Housing appeal dismissed despite 2.5-year housing land supply

A Planning Inspector has dismissed an appeal for a 45-unit housing scheme, despite the local planning authority having only a 2.5 year housing land supply and there being no "strong" fn.7 reasons for refusal.

Although the tilted balance applied, the Inspector found that the adverse impacts of the scheme significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits of housing delivery and other lesser benefits.

The adverse impacts in question were:

• harm to the character and appearance of the area,
• less than substantial harm to a Grade II listed church and a non-designated heritage asset,
• inadequate open space provision, and
• the unsustainability of the location where there was no realistic or meaningful choice of travel mode other than private car.
  

Of particular note is that the Inspector only gave limited weight to the "community hub" as part of the appeal scheme and the financing of a "community bus" for a period of 4 years - finding these measures were not enough to rescue the scheme, given the lower-order sustainability credentials of the location. The Inspector rejected the argument that NPPF§115 was inapplicable because the 45-unit scheme was not "significant development" on the basis that it did not meet the local threshold for needing a Transport Assessment.

The decision is a reminder that even where there is a serious housing land supply shortfall, the tilted balance applies and there are no "strong" fn. 7 reasons for refusal, proposals must still represent sustainable development in the right location.

George Mackenzie acted for Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council at the inquiry, alongside Robyn Milliner of ET Planning, Anne Priscott of Anne Priscott Associates, Steven H. of Handforth Heritage, officers from Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council and Hampshire County Council, overseen by Nicola Williams and Katherine Fitzherbert-Green.