Scrapping plans to build on Hucknall's Whyburn Farm among four local plan options on the table for Ashfield District Council

The document has been in limbo for years but, more recently, had been ‘paused’, primarily because of the inclusion of green belt in Hucknall.

Of sites for 8,226 homes in the plan, almost 5,000 were targeted at Hucknall, including up to 3,000 at Whyburn Farm.

It sparked outcry from local residents and gave rise to a hard fought campaign that included a 8,000-name petition, relaying concerns about the loss of a popular wildlife site and its impact on existing infrastructure.

Now new documents have set out the next steps for the plans before councillors meet to determine the fate of the controversial document.

The Ashfield Independents administration announced it wanted to remove the 3,000-home green belt settlement from the 15-year plan last month.

The housing plan is a blueprint of where the council plans to allow major new residential development.

Instead, councillors revealed proposals to submit a document with slightly more than 5,000 homes to Whitehall inspectors.

Council leaders said at the time they were responding to comments made by the now Prime Minister Liz Truss during Conservative Party hustings.

In those comments, Ms Truss described housing target calculations as “Stalinist” and has said she wants to put planning powers “back in local councillors’ hands”.

Under local plan rules, the Government sets a housing target calculation method and councils must use this to determine how many homes are needed in their areas.

They must then draw up a housing plan, often over a period of about 15 years, setting out sites where the homes can be built.

In Ashfield’s, the Government calculation meant 8,226 homes were required between now and 2038 – a target the authority has long described as “unrealistic”.

When putting the plan on hold, Ashfield councillors believed a change in national policy was on the horizon and now say they feel confident they can justify a significantly-altered plan without Whyburn Farm.

A decision on the next steps will be made on Tuesday, September 13 during the local plan development panel.

And documents published for the meeting have revealed there are a number of risks associated with the move.

These include requiring the authority to show the plan meets the district’s “objectively assessed needs”, including the amount of homes needed across the area.

The authority would also need to ensure the amended plan is “ready for examination” with a complete evidence base and to make sure it has “legal compliance”.

This means the council must co-operate with national laws around local plan creation and consult on any changes with neighbouring local authorities like Gedling and Mansfield councils.

The new report, written in part by assistant planning director Christine Sarris, also confirms the four options to move the plan forward.

These include continuing to pause the local plan or submitting the document in its current form.

But other options include the Whyburn Farm removal or making smaller changes but keeping a similar-sized document.

Outlining the risks with the latter two options, Ms Sarris said: “At the examination, one of the key aspects the [Government] inspector will be considering is whether the plan … as a minimum, seeks to meet the area’s objectively assessed needs and can be justified.

“This would include the basis of the housing need and the justification of any constraints in meeting the housing need.

“The onus is on the local planning authority to submit a plan that is ‘ready for examination,’ with a complete evidence base, and representations properly ordered and collated.

“One of the issues that the Inspector will consider is legal compliance. The council is under a duty to cooperate under the [law] in relation to strategic matters which the inspector will consider at the examination.”

Speaking last month, Councillor Jason Zadrozny-Bland (Ash Ind), the council’s leader, hoped the authority could submit a 5,000-home plan and be allowed to enforce it over a 10-year rather than a 15-year period.

However, on this issue, Ms Sarris said: “Strategic policies should look ahead over a minimum 15-year period from adoption.

“Therefore, if a delay results in the progress of the plan it may require an extension of the plan period to 2039.”

The local plan development panel will assess the four options next week before recommending their preferred option to be taken forward by cabinet members on September 20.