The Orsett housing inquiry due to open on 6th October has been postponed because the Planning Inspectorate’s appointed Inspector became unavailable. If you live in Orsett or have been following the proposed 150 homes east of Baker Street, the key point I want to make is that this is a delay, not a decision on whether the homes should go ahead.
Thurrock Council posted an urgent notice about the Orsett housing inquiry late on 5th October confirming that there would be no public inquiry this week and that an alternative date is being sought. The appeal concerns Barratt David Wilson Homes’ proposal for 150 homes on land east of Baker Street in Orsett.
The postponement of the Orsett housing inquiry does not change the appeal itself. Appeal 6009548 remains undetermined, and the Inspectorate will need to arrange a replacement timetable before evidence is heard on the disputed housing scheme.
Why the Orsett housing inquiry matters
The Orsett housing inquiry follows Thurrock Council’s refusal of application 25/00678/FUL for the demolition of one dwelling and development of 150 homes, together with access, open space, landscaping and infrastructure.
The application attracted particular attention because the site lies in the Metropolitan Green Belt while the applicant and council officers considered it to fall within the newer grey belt policy framework.
When the application first reached Planning Committee in December 2025, officers recommended approval. Their report identified a substantial housing benefit, including 50% affordable housing, and concluded that the proposal could be supported subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement.
Councillors disagreed and refused permission. The scheme subsequently returned to committee after legal concerns were raised about elements of the original refusal reasoning, but the authority maintained its opposition and the developer appealed.
Inquiry postponed before evidence could begin
The Planning Inspectorate had arranged the Orsett housing inquiry to start on 6th October 2026. A public inquiry is the most formal appeal procedure and allows expert witnesses to give evidence and be cross-examined.
However, Thurrock’s inquiry page was updated at 4.30pm on 5th October to say the Inspector could no longer attend. The council states that there will be no inquiry this week and that a new date is being sought.
For the Orsett housing inquiry, that is a procedural delay rather than a substantive decision. The appeal remains live and neither the council’s refusal nor the appellant’s case has been accepted or rejected by an Inspector.
For residents, advisers and expert witnesses following the Orsett housing inquiry, the practical consequence is that the previously advertised inquiry programme should no longer be relied upon. A fresh date and timetable will need to be issued before the oral evidence resumes.
150 homes with half proposed as affordable
The December committee report describes a full application for 150 homes ranging across different sizes and tenures. Half of the homes were proposed as affordable housing.
The scheme also includes children’s play areas, pedestrian and cycle connections, sustainable drainage, landscaping and biodiversity net gain measures.
Officers considered the site to offer significant planning benefits, particularly in relation to housing land supply and affordable housing delivery. The proposal was recommended for approval subject to planning conditions and completion of the necessary legal agreement.
Those benefits will form an important part of the appeal case. But the inquiry will also need to examine the council’s concerns about the location, Green Belt policy, infrastructure and the effect of a development of this scale on Orsett.
Grey belt arguments sit at the centre of the dispute
The case is especially relevant because it arrives after major changes to national Green Belt policy.
The applicant argued that the site should be treated as grey belt rather than land making a strong contribution to Green Belt purposes. Council officers broadly agreed with that policy analysis when recommending approval.
Members took a different view when refusing the scheme. Some of the original reasons were later reconsidered after officers advised that parts of the legal and policy reasoning could not safely be defended in their original form.
That history means the inquiry is likely to provide a useful test of how the grey belt provisions are applied to a substantial housing proposal where planning officers and elected members have reached different conclusions.
Planning Geek’s Green Belt and grey belt guide explains the distinction between Green Belt status, grey belt policy and the separate planning balance that still has to be carried out.
Postponement does not strengthen either side
It would be wrong to read anything into the Inspector’s unavailability. The council notice describes the postponement as arising from unforeseen circumstances and gives no indication that it relates to the merits of the appeal.
Neither side gains a planning advantage simply because the hearing dates have moved. The evidence remains to be tested, and the appeal will still be determined against the development plan and material considerations in force when the Inspector reaches a decision.
There can, however, be practical consequences. Expert witnesses may need to rearrange availability, statements and proofs may need updating if circumstances change, and any new material policy developments arising before the rescheduled inquiry may have to be addressed.
What happens next
Thurrock Council says an alternative date for the Orsett housing inquiry is being sought. Until the Planning Inspectorate confirms the replacement arrangements, the appeal remains pending.
Anyone intending to attend should check the council’s dedicated inquiry page rather than relying on the original October timetable.
The appeal reference is 6009548. The Planning Inspectorate appeal record should be checked alongside Thurrock’s inquiry page for the replacement timetable. Once the inquiry resumes, the Inspector will hear the appellant’s and council’s evidence before issuing a written decision.
Planning Geek’s planning appeals guide explains the difference between written representations, hearings and inquiries, and how the Inspectorate approaches the determination of a section 78 appeal.
Planning Geek view
The postponement itself is straightforward, but the underlying appeal is not. The Baker Street scheme combines housing delivery, affordable housing and a live grey belt dispute, all against a background of committee refusal despite officer support.
That makes the eventual inquiry more useful than a routine housing appeal. The Inspector will have to work through both the site-specific effects and the current national policy framework rather than treating the Green Belt label as the end of the exercise.
For now, I wouldn’t read the postponement as a sign that either side is winning. The inquiry did not open on 6th October, and the Inspector still needs to hear the evidence when a new date is arranged. If you’re following the plans locally, check the council’s inquiry page for the revised timetable.
0 Comments