Braintree District Council has reviewed its stance on two upcoming planning appeals in light of recent changes to the district’s five-year housing land supply position.
The appeals relate to planning applications on the edges of Halstead and Witham, with proposals for up to 200 homes on land at Bournebridge Hill, Greenstead Green, Halstead and up to 230 homes on land north-east of Rectory Lane, Rivenhall.
Developers were refused permission by the council’s Planning Committee earlier this year. In both cases the Committee raised a number of concerns in their reasons for refusal, including the fact that both sites were not allocated for development in Braintree District Local Plan and at that time, the Council could evidence the five-year housing land supply required by Government. Both developers have appealed the decisions to the Planning Inspectorate.
All local authorities have to review their housing land supply position annually, where there needs to be evidence that development sites will be delivered within the next 5 years in order to be included. When the most recent data and evidence was collated, the Council concluded that 4.86 years housing land supply could be evidenced. In these circumstances, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which guides all local planning authorities, states that planning permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly outweigh the benefits, tilting the balance in favour of housing developments, and housing land supply carrying more weight in determining planning applications than having a Local Plan in place.
Whilst the Council still consider that there would be some harm arising from both developments because Braintree’s housing land supply has currently fallen below the five-year threshold, taking into consideration all circumstances and the impact of the housing land supply position, the Council has taken the decision not to defend the appeals, agreed with Planning Committee members who proposed and seconded the refusal.
As part of this decision, the Council considered the extent to which it could prove its reasons for refusal in line with national policy against the ‘titled balance’, and also weighed up the risks of any possible costs being awarded, estimated to be up to £150,000, as well as the potential for the Council being seen as acting unreasonably.
Like all local planning authorities, Braintree District Council reviews each planning application and appeal on its individual merits and despite not defending these two appeals specifically, this does not mean that all applications will be approved even if a five-year housing land supply cannot be demonstrated. The Council will still oppose developments where there are strong grounds to do so, such as having adverse impacts on heritage assets or landscape, and the harm sufficiently outweighing the benefits of the development.
Councillor Gabrielle Spray, Cabinet Member for Planning and Infrastructure at Braintree District Council, said: “These have not been easy decisions, considering the extensive work already carried out behind the scenes to defend both appeals, but it is the right decision to make when we consider the current condition of Braintree’s housing land supply.
“It’s important to note that the council reviews each appeal on its merits and in these cases, it was sensible to not defend due to additional financial costs this could create for the council. This once again highlights the need for the Government to pursue plans to reform the national planning system, and to give more power and certainty to local communities so that the right homes will be built in the right places across the Braintree district.
“Under the current system the Council cannot force developers to implement planning permissions, but we will continue to work with landowners and developers to support us in evidencing the required five-year housing land supply for the future.”
Cllr Joanne Beavis and Cllr Andy Munday, the Planning Committee members who proposed and seconded the refusal for the Bournebridge Hill application, said: “We worked extremely hard alongside BDC planning officers readying a defence that unfortunately couldn't progress once the housing supply figure was updated. Councillors will continue to work hard to try and ensure housing developments are only granted when necessary."
Cllr James Abbott and Cllr Justin Wrench, the Planning Committee members who proposed and seconded the refusal for the Rectory Lane application, said: "The current planning system makes it difficult for many local authorities, including BDC, to deliver on Government targets whilst planning ahead with certainty for the benefit of the district. The complex Housing Land Supply issue hangs over local decision making, creating uncertainty and frustrating the council and local communities. Clearly reform is needed at the national level. Whilst BDC will not now defend this appeal, members of the local community will be engaging in the appeal process."
The final decision will be made by a Planning Inspector following a public inquiry for both appeals. The Bournebridge Hill appeal is due to be heard at an inquiry starting on Tuesday 11 October and the Rectory Lane appeal starting on Tuesday 6th December.
Further details about both inquiries can be found on the Council’s website here, including details of how to the public can view or participate.