Agenda item

Residential development (use class C3) for up to 145 homes, community orchard, children's play areas (LEAP), tree planting, habitat creation and ecology buffers and mitigation; site drainage and associated infrastructure. All matters reserved except for access.

Public Participation

Francis Morland spoke in objection to the application.

David Jenkins spoke in objection to the application.

Jemma Shorrock, Agent, spoke in support of the application.

Cllr John Masson, Heywood Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Gen Collins, Senior Planning Officer, presented a report which recommended that permission be refused for a residential development (use class C3) for up to 145 homes, community orchard, children's play areas (LEAP), tree planting, habitat creation and ecology buffers and mitigation; site drainage and associated infrastructure. All matters reserved except for access.

The background to the application was explained to be the same as set out for the application at Minute 15, having received initial approval by the Committee on 1 November 2023 subject to the signing of a s.106 legal agreement, with revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the impact on the planning balance and other material considerations leading to a change in recommendation from the officers.

Details were also provided of late and additional representations received, including disagreement on behalf of the Applicant on the council’s legal advice regarding the impact of the NPPF revisions. Key issues included the principle of the development and the council’s settlement and delivery strategies.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. It was confirmed that Highways officers had not amended their lack of technical objection to the application, and that conditions would be able to address any highways concerns.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The Local Unitary Member, Cllr Suzanne Wickham, then spoke in objection to the application.

In relation to comments on behalf of the Applicant the officer confirmed that the council’s advice was that reference to an appeal decision in Chichester was not applicable to Wiltshire, and that its position remained as set out in the report in respect of a requirement to demonstrate a four-year housing land supply only.

On the motion of Cllr Bridget Wayman, seconded by Cllr Carole King, it was then without further discussion,

Resolved:

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.    Principle of Development 

Core Policy 1 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the 'Settlement Strategy' for the County, and in doing so identifies four tiers of settlement - Principal Settlement, Market Town, Local Service Centre, and Large and Small Village.  Within the Settlement Strategy Westbury is defined as a Market Town.  The Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages have defined boundaries, or ‘limits of development’.  Beyond the limits of development is countryside.  The application site lies beyond / outside the limits of development of Westbury, and so is in the countryside.

Core Policy 2 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the 'Delivery Strategy'.  It identifies the scale of growth appropriate within each settlement tier.  The policy states that within the limits of development of those settlements with defined limits there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development; but outside the defined limits – that is, in the countryside – other in circumstances as permitted by other policies of the Plan, development will not be permitted, and that the limits of development may only be altered through identification of sites for development through subsequent Site Allocations Development Plan Documents and Neighbourhood Plans. 

Core Policy 32 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the 'Spatial Strategy' for the Westbury Community Area in which the site lies.  It states that development in the Westbury Community Area should be in accordance with the Settlement Strategy set out in Core Policy 1.

The proposal is for outline planning permission to erect up to 145 dwellings, etc. on the application site, which is in the countryside.  Under Core Policies 1, 2 and 32, this does not comply with the Settlement and Delivery Strategies as a matter of principle.  The Strategies are designed to ensure new developments satisfy the fundamental principles of sustainability, and so it follows that where a proposal such as this fails to comply with them then it will be unsustainable in this overarching context.   The application site is not identified for development in a Site Allocations Development Plan Document, and it is not allocated in a Neighbourhood Plan document.  Furthermore, there are no material considerations or exceptional circumstances, including set out in other policies of the Plan, which override the core policy's position.  The proposal is, therefore, contrary to Core Policies 1, 2 and 32 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy and paragraphs 2, 7-15, 47 and 180(b) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), comprising unsustainable development.

2.    Lack of a signed Legal Agreement

The proposed development fails to provide and/or secure adequate provision for necessary onsite and, where appropriate, off-site infrastructure to make the application proposal acceptable in planning terms. The application is therefore contrary to policy CP3 of the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy, and the National Planning Policy Framework, specifically the central social and environment sustainable development objectives enshrined within paragraph 8.

Informative to Applicant:

Reason for refusal 2 relates to the failure of the applicant to secure affordable housing and other financial contributions for the site.  In the event of an appeal it may be possible to address this through a suitably worded Planning Obligation.

It was requested it be noted that the decision to refuse permission was unanimous.