Developer reprieved of £647,000 contribution to affordable housing in five-home plan

Five new homes agreed in Bray look finally set to go ahead - after a drawn-out years-long disagreement over affordable housing appears to have been resolved.

Proposals include demolishing two homes on land at Zaman House and Awan House in Church Road and putting five new ones in their place.

This particular saga is a long one, spanning nine years. Plans to put something here date back to 2016, when a proposal for 13 flats was met with strong public objection, due to concerns about overdevelopment.

That application was withdrawn and a new proposal followed it in 2020, this time for six houses. Objectors again raised concerns about overdevelopment, and that application was revised to five houses.

Nonetheless, RBWM planning officers continued to recommend refusal, warning that the site’s redevelopment would harm the semi-rural character of The Fisheries.

Despite this, councillors on the Maidenhead Development Management Committee approved the plan in February 2021.

Councillors felt the site was likely to be redeveloped in some form - and thought the five-house scheme was the most acceptable so far. Some were concerned that refusing it could lead to a worse scheme being permitted at appeal.

However, this approved plan stalled again due to a disagreement over how much the developer should pay towards affordable housing.

RBWM insists on affordable housing wherever it can – for example, for developments of 10 homes or more, or ones covering a large area.

Though there are only five homes involved in the scheme, because it covers an area of 1,000sqft, this triggers the requirement for affordable homes on site.

But if developers feel their proposal cannot include affordable housing for whatever reason, they can pay a financial contribution towards putting affordable housing elsewhere instead.

In this case, the council had originally asked for more than £647,700, but the developer argued this was too high and would make the scheme unviable.

According to St Edwards Design & Planning consultants, writing on behalf of the applicant, RBWM was ‘unwilling to allow the applicant to consider the financial viability of this amount.’

As a result, the application was submitted again with a fresh viability assessment a year and a half ago, in January 2024.

Planning officers agreed to reconsider the contribution in light of the new evidence and have now approved the scheme with updated terms.

This does not necessarily mean that RBWM will never get any money for affordable housing out of the developer.

Rather, RBWM and the developer have entered into an agreement where the developer must continue to demonstrate that the contribution is unviable.

Effectively, if later reviews show that the housing is more profitable than the developer thought, they may need to pay an affordable housing contribution later. This could come, for example, before selling the fifth house, or before it is occupied.

There have been other changes over the course of this application’s lifetime - the layout was revised to introduce a single point of access and improve the street scene.

Moreover, as the site lies in flood zone 3 – highest risk of flooding – the Environment Agency initially objected, saying there was insufficient detail about how flood risk would be managed.

That objection was later withdrawn after the applicant provided further information showing safe pedestrian access could be maintained in the event of flooding.

This approval likely marks the end of the long saga. Section 106 agreements - which cover affordable housing contributions and other financial deals - are typically one of the last hurdles in the planning permission process.

To see the latest documents, enter reference number 24/00186 into RBWM's online planning portal at publicaccess.rbwm.gov.uk/online-applications