Tag Archives: appeal decisions

So Gladman wins again… Shottendane decision shows how government policy backs developer profits and betrays the people waiting for affordable housing

Posted , filed under Planning

CPRE Kent was disappointed, though not surprised, to see Gladman Developments given permission by appeal for 450 houses at Shottendane Road, near Margate. This was despite the scheme only offering half the required affordable housing.
For us, it is yet another sorry example of greenfield land being sacrificed to deliver developer profits rather than much-needed affordable housing. As we highlighted only this month, this thinking needs to change urgently.
Thanet, like Canterbury, has a significant need to provide affordable housing. In fact, the local authority has recently identified there needs to be 548 affordable homes built a year to rent [1].
However, last year, just 69 affordable houses were built in Thanet [2]. Amazingly, this seemingly low number was in fact the highest amount by some margin achieved over the last five years – though still some way from the 548 needed. 
Again like Canterbury, part of the reason so many affordable houses are needed is because market house prices have increased so significantly in recent years. For Thanet, it is by some 174 per cent since 2002. This is now at a point where only 27 per cent of current renters in Thanet have sufficient income to buy the cheapest quarter of open-market houses [3].
So why, with such a pressing affordable housing need, did the planning inspector agree with Gladman that only half the council’s requirement of 30 per cent affordable houses should be built?
Because if the inspector agreed any more than this, the development would not be deemed ‘viable’.
The viability appraisals submitted with the appeal supported this position and have now been subjected to robust scrutiny. They have been found to be technically correct and fully in line with Government policy.

Which makes it even more depressing when we consider they show [4]:

•          Gladman expects to sell 382 open-market homes for an average of £305,824.17.  The median salary in Thanet is £24,444 per annum. That means each of these 382 homes will be 12.5 times the average Thanet salary.

•          It has allowed just over £4.7 million to buy the land. This assumes that, while the existing farmland is worth £25,000 per hectare, it would need to offer at least 10 times this amount to entice the landowner to sell.

•          The inspector agreed that the developer’s profit should be ringfenced at 17.5 per cent. This was appraised to equate to just over £21 million profit.

… which is probably why Barratt Developments (with pre-tax profits of £432.6m for the six months to December 31, 2021) has just brought Gladman Developments for £250 million.

Not bad work if you can get it.
Just don’t tell that to the people waiting for affordable housing.

References

https://thanetcouncilplan.inconsult.uk/gf2.ti/-/1334370/119547045.1/PDF/-/Housing%20Needs%20Update%20Report.pdf

https://www.thanet.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/AMR-2021-Final-2.pdf

  • You can read the appeal decision here
  • For more on the saga of Shottendane, click here

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

And now for the good news: two appeal decisions confirm status of protected countryside

Posted , filed under Planning
The ‘presumption’ penalty does not apply in the Kent Downs AONB (pic Dimitry, flickr)

While the recent Housing Delivery Test results might have brought despair to CPRE Kent, this week brings far better news for those who care about the county’s countryside, with two extremely significant appeal decisions being handed down.
On Monday (January 31) the Planning Inspectorate dismissed an appeal for 800 homes in the Green Belt at Broke Hill, north of Sevenoaks. Then on Wednesday we had an appeal for 374 homes, a care home and relief road dismissed for a site within the AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) at Hawkhurst Golf Club.
Common to both appeals was confirmation that, where planning policies protect areas of particular importance and provide a clear reason for refusing the development, the so-called ‘tilted balance’ presumption in favour of granting planning permission does not apply.
For Broke Hill, the policies of particular importance related to protection of the Green Belt. For Hawkhurst, it was protection of the High Weald AONB that was important. For both relevant councils – Sevenoaks and Tunbridge Wells  – the presumption in favour of granting planning permission is otherwise engaged (as reported last week).
This is to be welcomed as there has been erosion of this protection over recent years, with inspectors increasingly finding the need for housing more important than Green Belt or AONB protection.  
These appeals, however, reaffirm that within Kent’s Green Belt and AONBs the ‘presumption’ penalty does not apply while also providing precedent that the need to provide housing does not automatically override this protection.
This is good news.  
There is always a flip side, though. And that is the continued pursuit of housing numbers over all else only increases pressure on those areas of countryside without Green Belt and AONB protection. Here it can be expected that the ‘presumption’ penalty will be imposed with even more vigour.
That is why CPRE Kent will continue to support calls for the presumption penalty to be scraped and a refocus on housing quality over quantity.
Nigel Britten, CPRE Kent’s Sevenoaks chair, made representations and spoke at the Broke Hill appeal, while the Tunbridge Wells committee made written representations to the Hawkhurst appeal.

  • The Broke Hill appeal decision can be viewed here 
  • The Hawkhurst Golf Club appeal decision can be viewed here

Friday, February 4, 2022