Opposition 'to nearly all the views expressed in Gazette over the past three years'

My family is a small part of an extended family of three generations from Devizes that would all directly benefit from the application at Coate Bridge. Several other families who live and work around the town would also directly benefit from the project. The actions of Devizes and Wiltshire have forced us to move out of the county, away from family and at greater cost to ourselves.

We are also dismayed at what appear to be underhand tactics by councillors, politicians and people with big voices to make Mr Pickles come to the outcome that he did.

My small family have lived the majority of their life in Devizes and its villages, and we to care passionately about the town and village life. Our home, a semi-detached, just outside the town boundary of Devizes, was our 'forever home'.

We made it suit our family needs perfectly, and we had neighbours that were like family, and friends that were kindred spirits. Our decision to move was the hardest one we have had to make in our life. We had made our house the home we wanted to live in for the rest of our lives but due to Wiltshire's policy on education for children with autism, the policies of Devizes planning and a want for the best for our children, we felt compelled to leave.

Our daughter has autism which in Wiltshire means that for secondary provision, unless you are too academically poor or too disruptive to school "generally", you are placed with varying degrees of support with in a mainstream schools across the county.

Since the closing of specialist facilities across the county, the maximum entry requirement for places at the remaining specialist schools have lowered, so far that they cannot take children with aspirations of potential GCSEs (or their new equivalent). This meant that we would be obliged to place our vulnerable daughter within a mainstream school where she would have to cope with daily high noise levels, staff with limited insight into her needs and peers who are themselves finding their place in the world.

This meant that we had to move at least an hour's drive from Devizes in order to get our daughter the education appropriate for her needs.

The family that I belong to has been a great supporter and provider to Devizes for over 100 years. Three generations gave employment and service to the Devizes community. The family has Devizes at its heart, and with the exception of my family's departure out of necessity, they remain close and continue to be a part of the town. I feel that when my daughter has finished her education, we want to return to Wiltshire, but it feels like Devizes may not have sufficient choice or supply for us to find a home again near the town.

In my opinion, the process that Mactaggart and Mickel have used along the way in the application for Coate Bridge, has been thoroughly professional one. They have dealt with concerns suggested by planning and gave sufficient opportunity to hear and liaise the community and their thoughts. They have applied within time for all their deadlines.

When I look at the plans proposed by Mactaggart and Mickel, there were great efforts made to ensure the site would not impose on the canal tourism, that local areas of interest were protected and that the housing was well spaced within the area of the site. Making it an area that would be comfortable for, and appreciated by its residents.

The majority of the initial comments were led by Ted East, Chair of the Trust for Devizes, whom throughout the course of the application, vehemently rejected any possible notion of development at Coate Bridge whilst his wish for an old people's village at Quakers Walk was pushed for acceptance.

The Quakers Walk project failed but Mr East and his colleagues stirred up the town against Coate Bridge alarming all with traffic congestion and air pollution fears despite the transport authorities having no objection to the development's impact.

A short while after his campaign had run, an application was mooted for Lay Wood.

Mr East, despite all his protestations about traffic and pollution said that he would rather give backing for Lay Wood as a "better option", a development further from Devizes and with only one main access route to the town which would be supporting it. Then after Coate Bridge was turned down, Lay Wood was accepted and within two weeks Mr East announced his retirement!

The campaign against the Coate Bridge was solely directed at this one development. 250 people stood in town waving their banners, and yet there has been minimal, if any, opposition to other applications around the town.

The need for housing in Devizes was apparent, but no one protested about the number of houses required. No one protested about the traffic fumes from prospective residents at Quakers Walk, Roundway, Lay Wood or Nursteed Road. Where were the protesters for 250 canal boat moorings at Foxhangers?

Instead of one development supporting a large proportion of the housing need within the area of Devizes, there has has to be a number of smaller developments, all causing their own individual disruptions, closer to the town centre.

When we look at the Town Council and Wiltshire Council's actions they are not so clear. The only objection to the original planning application was that Devizes did not wish to expand out further toward the East from its boundary.

Yet not long after it approved the proposal at Lay Wood, a site that is further from Devizes, and would probably have greater impact. Wiltshire Council, after rejecting Coate Bridge, find that the County's development strategy meant they could no longer defend the refusal of the application.

During the campaign against the developers Mactaggart and Mickel, Noel Woolrych, a devout Labour supporter, placed an online petition for those upset with the Coate Bridge proposal. The petition he created displayed the full names and postcodes of all those who signed up to it. This was not very professional as it did not uphold the privacy sufficiently of the respondents. The published information could have been easily use it to locate all those who had signed it to canvas them directly for either side.

Then there are the actions of Claire Perry.

I wrote to her before the "March of 250" in Devizes and she wrote to me saying that she could not get involved with such disputes as it was a local matter. And yet, her office had apologised to the rally that she could not attend the rally in the town as she was a pre-arranged meeting, hinting support for the anti-development protest. And throughout her time in office she has said that it is about localism, that she cannot be involved and yet before a scheduled inquiry into the proposed development, she said she had been in the Gazette saying she had referred it to the Secretary of State.

I was under the impression that any housing appeal over 250 houses would be referred but Mrs Perry appears to have made a special consultation.

According to the enquiry report, it was completed on June 3. News of the inquiry's findings did not get released mid-July as they were supposed to when a decision was due. Apparently they were moving office and could not complete work.

They then had setbacks supposedly because Parliament was on holiday. From the 1st of September (when Parliament resumed), no response came, and then at the end of October, came the decision formally.

This just happened to be after the DANP had placed its suggested strategy for public consultation. So Mr Pickles, who actually agreed with the findings of the inquiry, used a proposal submitted eight months after the application and five months after the inquiry as the reason to refuse the development.

However since Mr Pickles has turned down the Coate Bridge application there appears to be a flourish of thanks published toward Mrs Perry for her actions against this application.

I feel that the direction Devizes planners and the local lobbyists are going, the town will become increasingly less appealing and less prosperous to it's residents and prospective home owners. the lack of sustainable housing will help drive up local house prices in the Devizes area, making it more difficult for young families to stay in the area.

The other benefit to more housing and an increase in population is the local council will need to develop and provide for further schools and medical services, which are currently really lacking in the Devizes area.

The lack of development will severely impede the economic growth within the town. Development would bring greater skills and a better workforce to bolster the industry in the local area. A small group of local councillors are being allowed to dictate what happens to the town without truly seeking local views of the majority rather than just listening to to those that shout loudest.

To cram more housing within an outdated boundary line will lead to greater social and logistical difficulties for the town. I have seen many plots of land within the town converted to more housing, increasing the number of homes per area. Does this make The Green next to the Crammer a suitable plot too? Are there to be blocks of high rise flats in the centre of the town to protect the prospect of development outside its borders? Where will those who have grown up in the town live for their first homes? Devizes needs to embrace spacious developments, not crowded ones otherwise the respect for for where people live will be diminished.

My family regularly return to visit the town but a permanent return is in doubt.

We are so saddened that the policies of local and county councils, the tactics of politicians and local 'Not In My Back Yard' groups and the lack of forward thinking within the town which has forced us to leave the county.

If Devizes continues to withhold appropriate development, it will become increasingly less desirable for all who live within and those who drive through it.

Adrian Rea

Name and address supplied