Green Belts in the UK - Essay Example

Contents Topic page. No Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 Background and rationale behind the policy………………………………………..3 Need for protection………………………………………………………………….4 Problems of over protection………………………………………………………….7 Concluding remarks…………………………………………………………………..9 References Green belts in UK Introduction Green belt is a portion of countryside that checks urban sprawl. Development on the green belt can be permitted under extremely crucial conditions, for example, there might be a severe housing necessity in that specific area. In UK, land can be broadly divided into brown fields and green fields. A brown field site may be defined as a formerly developed land that has the potential for redevelopment. It generally includes land that has previously been used for any commercial or industrial purposes and is presently deserted and probably contaminated. Green field sites are mainly agricultural lands that have not been developed before. By definition, green field site is not synonymous to green belt. Green field is defined as an underdeveloped or undeveloped piece of land, which is either presently used for agriculture or left in its natural state and are considered urban development. (Greenbelt Land, n.d.) While green field land can be beautiful landscape, it can also be neglected and unattractive wasteland. (Greenfield Development, n.d.) Restoring the ecological balance has become a subject for concern all over the world. Hence, the issue of green fields and green belts arises. According to the Planning Policy Guidance, the purposes of green belts are “to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the most important attribute of Green Belts is their openness. Green Belts can shape patterns of urban development at sub-regional and regional scale, and help to ensure that development occurs in locations allocated in development plans. They help to protect the countryside, be it in agricultural, forestry or other use. They can assist in moving towards more sustainable patterns of urban development” (CURRENT PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT, 2005, p.14) Greenfield sites are the stretches of land, generally agricultural land, that are considered for urban development. The debate presented in this paper related to the pros and cons of the sustainable policy with specific reference to the housing cramps. The arguments concede to the fact that there exists a housing crisis in the UK, but the solution to this problem is distorted mainly by the interference of politicians, researchers and campaigners. The rest of the paper deals with a critical evaluation of the above statement highlighting the pros and cons on the green field-protection policy of the government. (“Greenfield Sites”, n.d ) The question that arises from the above discussion is whether sustainable development policy over-protects green field sites making new housing cramped and un-affordable? Background and rationale behind the policy The current Government’s stand on Green Belts in UK is laid down in PPG2. This shows that the Government puts a great weight on the conservation of Green Belts. The reasons behind this are:- countering the unrestricted urban sprawl; preventing the countryside from infringement; preventing neighboring towns from merging; preserving the wealth and special features of historic towns; assisting in urban restoration by encouraging the recycle of deserted land and urban land. (Epping Forest District Council n.d.) A number of controversies arise out of these stringent norms. The limited availability of physical space coupled with an ever-increasing population that needs housing, makes the issue of using green fields for housing purpose becomes litigious, and political. . (“Greenfield Sites”, n.d) Over protection of these green belts imposed by the government’s sustainable development policy has led to a scarcity for space and escalating prices of houses in the U.K. Because of the stringent clauses mentioned in PPG2, green belts cannot be used readily for housing purposes. This imposes a problem of supplying houses to the ever-growing population in the U.K. The stringent rules imposed on the use green belt coupled with the persisting space cramp have ultimately led to a steep rise in reality business. The limited space and increasing demand has increased the price of houses manifold, thus, making affordable areas unaffordable in the present day. Owing to the future development plans, the price of green field sites has gone up sharply in the past few years. Rural land prices have gone up by 30% in 2004 (figures given by RICS-Rural Land Survey November 2004). Greenfield land is considered as a potential substitute to shares and stocks and is rapidly bought by a fresh brand of private investor. This is because they perceive a potential of high returns from these lands once these get the planning permission. Even though the price of Greenfield land is high, the worth of an acre of land after the permission is at least 10 times more. (Greenfield Development n.d.) Need for protection Sustainable Development means sustaining current development at a level, such that the interests and resources of the future generation and environment are not compromised. Restoring the ecological balance has become a subject for concern all over the world. This leads to the framing of green fields and green belts. In 2004, reforms were introduced in the planning strategy to achieve the goals of ‘Sustainable Communities Plan with the motto that every individual has the right to a decent housing. These reforms were projected to design the planning system in such a way that it would become quicker and more flexible and more land could be released wherever necessary to build homes. The main objective was to use brown