A WAR of words has broken out between Wiveliscombe councillors and developer Summerfield Homes, which wants to build up to 25 homes on agricultural fields

Summerfield wants to turn 4.3 acres of grazing land into a housing estate next to Greenway Farm, off North Street.

But councillors have strongly objected to the proposal because the land was not allocated for development.

Town clerk Sarah Towells said developments in Tuckers Meadow and Allenslade were only granted as exception sites for social housing for local people.

Ms Towells said councillors previously objected to an application for a single house on the Summerfield site as it was outside Wiveliscombe’s development area.

She said: “There is already adequate land supply allocated in Wiveliscombe over the next five years.

“Since the most recent housing allocation targets, new builds include Willow Mead (52), Sandys Moor (94, on land that was not allocated), and 71 due to be built on Burges Lane.

“The visual impact on the landscape will adversely affect existing properties, with fears for removal of habitats for wildlife and biodiversity.

“Local flooding issues could be exacerbated by an increase in impermeable surfaces such as driveways.

“There is already a high risk of flash flooding from culverts in this and surrounding areas.

“There will be increased traffic on an already busy road through Wiveliscombe, and by the primary school, causing congestion.

“This could result in cars using nearby residential roads to access the B3188 toward Ford and beyond.

“Also mentioned is catching a bus to work, which ignores the timetable limitations of the 25 bus service.”

Summerfield divisional director Neal Jillings​​​​ said nothing raised by councillors provided a rational basis for refusal, and it was ‘a shame’ they had not taken up an offer for Summerfield to address them directly and answer questions.

He said: “We are at the same old stage of conflict and mistrust that one encounters during most applications.”

The planning application to Somerset Council was made ‘under the presumption in favour of sustainable development’.

Mr Jillings said: “This is on the basis the council is unable to demonstrate an adequate supply of land for housing.”

He said in such circumstances, national policy was clear that permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

Mr Jillings said: “Our case is that the benefits of delivery of market and affordable housing are not outweighed by any adverse impacts.”

The single dwelling opposed by councillors was actually on a completely different site and it was ‘neither here nor there in consideration of this application’.

Any flood risk concern was ‘unfounded’ because on-site attenuation would manage surface water.

When there was a lack of supply of housing, what mattered was how well the development related to the settlement and not the fact it was outside a planning boundary.

Mr Jillings said: “Being able to see housing should not be conflated with harm.

“The application submission has already taken the town council’s concerns into account.”