The Cottage, 21, Woodland Road, PATNEY Wilts SN10 3RD

16th May 2016

Dear Mr Wilmott,

Re: PATNEY PLANNING APPLICATION No: 16/03703/FUL

I write as the owner of The Cottage, 21, Woodland Road to support most firmly the above application to build at Woodland Road, Patney SN10 3RD a detached specialist dwelling for a disabled person, namely my 3 year old grand-daughter Sophia.

In addition, I wish to challenge the Notification of Refusal of Full Planning (Ref No: 15/09830/FUL dated 30 Dec 2015) which gave 3 main reasons (see Paras 1-3 of Notification) to refuse this earlier application as well as recognising that the unique “personal circumstances set out by the Applicant are considered to amount to a relevant material consideration” (See Para 4 of Notification).

The 3 reasons for refusal were:

1. Confliction with the Core Strategy (WCS) CPs 51 and 57 as well as Para 115 of the NPPF which “gives great weight to conserving the landscape of areas of outstanding beauty” (AONBs). This assessment conflicts with the North Wessex Downs AONB Director who visited the site last autumn and declared that the proposed site would have only limited impact on the settlement, provided that indigenous trees, hedges and shrubs were place in and around proposed area as well as sympathetic roof tiles and suitable wood-cladding being used. These recommendations are now comprehensively covered in great detail within the new Planning Application documents. 2. “The proposed development would harm the setting of the designated heritage asset at 21, Woodland Road” (ie – The Cottage). You will however note included in the new Planning Application is a firm rebuttal by a Heritage consultant with considerable experience in this sphere with photographs that clearly show that, with the existing thick hedging, mature trees and high bank in the bridleway to the North of the site, surrounding views of The Cottage (21, Woodland Road) will be affected in only a minimal way – indeed, it can be argued that the view Northwards from the village green would be enhanced by the proposed barn-like building, hence softening the existing view across the field to the exposed modern red-brick Southern gable-end of 2, Woodland Road immediately North of the bridleway referred to above. Furthermore, the sensitivity of this historic landscape setting has already been diminished due to the extant Planning Permission for the demolition of three neighbouring cottages (Nos 23, 25 and 27, Woodland Road, immediately North of The Cottage) and a garage block to make way for the development of three new houses. 3. The proposal conflicts with the settlement strategy of the WCS CPs 1, 2 and 18 as Patney has lost its previous status as a Small Village and is now regarded as Open Countryside with little perceived sustainable growth. This re-categorisation of Patney is challengeable, as also is the issue of sustainability in this age of wide motor vehicle ownership; for example, there is a thriving school in , half a mile from Patney and another school 3 miles distant in which also possesses a village shop, a thriving pub and an active church. In the rural areas of the , many parents drive miles to deliver children to school as well as carrying routine shopping, visiting GPs and other various tasks. The fact that a settlement has few facilities is of little relevance in the 21st Century.

With regard to the mitigating “relevant material consideration” recognised in Para 4 of the Notification, Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 confirms that Planning Applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This is echoed in Para 196 of the NPPF. The NPPF is itself a material consideration as well as is the Equality Act 2010 and the very circumstances of this particular case. The Equality Act 2010 places public sector duties on in shaping policy and decision making, inter alia, with regard to the provision of suitable disabled housing in the county.

As I mentioned in my earlier comments on the original Planning Application, this particular case is as much a Social Services / Welfare / Health issue as a Planning matter. It is therefore important that this second Planning Application be finally agreed by Wiltshire Council.

Yours sincerely,

Nigel Thursby

NDD THURSBY