Agenda item

Outline planning application for residential development of up to 59 dwellings together with access and associated works. (mix of units to be determined by Reserved Matters) - All matters reserved except access.

Public Participation

Steve Cole spoke in objection to the application.

Keith Millington spoke in objection to the application.

Jeremy Stokes spoke in objection to the application.

Alan Pearce spoke in support of the application.

Alex Wozniczko spoke in support of the application.

Tom Vaughan Jones spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Richard Ormerod spoke on behalf of Devizes Town Council.

Senior Conservation/Planning Officer, Jonathan James presented a report which outlined a planning application for residential development of up to 59 dwellings together with access and associated works. With the mix of units to be determined by Reserved Matters. All matters reserved except access. The planning officer noted that late correspondence had been received but no issues had been raised which had not been included within the report.

The site consisted of several agricultural grassed fields bounded by a mixture of fencing, hedgerow and mature trees. In addition, it was stated that the topography of the land sloped down across the site from east to west, with a plateau in the north/east and which sloped steeply down to the south to the lower paddock. To the east of the site were existing residential properties.

The planning officer presented the slides for the meeting (published as an agenda supplement).The proposed means of access was to the northeast of the site onto John Rennie Close. It was noted that the application has undergone amendments and revisions, including a reduction in number of units from 65 down to 59, following points raised on the scheme. The recommendation before the Council was based on this revised scheme. The planning officer also noted that strategic policies could not be applied to this application in full weight due to the tilted balance.

Reference was drawn to the development limit of Devizes, with it shown that part of the site would lie within the neighbourhood plan and that as the development would be within these limits, it would be policy compliant. Reference was also made that the site would be sustainable due to its walking distance from the town centre, with the scheme also looking to deliver at least 30% affordable housing which would create additional housing, investment locally as well as jobs during the construction phase.

The planning officer referred to the illustrative masterplan provided by the applicant, which highlighted a drainage basin proposed to the southwest and sewage disposal to the north, with all proposed housing removed from a 250m boundary to the sewage works. It was also noted that an odour modelling assessment from Wessex Water and a sniff test had been conducted by appropriately qualified assessors. The officer also noted that in regard to the land, this was identified as grade 1 agricultural with the topography identified as sub-grade 3b.

Concerns about visual impact were acknowledged, with it noted that the view had been agreed by Wiltshire Council’s landscape officer and that over time the impact would decrease to be neutral. Additionally, the Wiltshire Council urban design officer had been satisfied with the masterplan. It was also raised that though there had beenconcerns about highways safety from residents, this would not constitute a reason for refusal. Additionally, that no concerns had been raised by the Wiltshire Council Bio-diversity team in regard to the impact on protected species, dark corridors and  woodland maintenance.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were sought on, but not limited to that the 30% of social housing provided would be in line with the policy for the local area of Devizes and that the layout of the social housing would be identified at approval of reserved matters stage. Clarity was sought in regard to what percentage of the site would be outside of the area allocated by the neighbourhood plan, with is suggested that around 60% of the development would be on non-allocated land. In regard to further development, it was clarified that the land that would not be built on within the proposal would take significant engineering in the future in order to enable future development due to the topography. Reference was drawn to potential highways issues, to which the planning officer stated that the highways department had not raised any concerns about the impacts of the development. The planning officer also noted that the highways impact had already been established for the initial 47 homes in the proposal, which had increased to 59.

Further technical questions included but were not limited to whether the Wiltshire Council housing officer had approved the allocation of social housing, to which the planning officer clarified that the officer had identified recommendations in relation to the considered application and that the requirements of types of housing set by the housing officer would have to be met at reserved matters stage. A point was raised about the sniff test and whether this was carried out in accordance with Wessex Water procedures and whether it would have been better to have been carried out over a period and not just one day. The planning officer stated that the assessment had been carried out by specialists and the results satisfactorily met the Wessex Water assessment, so no objections were raised and the Wiltshire Council environmental officers agreed. In addition, a further point was raised in relation to odour modelling and that though all proposed housing would be outside of the 250m buffer zone, it was noticed that the edge of gardens of existing homes would be very close to the buffer.

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

Neighbouring Local Unitary Member, Councillor Iain Wallis then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Wallis raised the following points including that as neighbouring division member he had grown up on the farmland adjacent to the site. Cllr Wallis referenced the 112 letters of objection to application which had been placed before noting that he would focus on the following three areas:

In regard to pressure on local highways, Cllr Wallis stated that he disagreed that the development would only produce one additional vehicle per hour during peak times, with the road already being use by over 50 existing homes, local businesses and users of the main park in Devizes. Cllr Wallis stated that the road is currently busy with on street parking, with the development potentially leading to further delays at the junction, with the road unable to be widened. The impact on air quality management was also referenced.

In regard to the landscape and environment, Cllr Wallis referenced that the land had been used for sustainable farming, which could not be ignored during the current economic crisis. It was noted that the land consisted of Carbon-rich soil as well as habitats for creatures and that should the development take place 40% of this landscape would be concrete. Cllr Wallis also referenced that the development would potentially cause Nitrate run off to a farmer below the development and that the visual impact would be extremely negative and visible from the west.

In regard to the 5-year land supply, Cllr Wallis stated that he did not feel as though this was achievable and that deliverability should instead be considered, with Devizes having delivered plenty of local housing previously. Cllr Wallis concluded by stating that Devizes does not object to more homes but insists that they be in the right places.

