The intervention affects application 09/23/00003, submitted by Edward Ware (Bridgwater) Ltd for land between Bower Lane and the M5. Somerset Planning Committee North voted on 8th September 2026 to grant permission, but only subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement and the recommended and amended conditions. The committee resolution was carried by five votes to two, with three abstentions.
That distinction is important. The council had resolved to approve the scheme, but no planning permission had yet been issued. The Article 31 direction therefore catches the application during the gap between the committee resolution and the final decision notice.
What the Bower Lane holding direction actually does
Article 31 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 allows the Secretary of State to direct a local planning authority not to grant permission, either indefinitely or for a specified period. The authority must then deal with the application in a way which gives effect to that direction.
A holding direction is not the same thing as a call-in. A call-in would be a separate decision under section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, with the Secretary of State taking over determination of the application.
Somerset Council told the BBC: “A holding direction prevents the local planning authority from issuing a decision while the Secretary of State considers whether to call in the application.”
For Bower Lane, the immediate result is straightforward. Somerset Council cannot issue the permission while the direction remains in force. If ministers decide not to call in the application and lift the direction, the council could then continue towards a decision once the outstanding Section 106 work is complete. If the application is called in, the Secretary of State would determine it instead.
NPCU is considering whether the scheme should be called in
The current review follows representations asking ministers to intervene after the September committee vote. Somerset CPRE chairman Hugh Williams sought a holding direction, while Bridgwater MP Sir Ashley Fox also wrote to the National Planning Casework Unit raising concerns about affordable housing and pressure on local services.
Somerset Daily reports that NPCU case officer Rachael Beard confirmed an Article 31 direction was applied on 22nd September 2026, adding that the outcome of the Government’s assessment would be communicated in due course.
The actual direction does not appear to have been published on GOV.UK or Somerset Council’s public committee pages at the time of writing for Bower Lane, Bridgwater. The operative position is nevertheless corroborated by Somerset Council, which has confirmed that it cannot issue a decision while the Secretary of State considers call-in.
The issues being put before ministers include the level of affordable housing and the ability of local infrastructure, particularly primary healthcare, to accommodate the additional population. Those questions were already central to the council’s own debate before the application reached its September resolution.
Affordable housing and healthcare had already delayed the decision
This was not the committee’s first look at the application at Bower Lane. On 14th July 2026, members deferred the scheme specifically to allow further discussions with the NHS, reconsider the allocation of the available planning obligations and examine whether a better affordable housing outcome could be secured.
The council’s July minutes record that Policy D6 sought 30% affordable housing. At that stage the scheme offered 5%, around 38 homes rather than the 225 homes which a policy-compliant 30% provision would produce on a 750-home scheme.
Officers told members that an independent viability assessment had identified about £31 million of abnormal development costs, including surcharging, piling, noise mitigation and spine-road infrastructure. The viability evidence was said to support no affordable housing, although the applicant had offered a minimum 5%. The proposed Section 106 included an upward-only viability review mechanism which could increase affordable provision if viability improved.
Healthcare was also unresolved in July. The minutes record that NHS Somerset had sought a contribution but had not at that point identified specific qualifying projects capable of satisfying the legal tests for a planning obligation. Members deferred rather than accept the package as it stood.
By the September meeting the package had moved. The BBC reported that the affordable housing offer had increased to 6%, around 45 homes, and that NHS Somerset had accepted a £173,000 contribution towards local primary care infrastructure after originally asking for a larger sum.
The September committee then resolved to grant permission subject to the Section 106 agreement. That agreement had not been completed when the holding direction intervened.
What Edward Ware is proposing at Bower Lane
The hybrid application in Bower Lane covers a substantial part of the East Bridgwater strategic allocation. Outline permission is sought, with all matters reserved except site access, for phased development of up to 750 homes together with a primary school, community facility, public open space, play areas, landscaping, drainage and other infrastructure.
The application also seeks full permission for a noise bund, spine road and associated landscaping, drainage and engineering works. The spine road and the site’s relationship with the M5 are significant parts of the scheme, while land for the primary school and community facility is intended to be secured through the Section 106 package.
At the July meeting officers stressed that the land forms part of the wider East Bridgwater allocation under Policy B3 and represents the final major phase alongside earlier development at Bower Farm and Follett’s Farm. They also told members there were no objections from statutory consultees including highways, environmental health, drainage or ecology specialists.
That did not remove the viability and infrastructure arguments. Instead, those issues became the reason for July’s deferral, September’s revised obligations package and now the request for ministerial intervention.
What happens next?
There are now two separate processes which should not be blurred together.
First, the Article 31 restriction remains the immediate legal brake. Somerset Council cannot issue planning permission for Bower Lane while it applies.
Second, ministers must decide whether the application should actually be called in. The National Planning Casework Unit has not announced that decision and there is no basis for describing the scheme as called in at this stage.
The committee’s 8th September resolution also remains subject to the satisfactory completion of the Section 106 agreement. Even without the holding direction, the resolution was not itself a planning permission.
For developers and councils, the sequence is a useful reminder of why the period between a resolution to grant and the issue of a decision notice matters. A committee can be minded to approve a scheme, but until the legal agreement is completed and the permission is formally issued, there remains scope for a Secretary of State direction to prevent the authority crossing the final line.
0 Comments