450 Homes without any Affordable Housing – Walsingham Planning new Director persuades Secretary of State the site was costly enough!

Acting for Michael Shanly Homes, Mark Krassowski succeeded in persuading the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to allow an appeal for 450 new homes on a brownfield site in Maidenhead.

The site, a former unlicensed refuse tip within a residential area of Maidenhead and close to the town centre, has been the subject of much contention over the past 20 years with various planning rejections.

Identified as the largest allocated housing site in the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Local Plan, Michael Shanly’s proposals for 402 dwellings and a 46 unit ‘extra care’ housing scheme were originally refused planning permission by the local planning authority on grounds of overdevelopment, highway impact and lack of affordable housing and off-site infrastructure.

The application proposals had been supported by a comprehensive financial viability appraisal which identified that the abnormal site remediation costs meant that the residential scheme could only be financially viable by providing no affordable housing and limited section 106 payments that were well below the Council’s adopted standards.

On behalf of Michael Shanly Homes, Mark Krassowski lodged an appeal against the refusal and the Secretary of State recovered jurisdiction.

A public inquiry was held in September and October 2008 and Mark provided the planning evidence, arguing that both the national guidance and development plan policy allowed for financial viability to be taken into account when determining the amount of affordable housing a development should provide, and that the lack of affordable housing does not necessarily lead to an unsustainable housing development.

Strong arguments were made in relation to the need for the housing land to come forward and the environmental benefits of remediating a heavily contaminated site, as well as the lack of harm caused by the proposals to off site community infrastructure. Both the Planning Inspector and Secretary of State agreed and the appeal was allowed in January 2009.

The decision highlights the fact that development economics are an important planning consideration, particularly where proposals accord with other aspects of a development plan and/or provide development such as housing that is badly needed.