More than 400 new homes could soon be built after a council withdrew its opposition to the developments because of incorrect land supply figures.

Council planners are required by government to show a land supply available for new homes equivalent to the number of properties needed over five years.

However, Braintree District Council has admitted figures it used to defend planning refusals were incorrect.

It means it will now not defend appeals relating to planning applications for up to 200 homes on land at Bournebridge Hill, Greenstead Green and up to 230 homes on land north-east of Rectory Lane, Rivenhall.

In both cases, Braintree planning committee raised a number of concerns in its reasons for refusal, including the fact that both sites were not allocated for development in Braintree District Local Plan.

The council had said its five-year housing land supply required by Government stood at 5.1.

But this figure had been challenged by Gladman Developments as early as August when the developer said it did not trust the council figure when proposing plans for 200 homes in Bournebridge Hill.

The district council has now concluded that it has just 4.86 years housing land supply.

In these circumstances, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that planning permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly outweigh the benefits.

The council said that despite not defending these two appeals specifically, this does not mean that all applications will be approved even if a five-year housing land supply cannot be demonstrated.

It says the council will still oppose developments where there are strong grounds to do so, such as having adverse impacts on heritage assets or landscape, and the harm sufficiently outweighing the benefits of the development.

Councillor Gabrielle Spray, cabinet member for planning and infrastructure, said: “These have not been easy decisions, considering the extensive work already carried out behind the scenes to defend both appeals, but it is the right decision to make when we consider the current condition of Braintree’s housing land supply.

“It’s important to note that the council reviews each appeal on its merits and in these cases, it was sensible to not defend due to additional financial costs this could create for the council."