SAVE OUR GREEN BELT LAND ON CHEW MOOR LANE

While Persimmon Homes initially consulted on a proposal for around 230 homes, representatives later indicated a figure closer to 100 homes in meetings, which may be intended to portray the scheme as more modest and therefore more acceptable locally.

Under Bolton Council’s Core Strategy Policy SC1, developments of this size are expected to deliver around 35 % affordable housing, with the remainder being market homes. This typically means that on a development of 230 homes, around 80 should be affordable (e.g., for social rent, affordable rent, or shared ownership) and around 150 market homes, though viability tests can adjust this requirement. Bolton Council

For additional context, Persimmon’s average selling price for new homes was around £268,499 in 2024, indicating that the market homes on site could be significantly more expensive than many local residents can afford — particularly first-time buyers and households on modest incomes. Nevertheless they are claiming that 50% of the homes will be affordable. This is yet to be established. Persimmon Homes

The land off Chew Moor Lane is currently agricultural land within the Green Belt. While Persimmon Homes has described the site as “grey belt” based on its own assessment, that assessment has not been clearly explained or transparently evidenced.

In planning terms, land is sometimes described as “grey belt” where it typically shows one or more of the following characteristics:

• Previously developed or brownfield land

• Land dominated by permanent buildings or hardstanding

• Derelict, contaminated, or degraded land

• Land that no longer performs key Green Belt functions such as openness or separation

None of these characteristics apply to this site.
The land remains open, undeveloped agricultural countryside and continues to perform its Green Belt role by maintaining openness and preventing urban sprawl.

The presence of the nearby cricket club does not undermine the site’s Green Belt status. Recreational uses such as sports pitches and clubs are explicitly permitted within the Green Belt under planning policy because they preserve openness and support community use. Their existence does not reclassify surrounding land as previously developed or “grey belt”.

Despite this, the developer’s assessment has not clearly set out how or why the land meets any recognised criteria for grey belt classification. Re-labelling Green Belt land through developer-led assessment alone risks setting a precedent where almost any site could be redefined to suit development ambitions.

By the same logic, Bolton Town Hall could be described as “grey belt” — paving the way for new housing in the town centre. Clearly, that would be absurd, which is why land classification must be based on planning policy and evidence, not convenience.

Bolton Council is part of the adopted Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan, which sets out how housing needs across Greater Manchester should be met through a plan-led approach. This plan already provides a strategic framework for housing delivery and does not allocate undeveloped Green Belt land in Bolton for residential development.

A local councillor has indicated that the current housing shortfall in Bolton is negligible, rather than significant or persistent. A minor shortfall of this nature does not meet the threshold of exceptional circumstances required by national planning policy to justify the release of Green Belt land. Small fluctuations between housing targets and delivery are common and are expected to be addressed through existing allocations, windfall sites, and development on previously developed land.

Bolton already has an established planning framework, including an allocations plan, an interactive policies map, and a brownfield land register. While “grey belt” is sometimes used informally by developers, it has no formal status in Bolton’s adopted planning policy. Housing need alone does not justify redefining Green Belt land outside a formal plan review. Taken together, this demonstrates that there are alternative routes to meeting housing need without the premature and unjustified loss of Green Belt land at Chew Moor Lane.