AN APPEAL to overturn conditions placed on planning permission that an affordable home needs to be part of a three-house scheme in Llanfair Caereinion – has been dismissed by a Welsh Government planning inspector.
Earlier this year Nigel Griffiths lodged an appeal with the Welsh Government’s Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) after Powys planning officers refused his application to remove conditions from the planning permission given to the site.
Mr Griffiths argued that the number of houses he proposed building at Brocafnent Lane, Tanyfron in Llanfair Caerenion were “substantially below” the threshold needed to necessitate building an affordable home there.
In this part of Powys, a 10 per cent affordable home contribution would be needed from new housing developments of five of more dwellings or on a site that is bigger than 0.25 hectares.
In July 2020, Nigel Griffiths successfully applied for outline planning permission to build three homes on the 0.24 hectare site.
But council’s planning officers had added conditions to the planning approval that one of the houses needed to be an “affordable” home.
In December 2021, Mr Griffiths applied the conditions removed as he believed that they: “do not comply with national policy.”
However, in September 2022 the council refused the application.
Powys’ planning professional lead Peter Morris said that removing the conditions would: “result in a development that would fail to make provision for affordable housing on an allocated housing site in the Local Development Plan (LDP).
Planning inspector Claire MacFarlane said “The appeal site is a plot within a field forming part of a larger undeveloped housing allocation for 40 dwellings, including four affordable dwellings, as identified within the LDP.
“The appeal site clearly forms part of a larger allocation that is intended to make appropriate provision towards the countywide affordable housing target. ”
Ms MacFarlane points out that “no evidence” has been put forward by Mr Griffiths to show that an affordable home contribution would be “unviable” for this site.
She adds that Mr Griffiths has spoken of a “willingness” to provide affordable housing on the rest of the site but “no evidence” has been submitted to back this up.
Ms MacFarlane said: “As such, I cannot be confident that delivery of the remainder of the allocation, including adequate provision for affordable housing, would be likely to occur.”
She explains that a developer needs to be aware in principle of all planning obligations on an allocated site even if development is piecemeal.
“For the reasons given, the appeal is dismissed,” said Ms MacFarlane.
