Victory for Neighbourhood Plan as plans for 300 homes refused

Melksham’s newly adopted Neighbourhood Plan has scored an early victory after plans for 300 homes at Snarlton Farm in Melksham East were refused – just one day after the plan was formally adopted.

The housing site was not one of those allocated for development in the Joint Melksham Neighbourhood Plan, which was recently adopted following a community referendum on 31st July where 89% voted in favour. The plan is intended to guide local development and protect the area from speculative housing proposals.

The plan was adopted on Monday 4th August and faced its first major test the very next day, when plans for 300 homes, submitted by Catesby Estates, came before Wiltshire Council’s Strategic Planning Committee.

Speaking after the meeting, Cllr David Pafford Chair of Melksham Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group and Vice Chair of Melksham Without Parish Council said, “This is a great day for the Melksham Neighbourhood Plan and a validation of all the hard work undertaken. We are really pleased that this speculative development was refused today.”

At the meeting on Tuesday 5th August, Wiltshire Council officers controversially recommended the plan for the homes be approved, prompting strong criticism from councillors who raised serious concerns that this would undermine the newly adopted Neighbourhood Plan.

Responding to the officer advice, Cllr Nick Holder said, “It’s massively disappointing as the local member to be told that the Melksham Area Neighbourhood Plan carries no weight. What is the point of the referendum? What is the point of the statement coming from Wiltshire Council yesterday confirming that the Neighbourhood Plan is ‘made’, only to be told less than 48 hours later it carries no weight in planningdecisions? It drives a cart and horses through our plan. We have to represent our electorate.”

Cllr Nigel White said, “I would question the whole purpose of having a Neighbourhood Plan if we are going to ignore it.”

The development proposed up to 300 houses, land for local community use or building, public open space and a park. However, the site was not allocated for housing in either the Joint Melksham Neighbourhood Plan or Wiltshire Council’s emerging Local Plan.

One of the key issues discussed was Wiltshire’s current housing land supply, which stands at just 2.42 years – well below the government’s recommended five-year target. One of the reasons officers recommended approval of the application was this shortfall in land supply across the county. Some councillors expressed frustration over how this is impacting local decision-making.

Cllr Chris Brautigam asked, “If our land supply was over five years, would we be sitting here today? We are now in a situation where it is pointless us all being here.”

The meeting also heard from Cllr David Pafford and Melksham Without Parish Council’s clerk, Teresa Strange, along with a representative from developer Catesby Estates.

While councillors discussed deferring the decision, they ultimately voted to reject the application. One of the main reasons given was that the development conflicted with the Neighbourhood Plan, and its benefits did not outweigh that conflict.

The developer now has the option to appeal the decision, in which case the final outcome would be decided by the independent Planning Inspectorate.

Cllr David Pafford added, “We think it may be used as a test case in the future for the validity of Neighbourhood Plans if the developer chooses to appeal, but we’re glad Wiltshire Council recognised the value of the Melksham Neighbourhood Plan in their decision making this morning.

“A huge thank you to everyone who voted for the plan last week. Several committee members made the point that the Melksham community had spoken on Thursday at the referendum and their view should not be ignored.”

He also praised Wiltshire councillor Nick Holder for his continued support, and highlighted another recent success for the plan, with a separate application for 70 homes at Woodrow Road also refused due to conflict with the Neighbourhood Plan.