Somerset housing: why “affordable” doesn’t mean cheap

By Laura Linham 22nd Apr 2026

Local News by Laura Linham 22nd Apr 2026

A Somerset councillor has set out what "affordable housing" actually means as confusion continues over how the system works.

Councillor Oliver Patrick, vice-chairman of Somerset Council's planning committee south, explained the rules in a public post aimed at improving trust in the planning process.

The committee covers major applications across the former South Somerset area, including Yeovil, Chard, Crewkerne, Ilminster and Wincanton.

Mr Patrick said demand for affordable homes remains extremely high, with hundreds of applicants often competing for a single property.

He said it was "not unusual" for around 300 families to apply for one reduced rent home in villages such as West Coker.

Homes on new developments are split into two types: market housing, sold at full price, and affordable housing.

Affordable housing itself is divided into four categories:

Social rent: typically 40 to 60 per cent below market rates, set nationally with local incomes in mind
Affordable rent: around 20 per cent below market rates
Shared ownership: buyers purchase a share of a home and pay rent on the remainder
First homes: sold at a 30 per cent discount compared to market value

Under current planning rules, developments of ten homes or more must include a proportion of affordable housing.

In the former South Somerset and West Somerset areas, this is set at 35 per cent. It drops to 30 per cent in former Mendip and Sedgemoor, and 25 per cent in former Taunton Deane.

However, Mr Patrick said these figures are not fixed and can change depending on whether a site is considered financially viable.

He said developers often make significant financial sacrifices to include affordable homes, as they generate little or no profit compared to market housing.

Beyond housing itself, developers are also required to contribute towards local infrastructure through Section 106 agreements.

These can include funding for schools, GP surgeries, road improvements and sports facilities, often amounting to millions of pounds per development.

Mr Patrick said a lack of awareness about these contributions has led to public scepticism about new housing schemes.

He argued that councils need to communicate more clearly about both the need for new homes and the benefits they bring.

He said: "One of the biggest criticisms I hear is that new homes don't come with infrastructure, but in reality significant funding is secured for local services."