
This development came before the Committee in a slightly different form on 24 March last year – and was rejected on the grounds of additional traffic concerns, road access, inadequate parking provision, pressure on the town’s infrastructure, wildlife concerns and unsuitability of the recreational land offered as a like-for-like replacement. It was subsequently rejected by the County Council.
The revised application differs by proposing a reduced number of houses, but still encompassing some of the land in the water meadow area and an increase in the number of 4-bed detached houses.
Resident Jane Baker pointed out that “the latest application does not resolve any of the reasons given for the original refusal of the project”. She added that there was insufficient access for emergency vehicles for the new recreational area, where children would have to use as their former area had been developed, in the event of an accident or injury.
Elisabeth Cooper, another resident questioned what liability Wiltshire Council would accept for the safeguard of the children given the presence of unexploded ordinance. “Will the insurers for the council be prepared to underwrite loss of life or limb should there be an accident to a member of the public” “What will Wiltshire council do to ensure safe access by the emergency services to any injured member of the public?” she added.
Councillor Loosemore summed up the feeling of the committee by stating “I see no reason why, what’s been presented to us now makes an iota of difference from what we’ve already seen and the decision that we’ve already made” .….. “This is a thing that’s not right for this town, and although we need housing, we need to do it properly and they are not addressing the needs of the town”.
The committee voted unanimously to reject the amended proposal.








