A Suffolk village has been spared a development of 69 mobile homes after a planning inspector rejected an appeal against a decision to refuse the scheme.

Stephen Wilkinson turned down developer Birch’s Park Homes’ plans to build the homes at Great Bricett Business Park after hearing concerns about a lack of affordable housing and whether the village had the infrastructure to support such a large number of homes.

Following the decision, Sue Burnett, chair of Great Bricett Parish Council, said: “Obviously, from our point of view we are pleased with the result. We are only a small village and it was the volume of units which was too much, with the lack of facilities.”

Giving his reasons for the decision, Mr Wilkinson cited a discrepancy between the developer’s offer of £200,000 towards affordable housing and a suggestion by Mid Suffolk District Council, which had initially refused the plans, that Birch’s Park Homes could afford to contribute £952,730 towards affordable homes.

He backed the council’s valuation of the value of the park homes based on the strength of the park home market, which showed the properties were worth nearly £3m more than the developer’s valuation.

He also acknowledged the concerns about a lack of local facilities for the new homeowners, with essential services such as doctors, shops, pubs, leisure facilities and secondary schools being based in Stowmarket and Needham Market, which were six-and-a-half and five miles away from the site respectively.

He added the site could only be accessed by narrow, unlit lanes which would make walking and cycling difficult, while bus services to the area were not frequent.

During a four-day planning inquiry in September, the council’s solicitor Richard Ground described Great Bricett as having "very few facilities, no shop, no pub, no employment and very little public transport, meaning a car will be needed".

Mr Wilkinson accepted the developer’s argument that the park homes would help to meet the Government’s drive to increase housing supply, but the proposal did not comply with planning policy.

He said: “Overall, I conclude that the harm caused in this case would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits identified when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole. As such the proposed development does not benefit from the framework’s presumption in favour of sustainable development.”