The lack of a five-year housing supply in Rutland has led to a previously refused housing development near Rutland Water being given the go ahead on appeal. 

The plan for 62 houses on a field east of Normanton Road in Edith Weston had previously been refused on appeal in November 2023, but after the applicant Phillip Davies had that decision quashed at the High Court last March, the secretary of state had appointed an inspector to hear a new appeal.  But just days before the hearing last month, Rutland County Council (RCC) said it would not contest the appeal and planning permission should be granted. 

Changes to the national planning policy have meant more homes have been allocated to be built in Rutland each year, rising from 123 to 266 per year, and as of last December the authority can no longer demonstrate a five-year housing supply. This now leaves it open to challenges from developers, which can win planning permission even if the scheme is outside of local planning policy and is in sites where new home developments have not been allocated. 

The final appeal decision allowing the Edith Weston scheme was made at the end of last month. 

In his report inspector Gary Chamberlain said the development, which will be sited on a large arable field sandwiched between two existing housing estates, would be at odds with RCC's policy on countryside development, as well as some aspects of the emerging Edith Weston neighbourhood plan, but the lack of a five year land supply meant it should be allowed. 

He said: "The appeal scheme would be at odds with the development plan taken as a whole. A proposal should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. A very important material consideration in this instance is that the council are currently unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply." 

He said that meant permission "should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits". 

But despite granting approval, he was critical of the scheme. 

Mr Chamberlain said: "The appeal scheme would urbanise the appeal site, dramatically altering its character from an open arable field to a housing estate. It is simply not credible to suggest there would not be harm to the landscape character of the area. The previous Inspector was correct when he said the value of the site and its contribution to the surrounding countryside would be significantly eroded. 

He said the lack of housing supply was 'acute' – the authority can only demonstrate a housing supply of just under three years. 

He was also critical of the layout of the development, declaring it 'poor'.  He said the arable site 'is not an optimal location for significant development.'  And he said he was acutely aware of the local frustration allowing the scheme would provoke. 

At a planning meeting on Tuesday (March 18), Rutland County Council's development manager Justin Johnson said: "That development has now unfortunately been allowed."