URL: https://rother.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=2118

Decision Maker:

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: The application was referred to the Planning Committee due to the loss of affordable housing (AH).   The application sought to modify the completed Section 106 Agreement associated with the development of 15 dwellings, including three affordable units, which was granted planning permission in October 2025 (RR/2023/2153/P) following approval by the Planning Committee in October 2024. It was confirmed that the development had not yet commenced and that the permission currently remained extant.  The completed Section 106 Agreement secured a 20% AH provision, that represented a reduction from the policy requirement of 40% and was justified on viability grounds.  The current proposal sought to remove the AH requirement entirely based on viability.  The Applicant submitted a viability assessment indicating that the scheme was unviable even without any AH provision (i.e. as a 100% open market development), which was attributed to the softening of the housing market and increased build costs.  This assessment was independently reviewed on behalf of the Council, with the consultant agreeing that the delivery of AH was unlikely to be achievable.  Given that the viability case had been demonstrated in accordance with relevant planning policy, the Planning Officer recommended that a Deed of Variation be agreed to remove the AH requirement, but subject to the inclusion of a late-stage viability review mechanism, allowing for a future AH contribution should the scheme’s viability improve.   The Planning Officer highlighted the principal benefits of the scheme, including its contribution towards addressing the Council’s five-year housing land supply shortfall; a high-quality design that would enhance both the site and the surrounding area; improvements to existing bus stops; financial contributions towards transport services; economic benefits arising from expenditure by future occupants; and increased Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) contributions.  It was clarified that a Registered Provider would be unlikely to assume responsibility for only three AH units.   Councillor Stanger moved that the application be REFUSED on the grounds of conflict with Policy DHG1 (AH) of the Rother Development and Site Allocations Local Plan, loss of public benefit to the village of Iden, failure to meet local housing need, and less restrictive alternatives not demonstrated (not explored off-site contributions).  The motion was not seconded.  Following officer and legal advice that the proposed reasons would be unlikely to carry significant weight in the event of an appeal, Councillor Stanger withdrew his motion.   Councillor Stanger moved that the application be DEFERRED to explore other financial contribution and shared ownership options and to include a multi-stage viability review mechanism.  This motion was not seconded.  Councillor Stanger withdrew his motion.   In conclusion, the Planning Committee unanimously expressed disappointment that the scheme would provide no AH and that construction had not started.  Members noted the development would contribute to the Council’s five-year housing supply shortfall and it was hoped that by implementing a three-stage viability review mechanism that an AH contribution could be secured.   Councillor Drayson moved the motion to VARY the Section 106 Agreement to remove AH provision with the inclusion of a three-stage viability review mechanism.  The exact details, timeframes and wording of the three-stage viability review to be delegated to officers (commencement of no above ground works in relation to the construction of dwellings and after so many houses were built etc.), in consultation with the Chair of the Planning Committee.  This was seconded by Councillor Stanger.  The motion was declared CARRIED (8 for / unanimous).   DECISION: AGREE TO A DEED OF VARIATION TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION, SUBJECT TO THE INCLUSION OF A THREE-STAGE VIABILITY REVIEW MECHANISM (DETAILS, TIMEFRAMES AND WORDING TO BE DELEGATED TO OFFICERS, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE) TO SECURE A CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION IF THE SCHEME’S VIABILITY HAS IMPROVED

Date of Decision: June 25, 2026