TO COINCIDE with the 60th anniversary of green belt becoming government policy, a poll has found that nearly two-thirds of people surveyed believe that green belt land should not be built on.

Commissioned by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), the Ipsos MORI poll shows that 64 per cent of people agreed that the green belt should be protected whilst 17 per cent disagreed.

Despite this, CPRE Gloucestershire has argued that its protection should not be sacrosanct if its retention encourages urban sprawl.

The poll comes just weeks after the government re-emphasised its support for green belt protection at the launch of its Productivity Plan.

However, CPRE research shows that 226,000 houses are currently planned for green belt land.

A national campaign ‘Our Green Belt’ has been launched by CPRE in response, calling on the government to:

• be more specific on the limited circumstances in which green belt boundaries can be changed through local plans;

• call in or direct local authorities to refuse damaging developments in the green belt that are not identified in existing local or neighbourhood plans;

and • target public funding, through organisations such as Natural England, to increase the quality of and access to Green Belt.

CPRE Gloucestershire has disagreed to some parts of the national calls, saying that well-planned urban extensions to Gloucester and Cheltenham would be a more sustainable solution.

Richard Lloyd, vice chairman of CPRE Gloucestershire said: “Removing land from the green belt for development must always be the last resort and kept to the absolute minimum and fully justified by 'exceptional circumstances’.

"The Gloucester and Cheltenham Green Belt was created to maintain open land between the two urban areas. In our response to the emerging Joint Core Strategy for the area, we have accepted that well designed compact urban extensions to Gloucester and Cheltenham located in a way which maintains a clear separation between the two urban areas would provide a more sustainable solution for accommodating future development requirements than a more dispersed pattern of development, and that 'exceptional circumstances' may have been demonstrated in this case.

"However, before contemplating any release of precious green belt land, we are pressing for full use to be made of previously developed land and under-used land and buildings.”