As yet, what ‘near’ means is not clear. Although Ministers have spoken of a distance of 800 metres or a 10 minute walk as the 'working assumption', measures widely quoted in the media include 15 or even 20 minute walks.

 

The Taylor Wimpey proposal for Normandy includes a northern development which is considerably further than 800m from Wanborough station and demonstrates the real impact of this ambiguity. Is it just the southern part nearest the station that gets built, or does that part licence the whole thing?

 

Clarity on what 'near' means is vital. But even at 800m the negative impact on the Green Belt in our part of Surrey would be profound, as the graphic below shows (inner red circle). At 20 mins walk it would be catastrophic (outer, lighter, red circle). The impact on the Green Belt (green background) is clear for all to see. For present Green, read future Red.

 

Building near stations makes obvious sense. But indiscriminate building on the Green Belt does not. If it genuinely wants to prevent the creeping urbanisation of our precious countryside, as it claims to do, Government needs to come up with a more nuanced approach.