Fury as 125-homes plan for Calne approved on appeal

Protesters attended the appeal hearing to demonstrate their opposition to the homes plan

Protesters attended the appeal hearing to demonstrate their opposition to the homes plan

First published in News
Last updated
by

A fight against plans for 125 houses and a care home at Marden Farm in Calne lasting more than a year has ended in frustration after the development was given the go-ahead on appeal.

The application by developer Gleeson was rejected by Wiltshire Council last August and was the subject of a two-day hearing in February.

People in south Calne were left to defend themselves at the appeal after Wiltshire planning officers received a letter criticising parts of the council’s core strategy and pulled out.

It said the council should allocate provision for 42,000 houses across the county within five years – 5,000 more than planned.

The plan includes a 75-bed dementia care home, a ten-bed palliative care unit with parking and 125 homes, associated parking, gardens, amenity space and public open space, community orchard and allotments.

Residents raised concerns about access to the site, saying it would create a dangerous point in the road, as well as air quality issues.

But planning inspector John Braithwaite said the requirement for homes in Wiltshire could not be ignored as the council could not demonstrate a five-year housing supply.

In his ruling issued today, he said: “All relevant matters mentioned by all parties have been taken into account but do not, either individually or collectively, alter a conclusion that the proposed development would not cause any significant harm.

“In particular the development would not adversely affect highway safety on Stockley Lane. The neighbourhood plan has not even reached draft stage.”

Calne Town Council clerk Linda Roberts said: “We did everything we could, but we’re vulnerable until we get the neighbourhood plan done and even then who knows? You would think the powers that be would take into account the fact that the town is working on one, at least give us a chance.”

Derek Warnett, Calne town councillor and vice chairman of the South Calne Residents’ Association, said the decision undermined localism.

He said: “The decision basically says it doesn’t affect anyone or anything. For people reading that whose houses will now be overlooked by a massive care home there is no consolation at all.

“This junction is an unsafe junction, we live here and we see it all the time. Highways officers who don’t live here don’t experience the screech of the brakes and the cars coming round the corner at 50 miles per hour.”

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:38am Thu 3 Apr 14

Phorever says...

Are they really surprised?
Residents didn't want Sainsburys, but we got it.
We didn't want the houses on the Northern Bypass, but were ignored.
Existing residents don't matter to the council.
Developers that pay good backhanders do matter though.
Are they really surprised? Residents didn't want Sainsburys, but we got it. We didn't want the houses on the Northern Bypass, but were ignored. Existing residents don't matter to the council. Developers that pay good backhanders do matter though. Phorever
  • Score: 10

12:23pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Nickthegreek says...

Surprised? No. Start with the planning office/officer. It's never their fault when an appeal is successful, they're "just doing their job............"
Surprised? No. Start with the planning office/officer. It's never their fault when an appeal is successful, they're "just doing their job............" Nickthegreek
  • Score: 1

9:02am Fri 4 Apr 14

barbarella68 says...

The Council refused this but Gleeson appealed like they all do when it doesn't go there way. Likewise with Hills and Station Road.These developers are greedy,manipulative and underhand and don't care who they tread on.
The Council refused this but Gleeson appealed like they all do when it doesn't go there way. Likewise with Hills and Station Road.These developers are greedy,manipulative and underhand and don't care who they tread on. barbarella68
  • Score: 2

3:07pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Yanziboom says...

Claims of traffic and air quality issues are entirely spurious and not at all the real reason for these ‘residents’ objections. They simply don’t want anything new to be build and don’t give a tulip for the needs of potential new residents. Thankfully, the ‘I just don’t want’ opinion has no basis in planning law.
Claims of traffic and air quality issues are entirely spurious and not at all the real reason for these ‘residents’ objections. They simply don’t want anything new to be build and don’t give a tulip for the needs of potential new residents. Thankfully, the ‘I just don’t want’ opinion has no basis in planning law. Yanziboom
  • Score: 1

6:12pm Fri 4 Apr 14

brandx says...

Two things stick in my mind about this:

1. The sham that the much heralded Localism agenda is when confronted by the bank rollers of the Tory Party - property developers

2. The cry from the heart of the NIMBYS when the property developers get their way

Question is will this outcome change the way people vote.
Two things stick in my mind about this: 1. The sham that the much heralded Localism agenda is when confronted by the bank rollers of the Tory Party - property developers 2. The cry from the heart of the NIMBYS when the property developers get their way Question is will this outcome change the way people vote. brandx
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree