme reverts back to being in appropriate development (regardless of it being grey belt) and very special circumstances will determine on balance whether it should be granted.
Q. What does this mean in the context of a planning application on grey belt land?
A. If a proposed development that is subject of a planning application is within land that is grey belt and it satisfies the requirements in paragraph 155 of the NPPF (and for major housing (10 dwellings or more) satisfies the Golden Rules) it will not be inappropriate development and you will not need to demonstrate very special circumstances. Assuming there is no strong green belt policy reason for refusal, the titled balance would apply with the presumption in favour of development for this scheme.
Joanna Crow is a legal director in the real estate, planning and construction team, advising on the full spectrum of development work involving residential, commercial and mixed-use schemes as well as advising on consortium and strategic land.
Get in touch
If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact our real estate planning and construction solicitors; Holborn office (Email Holborn) +44 (0)20 3826 7523; Kingston office (Email Kingston) +44 (0)20 3826 7518; Putney office (Email Putney) +44 (0)20 3826 7518 or complete our form.