Research shows most ‘grey belt’ homes planned on unspoilt countryside
New research from CPRE, the countryside charity, reveals that the government’s ‘grey belt’ policy is paving the way for large-scale development on England’s unspoilt rural landscapes – not, as ministers promised, unused car parks and derelict petrol stations.
In December 2024, when the policy was introduced, the government gave ‘disused petrol stations’ and ‘abandoned car parks’ as examples of sites in the Green Belt that could be considered ‘grey belt’ and released for development. Since then, 13 developments of 10 or more homes have been approved by government planning inspectors on ‘grey belt’ land in the Green Belt. The approvals have been granted over the heads of local councils.
Of the 1,250 homes these schemes will deliver, 88% will be built on previously undeveloped countryside. These developments make up more than 90% of homes granted planning permission on ‘grey belt’ sites by inspectors. A further 21 smaller schemes, totalling no more than 91 homes, comprise the remainder.
Developers gain while Green Belt protections weaken
In April 2024, Sir Keir Starmer described ‘grey belt’ land as ‘poor-quality scrubland, mothballed on the outskirts of town’, as well as previously developed land such as disused petrol stations and car parks. He promised: ‘We’ll prioritise ugly, disused grey belt land, and set tough new conditions for releasing that land.’ A very different reality has been borne out in practice. Approval has been granted, for example, for 57 houses on some of the country’s best-quality farmland, in Tonbridge, Kent. In Castle Point, Essex, 47 houses have been granted planning permission on a designated Local Wildlife Site. Both examples comprise Green Belt land now considered ‘grey belt’.
Earlier this year, other CPRE research demonstrated that there is enough previously developed land in England for 1.4 million new homes, of which almost half have already been granted planning permission. This shows that the government can move quickly towards its UK-wide target of 1.5 million new homes with limited development on unspoilt countryside. Targeting the Green Belt is a choice, not a necessity.
CPRE is calling on the government to:
- Amend its ‘grey belt’ definition and ensure developments occur only on previously developed land.
- Ensure high-quality farmland and important wildlife habitats are protected from development.
- Set ambitious and legally binding targets for genuinely affordable and socially rented homes in all new developments, with developers held to account if they are not delivered.
CPRE chief executive Roger Mortlock said:
‘In practice, the government’s “grey belt” policy has not been about building on petrol stations but an existential threat to the protections of the Green Belt.
‘Our latest research shows that the policy is vague, subjective and misleading to the public. Its lack of clarity has been good news for large housebuilders but bad news for everyone who loves the countryside.
‘We know from CPRE branches across the country that the situation is getting worse, as local authorities are so desperate to meet revised housing targets that they are forced to approve speculative development in the Green Belt.’
CPRE policy lead Emma Marrington said:
‘The Green Belt is the countryside next door for almost 30 million people in this country. As well as having some of the country’s best-quality farmland and most important wildlife habitats, these places around our largest towns and cities play a vital role in helping to deliver the government’s target of 30% of land protected for nature by 2030.
‘We’ve got to stand up for England’s Green Belt. Once it’s lost, it’s lost for good.’
Case Study: Tonbridge, Kent
In February 2025, a planning inspector allowed a developer’s appeal for 57 homes on the former Court Lane Nurseries, within the Green Belt and near the Hadlow Conservation Area. This was despite local objections highlighting increased traffic, pressure on local services and the loss of Grade 1 agricultural land. This decision erodes the protected Green Belt, fragments natural habitats and removes high-quality farmland. It sets a precedent for urban sprawl, undermining long-term environmental resilience and the integrity of rural landscapes.
Case Study: Benfleet, Castle Point, Essex
In August 2025, planning permission was granted for up to 47 homes on land east of Chase Mews, Benfleet, despite its designation as part of the Thundersley Plotlands Local Wildlife Site. The site’s grassland and hedgerows act as a vital ecological corridor for bats, birds and badgers. Development will fragment habitats, reduce biodiversity and increase recreational pressure on nearby protected sites, even with mitigation measures. The loss of Green Belt space undermines local nature connectivity and contributes to urban sprawl, threatening long-term ecosystem resilience and species survival. This decision prioritises housing over environmental sustainability.
