Two Hayling Island appeals have resulted in outline permission for up to 89 homes across two separate sites, following an Inspector’s decision dated 11 November 2026. The approvals were issued despite an unresolved flood-risk sequential test affecting one scheme, a factor explicitly assessed in the planning balance.
The first proposal is for up to 29 homes north of the Oysters on Station Road, while the second is for up to 60 homes south of Saltmarsh Lane. Both were promoted by Hayling Island Builders Ltd after Havant Borough Council refused the applications. The sites have different conditions but were considered in a combined decision.
The Hayling Island appeals are significant because they show how the new August 2026 National Planning Policy Framework operates where housing need, coastal flood risk and internationally protected habitats intersect. Inspector H Nicholls found that material considerations justified permissions despite conflicts with the adopted development plan.
Why the Hayling Island appeals succeeded
The two appeal references are 6010200 and 6010237. A hearing was held on 23 September 2026, with a site inspection on 21 October. Both applications were in outline, with the principal access arrangements to be determined and detailed matters such as layout and landscaping left for later approval.
Havant Borough Council’s position altered during the appeal process, but the Inspector still considered the issues raised by residents and other interested parties. Those included the suitability of access arrangements, transport and walking routes, drainage, environmental impacts and whether the submitted planning obligations adequately addressed the schemes’ effects.
The Hayling Island appeals therefore centred in part on a serious shortfall in the supply of deliverable housing sites was central to the decision. The revised National Planning Policy Framework provides for some development outside settlements when it addresses evidenced unmet housing need and is appropriately related to existing settlements and infrastructure. The Inspector considered that these schemes satisfied the relevant criteria.
The flood risk sequential test was not passed
An especially important feature of the Hayling Island appeals was the future flood-risk position of the Saltmarsh Lane land. Updated Environment Agency mapping suggested at least that site would be exposed to a higher risk of flooding beyond 2070. The sequential test was therefore required to consider whether lower-risk alternative sites could reasonably accommodate the development.
The Inspector found that neither the appellant nor the council had demonstrated the absence of reasonable alternatives at lower risk, and that the evidence before the appeal did not support such a conclusion. The 60-home proposal therefore conflicted with Local Plan Policy CS15 and the national flood-risk policy, notwithstanding evidence that the individual development could be safe over its lifetime.
That distinction is critical. A finding that suitable flood protection could be designed into a scheme is different from demonstrating that the development passes the spatial sequential test. The Inspector did not quietly waive that test. Instead, the failure became an identified adverse consideration in the wider planning balance.
The housing supply deficit was sufficiently substantial that the Inspector considered a combination of lower-risk and higher-risk sites would be needed to address the shortage. In the specific circumstances, the sequential-test failure does not amount to a substantial adverse harm in this case
. This is not a general rule that flood-risk requirements can be disregarded whenever more homes are needed.
Thirty per cent affordable housing and obligations
Both developments include at least 30% affordable housing, with the final unilateral undertakings specifying a tenure mix of 70% affordable rent and 30% shared ownership. The undertakings are binding planning obligations addressing the circumstances of each site, rather than an informal offer to provide improvements later.
The packages include nitrate mitigation, wintering bird refuge arrangements, Bird Aware Solent contributions, sustainable drainage measures and support for community infrastructure. The Inspector considered the legal tests for such obligations, including whether their content was necessary to make development acceptable and appropriately related to the schemes.
Several of the obligations also relate to walking, cycling and access. One issue concerned better connections towards the Hayling Billy Trail and the scope to improve routes at Station Road. Some details will depend on later implementation and reserved matters, but the decision concluded that sufficient mechanisms were available to secure necessary infrastructure.
The Hayling Island appeals are a useful reminder that section 106 obligations and unilateral undertakings must be justified and enforceable. Planning Geek’s section 106 agreement guidance explains how these legal commitments operate.
Protection for coastal habitats
The sites lie near internationally important coastal habitats, including Chichester and Langstone Harbours, Portsmouth Harbour and the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation. The Inspector assessed possible effects on birds and habitats arising from recreational activity, the loss of functionally linked land and additional nitrate loads.
The Inspector found that, without mitigation, likely significant effects could arise. The proposed conditions and undertakings would secure bird refuge measures, contributions to habitat management, nutrient mitigation, ecology and construction management plans and other ongoing protections. The Inspector had regard to Natural England’s consultation responses before concluding that the integrity of protected sites could be maintained.
This was not approval to defer all ecological questions to another day. The Inspector’s finding depended on the obligations and conditions being capable of delivering the safeguards identified. The nutrient neutrality guide explains why such mitigation has become an important condition of planning permission around sensitive estuaries.
The permissions also carry conditions concerning surface water drainage, water efficiency, tree protection, access, construction arrangements, lighting, noise and archaeological evaluation. These matters will remain relevant when the developers prepare reserved matters submissions and discharge conditions.
Why the housing benefits prevailed
For the Station Road land, 29 homes, affordable housing, active travel benefits and construction activity were all considered important. The Inspector found the relevant harms did not substantially outweigh the benefits, so material considerations justified an outcome contrary to parts of the development plan.
The Saltmarsh Lane proposal would provide 60 homes, including affordable homes, plus public open space, biodiversity net gain and other benefits. Despite the additional sequential-test conflict, the Inspector concluded that the housing shortage and overall planning balance justified permission subject to the required safeguards.
The Hayling Island appeals underline that an identified development-plan conflict is not necessarily decisive. The Inspector recognised the conflicts, assessed the national decision-making policies in the 2026 National Planning Policy Framework and explained why the balance favoured granting consent.
The original Inspector decisions are recorded as 6010200 and 6010237. The appeal decision is also available on AppealBase.
0 Comments