Warwick District Council will have less power to refuse housing plans after an inspector ruled it had overestimated the probable delivery of new homes.

National planning inspector Steve Lee ruled that the authority, which handles planning permissions across Warwick, Leamington Spa, Kenilworth, Whitnash and the surrounding villages, could not evidence the number of homes it said would be built out over the next five years on 14 different sites allocated for housing.

The council's numbers were contested during May's planning appeal over proposals for 83 homes next to Warwickshire Police's headquarters in Leek Wootton, one that the council lost and had to pay costs over. 

As part of that challenge, developer Cala Homes argued that the council could not demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.

Rules state that councils must have enough land dedicated to meet targets for new homes for the next five years, and that enough of those homes must be deliverable in that period in order for its local plan to carry full weight when planning applications come forward. 

Authorities that fall short must apply what is known as a "tilted balance" where there is a "presumption in favour of sustainable development" on land that is not allocated for housing unless strong enough planning reasons can be offered for refusal. 

It means developers have greater scope to make the case to put housing on parcels of land that have not been selected, although other planning considerations such as rules over protecting the green belt still apply.  

The district's latest published calculation from October 2023 was that it had 6,450 deliverable homes in the pipeline, a figure that it revised to 6,112 when challenged during the appeal. 

Cala's calculation was 4,472 and while Mr Lee accepted that in many cases the homes would eventually come forward, he chalked off almost 1,200 from the council's number in his assessment of what could realistically come forward in the next five years.

More than 300 of those were taken off the five-year projections for two sites at Thickthorn, Kenilworth, another 200 from those at Kings Hill Lane, Stoneleigh, 180 from Asps Farm, Bishop's Tachbrook and 105 from the sites at Kenilworth School and Sixth Form.

Added to that, Mr Lee said that the extra homes Warwick District Council had committed to building to cater for Coventry's housing needs, which makes up some 45 per cent of the total annual requirement, should be taken into account, the element that takes Warwick from being close to an adequate supply to falling short.

The inspector's conclusion was that as things stood in May, 4,914 homes were likely to be delivered across the district across the five-year period, enough to equate to 4.01 years' worth of supply. 

A spokesperson said Warwick District Council had been "disappointed" by the verdict that it had "decided not to challenge" following legal advice. 

They added that all councillors had been briefed with the planning committee specifically "briefed on the implications".

It was noted that the position "will fluctuate" but that "it is likely that the council will find itself without a five-year housing land supply for a period of time".

A refreshed position is set to be published "within the next month" but that "is very likely to indicate that the council continues to have a housing land supply position of less than five years."