DEVELOPERS which wanted to build homes on land earmarked for local businesses in Chippenham has had planning rejected for a second time.

Green Square wanted to build 66 homes on land at Methuen Park Business Park, but failed to persuade officers the commercial land should have homes built on.

The planning Inspectorate rejected Green Square’s argument that the business park was in decline and stated that the land would provide key employment opportunities for people within the town to make more jobs available for local people.

Inspector Jameson Bridgwater said: “The Wiltshire Core strategy for Chippenham is based on delivering significant job growth, to help to improve the self-containment of the town by providing more jobs for local people. To achieve this it seeks to ensure employment is accessible to the local population, through sustainable distribution and choice of employment sites in the town.”

The row over the development has been going on since July 2016 when Green Square submitted the plans and an appeal was launched when council officers refused permission to begin building in August 2017.

However, the 1.5ha of land had been set aside since 2000 for business use within the vibrant commercial park in Chippenham. When asked why land hadn’t been used to build office space in the last eight years, Green Square stated the shape of the area and its location meant they were unable to find occupiers.

Site visits by the inspectorate caused these reasons to be rejected and concerns were identified about the possible increase in traffic if the development went ahead. Mr Bridgwater added: “The proposed 66 homes, including a policy compliant 40 per cent affordable housing provision would make a limited contribution to the overall supply of housing. Moreover, the proposal would be likely to result in a limited increase to economic activity in Chippenham and contribute towards public art. I do not consider that they would outweigh the harm identified with regard to the loss of employment land, to do so would allow residential development without regard to the need for it.”