Local Plan - Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Liberal Democrat position?

The Liberal Democrats are opposed to all Green Belt development which does not have community support.

Why does the Local Plan matter?

Councils are required to have an up-to-date plan that provides for future development needs. It also sets the framework for deciding local applications. Without one, Councils risk losing control over planning decisions. That could have serious consequences for our beautiful area.

Why are there still Green Belt sites in the Local Plan?

The Council has to be able to justify not fully meeting the Tory Government's excessive housing target. To reduce use of the Green Belt, we have found more brown field sites. On top of that, the evidence that residents provided has enabled 2,000 of the original Green Belt homes to be deleted. However, this still leaves us needing some Green Belt sites to give a level of new housing that is likely to be acceptable to the Government's planning
inspector.

If a Green Belt site is proposed for development, does that mean it will definitely be developed?

No. The planning inspector may decide that the exceptional circumstances are not sufficient to justify the site being taken out of the Green Belt. Even if the site does remain in the Plan, it can only be developed after a full detailed planning process. Any permission given will be subject to a number of conditions including contributions to infrastructure, provision of social housing and homes for sale at a discount, flood control and many other things.

How did the Local Plan get to this point?

The process for developing a new Plan was started by the previous Conservative administration in 2016. They invited developers to submit proposals for sites to be built on. They did not exclude the Green Belt and therefore a large number of Green Belt sites were submitted.

The Liberal Democrats took control in May 2019. At this point the draft Local Plan was already on the point of going out to public consultation. We were very concerned about the very high Government housing target that clearly could not be met without substantial incursion into the Green Belt. So we paused the process to challenge the target. Regrettably, neither Conservative Councillors nor our Conservative MP's supported this and we were not able to reduce the target.

Before going out to consultation, the Liberal Democrats wanted to change the site selection methodology but were told we couldn't. So the draft that went out to consultation had the same sites as the one prepared by the previous administration. This was because it was based on the identical site selection methodology, which had been approved by Conservative councillors in November 2018.

Not surprisingly, the consultation brought in a huge number of comments, over 4,000. These comments provided valuable evidence to help justify a revision of the sites selection criteria. As a result, we were able to react to what communities wanted by applying new criteria that removed 20 of the previously proposed Green Belt sites. This represented a reduction of 2,000 new homes in the Green Belt. In addition, we found new brown field sites to help get closer to the Government's target. These steps enabled us to publish a new draft with fewer homes than the Government target but with the new total fully supported by evidence. This is the version that has been submitted to the planning inspectorate.

Could Green Belt sites be avoided?

Yes, if the Conservative Government took action as follows:

a) reduce the government housing target to reflect the heritage, Green Belt and infrastructure constraints on development in Mole Valley; in particular they could update the household projection figures in their formula, which are currently based on out-of-date 2014 figures - the latest ONS figures would reduce the target by nearly half, making it unnecessary to consider any Green Belt development at all;

b) change the planning framework to make clear that local authorities should not be required to include Green Belt sites to meet government housing targets - the Government has said it is "looking" at how to change the framework, but it has failed to do anything;

c) provide the level of infrastructure (schools, GP surgeries, transport, drainage, etc) which is commensurate with the scale of development required by the government housing targets; and if it fails to do so, support a reduction in the housing target to a sustainable level.