field sites, which would account for 60% of the new development and the rest would use green field land Brownfield Land Development Information, n.d.). Such a practice of using green field land has provoked local resistance; especially groups like NIMBY (Not in my Backyard) are against development that they think are too close to their neighborhood or home. Nevertheless, the fact is, if the problem of housing scarcity is to be solved, green field usage is necessary. . (Greenfield Development n.d.) The current initiatives to protect greenbelt indicate the goal to restore and renew sustainable places has become a priority for the public and private sectors. The concept of “sustainable development” is a universal ideal and is an intergenerational necessity. Redevelopment of brownfield and protection of greenfield are land use strategies that lay emphasis on long run sustainability objective rather than unconstrained economic growth and resource depletion. Brownfield initiatives are implicitly entwined with the society’s economic development and job creation, as well as development of health facilities, safety parameters, neighborhood restitution, and the reutilization of urban space to offset the urban sprawl into green, open places. Planning practices such as urban infill and smart growth facilitate development management and curb the pace of urban sprawl. By building places of lasting value and by reutilizing and restoring buildings and other urban spaces, a common ground is built between sustainability and historic preservation efforts, and provides with an alternative to developing green field sites (Dorsey 2003) The key functions of greenbelt are to control urban sprawl, vacate centralized metropolitan populace and develop ecological balance. Through recognizing the multi-functionality of greenbelt, people have more chances to know the importance to harmonize human development with nature Based on the definition of Greenbelt, the main purpose of greenbelt could be summed up as: (1) to contract urban surge and optimum use of urban landscape (2) to develop urban environmental conditions, such as filter the atmosphere from air pollution, protecting water reserve, reviving deteriorated environment, and raising cities’ biodiversity (3) to offer leisure spots and activities (4) to provide learning and educational facilities. (Wei-feng, Zhi-yun, and WANG, n.d.) There are several disadvantages of using green fields for urban development. Once the land is transformed for urban development, it is not likely to be retraced to green field usage. It causes extermination of the natural habitat of some flora and fauna. Reduction in arable land leading to loss in production and employment it brings about a drop or complete loss of recreation value. It has an adverse effect upon energy used. It brings about loss of the green belt of agricultural or wildlife land, that clearly defines and separates areas of difference, be they cities, towns, suburbs, villages or small settlements. These are the potential negative effects of building and developing Greenfield site and its surrounding areas. . (Greenfield Sites, n.d.) .Problems of Overprotection On the contrary, over protection of these green belts imposed by the government’s sustainable development policy has led to a scarcity for space and escalating prices of houses in the U.K. Because of the stringent clauses mentioned in PPG2, green belts cannot be used readily for housing purposes. This imposes a problem of supplying houses to the ever-growing population in the U.K. The stringent rules imposed on the use green belt coupled with the persisting space cramp have ultimately led to a steep rise in reality business. The limited space and increasing demand has increased the price of houses manifold, thus, making affordable areas unaffordable in the present day. There are societal, economic and environmental aspects of sustainable development. The present dispute about government policy and housing is subjugated by beliefs, which put an endless value on saving Greenfields despite the social consequences, and merely assumes that greater development densities will diminish the reliance on car and thereby reduce traffic congestion. There is a significant requirement for affordable accommodation that is not met up in a number of urban and rural sections in the U.K. The shift of residents from older urban areas to semi-urban areas has inflated housing costs in those regions and has created accessibility to accommodation for people on lesser or average incomes hard. Limitations on Greenfield development are expected to aggravate the crisis and the urban areas, which are experiencing an urban regeneration, are also subjected to the like difficulties to the lower income families. The, excess demand or, disequilibrium between the supply and the demand for reasonably priced housing is typical to many of the housing condition in a number of areas, especially in southern England. (“ Housing Policy Statement”, 2000) The protection policy on the green belt has successfully repressed the availability of land in urban areas and limited the number of houses that can be constructed. Under-provision of houses and their excess demands has inflated the prices of housing. The rising prices of housing in the brown field areas may be combated by promoting low cost housing development in the green belt areas, but the government proposes high density housing (need to increase the density of housing to 80 homes per hectare has been suggested by the Communities Plan from 23 houses per hectare). The suggestion is that cities should be encouraged such that people do not move out to the suburbs. The landscape Institute believes, “the protection of existing green belt designations that effectively prevent developers taking the low-cost option of green