A LEADING developer has expressed its disappointment after its 'much-needed' plans for Tadley were refused by the borough council on an issue surrounding affordable housing.

McCarthy Stone submitted plans in October 2018 that would see the Reading Warehouses building and 48 New Road, Tadley, redeveloped with 42 one- and two-bedroom retirement living apartments for private sale, together with landscaped gardens and on-site car parking.

The plans also included a new retail space, with five affordable apartments above.

Reacting to the application’s refusal, the developer’s division managing director said the company is ‘extremely disappointed’ and thinks the decision is ‘irrational’ and indicates a ‘lack of understanding’.

He also confirmed that McCarthy Stone will be appealing the decision in the coming weeks.

The plans were approved in November 2019, but without the condition that if there was no interest from registered social landlords in the five affordable units, McCarthy Stone instead pay a contribution towards off-site affordable housing - as part of a required Section 106 agreement.

This was something that McCarthy Stone says it wanted, to ensure that these homes would not remain unoccupied upon completion.

Following discussion with council officers, the application was referred to the development control committee on December 9 2020, with an amendment stating the option for this off-site contribution to be provided, should there be no interest from any affordable housing providers. However, the committee did not agree to this.

According to a council report, members expressed concerns regarding the ability to identify affordable housing schemes in the Tadley area, and where the total contribution of the Section 106 agreement could be spent given restrictions on development.

Officers subsequently suggested that, in the event that there is no interest from registered social landlords, and apartments also cannot be occupied through direct referrals of “qualifying purchasers”, then the five apartments be offered to the general market at 80 per cent of the market value, thereby still providing a discounted, affordable rate.

McCarthy Stone agreed to this, and the recommendation was put forward by council officer Mike Townsend to the development control committee earlier this month.

However, at its meeting on January 13, the committee rejected this option, meaning that the application overall was refused.

Cllr Nick Robinson said: “I am still concerned about this because basically what this ‘option 3’ does is get them out of the requirement to provide on-site, affordable, rented.

“I feel it does not give an appropriate on-site mix of affordable housing. This is not a difficult site, it is not a difficult location, I don’t understand why the developer thinks they may have this problem in the first place. If they build the houses and the flats to the correct standard, this problem shouldn’t exist.”

He continued: “Effectively what it does is offer discounted houses to people who can afford a market value one. That’s doing nothing whatsoever for the people who are struggling to get on the housing ladder.

“There’s nothing stopping a buy-to-let landlord taking advantage of a 20 per cent discount on a flat and then letting it at full price. I’m a Conservative councillor, I believe in a market economy, but that is absolutely outrageous.”

The recommendation was rejected seven votes to four with one abstention.

Cllr Sven Godeson, Cllr Stephanie Grant, Cllr Andrew McCormick, and Cllr Paul Miller supported it, however votes against it from Cllr Nick Robinson, Cllr David Leeks, Cllr Dave George, Cllr Paul Harvey, Cllr Michael Bound, Cllr David Potter, and Cllr Chris Tomblin made the decision.

Requesting that reasons for refusal be given, council officer Mike Townsend said that the “mix” of five affordable housing units had “already been accepted” by the committee, and therefore the decision “put the council in an odd and unusual position” and “effectively goes back against our original resolution.”

He stressed that the possibility of people who can afford full-price houses receiving a discount “only becomes relevant” if the two previous options are exhausted.

Cllr Paul Harvey said: “If the developer can deliver options one or two, and they are giving you that confidence, then I don’t know why they’re after option three”.

Mike Townsend added: “I can only offer this advice, which is on the narrowness of this issue where there is already a resolution to grant planning permission, subject to the majority of these things being fulfilled, I think there is a high probability of losing the appeal, and certainly a probability of costs decision against the council as well.”

Shane Paull, divisional managing director for McCarthy Stone Southern Division said: “We are extremely disappointed with the decision of the Development Control Committee, which we feel demonstrates a lack of understanding of the cascade system proposed by its own officers, and is entirely consistent with planning practice.

“If the affordable units do not attract any interest from affordable housing providers, it is irrational for the council to require the apartments to remain empty pending further discussions. The last 12 months do not provide us with confidence that the matter would be resolved with any urgency, and unfortunately, we are unable to continue with these delays.

“We are however, committed to delivering an attractive and much-needed residential development on this brownfield site, which will help to meet an acknowledged and growing need for specialist accommodation for older people and affordable housing. As a result of this refusal, we will now undertake a formal appeal process, which will be submitted in the coming weeks.”

He added: "There is a significant need for new homes in the Basingstoke and Deane, with the borough falling short of its five-year housing land supply. McCarthy Stone’s development would provide a significant contribution to helping towards this target, on a previously-developed, brownfield site in an urban, sustainable location which is close to local facilities and transport links. At the same time, studies have shown that our developments stimulate the housing chain when homeowners choose to downsize, creating opportunities for families and first-time buyers in the area."