Grey belt homes refused in Staffordshire
Applicants sought permission in principle to build up to nine homes in a field on the edge of Biddulph Moor
Residents have won their fight against plans to build homes on Green Belt land outside their village. Applicants sought permission in principle to build up to nine homes in a field on the edge of Biddulph Moor, claiming that the land qualified as ‘grey belt’.
The proposals sparked around 40 objections from members of the public, who rejected the grey belt classification and raised concerns over flooding, highways and over-development. Planning committee members at Staffordshire Moorlands District Council have now voted to refuse the application, despite their officers recommending approval.
Officers agreed with the applicants’ assertion that the land, between Rudyard Road and Hot Lane, meets the definition of grey belt, saying it does not make a strong contribution to the Green Belt. And they told the committee that other issues, such as highways and drainage, would be considered at the technical details stage of the application.
But a majority of committee members voted to refuse permission, saying they did not accept the grey belt argument. Biddulph Moor resident Martin Lawson, who was among the objectors, told the committee that the land serves an important purpose.
He said: “The site lies within the North Staffordshire Green Belt and outside the village development boundary. This is fundamental.
“The site currently forms open land, and contributes to the separation between the built edge of Biddulph Moor and the surrounding countryside. Approving development here would result in clear encroachment into the open countryside and would erode the fundamental purpose of the Green Belt.”
Mr Lawson also pointed out that the council does not currently have an adopted grey belt policy.
Caroline Payne, agent for the applicants, claimed that the site, just next to the village boundary, would be a ‘logical’ place to build much-needed new homes, with the district council currently unable to demonstrates a five-year housing land supply. She said: “The proposal would meet the exceptions for grey belt development. It would contribute towards meeting the housing land supply shortfall in a sustainable way on a small site, as expressly supported in national policy, and would result in economic benefits during the construction and operational periods.”
A number of committee members complained about the lack of information in the plans, and feared that the proposed development would result in Biddulph Moor encroaching into the countryside.
Councillor Paul Roberts said: “I would have liked to have seen a full application. There’s so much information missing. We don’t know what highways think.
“It’s in the Green Belt. I don’t agree with it being grey belt. It’s totally wrong. We’re being put under pressure by the government to build on Green Belt that they class as grey belt. I’m sorry, to me, it’s Green Belt.”
The committee voted to refuse the application due to it conflicting with local planning policy and the Biddulph Neighbourhood Plan.