Housing developers will be able to build on once-protected green spaces without having to replace the loss of nature in the nearby area, the Guardian understands.
New nature areas, parks and community gardens created to offset the removal of green spaces to make way for housing developments may not even have to be in the same county, under the new planning and infrastructure bill, sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said on Thursday.
The planning and infrastructure bill, which is currently at committee stage, has provisions to allow developers to build on green spaces and remove nature from local areas, if they pay into a fund which will create habitats elsewhere. The aim is to streamline regulations for developers so they can speed up their projects and the Labour government can meet its target for delivering 1.5m new homes by the end of this parliament in 2029.
The title is misleading, this isn’t anything new. The credits system for developers requires them to acquire credits from somewhere else, and this typically isn’t in the local area. Eg, a solar farm developer might have various solar farms across the country, some with more space kept natural and others that don’t have the viability for it. The natural space in one area will offset the lack in another.
I’m not saying this is really the right way of doing it, nor am I arguing against maintaining natural spaces more locally, but the point is the article is making out that this is a new idea rather than an evolution of existing practices - practices that themselves are relatively new. Hell, any requirement to maintain natural spaces is better than it was 10-20 years ago. Things are moving in the right direction, even if they aren’t yet where they should be.