A CAMPAIGNER says he is baffled by planners’ justification for allowing a York affordable housing scheme to be transformed into private housing.

Local resident Nick Parker said he cannot see how the re-development of a former dairy off Haxby Road can go ahead without a fresh planning application to City of York Council.

The Press reported last month how developers Niche Homes had revealed the development would no longer involve the provision of 13 affordable homes for Yorkshire Housing “because of subsidy cutbacks”, but would instead be an exclusive private housing scheme aimed at younger families and working professionals.

Mr Parker said he had been through planning documents and emails and found the original planning application document referred to “proposed social rented housing total: 13”.

He had also discovered an email from planning official Hannah Blackburn to Niche, in which she said: “I would just like to point out though that what has been applied for on the planning application form is 100 per cent social rented units. This is how the application will have to be dealt with.”

And a statement from agents for Niche had said: “The proposed development provides for a sustainable, high quality residential development of Code 4 affordable housing on a brown field site,” and later added: “100 per cent of the site will be delivered as affordable housing through the medium of a registered social landlord.”

The council said it was correct that the application had been by Yorkshire Housing and was presented as such at committee, and reference was made to affordable in the documentation.

However, it said “the description of the application is not specific to these being affordable homes”, and said: “The expectation was for the development to comprise affordable homes, but following the refusal, the Inspector did not include any requirement for this to be the case. “The scheme was below the threshold of 15 units for the scheme to include affordable housing under the prevailing local planning policies, and as such no formal requirement was included by the Inspector.”