The McCarthy and Stone development of retirement apartments on the Granham Hill garage site has been given planning approval. The vote at Thursday’s meeting (February 19) of the – all male – Eastern Area Planning Committee was five to two in favour with Marlborough’s two unitary councillors – Stewart Dobson and Nick Fogg – voting against.
The committee did force officers to write into their report’s conclusions that the Section 106 money the developer will pay instead of providing affordable homes on the site (£334,625.51) will be used for affordable homes “in Marlborough”. That is something for the objectors to monitor closely.
Objectors to the scheme were led by Mrs Val Compton and Mrs Sue Harris. Councillor Justin Cook put the town council’s case against the development.
There was some dispute about the need for a controlled crossing on Pewsey Road Bridge. A crossing had been suggested by the developers, but turned down by Wiltshire Council’s Highways officers – apparently on the grounds that it would be too close to the yet to be installed pelican crossing for College students in Bridewell Street.
Councillor Fogg foresaw the lack of a crossing as “isolating old people” on the edge of town: “On humanitarian grounds it’s a non-starter.” But Councillor Jerry Kunkler had that morning walked quite safely from the garage to the Wellington Arms (“It was closed”) in nine minutes.
The objectors all agreed that Marlborough had enough housing for old people and needed affordable housing for young people. And there was a great deal of talk that the apartments would merely import old people into Marlborough as ‘incomers’. Even the elderly of Marlborough area’s villages were warned they should not expect to find retirement homes in Marlborough.
This argument was undermined by Councillor Peter Evans who said he had been “surprised and pleased” by the number of local people choosing to live in a similar McCarthy and Stone development in Devizes.
As the growing amount of retirement housing of one level or another was argued back and forth, it became clear that the newly adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy – now the planners’ ‘holy writ’ – can be interpreted in virtually any way you need to support your case.
Mike Wilmott, Wiltshire Council’s head of development control and conservation, pointed out that “A single planning application had to be seen in it’s own right. You cannot object to it because you need more affordable housing in Marlborough.”
And Councillor Richard Gamble, who proposed that approval should be granted, said the site was not in any case suitable for affordable housing. In terms of planning, he said, “We haven’t got a hook to hang an objection on.”
Councillor Stewart Dobson asked his fellow committee members and the Council officers: “At what stage do planners say we have too many retirement homes in Marlborough?” His pertinent question was left unanswered.
It is a matter of opinion whether the decision in favour of these 27 retirement apartments on a ‘light industrial’, brown field site that is not part of Marlborough’s historic heritage justified one objector’s view after the meeting closed that “The rape of Marlborough goes on.”
[Click on pictures to enlarge them]
