Essex council refuses permission for major developments despite lack of housing land supply

Under national planning policy, councils must demonstrate that they are able to meet the local need for housing for at least the next five years. Housing policies of councils that are unable to supply enough housing land are considered out-of-date and those councils must grant permission for planning proposals they receive unless they contradict specific national planning policies or the adverse impacts of permission would "significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits".

The planning committee of Tendring District Council in north east Essex met last week to consider applications for a total of 1,156 homes in the Council's administrative area. Planning officers had recommended that the Council granted approval for all but one application of 60 homes, having noted in their reports to the committee that the Council could not demonstrate the necessary five-year supply of housing land and that this view had been supported by the Planning Inspectorate in recent appeal decisions.

However, the planning committee decided to reject the officer's recommendations in relation to three of the applications under consideration. They resolved to refuse outline permission for a 240-home development on agricultural land in the local green gap to the west of Clacton-on-Sea; full permission for 237 homes at the site of a caravan park to the north west of Walton-on-the-Naze; and outline permission for 150 homes and an employment site on farmland at the edge of the village of Great Bentley.

Councillors had raised concerns that health and education facilities would not be able to support the proposed development near Clacton-on-Sea, despite the applicant's offer of a financial contribution towards health services. Members of the committee were also concerned that the site proposed homes in the flight path of Clacton Airstrip and that the scheme would reduce the green gap between Clacton-on-Sea and neighbouring Jaywick.

Committee members had considered the caravan site proposal near Walton-on-the-Naze to be overdense and had objected to the quality of the proposed design and the impact of the proposals on the surrounding area. The committee unanimously refused the outline proposal for Great Bentley, considering that it would change the nature of the village and raising concerns about the adequacy of local transport infrastructure and health and education provision.

Planning expert Emma Cottam of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said: "Paragraph 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework requires housing applications to be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development at paragraph 14. In two of the three reports preceding the release of the decision notices for each application, it was noted that the harm of the proposed development outweighed the benefits of the new homes, however there was no reference to the 'significantly and demonstrably' test required by paragraph 14."

"In the context of recent planning press these last few weeks, which has largely majored on the legislative and policy changes aimed at speeding up the delivery of new homes and the role local planning authorities should play in this process, these decisions by committee members may well come as a shock, and serve as an unwelcome warning to developers who are looking for a degree of certainty when submitting applications for housing-led development," Cottam said.