This report provides an early indication of Officers’ emerging thoughts on potential next steps – including provisional recommendations for changes to the Draft Local Plan and additional work to strengthen the technical evidence base.

 

The report also sets out the revised housebuilding requirement for an adjusted 17-year period 2026-2043, based on an updated calculation using the Government’s standard methodology and taking into account the Council’s updated housing land supply position at 1 April 2026. 

 

Given the very tight timescales for progressing the Local Plan to the next stage of the statutory plan-making process, the Committee’s early consideration of the matters set out in this report, and its direction on the provisional approach to next steps and potential changes to the Local Plan, will enable Officers to progress work without delay on both the revised ‘Submission Version’ of Local Plan and the supporting evidence-base.

 

This report focusses mainly on potential changes to site allocations, on a provisional basis, but also touches on notable areas of policy that may require revisions or further development. The intention is that the revised Submission Version of the Local Plan, containing the detailed set of revised policies and maps, will return for the Committee’s consideration in late Summer of this year, ahead of a Full Council decision to proceed to the next round of formal consultation.

As mentioned above in Minute 6, after the short adjournment, Mrs Hastings the Council's Monitoring Officer confirmed that following the declaration of interest on Report A2, that the land shown coloured blue as referred to in the Update Sheet, was owned by her son, that fell within the definition of a Non-Registerable Interest.  As the matter affected a financial interest or well-being of a relative, therefore in accordance with the Code of Conduct, Councillor Chapman left the room and would not participate in this item and its deliberations.

 

The Committee considered a detailed report (A.2) of the Corporate Director (Planning & Community) which provided it with an early indication of Officers’ emerging thoughts on potential next steps – including provisional recommendations for changes to the Draft Local Plan and additional work to strengthen the technical evidence base.

 

The report also set out the revised housebuilding requirement for an adjusted 17-year period 2026-2043, based on an updated calculation using the Government’s standard methodology and taking into account the Council’s updated housing land supply position at 1 April 2026. 

 

Given the very tight timescales for progressing the Local Plan to the next stage of the statutory plan-making process, the Committee’s early consideration of the matters set out in this report, and its direction on the provisional approach to next steps and potential changes to the Local Plan, would enable Officers to progress work without delay on both the revised ‘Submission Version’ of Local Plan and the supporting evidence-base.

 

The report focussed mainly on potential changes to site allocations, on a provisional basis, but also touched on notable areas of policy that might require revisions or further development. The intention was that the revised Submission Version of the Local Plan, containing the detailed set of revised policies and maps, would be submitted for the Committee’s consideration in late Summer of 2026, ahead of a Full Council decision to proceed to the next round of formal consultation.

 

Adjustments to the Local Plan timeframe and housebuilding requirement

 

The Committee was informed that one of the recommendations in this report (A.2) was to adjust the proposed timeframe for the Local Plan in the  Submission Version to cover the 17-year period 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2043; and for the total housebuilding requirement for that period to be revised to reflect an updated calculation using the Government’s standard methodology – giving a total requirement of 18,173 homes based on the adjusted annual requirement of 1,069 (up from 1,063 in the Preferred Options Draft).

 

The adjustment to the plan period reflected the requirement in national planning policy for Local Plans to cover a minimum of 15 years from the anticipated date of adoption. Based on an expected adoption before April 2028, this necessitated extending the end date of the Plan to March 2043. This revised timeframe also brought Tendring’s Local Plan into broad alignment with those being prepared by neighbouring authorities, including Colchester and Braintree, which was beneficial in the context of Local Government Reorganisation and the need for greater strategic alignment across the North Essex area.

 

Through the latest update of the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), Officers had estimated that 10,100 of those 18,173 homes would still be built on sites either already identified for development in the Council’s previous adopted Local Plan or on sites that were either already under construction or where planning permission had already been granted (or was intended to be granted following a Planning Committee resolution) including an updated predicted contribution from smaller ‘windfall’ sites.

