ARMSTRONG RIGG PLANNING
Site: Land at New House Farm, Haybridge Hill, Wells
Client: Gleeson Strategic Land
In September 2023 Mendip District Council refused Gleeson Strategic Land’s outline planning application for up to 50 new homes on land at New House Farm on the edge of Wells on the grounds that it would result in development in the open countryside and would cause substantial harm to the distinctiveness and identity of Wells, Haybridge and Elm Close, due to the coalescence of the three settlements (Appeal Ref: APP/N1920/W/24/3346928). Other reasons for refusal relating to ecology, drainage and sustainable transport were resolved prior to the Hearing.
The site is located to the west and north of Wells and its settlement boundary. Between the site and the settlement boundary to the east is land allocated for housing in the Mendip Local Plan Part I, which has now been built out and to the south is existing housing at Elm Close and land allocated for housing in the Mendip Local Plan Part II, which now has planning permission.
As an unallocated greenfield site located in the countryside the proposals conflicted with the development plan but because the development boundaries are not delivering the amount of housing that is needed this conflict was afforded only limited weight. Further, the Inspector found that the proposal would not intrude on the gap between the western edge of Wells and Haybridge. Whilst he noted that this gap had been identified as an important consideration in the development plan, he found that the proposal would not be harmful to the character or identity of Haybridge or Elm Close such that the issue of coalescence was not a factor weighing against the appeal. He considered that the proposal would not cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area and that with the mitigation measures proposed the scheme would contribute to local identity and the proposal would not result in the loss of any scenes or features that are recognised as being distinctive. Accordingly, the proposal would be compatible with the pattern of natural and man-made features in the host landscape character areas and any localised landscape and visual harm identified should also be afforded limited weight to that conflict.
Against the limited level of harm identified, the Inspector attached significant weight to the benefit of housing delivery, significant weight to the benefit of affordable housing delivery and moderate weigh to the economic benefits. Some weight was also attributed to the provision of green infrastructure and biodiversity enhancements. Accordingly, the Inspector found that the adverse impacts of granting permission would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework as a whole.
