Housing development: relevance of New Homes Bonus

An inspector hearing a s. 78 appeal recently considered whether New Homes Bonus money from a development could overcome a failure to provide necessary contributions. David Lintott explains the decision.

A recent s. 78 appeal into land at Newlands Road, Luton was interesting because the Inspector, Jennifer Vyse, considered whether it could be argued that money which would be received by way of New Homes Bonus should the appeal be successful could overcome a failure to provide necessary contributions.

The appeal also considered the importance of good design, the usefulness of photomontages, and how paragraph 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework operated so as to restrict development.

Vyse, an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, delivered her decision dated 8 August 2013 in respect of an inquiry which sat for two weeks closing on 7 June 2013. The appeal was made by Templeview Developments against the decision of Luton Borough Council to refuse to grant outline permission for 230 units of residential accommodation.

The inspector, in dismissing the appeal, decided at [57]-[61] that:

1. For the purpose of performing the planning balance she would assume without deciding that there was a significant shortfall in the supply of housing land, she would therefore consider, pursuant to paragraph 14 of the NPPF, whether (i) the adverse impacts of the development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies of the framework taken as a whole; and/or (ii) specific policies in the framework indicate that development should be restricted;
2. The substantial harm which the development would cause in relation to impact on the character and appearance of the area (as demonstrated by photomontages produced by the council) and the significant strain on local education facilities and waste management services significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefit of providing 230 dwellings, even if one assumes a substantial shortfall in housing supply as asserted by the appellant. It would be inappropriate and possibly unlawful to take the New Homes Bonus into account as a material consideration since there could be no guarantee that it would be used for the purpose intended by the appellant ([49]);
3. The Government attached great importance to the design of the built environment. Paragraph 64 of the framework advises that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions. Given the poor design of the development paragraph 64 was engaged and was an indication that the development should be restricted.

David Lintott of Cornerstone Barristers appeared for Luton Borough Council in the s. 78 appeal.