Plans for more than 70 new homes on the edge of a Somerset beauty spot have been refused by planning officers.
Rubix Land Ltd put forward plans in early April to deliver 73 homes on Orchard Lea in Wells, very close to the southern edge of the Mendip Hills national landscape.
The land promoter – which is currently fighting an appeal over 40 new homes in Evercreech – argued that the development was in close proximity to numerous local facilities and would help to ease Somerset’s housing crisis. But Somerset Council has given the plans the cold shoulder, arguing that the development would do ‘substantial harm’ to the character of the Mendip Hills and ‘erode the open rural setting’ of the city.
Access would have been primarily from Orchard Lea, with additional pedestrian accesses being delivered onto Merlin Drive and Milton Lane.
Of the 73 homes planned for the site, 28 would have been affordable – the equivalent of 40 per cent – with the majority being offered as social rent.
A spokesperson for OG Group (representing the applicant) said: “The site is situated on Wells’ northern edge, accessible from Orchard Lea, and located within a mature residential neighbourhood near schools, green spaces and pedestrian pathways.
“The location enjoys good connectivity through local bus routes, Wells bus station and major roads like the A371 and A39. Existing footpaths and quiet streets support walking and cycling.
“Schools, parks, healthcare, employment hubs, and Wells city centre are all within walking distance, making it a highly sustainable area for new housing.”
The council refused permission through the delegated powers of its planning officers, rather than a public decision by its planning committee east (which handles major applications within the former Mendip area).
Bill Cotton, the council’s interim service director for planning, identified six reasons for refusal, including:
- The development would result in ‘the urbanisation of an elevated and visually prominent greenfield site’ on the edge of the Mendip Hills, causing ‘substantial harm’ to the landscape character and ‘eroding the open rural setting of Wells’.
- The developer has provided ‘insufficient information’ on how local bat populations would be protected, along with other wildlife within the Underwood Complex local wildlife site.
- The developer has ‘failed to demonstrate’ that the development would provide the ten per cent biodiversity net gain which is enshrined in planning law.
- The plans do not contain a ‘viable and deliverable means’ of handling surface water drainage, including improvements to Wessex Water’s sewer network, resulting in ‘uncertainty’ about the risk of localised flooding.
- The development would result in increased traffic congestion by using ‘unsuitable’ roads of ‘restricted width and poor alignment’.
Alison Orchard, a member of the local community group that campaigned passionately against the proposed building plan, said: “Like many planning applications for large-scale housing developments that Somerset has seen in recent times, Rubix Land were arguing their case, citing a national planning policy in favour of sustainable development – also known as the ’tilted balance’. However, due to the ‘substantial harm’ that the proposed development would cause to the landscape and the adverse effects on the North Somerset and Mendip Bats Special Area of Conservation, the tilted balance policy was disapplied in this case.
“The campaign to protect the hillside from development was widely supported by members of the public, and sought to raise awareness of Rubix Land’s proposal. This included hundreds of conversations, posters and leaflets, and attendance at key meetings. In the Wells City Council planning advisory meeting in April, several groups and individuals spoke against the application while no one spoke in favour of it. Wells City Council recommended refusal and over 250 members of the public filed their objections online during the consultation period.
“Given the strength of the very robust, multi-point refusal, one might ask why we went to all that effort, but we weren’t prepared to be passengers in the process. It’s clear from the Case Officer’s 80-page report that she read all the objections as part of her decision making. Ultimately, we want to thank everyone for their part, and also Somerset Council for a thorough application of the planning process. It’s a victory for common sense, and of course for the bats and other wildlife who are active on the hillside.”
Daniel Mumby – Local Democracy Reporter