Agenda item

The planning officer presented the report to the Committee which recommended approval to be granted and circulated an item of late correspondence to be included on the council website with the agenda.

Members discussed the footpath on the parish boundary and clarification was sought over surrounding buildings on the site. In response to Committee questions, the planning officer confirmed that most of the surrounding buildings were light industrial and should not cause an issue with residential developments.

A potential restriction on the number of houses that could be constructed was discussed. In response, it was stated by the planning officer that Members would be agreeing to the access arrangements and the four dwellings only.

The access to the four dwellings was discussed by Members. It was stated by the planning officer that Highways would object to any additional accesses being added.

The level of screening required in this rural area was also raised. Concern was raised over the visibility of the four dwellings and also the development of a footpath that could be detrimental to the rural landscape. In response to these concerns, was stated that hedges cannot be used to screen two storey houses. There was little room remaining after the development of the dwellings, parking and the access road.

The significant development of the adjoining Longhedge site was also discussed. It was stated that the area was about to become a very urban development and it was queried whether a restriction could be put on this application until a roundabout has been built as part of the Longhedge development. In response, it was stated that the decision on the current application could not be made depedent on the accounts of a third party.

Concern was raised that if Longhedge was not developed then this would have been four dwellings approved in the open countryside, rather than next to another development.

The local member, Cllr Ian McLennan, spoke in objection to the application.

At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

That the application be refused for the following reason:

The proposed dwellings would be located on a site which is currently located in the open countryside, and is not specifically allocated for housing development in the South Wiltshire Core Strategy or the draft Wiltshire Core Strategy. The adjacent A345 road onto to which the dwellings would have a vehicular access is a very busy arterial road between Salisbury and Amesbury, where traffic speeds are very high.

A large area of land immediately adjacent the site has been allocated for a significant mixed development within the development plan, and planning permission has been granted. A new highway arrangement has been proposed as part of the adjacent development, which will help improve highway safety and reduce traffic speeds.

However, this adjacent permission is in outline form and development has yet to commence. Consequently, at the current time, the surrounding land remains of a rural character, and it may be some time before the land is actually developed, including the provision of a roundabout. As a result, there is no certainty that the final development will resemble the layout currently envisaged or that the future developments would not conflict.

Consequently, due to the lack of certainty that the development of the area would occur as currently envisaged, it is considered that the scheme would be likely to result in housing development within the open countryside also result in additional traffic generation onto a busy arterial road to the detriment of highway safety, contrary to policies CP6, C2, C7, H23 & G2 of the adopted South Wiltshire Core Strategy.