The government's target to build 1.5 million homes by 2029 has sparked a series of local planning battles across England, with communities and councils pushing back against developments they say threaten green spaces and heritage sites. According to multiple reports, plans to build 3,500 homes on the foothills of the Malvern Hills are part of this national target. Thousands of people are expected to protest on Saturday May 7 in a national day of action against development on green spaces, organized by the Community Planning Alliance and supported by Chris Packham, the Woodland Trust, and the National Federation of Parks. The Community Planning Alliance says 14,700 acres of Green Belt land are currently at risk of development, equivalent to over 11,000 football pitches.
In the Forest of Dean, the Green Party-majority council, led by Zack Polanski, has a target of building 13,000 new homes by 2045. The proposed Glynchbrook site, located where Gloucestershire, Worcestershire and Herefordshire meet, has become a flashpoint. A council-commissioned study concluded the site was 'unlikely' to meet needed criteria and would cause landscape harm, potential heritage harm, and high car reliance. The site is 16.5km from Gloucester and near the Cotswolds. Local residents have formed the United Against Glynchbrook campaign group to oppose the development, citing concerns about flooding, lack of public transport, and proximity to conservation areas and listed buildings. Green Party council chair Andy Birch survived a no-confidence vote by one vote last month. Residents claim Birch said his hands are tied by the government and admitted to only sending two emails as pushback. However, the council stated in a January meeting that the leader had written to central government to challenge the numbers but received no supportive response. Ledbury Town Council has agreed to oppose the plans over fears of significant harmful impacts, according to Ledbury Town Council.
I am not saying the King should have any say over land use above that of a normal citizen. But it is very close to Highgrove, and the people of Tetbury give him peace wherever he goes. I am sure he enjoys the tranquillity of the fields and the surroundings.
Plans to build 135 homes near King Charles' Highgrove House in Tetbury have also sparked local opposition. The fields near Highgrove are a priority conservation habitat within the Cotswold National Landscape. According to Daily Mail - News, Conservative councillor Laura Hall-Wilson said she has not spoken to a single resident in favour of the development. She described the plans as extremely unpopular in Tetbury. Meanwhile, plans to build 30 affordable homes on Chyngton Field near the Seven Sisters cliffs have drawn objections from the National Trust, Sussex Wildlife Trust, and Seaford town council. A petition against the development has attracted more than 3,000 signatures, and Natural England has designated Chyngton Field as a habitat network expansion zone. According to GB News, protester Rupert Kirby described the development as eroding the natural character of a nationally significant landscape.
In a separate case, Three Rivers District Council refused a planning application for 256 homes despite housing minister Matthew Pennycook directing approval 24 hours earlier, according to multiple reports. The refusal was on grounds of green belt harm, flooding, and loss of hedgerows. The council's own planning officer had recommended approval, concluding the site met 'grey belt' definition, according to Three Rivers District Council planning officer. Developer Burlington Property Group called the decision 'a declaration of war' on government policy, according to Burlington Property Group. A Sky News investigation found over £20m in costs paid out due to unreasonable council planning decisions, and more than 100 local councils did not respond to FOI requests about planning decisions. The government has not yet indicated whether it will 'call in' the Three Rivers decision.
It is extremely unpopular in the village - I would say it is unanimously unpopular in Tetbury - I've not spoken to anyone in favour.
This is a direct affront to your ministerial authority; it is nothing short of a 'declaration of war' on the government's core policy objective to increase the delivery of new homes.
Developing this site would erode the natural character of a nationally significant landscape, set a worrying precedent for future encroachment into protected areas, impact the setting and integrity of the neighbouring SSSI and undermine the very reason people are drawn to this area in the first place.