Tilted Balance: Fields, Homes and the Hard Choices in Planning

For many councillors, those two words can immediately create anxiety. They appear in planning training sessions, committee reports and appeal decisions, often accompanied by warnings about five-year housing land supply and the consequences if councils fall short. In those moments, planning can feel like a battle: us — councillors representing our communities — against them — developers, planning lawyers and sometimes even our own planning officers.

But perhaps the phrase itself invites a bigger question.

Is “tilted balance” simply a technical planning term? Or does it reflect a much deeper balance we are struggling to find — the balance between protecting our fields and landscapes, and ensuring people have somewhere to live?

Sitting in planning committee recently brought this question sharply into focus. Members approved a scheme for 127 homes on land within the Green Belt. At first glance that might sound controversial. Yet the decision was not as simple as “build” or “protect”. Through genuine partnership between officers, the applicant and the council, the proposal evolved. The development was designed in a way that protected a precious heritage asset on the site while still delivering new homes.

We often speak — rightly — about the importance of protecting heritage and landscapes. Historic buildings, open spaces and green fields shape the identity of our communities. They are part of our shared story and deserve careful protection.

But perhaps we should ask ourselves another question: should we not also recognise that the right to a safe, warm and secure home is precious too?

For many families today, that basic security is far from guaranteed. Homelessness continues to rise. People spend far too long in temporary accommodation. Others are placed in housing that is unsuitable or far away from their jobs, schools and support networks. This is often a hidden crisis. Just because someone is not sleeping on the street does not mean they are not homeless or living in housing insecurity.

And so we return to the balance.

When we look at a field, we often see what is there today — open land, views, wildlife, a sense of space. But for someone moving into their first home, perhaps after years of renting or living with parents, their perspective may be different. They see a front door of their own, stability, warmth and the chance to build a future.

Do they think about what the land looked like before their home was built? Perhaps sometimes — but more often they are thinking about finally having somewhere secure to live.

That does not mean the answer is simply to concrete over every green space. Our countryside, parks and green fields are vital to the health and character of our communities. Once they are lost, they are difficult to replace.

But it does mean we must think more carefully — and more creatively — about how we use the space we have.

Can we design developments that protect key landscapes while still delivering homes?
Can we make better use of brownfield land and underused spaces in our towns?
Can we build more thoughtfully, with better design, higher quality places and stronger infrastructure?
Can we plan communities rather than simply approve housing estates?

Planning should not simply be a process of saying yes or no. It should be about shaping places.

Councillors have a crucial role in that process. Planning committees should not feel like battlegrounds between councils and developers. They should be forums where leadership, negotiation and creativity help deliver better outcomes.

Developers also have responsibilities. The most successful schemes are those where developers engage meaningfully with councils and communities from the start — not just when plans are finalised. When that partnership works well, developments can respect heritage, protect important features and still provide the homes people need.

Perhaps the greatest challenge, however, is bringing the public with us. Planning debates can quickly become polarised, particularly when green spaces are involved. Residents often feel decisions are imposed upon them rather than shaped with them.

Councillors, as community leaders, have an important role in explaining the bigger picture: why homes are needed, how the planning system works, and how good development can strengthen rather than damage communities.

Because ultimately, the real question is not simply whether the balance is tilted.

The real question is how we find the right balance — between protecting the places we love and ensuring everyone has the chance to live in a safe, warm and secure home.

If we think longer term, plan more creatively and work in genuine partnership, planning does not have to be a fight between “us and them”.

Instead, it can become what it was always meant to be: a shared effort to build communities that respect the past, protect what matters, and still make room for the homes people need in the future.