MINEHEAD’s mayor and the chairman of the town council’s planning committee are the latest civic leaders to put pressure on Somerset Council not to drop a requirement for affordable homes on a controversial housing estate.

The 71-home Exmoor Gate estate, off Hopcott Road, remains half-built after Stratton Land went into administration last year with £36 million debts.

The site was sold to Bridgwater Homes (Hopcott) Ltd shortly before administrators were appointed, but it, too, went bust soon after.

Now, Savills, acting with the Bridgwater Homes receivers, has asked the council to remove a requirement for 35 per cent of the houses to be ‘affordable’ as it seeks to maximise the money it can raise for creditors.

Mayor Cllr Craig Palmer and planning chairman Cllr Mimi Palmer have individually joined Somerset Cllrs Mandy Chilcott and Andrew Hadley, along with the town council corporately, in opposing Savills’ application.

Savills wants to vary a legal agreement to deliver affordable housing ‘following changing financial circumstances and challenging market conditions, in order to unlock the site which is currently stalled and has been subject to vandalism while construction is on hold’.

Outline permission for the houses was granted in 2014, but construction work ceased in 2024 with 35 dwellings 90 per cent complete.

Cllr Craig Palmer said the change would breach the current West Somerset Plan which required 35 per cent affordable housing on a site of such size.

Receivers are trying to maximise funds which can be paid to creditors by persuading Somerset Council to drop a requirement for affordable homes on the Exmoor Gate development in Minehead.
Receivers are trying to maximise funds which can be paid to creditors by persuading Somerset Council to drop a requirement for affordable homes on the Exmoor Gate development in Minehead. (Google Maps)

He said: “The application clearly shows a profit would still be made on the site if the required affordable housing is built.

“The application then implies that would be insufficient profit for the site developer, without clear definition of who the developer is.

“The profit margin of a developer is not more important than the impact of a development on the local community.

“It is not the local community's fault the original developer of the site failed, or the applicant wishes to put an imagined profit requirement above the needs and requirements of the community.

“The local community needs to be compensated for the impact of this development, therefore this application must be refused, and the section 106 payments must be paid.”

Cllr Mimi Palmer said: “Developers and receivers cannot be permitted to cherry-pick which parts the legislation they will adhere to.

“The developer's financial ineptitude and insolvency are solely of their own making and wholly irrelevant to the planning process.

“What is relevant is, the proposed abandonment of much-needed affordable housing this development should be providing.

“The local community has already suffered from the lack of affordable housing the development should have provided.

“The community should not be held hostage in the interest of profit margins.”

She said granting the variation would deprive the community of much-needed affordable housing and community funding, and the Savills application should be refused.

An official objection from the town council said affordable housing was part of the original agreement, so any decision on the Savills application should be made by the unitary authority’s planning councillors and not by unelected officers.