Agenda item

Erection of 4 dwellings.

Public Participation

Angeli Dunkerley was unable to attend the meeting, therefore Democratic Services Officer Ben Fielding read out a statement that had been provided prior to the meeting in objection of the application.

Peter Gray spoke in objection of the application.

Ann Skinner spoke in objection of the application.

Sam Croft spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Roger Budgen spoke on behalf of St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish Council.

Development Management Team Leader, Lee Burman, presented a report which outlined the erection of four dwellings.

Details were provided of the site including the principle of development/development plan compliance, ecological impact, drainage impact, highways impact, impact on the character, appearance and visual amenity of the locality, impact on residential amenity.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were sought on the case law within the officer’s report and how the housing shortfall figures that were referenced would compare to Wiltshire, additionally that the housing land supply shortfall would not impact the recommendation for approval. It was also stated by Lee Burman that an Inspector at appeal would likely approve this application.

It was clarified that the ecology and Natural England reports had not raised objections to the application. It was stated that this site had not been approved to be a site within the Malmesbury Neighbourhood Area Plan, nor the Wiltshire allocation plan. Clarification was sought between the difference of the terms “infill” and “greenfield” site. It was also questioned where the Right of Way was located on the presentation provided.

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

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Martin Smith, then spoke regarding the application. Key points included that this is only one of two local nature reserves in North Wiltshire, which would mean potentially halving biodiversity numbers. Additionally, Councillor Smith cited the Wiltshire Wildlife Trust where the need to where possible direct developments away from sensitive locations was drawn upon. It was also referenced that Natural England raised concerns about water levels in the pond being disrupted, which was not mentioned along with the mitigation of flooding to house No.6.

Councillor Smith also questioned whether the nature of this development was sustainable, citing that Corston is isolated with infrequent public transport and little local employment or services. Given the evidence provided, Councillor Smith did notbelieve that the benefits outweighed the harm of the case.

At the start of the debate a motion to reject the officer recommendation was move by Councillor Grant and seconded by Councillor Smith, with the reasoning that the proposal conflicted with CP2 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy that seeks to limit development in small villages to infill within the existing built area. Councillor Bucknell offered a friendly amendment regarding the reasons for refusal, which was accepted, on the grounds that the application conflicted with CP51 and CP50 that seek to conserve and enhance the landscape and protect features of nature conservation interest respectively.

During the debate issues included that the application site had not been included in the Malmesbury Area Plan, nor the next stage of the plan’s development, potentially due to the site application conflicting with CP2 which seeks to limit development in small villages and infill within an existing built area. Additionally, the potential for the application to elongate the village and potentially harm a sensitive landscape was discussed due to the nearby local nature reserve.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was,

Resolved:

That planning permission be refused for the following reason:

The proposed residential development is located on a site outside of the existing built area of the village and is in an unsustainable location that would elongate the small village of Corston into the open countryside. This would result in harm to the character and appearance of the area and the ecological value of the adjacent Local Nature Reserve / Country Wildlife site. As such, the proposal conflicts with settlement policy CP2 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy that seeks to limit development in small villages to infill within the existing built area; and conflicts with polices CP51 and CP50 that seek to conserve and enhance the landscape and protect features of nature conservation interest respectively.