9.1 There is a need to allocate land outside the existing built up areas through planned Green Belt release in order to meet identified needs for development in the District. Green Belt sites identified as having the potential for release are those at sustainable locations on the edge of existing settlements, with priority given to previously developed brownfield sites over greenfield sites in the Green Belt.
9.2 The majority of the sites with potential to be allocated for housing (Section 2), employment (Section 5), education (Section 9) and both of the preferred sites to be allocated for Warner Bros. Studios at Leavesden (Section 6) would require removal from the Green Belt if they were to be allocated. Whether or not a site would require removal from the Green Belt is stated on a site by site basis in the individual site tables.
9.3 Reviewing the Green Belt boundaries around sites should ensure that there are sensible and defensible Green Belt boundaries in the future. Further work will be undertaken to ensure that a defensible Green Belt boundary exists when revising the boundary to accommodate the future allocation of sites. The revised Green Belt boundary will need to account for the removal of future allocation sites from the Green Belt, the need to ensure a defensible boundary in the future and the proposed insetting of Bedmond in the Green Belt.
9.4 Following a District Council decision on the proposed sites for allocation at a later stage, the revised Green Belt boundary will be consulted on, anticipated to be at the time that the Draft Local Plan is published for consultation7.
Proposed Insetting of Bedmond
9.5 An analysis of settlements within the Green Belt is required by national policy to determine whether there remains a case for them to remain ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt, by virtue of their contribution to Green Belt purposes set out in the National Planning Policy Framework in respect of helping to maintain openness.
9.6 National planning policy8 states if it is necessary to restrict development in a village primarily because of the important contribution which the open character of the village makes to the openness of the Green Belt, the village should be included in the Green Belt. If, however, the character of the village needs to be protected for other reasons, other means should be used, such as conservation areas or normal development management policies, and the village should therefore be excluded from the Green Belt.
9.7 This means that villages should only be included in the Green Belt if the open character of the village makes an important contribution to the openness of the Green Belt and those that do not should be ‘inset’ within the Green Belt9.
9.8 Therefore, an analysis of settlements within the Green Belt is required by the NPPF to determine whether there remains a case for keeping them ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt, by virtue of their contribution to Green Belt purposes in respect of helping to maintain openness.
9.9 The Stage 1 Green Belt Review (2017) carried out an analysis of three settlements within the Green Belt which are ‘washed-over’ by the Green Belt (Heronsgate, Sarratt and Bedmond) to determine whether there remains a case for keeping them ‘washed-over’ by virtue of their contribution to Green Belt purposes.
9.10 The Stage 1 Review considered that the village of Bedmond could be inset from the Green Belt by virtue of its size and density.
9.11 A Stage 2 Green Belt Assessment (2019) further assessed the washed-over settlement of Bedmond through an assessment of harm that considers the extent to which the release of different areas of land reduces the contribution to the Green Belt purposes. This finer grained review of parcels of land in Bedmond is taken into consideration when determining the area to be ‘inset’.
9.12 The proposed revised Green Belt boundary which would inset Bedmond in the Green Belt takes into consideration the findings from both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Green Belt Reviews and the national planning policy requirement for a defensible boundary.
9.13 The current ‘washed over’ location of Bedmond in the Green Belt and the proposed inset location of Bedmond in the Green Belt are shown below.
9.14 It should be noted that if any of the potential sites for allocation which are adjacent to Bedmond are allocated and removed from the Green Belt, then the proposed Green Belt boundary would require amendment.
Question 77 Do you agree with the revised Green Belt boundary to inset Bedmond and the reasons why? If not, please explain why. |
| Current Green Belt Boundary (Bedmond – ‘washed over’ village) |
 |
| Proposed Green Belt Boundary (Bedmond – ‘inset’ village) |
 |
7 The Local Development Scheme which sets out the timetable for the new Local Plan can be viewed at: https://www.threerivers.gov.uk/egcl-page/local-development-scheme
8 Paragraph 140 of the National Planning Policy Framework
9 ‘Insetting’ a settlement in the Green Belt excludes the settlement from the Green Belt through a revision to the Green Belt boundary; this means that Green Belt policies do not apply to development in the ‘inset’ area.
< Previous | ^ Top | Next >