Purbeck View housing plans for 47 homes on a former school site in Swanage have reopened a familiar argument: how far should a developer be allowed to reduce affordable housing contributions on viability grounds? The application is live, but the proposal currently includes no affordable homes, according to local reporting published on 21 October 2026.
The developer, Archel Homes, proposes to replace much of the former Purbeck View School at 23 Northbrook Road with housing while retaining the historic chapel for office use. Dorset Council’s public application record identifies the scheme as P/FUL/2026/05301. This is a proposal awaiting determination, not permission already granted.
I think the crucial distinction is between an applicant arguing that affordable housing is unviable and the planning authority accepting that conclusion. Those are very different stages. The Council’s adopted policy seeks a substantial affordable element on qualifying brownfield sites, and the financial evidence must be tested before anybody can say how much of that requirement should ultimately apply.
What the Purbeck View housing application proposes
The new proposal would demolish much of the existing former school accommodation and provide 47 dwellings, a new vehicular access, public open space, landscaping and related infrastructure. The chapel would be retained and converted to office use within Class E(g)(i). The formal description appears in the Dorset Council public notice and on its planning register.
The application was registered in September 2026 and has been advertised for consultation, with the published notice specifying representations by 30 October 2026. It should be checked against any later changes to the council’s case page, because consultation and determination dates can be extended.
According to Swanage News, an earlier, substantially larger proposal envisaged 92 dwellings but was rejected, with concerns about overdevelopment. The current 47-home scheme is materially different, replacing the former mix of flats and terraced houses with a lower-density development of mainly houses. That previous history provides context but is not proof that the new layout is acceptable.
The chapel matters in its own right within the Purbeck View housing proposals. Local reporting identifies it as a non-designated heritage asset and quotes the applicant’s design case for reusing it rather than letting the building decline. The design, setting and practical suitability of the proposed office use still require assessment through the live application.
Purbeck View housing and the 30% affordable requirement
Dorset Council adopted the Purbeck Local Plan (2018 to 2034) on 18 July 2024. Under Policy H11, qualifying sites of ten or more dwellings normally provide 30% affordable housing on brownfield land, compared with 40% on greenfield land. The precise brownfield classification, eligibility and site circumstances remain part of the authority’s assessment.
For Purbeck View housing, a straightforward calculation of 30% of 47 homes produces 14.1 dwellings before applying the plan’s detailed rounding and contribution provisions. That arithmetic is useful for explaining the scale of the policy expectation, not for asserting the exact number Dorset Council must secure in this particular application.
The Council’s affordable housing guidance for Purbeck explicitly sets out a viability route: an applicant may submit an assessment to demonstrate that the required contribution would make the development unviable, and the authority can independently assess the scheme. Policy H11 also favours on-site affordable provision for developments of this size.
For Purbeck View housing, affordable provision is not simply an optional extra that applicants can remove by putting a consultant’s report alongside their drawings. Conversely, a local policy percentage is not an absolute assurance that a site can financially support the full contribution. The planning process has to confront both questions with evidence.
Developer says the scheme cannot support contributions
Swanage News reports that Archel Homes commissioned a viability assessment from chartered surveyors Stuart and Company. The newspaper says the assessment concludes that the scheme cannot support further Section 106 contributions, including affordable housing. The underlying redacted assessment is listed in the council’s application documents, but its full figures were not independently available for inspection through the public reader used for this report.
The same report describes the valuer comparing likely sale prices with a separate former school development at St Mary’s in Swanage, then applying a 10% discount to projected values for Purbeck View. The appropriateness of that adjustment is part of the scrutiny that should follow. We should not assume that one estate’s prices, views or layout automatically provide a dependable valuation for another.
Viability depends on assumptions. Gross development value, land value, build costs, abnormal remediation, finance, developer return and the timing of sales can all affect the conclusion. It is the evidence supporting those inputs, rather than the headline figure in isolation, that determines whether a reduction in affordable provision is justified.
Where market circumstances remain uncertain, the authority can also examine whether review mechanisms or staged obligations would be appropriate. Such an arrangement would need a properly drafted Section 106 agreement; it is not an automatic consequence of an applicant submitting a viability appraisal.
Swanage Town Council challenges the absence of affordable homes
Local reporting reproduces objections from Swanage Town Council and comments from Dorset Council’s housing enabling team. The Town Council is reported to have raised concerns about the complete absence of affordable housing and to have sought an independent viability review. Dorset’s housing team is also reported to favour independent scrutiny before determining what can reasonably be secured.
Those reported representations should not be confused with a final decision by Dorset Council, nor with an adopted council-wide finding that the scheme is financially viable. They are consultation views within an ongoing application.
Equally, if an independent appraisal concludes that some affordable housing can be supported, the Council will need to establish what tenure and quantity can realistically be delivered, and how commitments will be secured. The debate should be about verified numbers and enforceable terms, not simply whether the developer or objectors sound more persuasive.
Does the local second-homes restriction apply?
Policy H14 of the adopted Purbeck Local Plan places a principal-residence requirement on qualifying new homes in the Dorset National Landscape, subject to stated exceptions. Where it applies, the restriction is secured by a condition or planning obligation. It is a separate policy mechanism from the affordable housing requirement and does not itself turn open-market houses into affordable homes.
For the Purbeck View housing site, the geographical application of Policy H14 and the proposed planning conditions need checking against the definitive policies map and the eventual decision. It would be premature to claim that every house in Swanage is covered by an automatic second-home ban, or that any condition has already been imposed here.
That distinction matters to purchasers and local residents alike. Principal residence controls address occupation, while Policy H11 addresses affordability and tenure. A development could raise significant issues under both policies, but compliance with one does not remove the need to address the other.
What Dorset Council must decide next
The Purbeck View housing application now requires a decision on the planning merits: whether the lower-density scheme is appropriate for the site; how it affects the chapel, surrounding character, neighbours, access and ecology; and whether its proposed infrastructure and planning obligations are adequate.
The authority must also decide what weight to give the viability case. If there is a dispute over gross development value or costs, independent review will be especially important. Readers should look for the planning officer’s final report, the independent viability findings where disclosed, and any draft Section 106 terms rather than taking a proposal or consultation response as the outcome.
Developers seeking reduced affordable housing obligations need site-specific evidence. Anyone objecting to an application should identify the relevant development plan policy and the evidence requiring scrutiny.
The Purbeck View housing proposal may ultimately help bring a redundant school complex back into use and conserve part of its heritage. Whether the public benefits justify its affordable housing position is still a live question. Nothing in the current proposal settles that balance.
Official documents and further reading
Primary sources: Dorset Council application P/FUL/2026/05301; Dorset’s statutory public notice; the adopted Purbeck Local Plan, Policies H11 and H14; and the Council’s affordable housing guidance.
Local reporting of the submitted viability case and consultation responses: Swanage News, 21 October 2026. This article reports an application under consideration, not a final planning permission or a verified conclusion about the site’s financial viability.
0 Comments