A HOUSEBUILDER'S quest to reduce affordable housing from 15 dwellings to zero on a controversial Calstock development has been thrown out on appeal, writes Sarah Pitt.

Developer Construction Partners must continue to build the 33 homes at Bridge View off Church Lane according to the permission granted by Cornwall Council in December 2018, ruled planning inspector Nick Davies.

Lawyers acting for Michael Wight, who runs Construction Partners, argued at the appeal held at Calstock Village Hall on November 29 they could no longer afford to build 15 homes as affordable units.

The appeal by the developer to planning authority Cornwall Council turned on a question of whether the developer's proposal to add extras to some of the houses, including garages and PV panels, would make them unaffordable.

But a further card was played by the developer on the day of the appeal, when they submitted a Financial Viability Assessment on the part-built development, which stated they could not afford to build any of the affordable housing.

Dismissing the appeal, and an application for costs against the council, Mr Davies said the developer had breached their permission by starting work on the site before setting out which of the 15 homes would be affordable. They have also failed to enter into a contract with a Registered Provider to buy the affordable homes on the site.

He said: 'The appellant does not contest that the inclusion of garages would increase the value of some of the houses which were identified as affordable dwellings on the plans that formed part of the Original Permission.

'In the absence of clarity on the mix of the affordable housing, and evidence that a Registered Provider would be able to purchase and let the dwellings at affordable levels, I cannot safely conclude that the proposed alterations would not be harmful to the affordability and deliverability of the affordable housing.'

He dismissed the Financial Viability Assessment, stating that he developer could not afford to build any affordable homes on the site.

'I have concluded above that my consideration of the appeal should be based, essentially, on what was considered by the Council, and on which interested people’s views were sought. On this basis, I have no robust evidence to conclude that it is justified, on viability grounds, for the development to proceed without the provision of any affordable housing,' he said.

He admitted that a site visit had brought home that the site, which has half-built homes at present, was a costly one to develop, [it] is on two levels, requiring a retaining structure of considerable height and on two levels'.

He added: ' In view of the abnormal costs associated with the development, which were evident from my site visit, I have considerable doubts that the approved level of affordable housing will prove deliverable. Therefore, without co-operative discussions between the parties, there is a significant risk that the development will stall. I am mindful that the appellants signalled an intention to renegotiate.'

During the appeal, an offer was made on behalf of the developer directly to the Cornwall Council officers present to renegotiate for 30 per cent affordable housing. However community representatives made it clear that Calstock Parish Council had only backed it because it offered 45% affordable housing for the community.