SOMERSET villagers have been “stabbed in the back for the sake of sheer profit” by a housing developer, a local councillor has claimed.
Strongvox Homes was granted permission in October 2020 to build 109 new houses on the Cricketer Farm brownfield site on the A39 Cannington Road in Nether Stowey, between Bridgwater and Williton.
The Taunton-based developer applied to Sedgemoor District Council to get out of providing any affordable homes on the site, claiming the development as approved was no longer viable.
Members of the council’s development committee voted on Tuesday morning (April 5) to delay a decision on Strongvox’s request to give councillors more time to assess the viability claims.
Strongvox undertook a viability assessment for the site in 2021, concluding that the site could not be successfully delivered unless the 16 affordable homes contained within the original permission were removed.
Bill Richardson, Strongvox’s planning manager, told the committee when it met in Bridgwater on Tuesday (April 5) that the cost of delivering the new junction with the A39 had “increased from £440,000 to £1.1m, with more to spend” since construction began.
He added: “We have pro-actively entered into discussions with officers and identified 16 plots which can be purchased by the council [to develop as affordable homes].
“Currently Homes England funding cannot be drawn down while affordable homes provision is in the Section 106 agreement – which is now undeliverable.”
Homes England grants are provided by central government to ‘unlock’ housing sites, whether by removing contaminated land and overgrowth (as on the Saxonvale site in Frome) or providing a new road link (as on the Brimsmore Key Site in Yeovil).
The council can apply for this funding, but it does not have sufficient funds within either its own reserves or contributions from the Hinkley Point C construction to deliver the 16 affordable homes under its own steam if the grant application is unsuccessful.
Councillor Mike Caswell, whose Quantocks ward includes the site, said the developer’s excuse surrounding the cost of delivering the new junction was “a red herring”.
He said: “Yet again, we have a developer that’s seeking to remove the much-needed affordable housing, with scant regard for local people and Sedgemoor District Council.
“Whoever built on this site would have had to make those adjustments to the A39. We have been stabbed in the back for the sake of sheer profit.
“This is another case of get planning permission and then do what you like – which seems to be an epidemic.”
Councillor Kathy Pearce concurred: “To think the developer hadn’t planned enough to take account of the highways works – I find it impossible to support the application as it stands.”
Councillor Alistair Hendry, however, argued that failing to allow this change could lead to potential legal action against the council.
He said: “We don’t base decisions [like this] on how much a house is worth, or whether the developer will make a profit. As this stands, this is not a big enough issue to stop this. Although it’s not ideal, it has to be.
“If we go against this today, it will worsen our housing stock issue and the developer is going to come back to us. It’s not ideal, but it’s acceptable.”
A vote to remove all affordable housing from the development site was lost by four votes to nine. After this, the committee voted by nine votes to four to defer a decision until a future meeting to give councillors more time to study the viability assessment.
The council has not indicated how soon the plans will come back before the committee, with the next meeting due to be held on May 3 – just before the local elections.
Written by Daniel Mumby, Local Democracy Reporter
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel