PLANNING permission for a major housing development in Bishops Lydeard has been deferred by Taunton Deane’s planning committee after members decided that the developers had failed to meet the requirements of the parish council’s Neighbourhood Plan.

David Wilson Homes had applied for permission to build 173 homes and a new care-home around Taunton Road, leading into the village but Bishops Lydeard and Cothelstone Parish Council had objected to the number and type of houses and raised concerns about highway safety.

The planning committee unanimously recommended that there should be closer consultation with the parish council in order to produce a scheme more in line with the Neighbourhood Plan and more in keeping with the rural environment.

The developer had claimed that the site could deliver much-needed affordable housing to the village while the parish council believed that the development was too large and did not meet the demand for bungalows.

The committee heard that proposed homes would be built either side of Taunton Road, which links the village to the busy A358. Of the 173 homes, 43 would be affordable housing, comprising a 60:40 split between social rent and shared ownership homes.

The care home would be positioned at the north-western end of the site, opposite the entrance to King’s Yard.

Parish councillors told the committee that they were unable to support the application its present form and that it failed to meet the requirements of the council’s Neighbourhood Plan.

They believed there should be a substantial reduction in the number of dwellings to around 120 but an increase in bungalows from the proposed six. They also had “very considerable reservations” about the road layout, the lack of speed restrictions and the number of accesses onto Taunton Road.

It was claimed that David Wilson Homes had made ‘very little effort’ to match the proposed homes’ designs to those of the wider village and there should be greater use of sandstone on the exteriors rather than red brick.

A total of 37 letters of objection believed that the development was too large, would ‘strain existing services’, including the health centre and the local schools, would not provide employment, impact on the countryside and increase traffic congestion

Somerset County Council’s highways team said in a report that the A358 junction had ‘sufficient spare capacity’ to cope with this development.

The report added: “We considered the effect of the proposed development on the Cross Keys roundabout and Silk Mills junction. Both these junctions are already very busy, and any development within western Taunton Deane or West Somerset is likely to have some impact on their operation.

“However, our transport assessment has identified that the impact from this development will be relatively small.”

Gareth Clifford, the borough council’s area planning co-ordinator, said in his written report: “While the proposal is for 173 homes, which is greater than specified in our policy, it is not considered an over-development of the site given the nature of the design and layout of the proposed development.

“The scheme is considered to address the relevant neighbourhood plan policy other than the provision of self-build plots.

“It is for ward members to consider whether this shortfall is grounds to refuse the development in light of the other benefits.”

Parish council vice-chairman Cllr Clive Martin said the deferred decision was ‘the best possible result’.

He added: “We have always accepted that there would be a housing development but we hope that in consultation with the developers we can come up with something more suitable for the village and which meets the stipulations of the Neighbourhood Plan.

“The committee were unanimous that the developers should think again about what they were planning for this important village site.”

In a Facebook post after the planning meeting, local county councillor Mike Rigby said: “Team Bishops Lydeard successfully persuaded the committee to accept our view that the developer has not gone far enough to address the requirements of the parish’s Neighbourhood Plan.”

DANIEL MUMBY

Local democracy reporter