Controversial proposals to build 121 new homes on fields next to Lakeside in Highbridge were given the go-ahead on Tuesday (February 4th) by Sedgemoor district councillors.
Outline plans for the site, which is south of the existing Lakeside development, were granted at the council’s Development Committee meeting.
The highly contentious application, from Coln Residential, has attracted 140 objections from local residents, pictured below. Their concerns include a loss of public land, traffic and safety issues, access, and the impact on wildlife.
Part of the proposed development site is owned by Sedgemoor District Council, with the remainder being privately owned by a few individuals.
Cllr Phil Harvey spoke out strongly against the application during Tuesday’s meeting: “The application site includes 5.5 acres of land owned by this Council. For many years it was used as public open space (although not formally designated as such) and in 2012, the S106 agreement on the Springfield Road development recognised this and set aside £399,868.15 ‘towards the costs of improving and enhancing the Council’s public open space at Isleport Ponds’.”
He added: “The Council’s Accessible Natural Green Space survey in 2017 states that there is a deficiency of such space in Burnham and Highbridge and that there is a concentration of this deficiency in the Lakeside area, among others. Opening up the 5.5 acres and utilising this S106 money to improve it would address this deficiency.”
Cllr Harvey added: “The 2019 National Planning Policy Framework sets out that existing open spaces should not be built on except in very special circumstances. These include the open spaces being surplus to requirements or being replaced by equivalent or better provision. With the scale of housing already going on in Highbridge, and the existing deficiency of accessible green space, the former of these is certainly not true.”
“The ‘nature nearby’ report from Natural England sets out three principles for enhancing accessible natural green spaces – improving access, improving naturalness and biodiversity, and improving connectivity. These are all possible for the Council’s 5.5 acres and, by utilising the almost £400,000 S106 money, could enable it to become an important green lung for the people of Highbridge.”
“An argument for this development which may be advanced is that there is an over-riding housing need which justifies building on open space. However, the site is not identified for development in the Local Plan and so falls into the category of sites with potential – the so-called “opportunity sites”. The adopted plan identifies a need for 6848 new dwellings in addition to those on identified sites. However the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment identifies 26 sites within settlements and 151 outside, with a capacity of 14,485 houses – over twice as many as the 6848 which are needed. Building on this particular site is therefore not necessary and would be contrary to National planning policy. The application should be refused.”
Burnham and Highbridge Town Council has previously objected against the plans, on the grounds of inadequate highways access, ‘over-development’ of the site in terms of a loss of open public space, safety concerns around the proximity of the railway, insufficient flood mitigation measures, detrimental impact on wildlife, and light pollution.
However, the applicant has been working to address the concerns. In order to provide additional public open space at the site, the housing plans have been reduced during the consultation period from the initial 127 planned homes to the current 110 proposed new homes.
Furthermore, to enhance safety and the environment, it’s proposed that the neighbouring Worston Rhyne will be re-modelled to make it safer.
It is also proposed that the existing railway crossing will be removed to address safety concerns and that a new, safer public right-of-way for walkers and cyclists will be introduced instead.
The final decision on whether the scheme goes ahead rested with Sedgemoor District Council – and the plans were granted permission on Tuesday, subject to a slight amendment to a condition and adding a so-called “clawback” clause.
In a report to district councillors this week, Sedgemoor’s case officer had recommended that the planning application be approved.