 

This meant that the new Local Plan was still required to identify additional locations and sites to accommodate a residual requirement of around 8,000 homes and so the overall figures and expectations for housing growth for the adjusted period 2026 to 2043 were broadly unchanged from what was set out in the Preferred Options Draft for the period 2025 to 2042. 

 

Officer’s provisional recommendations for responding to the identified main matters

 

Matter 1: The realistic deliverability and soundness of the Garden Villages proposed for Hare Green and Horsley Cross in light of the comments made by Essex County Council, National Highways, certain developer/landowners and residents and whether they could realistically contribute towards meeting the Government-imposed housing in the plan period up to 2042/43 – for which the updates to the transport modelling and infrastructure delivery plan evidence would help determine.

 

Members were made aware that Officers’ advice was that without the introduction of Garden Villages at Hare Green and Horsley Cross, it was highly questionable if Tendring could realistically accommodate the level of development required by the Government in a sustainable manner. It was therefore currently suggested that the Garden Village proposals needed to remain in the Local Plan, but that Officers proceeded to work with Essex County Council and National Highways to carry out the necessary next phase of transport modelling, alongside further work on the Infrastructure Delivery Plan,  to inform any final judgement on the deliverability and soundness of the Hare Green and Horsley Cross Garden Villages in due course.

 

Whilst a final decision on the inclusion of the Garden Village proposals in the Local Plan would need to await the consideration of that technical evidence; Officers were suggesting that even if the proposals remained in the Plan, the trajectory for housebuilding, and thus the total expected contribution of homes from each of the Garden Villages up to 2043 be revised down from 1,700 homes from each development to 1,450 with first homes from 2033/34. This would allow for a more flexible and reasonable timeframe for the initial preparatory planning work, including the preparation of site-specific Development Plan Documents (DPDs) and determination of planning applications. The consequence was a 500-dwelling reduction in the overall predicted housing supply from what had been indicated in the Preferred Options Draft. 

 

Matter 2) The realistic deliverability of the overall housebuilding requirement up to 2042/43 and whether the Local Plan identified sufficient deliverable land, with a suitable level of headroom/contingency, to meet the overall government-imposed housebuilding requirement – despite the number of issues raised about how challenging and unrealistic those targets were.

 

It had always been the Council’s contention that the housebuilding requirement for Tendring generated through the Government’s standard methodology calculation was over-ambitious and would be challenging, if not impossible to achieve. Whilst, in the Preferred Options Draft of the Local Plan, the Council had incorporated around 1,500 homes-worth of over-allocation and contingency into the housing supply for the plan-period (around 8%), some landowners, developers and planning/land agents had suggested the Council needed to include more headroom (at least 10%) by adding additional sites into the Plan for housing.

 

However, given the significant concerns raised about developments already proposed across the District in response to the Preferred Options consultation to address what was considered to be an unrealistic target, the provisional approach being explored in this report was to delete certain housing sites from the Local Plan and adjust assumptions around deliverability on others (including, as stated above, the larger Garden Villages) that would result in an overall net reduction in the headroom contingency level from 1,500 to closer to 300 homes (8% down to 2%) as opposed to the increase being suggested by certain landowners, developers and agents which would involve the inclusion of sites that would either conflict with the Draft Local Plan’s overall strategic approach to the pattern of growth, or would be unsuitable for other planning reasons. 

 

As a consequence, whilst the recommendations to delete certain sites and reduce the headroom from 1,500 to nearer 300 homes might address a significant number of public and community objections to the Local Plan, the consequence would be far greater scrutiny at the examination of the Local Plan of the deliverability of the Government’s housing target and the specific sites that were being retained in the Plan – with landowners, developers and agents looking to convince the Planning Inspector that the Plan did not include enough flexibility within its supply of sites to ensure delivery of the Government’s requirements.

 

Matter 3) The soundness of the Brightlingsea allocation of 300 homes (site SAH4) in light of issues raised in the large number of public objections and by the Town Council and whether an alternative approach of distributing Brightlingsea’s growth across a number of smaller sites would be justified and more appropriate.

 

Officers provisionally suggested that Site SAH4 be removed from the Local Plan in acceptance of the concerns raised by Brightlingsea Town Council and a large number of local residents, particularly in respect of the site’s weak physical relationship to the settlement form of Brightlingsea and its landscape sensitivity; acknowledging the concerns raised around Brightlingsea’s unique transport limitations with its single road access.

 

As a part replacement for the housing numbers lost from the deletion of this site, it was suggested that two smaller sites be included in the Local Plan around the urban area of Brightlingsea and increasing the capacity expectation of one of the existing proposed sites. If agreed, those changes would bring about an overall reduction in the number of homes proposed for Brightlingsea from 325 to 150; a net reduction of 175 homes.    

 

Matter 4) The soundness of the Kirby Cross and Walton allocations of 420 and 200 homes respectively (sites SAH2 and SAH3) in light of issues raised in the large number of public objections and the specific objection from the Essex Wildlife Trust to the Walton site.

 

Officers suggested that Site SAH2 for 420 homes north of Thorpe Road in Kirby Cross was a sound allocation that was currently considered capable of being retained in the Local Plan and that many of the concerns raised by residents in their objections could be addressed appropriately through the policies in the Plan, with some strengthening of the wording. Having further assessed the site and considered information submitted by the site promoter with their representation, Officers were satisfied that the site capacity could appropriately be increased to 450 homes.

 

Officers provisionally suggested the deletion of Site SAH3 for 200 homes off Arthur Ransom Way, Ward Chase and Coles Lane in Walton-on-the-Naze from the Local Plan in response to formal objections from the Essex Wildlife Trust identifying the allocation as one of the most ecologically problematic in the Local Plan without substantial mitigation that would significantly reduce the development of the site; acknowledging also the local concerns about landscape sensitivity.

 

Those changes, would, if agreed, result in a net reduction of 170 to the proposed housing numbers for the Frinton, Walton and Kirby Cross area from 660 to 490. This might help relieve some of the community’s wider concerns about the impact of development on local infrastructure and traffic through Thorpe-le-Soken but would add to the aforementioned matter in respect of the reduced headroom contingency across the overall Local Plan. 

 

Matter 5) The amount of development proposed at Thorpe-le-Soken and whether, in light of Essex County Council’s concerns about the limited and potentially irresolvable capacity issues at the local school, one or both of the housing allocations at Thorpe should be removed from the Plan or reduced in size.

 

Officers suggested that the only way to address the objection raised by Essex County Council (ECC), having discussed further with relevant colleagues involved in the planning of school provision, was to either reduce the overall amount of development proposed for Thorpe to a much lower level by either deleting and/or reducing the size of either one or both the village’s site allocations; or significantly increasing the overall amount of development for Thorpe to a level that would facilitate and incorporate new school provision.

 

Officers’ provisionally proposed to reduce rather than increase housing provision through the deletion of Site SAH10 for 150 homes to the west of the village off Colchester Road and a reduction in both the site area and indicative numbers proposed for Site SAH11 north of the Lifehouse Spa & Hotel from 110 to 70 homes, but still retaining and strengthening the requirement for open space provision to expand Lady Nelson Playing Fields.

 

Reducing the overall expectation for new housing at Thorpe le Soken from 260 to just 70 homes, a significant net reduction of 190, might again relieve some of the wider community concern about infrastructure and traffic but it marked yet another reduction in the Local Plan’s built-in headroom contingency and was the only recommendation in this report (A.2) that resulted in a departure from the overall spatial strategy in the Local Plan, in that Thorpe’s housing figure would fall short of the 100-300 home range established through the preferred option. Elsewhere, all suggested changes to site allocations worked within the ranges established through the preferred option.  

 

Matter 6) The sustainability of housing developments in smaller rural villages in light of objections from residents and concerns raised by Anglian Water about limited sewage capacity, the remoteness from jobs, shops, services and facilities and local impacts on village character – particularly Little Bentley, Little Bromley, Tendring Heath, Beaumont Cum Moze and the choice and size of sites in Wrabness and Bradfield. 

