For residents · voters · village communities
It is exposing green fields around villages to development. Three figures show the scale of the problem—and why your voice matters.
Join · read · follow · share
The grey-belt sequence
The national test overlooks villages and excludes countryside encroachment. Once the grey-belt label is applied, the evidence shows how strongly the balance shifts towards development—and how much of that development reaches green fields.
The rural test
551 of 575 areas in Guildford’s AECOM assessment were judged not to contribute strongly to purposes A, B or D—the three purposes used by the current grey-belt definition.
This is the contribution threshold, not a finding that every area is suitable or allocated for development.What happened at appeal
The first national study found that 16 of 20 major residential grey-belt appeals—schemes of ten homes or more—were allowed.
Marrons and the Land, Planning and Development Federation, October 2025.Where the homes would go
CPRE found that 88% of the homes allowed in its sample of 13 grey-belt appeal schemes would be built on previously undeveloped countryside. Only 12% were on previously developed land.
The 88% is the share of homes in CPRE’s sample, not the share of sites.That is the rural blind spot. The rules do not test village sprawl, villages merging or the setting and character of historic villages. Purpose C—safeguarding the countryside from encroachment—is left out. Rural ROAR wants the test suspended for villages, reformed and backed by real parish planning power.
Your most direct action
Use the official UK Parliament service to find your MP. Then copy the letter, replace the highlighted details and send it from your own email address. Include your home address or postcode so the MP can confirm that you are a constituent.
Find my MP on UK Parliament ↗Rural ROAR does not collect your name, address or postcode. The template is copied to your device for you to personalise and send.
Template letter to your MP
Subject: Grey-belt policy must not treat villages as blank spaces
Dear [MP NAME],
I am writing as a resident of [VILLAGE/TOWN] to ask you to support urgent reform of the grey-belt rules as they affect rural villages.
Guildford Borough Council’s 2026 Green Belt Assessment, prepared by AECOM, examined 575 assessment areas. Table 3-4 found that 551 of them—96%—did not strongly contribute to Green Belt purposes A, B or D. The 17 August 2026 NPPF now defines grey belt through those three purposes alone, although Guildford is updating its assessment to reflect the new Framework.
The update also removed the Footnote 7 exclusion for heritage, habitat, landscape and flood-risk constraints from the grey-belt definition, widening the land capable of being labelled grey belt. Purpose C—safeguarding the countryside from encroachment—remains excluded, and the A/B/D tests do not assess villages.
The consequence is already visible. Research published in October 2025 found that 16 of the first 20 major residential grey-belt appeals—schemes of ten homes or more—were allowed.
CPRE subsequently found that 88% of the homes allowed in its sample of 13 grey-belt appeal schemes would be built on previously undeveloped countryside. Only 12% were on previously developed land.
Villages are not spaces between towns. The green fields around them provide their setting, separation and identity, and many communities have already planned positively for housing through referendum-backed Neighbourhood Plans.
Please will you:
I would be grateful if you would tell me whether you support these reforms and whether you will raise them with the minister responsible for planning.
Yours sincerely,
[YOUR NAME]
[YOUR FULL ADDRESS OR POSTCODE]
Keep the ROAR moving
