A DEVELOPER has won an appeal over plans for 27 new homes near the new Hinkley Point C nuclear power station.

Land Allocation Ltd was refused permission by Somerset West and Taunton Council to build 27 new homes on Shurton Lane, Stogursey, in October 2020.

The Hull-based developer subsequently failed to win an appeal against the council for 70 homes on the same site, in April.

But the developer has won a further appeal against the council for the original number of homes.

The site lies less than 10 minutes’ drive from the Hinkley Point C construction site.

The developer’s third application originally specified 32 homes – but this was downgraded to 27 during the appeal process.

Planning inspector Hollie Nicholls published her ruling ahead of a meeting of the council’s planning committee on Thursday (October 14).

Ms Nicholls said 'around 25' homes on this site 'would not be disproportionate', given delays surrounding the deliveries of other new housing.

She also ruled the council’s lack of a five-year land supply – and said recent approvals granted for several “contested sites” were not a reason to refuse development in this settlement.

Ms Nicholls said: “Despite the clear intent to progress these matters, the status of those sites has not yet changed to a degree that would enable me to reach an alternative view.

“Consequently, based on the evidence before me, I reach the view that the council is still incapable of demonstrating a five-year housing land supply at the present time.”

Burnham and Highbridge Weekly News: Plans For 32 Homes On Shurton Lane In Stogursey. CREDIT: AAH Planning Consultants. Free to use for all BBC wire partners.

Ms Nicholls accepted the large scale of the scheme could “monopolise the increase in housing in the village” for the next decade – but added benefits of new housing outweighed the harm.

She said: “The provision of housing would be beneficial both socially and economically.

“It would create construction phase job opportunities in the short- to medium-term, and help to sustain local services and facilities in the longer term.

“In respect of the subdivision of the larger field and the part which would remain undeveloped, I do not share the view that this would necessarily lead to another similar development in the future.

“The future occupants would likely increase the patronage and consequently, the viability and vitality of the village’s services.”