Bran Sands Long Sea Outfall Data via plota.co.uk

R/2026/0519/LAC - Local Authority Consultation Decision

Proposal

Consultation from Marine Management for an EIA scoping opinion under the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 ("the MWR") (as amended) under reference number Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

Received
26 Jul 2026
Decision
Expected by 20 Sept 2026

This application is under consideration - no decision has been issued yet. A decision is expected by 20 Sept 2026.

Site constraints 8

Special protection area: Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast
2 designations overlap here. A habitats assessment is needed.
Harm to a protected site is only accepted where there is no alternative and an overriding public interest.
SSSI: Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast SSSI
Natural England must be consulted on work that may affect it.
Sites of special scientific interest are the best wildlife and geological sites in the country. Development likely to harm one is rarely permitted.
Nutrient neutrality catchment: Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast SPA/Ramsar
New homes and overnight accommodation must show nutrient neutrality before approval.
Natural England advice: extra wastewater in these catchments harms protected habitats, so schemes must offset their nutrient load, usually through credits.
Filey Brigg to Newport Bridge across the site
Matters where it crosses or adjoins the site; the route and its margin are protected.
Priority habitat: Coastal sand dunes
A habitat of principal importance. It shapes the ecology work and the biodiversity net gain a scheme has to show.
Agricultural land, grade 5
Very poor quality farmland, not best and most versatile. Predicted from the national soil map. A site survey can differ.
Where development of farmland is needed, policy prefers poorer land over the best and most versatile (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Three sources: Natural England's post-1988 field surveys, which are definitive where they exist; the Defra predictive map for England (2025) and the Welsh Government predictive map, modelled from the soil map with 3a and 3b split; and the 1970s provisional map, which planners and other services still show, coarser and with grade 3 undivided. Where the provisional and predicted grades disagree, treat the predicted grade as the current estimate and expect an application to carry its own survey.
Habitat network: Coastal sand dunes
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Also on the record
Nature recovery project: Tees Estuary Recovering Nature (TERN).
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 11 September 2026. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England and council datasets, Open Government Licence. A boundary can run through a site and the council holds the definitive record: confirm with the council before relying on this.

Work with planning data?

Every application in Redcar and Cleveland - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Application type
Local Authority Consultation
Postcode
TS10 5NX
Received
26 Jul 2026
Validated
26 Jul 2026
Case officer
Show
Applicant
Show
Agent
MARINE MANAGEMENT ORGANISATION
Redcar and Cleveland
Planning Authority Score
6.8/10
Good
#69 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Redcar and Cleveland ranks #169 out of 296 councils for householder decision speed. Only 30% of applications have the time limit extended, well below the 41% national average - the council usually decides on time. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (96%) than the national average (90%).

Rarely extends deadlines
decisions usually arrive on time
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Redcar and Cleveland decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
96%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #15 of 296
96%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #58 of 296
62%
Decided in 8 weeks
Below avg (63%) #169 of 296
30%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #56 of 296
78%
Minor dwellings approved
18 decided (1-9 homes)
100%
Major dwellings approved
9 decided (10+ homes)
95%
Change of use approved
37 decided
418
Total decisions
16 refused in the year to March 2026