The procession of overdevelopment in the Langport/Huish Episcopi area continued today. An application for 100 houses on the north side of the Somerton Road was unanimously approved by councillors.
Despite overwhelming opposition from local people and the parish and town council, the planners at Somerset Council had recommended approval. Once again our old friend “5 year land supply” was at the heart of the matter. South Somerset (housing supply is still calculated by the old districts) can only show a 3.1 year land supply instead of the 5 needed. Which basically means most of the normal planning rules are chucked out of the window. It is, and remains a developers charter.
Once again the fact that good quality, arable agricultural land will be bulldozed for housing has been ignored. The planners acknowledge this was grade 2 and 3a agricultural – the best and most versatile farmland. But because Somerset Council has no idea how much agricultural land has been lost, in the past decade, the true implication of the loss of yet more agricultural land is unknown. Which is probably why the planners decided the issue could be overlooked in coming to their decision.
Committee Chair Peter Seib (LibDem) proposed to accept the officer’s recommendation. Cllr Sue Osborne (Cons) seconded it. In seconding it Cllr Osborne noted three factors that made approval inevitable.
First the direction of growth was in line with the Local Plan.
Second the fact that the development would include 35% Affordable Housing.
And thirdly the fact the council could only show a 3.1 year housing supply.
So once again residents of a community that is visibly overdeveloped look on helplessly. While a council that has built more houses in the past decade that any other bar two, is laughably, unable to show a 5 year land supply. Cllr Hobhouse noted: “Castle Cary has suffered in the same way (as Langport now is). You can’t say the character of the town has not changed fundamentally. But there is nothing anyone can do about it.”
As I said on a previous page, we need more independent counsellors – people who actually care about the local area.
Planning is apolitical – it’s about the application of Central Government planning policies. Independent Councillors would be bound by the same restrictions.
Are you a Councillor? Because if you are you know that Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans carry legal weight in planning. These are created by local councils and residents and are, therefore, part of our local democracy and political!
Yes Ben I’m a Somerset Councillor and have sat on Planning Committees for 4 years now. I can tell you politics has never interfered in the Planning process in my experience. So there are no political Group whips, no politics.
In any case you might have misunderstood me: what I meant was that planning is quasi-judicial, it is about the implementation of policy set down by the Westminster Government.
Sure, Local Plans etc are part of our democracy but that doesn’t mean they’re political. Local Plans must abide by the NPPF set down by the Westminster Government and there is little room for manoeuvre.
What a bl–dy shambles but then what else would you expect from a Lib Dem council.
Of course there’s no mention of how much they need the S106 money, which will no doubt go towards reducing the debt problem rather than being spent on the people in the area
S106 money goes specifically on local services. Contributions go to parks, schools etc to improve or expand them.
And Somerset Council’s financial emergency isn’t being driven by “debts”. It’s being driven by the soaring cost of Social Care (+£70 million next year), inflation, and interest rates which are all outstripping our income.
Imagine my surprise.
And despite what “the experts” may say, it’ll increase the flood risk. We’ve just seen it in SW Somerton for the first time in 20 years. Total coincidence the new houses on Cartway Lane – adjacent to a field that water pours off.
New housing is required for local people to get on the housing ladder. Our area has relatively low wages and, as a result of the popularity of South Somerset amongst retirees, house prices are unaffordable currently. However, what the area does not need is the sort of low-quality housing that has been built locally. These are built to the lowest standards of design and are a blot on the landscape. The unitary council should take a more interventionist approach in terms of the design of new developments, rather than the cookie-cutter approach we see.