field development over the higher cost and increased responsibility of brown field sites” (Dennys, 2004, p.21). According to Henry Oliver, the planning head for the Campaign to Protect Rural England, “We believe the Government should raise its sights even higher, to aim for at least 75 per cent of new housing on previously developed land. By sticking to its 60 per cent target, the Government risks slowing further progress and sacrificing countryside to unnecessary greenfield development.” (Dennys, 2004, p.21)Thus the pressure is built up on developers and researches shows that most of the people are averse to living in flats and congested housing plans. Moreover the demand for more and more houses owing to the immigration factors has raised the aggregate demand and thus raising prices of houses. The idea of increasing density of housing cannot be a sustainable process since it basically cannot address the need for greenery and some space to breathe. The compact cities plan might lead to a disaster, unnecessary raising prices and cramping spaces. A solution could be there by bringing in the greenery into the cities. The blocs may be separated and connected by green spaces such that people are blocked form the view of greenery. For both spiritual and physical well-being people are in need of greenery. According David Nicholson-Lord, “The green belt should not necessarily be a fixed ‘belt’; it should wind in and out of built-up areas, interweaving town and country. In this way, everyone can live within walking distance of a green space.”” (Dennys, 2004, p.23) This proposition therefore suggests a need to use the green belt areas. Conclusive remarks From the above discussion therefore we may come to conclude that the sustainable policy of the government with respect to preserving the green belts might result in urban cramps and rising prices of housing. As per the Countryside campaigners Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) the rise in housing complexes in the countryside would aim at destroying the process of urban regeneration and there will be more outflow from the cities towards these open landscapes of greenery. A pressure is constantly being put on West Midlands for housing expansion in the green fields. This is done in order to bring down the housing prices and avoid the high-density housing projects. However the CPRE says that the demands of the government regarding more green belt lands being used for housing and developments are not consistent with the sustainability plans. Moreover the Council suggests that this will not necessarily resolve the problems of prices because firstly the building of houses in those cases will pick up fast and the developers will seek for the most profitable areas. The prices in the rural areas will therefore rise, as the inhabitants from cities will flow out towards these greeneries. Against this in turn could cause traffic congestion and degrading the quality of life. This could build up the pressures on natural resources as well. A discussion is going on regarding the replacement of lost green belt lands elsewhere in the world but this again will be a costly proposition and not viable. (The National Directory of Estate Agents 2006) Thus the solution might lie in a controlled and monitored legislation of building houses in green belt areas. The regions within the green belts to be developed should be specified such that there is no unnecessary loss of greenery and the market is well regulated. References 1. Environmental Pollution Its Sources and Effects (n.d.) Available from: http://www.tropical-rainforest-animals.com/Environmental-Pollution.html 2. CURRENT PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT (2005). ECDC Green Belt Review, September, available at: http://www.eastcambs.gov.uk/docs/publications/devservices/gbr4.pdf (accessed on December 7, 2009) 3. Epping Forest District Council (n.d.), “Greenbelt” (n.d.) Available from: http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/Council_Services/planning/forward_planning/greenbelt.asp (accessed on December 7, 2009) 4. “Greenfield Sites”, n.d. Sustainable Build. 5. Available from: http://www.sustainablebuild.co.uk/GreenfieldSites.html (accessed on December 7, 2009) 6. “Greenbelt Land” (n.d.) The Green Belt is fundamentally a concept for controlling metropolitan growth, Available from: http://www.plot-sales-uk.co.uk/greenbelt-land.asp (accessed on December 7, 2009) 7. Greenfield Development (n.d.) Available from: http://www.buildinglanduk.co.uk/greenfield-land-uk.htm (accessed on December 7, 2009) 8. Brownfield Land Development Information (n.d.). UK Kand, available at: http://www.uklanddirectory.org.uk/brownfield.asp (accessed on December 7, 2009) 9. Dorsey, J. W.  (2003), Brownfields and Greenfields: The Intersection of Sustainable Development and Environmental Stewardship, Environmental Practice, Vol. 5:1:69-76 Available from: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=332495 (Accessed on December 7, 2009) 10. Dennys, H.(2004). Analysis, Landscape, February, available at: http://www.landscapecharacter.org.uk/files/pdfs/Urban-Fringe.pdf (accessed on December 7, 2009) 11. The National Directory of Estate Agents (2006), New housing threat to countryside, UK Property Shop, available at: http://www.ukpropertyshop.co.uk/news/199.shtml (Accessed on December 7, 2009) 12. TCPA Town And Country Planning Association, Housing Policy Statement, April 2000, available at: http://www.tcpa.org.uk/data/files/housing.pdf (accessed on December 13, 2009) 13. Wei-feng, L, Zhi-yun, O. and WANG R. (n.d.) “Land Potential Evaluation for large-scale greenbelt development at urban-rural transition zone a case study of Beijing, China”, available at: http://www.isprs.org/commission8/workshop_urban/li.pdf (accessed on December 13, 2009) Read More