 

Whilst Officers accepted that housing developments in and around the District’s smaller rural settlements were generally less sustainable than sites in or around towns and larger villages in respect of access to shops, jobs, services, facilities and infrastructure, the Government-imposed housebuilding target for Tendring was so high that it would only realistically be achieved through a variety of sites in different locations and of different sizes to deliver new homes – including smaller-scale developments in and around some of the smaller rural settlements. This approach would also assist in meeting the expectation set out in national planning policy that at least 10% of the housing requirement should be accommodated on sites of one hectare or less.

 

However, the representations from Anglian Water specifically in respect of sewage capacity  limitations at Little Bentley, Little Bromley, and Tendring Heath, and its explicit suggestion that those areas were best treated as open countryside to which no additional development be directed, had led Officers to provisionally suggest that the specific allocations in those areas (MSA19, MSA20 and MSA22), amounting to 39 homes in total, be removed from the Local Plan.

 

In Bradfield, comments from the Parish Council and residents had raised concern about Site MSA9, the currently proposed allocation of 100 homes on land off Windmill Road and Straight Road in respect of its weak relationship with the wider settlement of Bradfield village and concern that an estate development would not be compatible with the linear character of the village and the historic incremental pattern of growth. The Parish Council had suggested that some housing growth could be more sensitively accommodated across a number of smaller sites. Officers had acknowledged and accept this argument and were therefore suggesting the replacement of a single 100 home allocation and its replacement with three smaller sites across the village with a total capacity of 75 homes – a total net reduction of 25 for the village.

 

Those changes might help to address a number of local concerns and objections, but they also bring about another reduction in the overall headroom contingency built into the Local Plan’s housing supply numbers. 

 

Matter 7) The justification and soundness of the District’s Strategic Green Gaps in light of objections from certain landowners and developers stating that the designation did not align with Government policy and was preventing otherwise sustainable locations for housing development (for example around Clacton) being included in the Local Plan. 

 

Members were aware that one of the overarching guiding principles agreed by the Planning Policy and Local Plan Committee at the beginning of the review process was to carry forward and expand upon the designated Strategic Green Gaps from the Council’s current Local Plan to ensure the principle of maintaining the separate identity of settlements and preventing the coalescence of settlements for the long-term. Officers had not suggested that the Council should move away from that principle and it was therefore provisionally suggested that Strategic Green Gaps continued to be included in the Local Plan and defended, with additional work undertaken by specialist consultants to review and strengthen the evidence-base in support of those allocations – in anticipation that they would come under increased scrutiny through the examination process. 

 

Matter 8) The protection given to Ardleigh and Elmstead over other similarly sized villages due to their up-to-date Neighbourhood Plans and proximity to the Tendring Colchester Borders Garden Community; and whether, in light of objections from developers/landowners and current planning applications, the protection was justified.

 

The Committee recalled that the preferred spatial strategy in the Local Plan proposed no additional housing development in or around the villages of Elmstead Market or Ardleigh in recognition of significant developments already in the pipeline, the proximity to the Tendring / Colchester Borders Garden Community and the recent adoption of Neighbourhood Plans in both areas.

 

Elmstead Market was already the subject of more than one speculative planning application for major housing development which demonstrated a pressure and demand for additional housing development around the village for which the Council would need to make decisions in due course. However, Officers considered that the rationale for providing Elmstead Market and Ardleigh with additional protection was justified. Whilst Elmstead Parish Council had submitted a strong objection to the Local Plan, Officers noted that the Draft Plan included a significant level of protection for the village in terms of limiting further allocations. Notwithstanding this, Officers’ provisional view was that the protection should be carried forward.

 

There would likely be a strong challenge to this position from landowners, developers and agents with an interest in land around Elmstead Market and Ardleigh both through the examination process, planning applications and, potentially, planning appeals. 

 

Matter 9) The viability of zero carbon, water efficiency and BNG policies in light of the concerns raised by landowners, developers and agents in their representations when considered alongside affordable housing requirements and financial contributions sought for education, health provision, police, fire and other infrastructure.

