Interesting ruling in a planning case in Crewkerne just announced which could have implications for sites in East Devon. South Somerset (as one might expect) did not have a local plan or a 5 year land supply. The council dragged its heels about a decision so the planning application went straight to a Planning Inspector for decision. Had the council pulled its fingers out, one of the objections to the site would have been the impact on the landscape character and accessibility of the site. The planning application was for a site that had been considered for inclusion in the (draft) local plan but which had been rejected.

The site does not have a specific landscape designation but the Inspector states:

“The appeal site and the surrounding countryside have no established landscape designation. Nevertheless, that does not mean that the area is not a valued landscape which the Framework advocates should be protected and enhanced. It is a highly attractive undulating landscape in which the relatively small fields, said by the Council to be pre-17th century ancient enclosures, are largely defined by well established hedgerows a and intermittent mature trees. The site acts as an intimate scale buffer between the town’s built edge and the larger agricultural rolling fields of the surrounding landscape. The area has intrinsic character and beauty, which the Framework, in one of its core planning principles, advocates should be recognised. … there are some parts of the appeal site which have more moderate landscape sensitivity. …

…In conclusion, I am not persuaded by the appellant’s contention that the design of the proposed residential scheme fully respects the form, character and setting of the locality. The development would have a significant and adverse impact on the character and quality of the local landscape particularly when viewed from nearby publicly accessible vantage points, …

The Inspector goes on to say that lack of suitable public transport to the site is an issue and that he finds the associated travel plan weak. He also mentions that the developer says that the Local Plan underestimates how many new houses will be needed. However, the Inspector is not persuaded by this argument as the developer cannot say exactly how many houses ARE needed. He is also similarly not persuaded by the developers when they cite their “experience” and “opinion”.
He goes on to say:

“Boosting significantly the supply of housing will inevitably require housing to be built on some greenfield sites which will result in changes to local environments. Nevertheless, the substantial and specific harm to the natural environment that would arise from this development, and the shortcomings of the location in terms of its accessibility and sustainability would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the a acknowledged benefits of the proposal. Therefore, I conclude that the appeal must fail.

The full decision notice is here