A controversial outline application for up to 22 new homes in Broadwindsor has been approved by West Dorset planners.

The site, south of Fullers, off the Bridport Road, received a near unanimous vote despite concerns about the effect on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), the local sewer system and extra cars on the roads.

District council planning officer Bob Burden said the developers had also promised a new section of footpath linking into the village centre and landscaping to mask the new homes.

The outline scheme asks planners to approve the principle of developing the site, together with the access, but no details about any of the houses which may eventually be built there.

Public meetings in the village, called by the parish council, had attracted a good turn-out, the committee heard, but had not been attended by the applicants, or their agents.

Local resident Jess Burns told the district planning committee that the site was an important gateway to the AONB.

“This scheme is not compliant with the AONB landscape plan. If it has to be screened it should not be there at all.”

Another resident, Julie Steel, said that with other local sites already with planning permission, including the Clipper Teas site, it was questionable whether there was a need for the houses to meet local demand. The committee heard that there is also a community land trust project about to submit an application for homes in the area.

“This is an important site in the landscape setting. Is it worth ruining this forever?” said Ms Steel.

Others argued that the development could ruin ancient hedgerows and would disrupt places where people walk in the area.

Senior planning officer Jean Marshall advised the committee that councillors needed to judge whether any effect on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty was outweighed by the contribution to local housing need.

Proposing the scheme for approval Cllr Tim Christopher said: “Broadwindsor is not an unsubstantial village. It has a shop and a school, there are no highway objections to this scheme…I believe the economic and social benefits outweigh any harm and we must remember that we don’t have the minimum five-year land supply we are supposed to have.”