 

The economic viability of new development was already known to be more challenging in parts of Tendring than elsewhere across Essex due to the area’s geography, economic profile and lower than average property values; and this was recognised in the proposed reduction of the Local Plan’s affordable housing requirement from 30% in the current Local Plan to 20% for most developments in the Preferred Options Draft. Despite this proposed change in policy there were still clearly a variety of pressures on new development to deliver higher energy and water efficiency standards, greater levels of BNG and greater contributions towards an increasing range of infrastructure priorities that had to be balanced against affordable housing and general viability expectations. 

 

Officers would instruct the Council’s viability consultants to revisit and update the Viability Assessment as part of the evidence-base to help determine if the various requirements in the Local Plan were justified and defendable or whether any further changes might be required in any of those policy areas to inform the decision on the content of the final Submission Version. It would be important that the combination of different policy requirements were demonstrated to be economically viable for most developments, in order for the Local Plan to be found sound, taking into account any changes in national policy that might come into force this Summer.

 

Matter 10) The robustness of the evidence base in light of Natural England and the Essex Wildlife Trust’s advice on the work required on Habitat Regulations Assessment, Essex County Council and National Highways’ advice in respect of transport modelling; Historic England’s request for a Heritage Impact Assessment; the Environment Agency’s request to update the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the general need to ensure the Local Plan was supported by a proportionate range of appropriate and robust evidence. 

 

Officers advised the Committee that much of the additional evidence-base work required to support the Local Plan review and suggested in representations submitted by statutory consultees and other partners was already commissioned and underway – with the intention that all necessary work be completed to inform the Committee’s consideration of the  Submission Version of the Local Plan in late Summer 2026 and a final decision from the Council to proceed to the next formal round of consultation.

 

The only area where evidence had been commissioned, but might not be completed in time for the decision on the  Submission Version, was the Heritage Impact Assessment recommended by Historic England; but Officers were satisfied that there was sufficient available information and analysis available to justify the choice of site allocations in the Local Plan; which would be supplemented and strengthened through the HIA work in due course. If the Council delayed consultation and submission of the Local Plan to await the completion of the HIA work, it would miss the Government’s cut-off date for submitting Local Plans being prepared in accordance with the current regulations. 

 

Summary of recommended changes to sites

 

The most important matter for the Committee’s consideration and agreement through this report (A.2) was the approach to be taken in respect of changes to housing and mixed-use sites; which would enable Officers to proceed, without delay, with preparing the Submission Version of the Local Plan and updating the evidence-base.

 

The recommended changes were presented through a serious of ‘before and after’ maps attached at Appendix 1 to this report (A.2) relating only to those areas where changes were being suggested.

 

The following reflected a provisional set of working assumptions on potential changes to site allocations, intended to enable Officers to progress evidence base work and preparation of the Submission Version of the Local Plan. They did not represent final decisions on site allocations, which would be subject to further consideration by the Committee. In summary, the recommended changes were as follows:

 

Provisional recommendations for deletion or reduction of sites

 

1.         Site SAH3 – Land off Arthur Ransome Way, Walton (200 homes) - deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan along with Policy SAH3 and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Frinton, Walton and Kirby Cross policies map.

 

2.         Site SAH4 – Land East of Church Road, Brightlingsea (300 homes) – deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan along with Policy SAH4 and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Brightlingsea policies map.

 

3.         Site SAH10 – Land south of Colchester Road, Thorpe le Soken (150 homes) – deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan along with Policy SAH10 and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Thorpe le Soken policies map. 

 

4.         Site MSA9 – Land south of Windmill Road and east of Straight Road, Bradfield (100 homes) – reduction in the size of the allocation to retain a proportion of the site fronting Windmill Road, a reduction in the indicative capacity of the revised site from 100 to 20 dwellings and an associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Bradfield policies map.

 

5.         Site MSA18 – Land north of Kirby le Soken Evangelical Church, Kirby le Soken (20 homes) - deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on both the Frinton, Walton and Kirby Cross and the Kirby le Soken policies maps. 

 

6.         Site MSA19 – Land west of Manningtree Road, Little Bentley (12 homes) – deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Little Bentley policies map. 

 

7.         Site MSA20 – Land south of Shop Road, Little Bromley (17 homes) – deletion of site from the Draft Local Plan and associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Little Bromley policies map.  

 

8.         Site MSA22 – Haulage Depot, Heath Road, Tendring Heath (10 homes) – deletion of site from Draft Local Plan (but with no adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary for Tendring Heath).

 

Provisional recommendations for addition of sites

 

9.         New Site MSA33 – Former Wellhouse Site, Chestnut Way, Brightlingsea (60 homes) – addition of new site allocation, a previously developed brownfield site with potential to accommodate around 60 residential units in the form of an extra-care/assisted living scheme.

 

10.       New Site MSA34 – Vicarage Field, Church Road, Brightlingsea (30 homes) – addition of new site allocation with an associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Brightlingsea policies map.

 

11.       New Site MSA35 – Land North of Robinson Road, Brightlingsea (25 homes) – addition of new site allocation with associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Brightlingsea policies map.

 

12.       New Site MSA36 – Land north of Wix Road, Bradfield (25 homes) – addition of new site allocation with an associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Bradfield policies map.

 

13.       New Site MSA37 – Paddock Site south of Bradfield Playing Field, East of the Street, Bradfield (30 homes) – addition of new site allocation with an associated adjustment to the Settlement Development Boundary on the Bradfield policies map.

 

Provisional recommendations for adjustments to dwelling numbers on certain sites

 

14.       Site SAMU8 – Hare Green Garden Village - reduction in indicative dwelling numbers for Hare Green Garden Village from 1,700 to 1,450 within the plan period up to 2043 but retaining 4,500 as the total longer-term expectation.

 

15.       Site SAMU9 – Horsley Cross Garden Village – reduction in indicative dwelling numbers for Hare Green Garden Village from 1,700 to 1,450 within the plan period up to 2043 but retaining 6,000 as the total longer-term expectation.

 

16.       Site SAH2 Land North of Thorpe Road, Kirby Cross – increase in the indicative dwelling number from 420 to 450 having considered further information submitted by the site promoter with their representations.

 

17.       Site SAH11 – Land North of Lifehouse Spa & Hotel, Thorpe le Soken – reduction in indicative dwelling number from 110 to 70.

 

18.       Site MSA4 Crisp Maltings, School Lane, Mistley – reduction in indicative dwelling number from 80 to 50 on the advice of the site promoter having carried out further work on the potential capacity of the site.

 

19.       Site MSA6 Land at Pannell Place, Brightlingsea – increase in the indicative dwelling number from 10 to 20 homes but with no adjustment to the site area or its depiction on the Brightlingsea policies map, based on more recent information provided by the site promoter.

 

20.       Site MSA8 Land adj Village Hall, Harwich Road, Beaumont - reduction in the indicative dwelling number from 20 to 12 homes on the advice of the site promoter. 

 

If those indicative changes were to be taken forward, it would result in the overall potential housing supply in the Draft Local Plan reducing from 19,517 to 18,432 – a net reduction of 1,085 dwellings. This would mean that the total potential housing still supply remained above the Government requirement of 18,173 albeit with a much-reduced level of oversupply and contingency.

 

Next Steps

 

With the Committee’s agreement, Officers would progress work on the Local Plan Submission Version and updating the evidence-base in line with those recommendations – but without prejudice to the Committee’s final decision in respect of the Submission Version itself in late Summer 2026, which would include the full suite of updated policies and maps.   

 

At the meeting, the Corporate Director (Planning and Community), assisted by the Planning Policy Team Leader, introduced the report.