The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Simon Jacobs then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Jacobs raised the following points that having been the Local Division Member for the past 10 years, one of the things he was proud of in his ward was the greensand escarpment, which was rare landscape and unique in Wiltshire. Cllr Jacobs stated that it was the duty of councillors to protect such landscapes and that to build on this site would be detriment to this landscape. Cllr Jacobs drew attention to the heritage, history and culture of Devizes, which has grown rapidly over the last 25 years, with the town ahead in fulfilling its own local 5-year land supply, with agreed and previous developments listed. Cllr Jacobs emphasised that Devizes is not against development but rather embraces it when it is in the right place.

The Chairman then opened the debate and requested that the first Member to speak proposed a motion that the Committee could debate.

At the start of the debate a motion to reject the officer’s recommendation to Defer and Delegate to the Head of Development Management to grant outline planning permission subject to the conditions set out below and to the prior completion of a Section 106 legal agreement to cover the contributions identified in Section 10 of the report was moved by Cllr Tony Trotman and seconded by Cllr Bridget Wayman.

The reason for refusal was that the application would be in conflict with Core Policies 1, 2, 51 and 58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy (Jan 2015).

During the debate, issues were raised, but not limited to that had the application been for 47 houses within the neighbourhood plan boundary, then the application would have been difficult to object to. Attention was also drawn to how the land was a historic area and that the application would conflict with Wiltshire Core Strategy (Jan 2015) Core Policies 51 and 58. Contrary to this, a point was raised that part of this land had been allocated by the neighbourhood plan and that though sites like this were being brought to committee it would be difficult to object given that the area had been included within the neighbourhood plan. A counterargument was raised that though part of the site had been allocated within the neighbourhood plan, the majority of the site would be outside of this boundary and that it could be therefore suggested that the site would constitute over-development as it was more than what was initially allocated. This was further supported by a member who noted that the additional 12 homes would be an increase of 25% on the original plan and significantly different to what had been allocated in the neighbourhood plan.

Attention was drawn to the tilted balance and that though Wiltshire may not have a 5-year land supply, the county had been overdelivering, especially in the case of Devizes, which in comparison to other towns did not have good connectivity due to being highly congested and without a rail station. The value of greensand escarpment was also stated.

A member suggested that as a result of the failure of national planning policy, in regard to the 5-year land supply, the Council were obliged to decide on something which was out of their hands, with it noted that a huge number of other local authorities have also failed to meet the 5-year supply. Frustration was expressed in the respect that though developers had said the application was within the allocated site, only 40% of the application would be within the allocated site and that it would therefore open up a difficult position at appeal stage. It was suggested that that the application could potentially be deferred in order to reduce the number of dwellings outside of the allocated site in order to maintain access to arable land. Regarding the allocation of land from the neighbourhood plan, it was referenced  by a member that 60% of the development would be without the Council framework boundary and additionally it was suggested that the development would not work due to both landscape and traffic issues.

A member drew further attention to the vertical line through the site which represented the boundary of the plan, with it stated that they found it strange that this line had been put in this place and that it could be assumed that this had been done for a specific reason as there didn’t seem to be a natural boundary.

The local members and residents who had provided their comments were commended, with further reference given to the farmer who had stated without his current access he would not be able to farm the rest of his land. It was therefore queried why this had not been included within the report as though the development would provide short-term employment during the building phase, it would also jeopardise the farmer’s employment.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was, 

Resolved:

To refuse the application for the following reasons:

1. Core Policy 1 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the 'Settlement Strategy' for the County, and identifies four tiers of settlement - Principal Settlements, Market Towns, Local Service Centres, and Large and Small Villages.  Within the Settlement Strategy Devizes 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.  A large part of the application site lies beyond / outside the limits of development of Devizes, 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.  Although part of the application site lies within the limits of development of Devizes and is also allocated in the Devizes Area Neighbourhood Plan, that large part lying outside the limits is not.

Core Policy 12 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the 'Spatial Strategy' for the Devizes Community Area in which Devizes lies.  It states that development in the Devizes 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 59 dwellings, etc. on the application site, a large part of which would be on the land which is in the countryside.  Under Core Policies 1, 2 and 12, this does not comply with the Settlement and Delivery Strategies as a matter of principle.  The Strategies are designed to ensure new development satisfies the fundamental principles of sustainability and so it follows that where a proposal such as this does not accord with them then it is unsustainable in this overarching context.  The site is not identified for development in a Site Allocations Development Plan Document, and it is only partly allocated in a Neighbourhood Plan.  Furthermore, there are no material considerations or exceptional circumstances, including set out in other policies of the Plan, which override the core policies position.  The proposal is, therefore, contrary to Core Policies 1, 2 and 12 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy, the Devizes Area Neighbourhood Plan and paragraphs 2, 7-15 and 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).  In accordance with paragraph 11d(ii) of the NPPF the benefits of the proposal have been fully considered but the adverse impacts, including those set out in reason for refusal no. 2 below, and the serious undermining of public confidence in the Devizes Area Neighbourhood Plan, would significantly and demonstrably outweigh those benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole.

2. By reason of its urbanising effect, that part of the proposed development located in the open countryside would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the countryside, causing irreversible loss of an attractive and historic landscape.  The proposal, therefore, fails to protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character, contrary to Core Policies 51 and 58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy and paragraph 174 of the NPPF.

3. The application fails to provide and/or secure any mechanism to ensure that the provision of essential infrastructure, services and amenities made necessary by the development are delivered, these being affordable housing, recreation/open space, education facilities, refuse collection facilities, and sustainable transport improvements.  This is contrary to Policies CP3, CP43, CP45, CP51, and CP52 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy and Policy HC34 of the ‘saved’ Kennet Local Plan, and paragraphs 8, 34, 56, 64 and 92 of the NPPF.

The meeting adjourned at 12:40pm and resumed at 12:50pm.

Cllr Adrian Foster left the meeting at 12:45pm.