Following legal advice Powys councillors have voted in favour of removing an occupancy restriction that could add more than £100,000 to a councillor's property’s sales price.
The application had been submitted by Dai Davies, the Independent County Councillor for Berriew.
The occupancy restriction condition known as section 73 is on a four bedroomed detached house with a double garage Maes-y-Nant, near Berriew.
In the an updated report District Valuers confirmed the unrestricted value of the property was considered to be £345,000.
With the occupancy restriction, it would be limited to £235,000.
Planning officer, Bryn Pryce, said: “In light of the independent valuation report officers are satisfied that the dwelling has been marketed at a price that is fair and not excessive in relation to its setting and restrictions.”
Cllr Francesca Jump said: “I’m very uncomfortable with this application.
“I have no objection to agricultural workers living in beautiful houses, but seeing as it’s not affordable now, I think it’s awful and don’t want to agree to this.”
Cllr David Selby said: “I thought the market was you reduce the price until someone is willing to pay for it.
“To say that a certain price is fair if certain conditions weren’t there is something I just don’t get.
“I’m uncomfortable being on this committee voting to give another member of this council £110,000.
“I would rather vote against, as it’s unacceptable to put me and others in this position.”
Cllr Elwyn Vaughan said that he understood that Cllr Davies had tried to have planning conditions removed from his property before and asked planning officers for confirmation.
He was told by Mr Pryce that councillors were “only dealing with the application in front of them”.
“We can’t stick to our own rules, gives the totally wrong message about Powys,” said Cllr Vaughan.
Committee solicitor, Colin Edwards, advised councillors: “You must try and put the identity of the applicant out of your mind.
“You are well aware that members of the authority do make applications and you have to treat them just like you would any other person’s application.”
“When you’re dealing with the application you should be blind. Put it out of your minds that another member of this authority will have enhanced value on his property.”
Cllr Hywel Lewis: “I’m equally uncomfortable about this, but the report is quite clear. I don’t think we have any choice.
“We have to put who’s applying for this out of our minds, on that basis I move the recommendation.”
Cllr Jump added that she wanted it noted that the committee was unhappy that agricultural dwellings had become “such a size” that they were now unaffordable to people working in agriculture.
The application was passed by eight votes to three and three abstentions.
The house was built as an “agricultural dwelling” after being given permission in 2005.
The restriction means that the occupier should “solely or mainly be employed in agriculture or forestry”. In 2009 consent was given for a double garage.
The house had been for sale from November 2016 to June 2018 at £235,000 when the application to remove the restriction had been made.
