Housing secretary calls in planning refusal of 480 new homes in Stansted

The housing secretary has called in Uttlesford District Council’s decision to reject two schemes in Stansted Mountfitchet and Birchanger.

This follows the developer’s call for state intervention at the end of last month. Stansted-based City & Country argued that the planning committee’s decision was inconsistent with national planning policy.

The applications proposed the development of 480 new homes, designed by Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios, 50% of which would be affordable. The schemes, a 300-home development at Stansted Mountfitchet and a 180-home projectct at Birchanger, were originally recommended for approval by planning officers, with the council’s principal urban design officer describing both proposals as “exemplary and exceptional.”

However, the committee ultimately decided that approving the developments would go against its plan‑led strategy because they sit on unallocated sites outside the settlement boundary,  As a result, they were considered to conflict with several core policies in the Uttlesford local plan and with the NPPF’s emphasis on delivering homes in appropriate places.

It also said the schemes amount to inappropriate green belt development, although the committee reports note the sites can be regarded as grey belt - meaning it is on green belt land considered to be of lower environmental quality.

Plans for the Stansted scheme included a shop, café, nursery and care home, while the Birchanger neighbourhood proposed new cycle and pedestrian links between the villages, alongside a habitat bank designed to improve biodiversity and separate the settlements.

The planning committee report previously stated: “The council’s principal urban design officer describes the scheme as exemplary and exceptional, noting that it represents a genuinely place-specific and landscape-led response.”

Tim Sargeant, chair of City & Country, said: “We believe the committee failed to properly apply national planning policy and did not fully assess and consider the benefits of these schemes. This case has important implications for how planning policy is interpreted and applied.

“We are disappointed that the applications must go to an inquiry, especially as it will prove to be both costly and time consuming. However, we have attempted to work proactively with the council and the parish councils to address their concerns while delivering the homes and community infrastructure that local people need.”

Uttlesford District Council has been approached for comment. It will be required to submit a statement of case by August 12, six weeks after the starting date defined by the call-in letter issued on the July 1. A date for the enquiry will be agreed later this year.