Countryside Properties have addressed the matter of the Green Belt boundary in separate representations to the Core Strategy and Site Allocations DPD. Paragraph 2.8 of PPG 2 notes that if boundaries are drawn excessively tightly around existing built-up areas, it may not be possible to maintain the degree of permanence that Green Belts should have, and that such an approach devalues the concept of Green Belt and reduces the value in Plans making proper provision for necessary development in the future.

Paragraph 2.12 in respect of Safeguarded Land confirms that any proposals affecting Green Belts must relate to a longer timeframe than for other aspects of the Plan, i.e. in this case, beyond 2025. There is a positive requirement (as opposed to an optional choice) on Local Planning Authorities to address the need for Safeguarded Land when reviewing Green Belt boundaries, and there is a need to be certain that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be reviewed at the end of the Plan period. The RSS provides a strategic context for this consideration, since H1 makes clear that the same rates of provision should continue after 2021.

The reference to ensuring that the "minimum amount of Green Belt is allocated" completely ignores the requirement in PPG2 to set a long-term, permanent Green Belt boundary that will not need to be altered at the end of the Plan period.