Controversial plans for a new development of 13 new homes in Berrow have drawn more than 30 complaints from local residents, prompting councillors to this week delay their decision on whether to approve the scheme in order to further investigate the issues.
ARC Homes has applied for full planning permission to build 13 dwellings on open land to the east of Manor Way comprising of seven 3-bedroom and six 4-bedroom homes plus 38 car parking places.
District councillors met on Tuesday to assess the plans, but decided to defer their decision in order to visit the site and examine some of the concerns.
Berrow Parish Council has objected on the grounds that the scheme “represents an overdevelopment of the site with houses which are inappropriate to the scale, design and character of the existing community.”
31 letters of objection have also been sent to Sedgemoor District Council by residents living in Manor way, Manor Close, Manor Drive and Claremont Park.
Cllr Bob Filmer, who chairs Sedgemoor’s Development Control Committee, told Burnham-On-Sea.com: “There have been a number of concerns raised about highways access and the relation of the proposed houses to the surrounding properties.”
“Several issues surrounding affordable housing are also being looked into and we’ve therefore deferred the decision until after a site visit.”
Further objections and concerns have also raised by the The Highway Authority, Internal Drainage Board, Sedgemoor’s Ecologist and Somerset Environmental Records.
However, Sedgemoor’s Case Officer Shawn Fleet has recommended the proposals are granted permission.
He explained: “The agents are aware that local residents are opposed to the principle of residential development and have therefore sought to design this scheme on the same principles – an inward orientated scheme in the centre of the site.”
“Meetings with the agents and residents have resulted in a multitude of minor design changes which collectively have enhanced the scheme. While there have been objections from the residents, these have been shown to be not sufficient to justify refusal of consent.”
