Plans to deliver almost 10,000 more homes in a Kent district have been pushed back by up to a year amid a government shakeup of housebuilding rules.
Canterbury City Council (CCC) was originally planning to have its plan for housing up until 2040 finished by June 2025, but has pushed it back to spring 2026, giving them “much needed breathing space”.
In March this year the local authority announced its plans to do away with the previous Tory administration’s controversial local plan.
The much-derided blueprint proposed splitting the city into zones and regulating how frequently residents could move from one to the other without entering a new ring road outside the city.
However, the Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition council which took office in May 2023 threw out the plan and developed a new one.
The new local plan allocates sites for 9,346 homes to be built across the district until 2040, and was originally slated to be sent to the government for final approval by June 2025.
However, this week it was announced that they will delay this with government permission until 2026.
Council leader Cllr Alan Baldock (Lab) explained to the cabinet on September 30 the move was made because the new government “decided to have a real big shake up of the whole planning system.
“What we’ve decided to do and what the government allowed us to do was park the mandatory 25th of June next year deadline, and allow councils that were in the process of constructing their new local plans to bring their new plans up to and meet the new standards.”
The new Labour government was elected in July promising in their manifesto to “get Britain building again”, and announced changes to the National Planning Policy Framework which governs housebuilding.
A public consultation on these changes closed on September 2024, but in July they announced provisional new housing targets for every local authority in the country.
“The Labour government are not mucking about,” Cllr Baldock continued at the meeting.
“They are absolutely adamant that all local authorities will have local plans, they will meet their housing targets and those that are lagging behind will be dealt with firmly, probably by sanctions.”
Under the provisional figures, Canterbury City Council’s yearly target has only increased from by 37 homes a year, from 1,141 to 1,178.
But in practice, from 2020-2023, the authority has only actually built an average of 552 homes a year – so in effect the rate of housebuilding across Canterbury, Whitstable and Herne Bay needs to double in coming years.
The delay was warmly received by the cabinet though, with Cllr Alex Ricketts (Lib Dem) citing the need for “much needed breathing space”.
“Local plans will rarely be welcomed by all residents, there’s always going to be controversial issues in them,” added Cllr Mike Sole (Lib Dem).
“We’ve got to have a local plan because without it it’s a bit of a free for all out there and we don’t know where anything’s going to go or what infrastructure we might get to go with it.”
Councils must show the government they have in-date local plans.
If they fail to do so, they can get placed in a “state of presumption in favour of sustainable development”.
In practice this means councils can’t refuse many developments, regardless of their location, and if they do the government’s Planning Inspectorate can overrule them and allow the development.
One of the most controversial elements in the new local plan is the proposal for a 2,000 home “new settlement” north of the University of Kent, near the villages of Tyler Hill, Blean and Hackington.
The proposal has spawned the “Save the Blean” campaign, which has been endorsed by wildlife presenter Chris Packham and has held protests against the scheme.
However, the Save the Blean campaign support the council’s decision to slow down the local plan process.
Julia Kirby-Smith, chair of the campaign, said the delay “allows time for more potential sites to come forward.
“It will enable the new NPPF and housing numbers to be properly incorporated into the Local Plan, with important changes expected such as a stronger emphasis on brownfield sites, protection for agricultural land, and an encouragement for councils to increase housing density,” she added.
CCC’s consultation on the new local plan closed in June, and responses are available for the public to read.
“It is deeply regrettable this proposal involves so much farmland in a country that can already not produce enough food for its population,” wrote Alan Nutten.
Debbie Waters, of Whitstable, added “The frenetic scramble to throw up as many properties as possible in pursuit of dubious targets is unsustainable in this town.
“We already suffer from lack of basic infrastructure.”
Whitstable is set to host about 3,500 new homes under the Local Plan.
CCC’s cabinet voted unanimously to approve the new timetable.
A council officer explained to members: “In the hiatus we’re going to be carrying on looking through the considerable consultation feedback we’ve received and see what changes we need to make as a result of that.”
