Is grey belt the key to unlocking growth in the logistics sector?
The Government has announced its intention to shape the AI revolution (see our article here). To facilitate this, it needs data centres. The Government is therefore intending to introduce secondary legislation to prescribe data centres, gigafactories and laboratories as types of businesses capable of being directed into the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime (confirmed here) and it is also advocating the use of nuclear power, in the form of small and advanced modular reactors (SMR), to power them (see our article here). However, the NSIP regime is notoriously slow-moving (although streamlining is proposed – see our article here) and the deployment of SMRs is still at technical assessment stage – so we are some way off these changes helping to unlock growth in the the logistics sector. Nevertheless, we are starting to see more consents for data centres – thanks in part to national planning policy changes on the Green Belt.
In general, new development in the Green Belt is considered “inappropriate”, such that Very Special Circumstances are required for permission to be granted – a high hurdle. In February, the Government published an updated National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which provides that certain “grey belt” development within the Green Belt is not “inappropriate”, such that it may be easier to satisfy policy tests and get permission. “Grey belt” land is either previously developed land and/or other land that does not strongly contribute to any of three of the five Green Belt purposes i.e. to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas, to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another and to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns. Grey belt can include land subject to other designations (such as National Landscape) provided that the application of policies relating to those designations does not provide a strong reason for refusal or restriction of development.
The Government has also now published planning guidance to help authorities review their Green Belt boundaries in making their plans and identify grey belt land (see here). Ahead of any such reviews, this guidance will also help developers to identify which land could be classed as grey belt land.[1]
Not all development on grey belt land will be acceptable under the NPPF policies. Development must not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the remaining Green Belt across the plan, there must be a demonstrable unmet need and the development must be in a sustainable location (and in the case of housing schemes, consideration of the golden rules is required – for which see our article here.)
Nevertheless, the introduction of grey belt policy is already filtering through into decisions and, consequently, the release of land for development. For example, in January, Hertsmere planning committee granted outline permission for a data centre which, when built, will be Europe’s largest cloud and AI data centre, with up to two million square feet of space, which was partly due to officers identifying the land as grey belt[2]. Then, just last month, a 35 megawatt battery storage facility was allowed on appeal after the Inspector determined the site constituted grey belt[3].
Whilst there is still some way to go to achieve all of the Government’s long-term plans for AI and data centres, as set out in its AI Opportunities Action Plan (published here in January), the new grey belt policies are a step forward in terms of unlocking opportunities in the logistics sector.
[1] Subject to the exclusion in footnote 7 of the NPPF.
[3] Appeal reference: PP/Q4245/W/24/3354822
When making judgements as to whether land is grey belt, authorities should consider the contribution that assessment areas make to Green Belt purposes a, b, and d.