 

Officers then responded to the following questions/concerns/queries et cetera from Committee Members:-

 

·        Is it correct to say that the houses in Little Bentley and Little Bromley are not going to be connected with sewage, that they would have to provide their own sewage?;

·        Has the new locations had any considerations on improvements on Highways, surgeries, schools and garden communities?;

·        Would the roads in Elmstead Market, Bromley, etc. be getting improved?;

·        Does Local Government Reorganisation have any significance in terms of the way that the Council deal with the recommendations that are being made for the Local Plan?;

·        Does the presumption in favour of development impact SAH4, SAH3, MSA18 and SAH10 in terms of taking them out of the allocations, would developers be able to go to those sites and put in planning applications and would there be any point of taking them out?;

·        Are drainage and sewage a realistic defence to take sites out of the Local Plan?;

·        Would Thorpe-le-Soken be getting an upgrade to the roads to deal with the extra traffic?;

·        What mechanisms are in place by the Council for auditing the number of deletions/additions within the Local Plan year-on-year?;

·        How does the Council get accurate figures when sites have been sitting empty for a while after getting permission?; and

·        Is the Council risking, if there has been a change in Government, cutting the housing supply too far and reducing the size of the buffer?

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, the Housing & Planning Portfolio Holder (Councillor Baker) addressed the Committee on the subject matter of this item. Councillor Baker highlighted the fantastic points within the Officer report (A.2) and the fact the Local Plan was at the current stage was a credit to the Officers.

 

Having duly taken all the above information into account and having discussed the matter, it was moved by Councillor M Cossens, seconded by Councillor Everett and unanimously:-

 

RESOLVED that the Planning Policy and Local Plan Committee –

 

a)       having previously considered report A.1 containing an initial overview of the response to public consultation on the Local Plan: Preferred Options Draft, notes the contents of this report, which sets out Officers’ emerging thoughts on potential next steps, including provisional recommendations for changes to sites and further work to strengthen the technical evidence base; 

 

b)       acknowledges and agrees that the updated mandatory housebuilding target for Tendring, calculated using the Government’s standard methodology, increases to 1,069 homes a year, giving a total requirement for the rolled-forward 17-year period (1 April 2026 to 31 March 2043) of 18,173;

 

c)       approves the Officers’ provisional recommendations for potential changes to site proposals in the Draft Local Plan, as set out in this report and depicted on maps at Appendix 1, subject to the following amendments:

 

i)                 that sites MSA19 (Little Bentley), MSA20 (Little Bromley) and MSA22 (Tendring Heath) are not deleted from the Draft Local Plan – having had regard to representations made by speakers and advice from Officers. This is on the basis that these sites could make a valuable contribution to local housing supply, support the rural economy and help the sustainability of local services in rural areas; and that, whilst Anglian Water has advised against development in these locations where it is dependent on connecting to the public sewer network, there should be a reasonable prospect of these developments coming forward in line with relevant adopted and emerging planning policies with appropriate alternative sewage treatment provision;

 

ii)                that, in retaining site MSA20 (Little Bromley) as a housing allocation, the indicative number of dwellings be reduced from 17 to 10 to better reflect the character and density of development within the village;

 

iii)              that site MSA27 (Wix) be deleted, having regard to updated information provided by Officers on the update sheet, indicating that the site is unlikely to be deliverable; and

 

iv)              that the recommended changes, together with the amendments set out above, form a working basis for further evidence base work and the preparation of the Submission Version of the Plan, and do not represent a final decision on site allocations

 

d)     notes that , if the provisional changes set out in this report with the amendments set out in c) above, the potential supply of homes from proposals in a revised Local Plan (alongside development that is already in the pipeline) would be expected to total approximately 18,444, which would still exceed the total mandatory housebuilding requirement of 18,173 by 271 homes – albeit with a much reduced level of oversupply and contingency from that indicated in the Preferred Options Draft;

 

e)       agrees that the provisional approach to site changes, be used as a working basis for progressing the preparation of the Submission Version of the Local Plan and associated evidence base, with the full draft Plan (including updated policies and maps) to be brought to the Planning Policy and Local Plan Committee for further consideration in late Summer 2026 ahead of any decisions to proceed to the next stage of public consultation; and

 

f)         notes that Officers will progress updates to the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitat Regulations Assessment, Transport Modelling, Infrastructure Delivery Plan and other relevant evidence base documents in order to test and inform development of the Submission Version of the Local Plan.