Land at Widham Farm, Purton Evidence provided by Dr Richard Pagett, Huntersbrook House, Hoggs Lane, Purton, Wiltshire SN5 4HQ 1. My name is Richard Pagett, I hold two science degrees and am a Chartered Biologist, a Chartered Water and Environmental Manager, a Chartered Environmentalist and a Chartered Scientist. I have been a resident of Purton since 1986 and I live in Hoggs Lane and so am not directly affected by the proposed development. I am a former chairman of the Purton parish council and retired from leading the Purton Sustainability Group, Ps and Qs earlier this year, after nearly twenty years. 2. I appreciate the need to avoid repetition where possible and, in the interests of brevity, I will restrict my observations mainly to those commenting on the 253 pages of Mr Harris’ proof of evidence, particularly those parts referred to as Propositions 1 – 6. In general, I will also adopt Mr Harris’ text headings to assist orientation between his proof and my commentary. Growth of Purton 3. The Proof considers that additional growth at Purton can assist in achieving the fourth bullet point of paragraph 28 of the National Policy Planning Framework (the Framework) which is to “promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages, such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship”. Of course, this is not an argument for housing at Widham itself, merely for housing and so could apply equally in almost any rural village. This is critical to understand because it is widely recognised that some housing in Purton to meet Purton’s need may be desirable. The key to the success of that housing in meeting the aspiration of 4th bullet on paragraph of the Framework is not housing per se, but its location and scale. 4. There is a limited number of shops, and previous housing developments over the years has not led to increased growth of Purton. Housing such as Widham Farm will contribute little to Purton other than more congestion on the oversubscribed roads and out-commuting. In essence Widham Farm would be, simply, a large dormitory, and that is against past and emerging policy. 5. The Proof further notes (paragraph 55 of the Framework) that “to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities”. The Proof supports this assertion by quoting part of the Ministerial Forward [sic] to the Framework which states that: “sustainable development is about positive growth - making economic, environmental and social progress for this and future generations”. 6. At this point it is necessary to shine some light on the nature of sustainable development. In 1987 when Gro Harlem Brundtland (a former prime minister of Norway) chaired the group that wrote the first definition of sustainable development it was completely clear that sustainable development was about encouraging human development sustainably, it was about helping millions living in abject poverty to come out of poverty in a sustainable manner by ensuring that social progress, environmental protection and economic improvement were equal contributors. The word “development” was never about (and is still not about, except in the UK) infrastructure. The concept of sustainable development referring to a housing development is a gross distortion of what sustainable development is about. That is why, of course, there is no single example of sustainable development in the UK, anywhere. 7. In fact, worldwide, sustainable development has been demonstrated to be an unachievable aspiration, anywhere. So, it is not surprising that Towards a Green Economy (United Nations Environment Programme, 2011)1 concluded that: “over the last quarter of a century, the world economy has quadrupled….in contrast 60% of the world’s major ecosystem goods and services that underpin livelihoods have been degraded or used unsustainably.” So, there is a mere 40% left for the rest of time. 1 http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_synthesis_en.pdf 1 | P a g e Land at Widham Farm, Purton Evidence provided by Dr Richard Pagett, Huntersbrook House, Hoggs Lane, Purton, Wiltshire SN5 4HQ 8. In local terms, Widham Farm will simply exacerbate the congestion of the limited road network and will have no meaningful access to a public transport network. This site is unsustainable. 9. Let us be clear, sustainability or sustainable development has had its time and has been shown to be completely unachievable. So, when the Proof asserts that “… town and villages should continue to grow and Purton is no exception.” This is pure, self-serving interpretation that has no basis in science, is nothing about sustainability, and is only about turning some land into profit. 10. The Proof does recognise, correctly, that the site is outside the settlement boundary as defined by Policy H 3 of the local plan. This plan will in due course be replaced by the currently-emerging Wiltshire Core Strategy which also sees no reason to change the settlement boundary. 11. The Proof tries to argue of course that “…it is a logical infill site”. Wiltshire Council policy is clear, infill is one or two houses slotted in between existing housing and is expected to be within the settlement boundary. 12. Logically, infill sites need to be within the settlement boundary and, indeed, there are several potential infill sites within the boundary. Widham Farm is clearly not one of them. Frankly, this whole appeal should be dismissed on that ground alone, otherwise what is the point of these boundaries in the first place. Planning History 13. We must remember that when this land was first put forward during the deliberations of the North Wiltshire Local Plan many years ago (I was chairman of the parish council at the time and remember this well) the Inspector at the time did not allocate the site simply because there were other, better, sites available, as there are now. 14. Despite this clear steer from the planning inspector at the time, the applicant chose to ignore this advice and attempt to gain planning permission some years later in 2009. It was refused and the subsequent appeal dismissed on the grounds that it was outside the settlement boundary and there was no overwhelming reason to breach this boundary. That still remains the case. 15. In complete disregard to the comments of the previous inspectors, the wishes of the parish council and of the local people, the applicant simply turns up again in July 2011 and, after an appeal for non-determination, was again dismissed (decision dated 5th October 2012). 16. The Proof tries rather too hard to suggest that there were no better sites within the settlement boundary. In fact there were and are several. The question is whether or not they are likely to materialise. If one still wanted to harp back to the concept of “sustainability” one does not decide that on the basis of which developer has some land to offload first. If there was any merit in the notion of sustainability, then when a parcel of land comes forward for development should not figure in that decision at all. Such a transitory criterion is clearly a flawed prospect if we are genuinely are trying to build communities rather than simply houses. 17. The Proof concludes this section suggesting that the Wiltshire Council does not have an issue with the scale or location of the development. Yet from the Council’s actual proofs, it does. Consequently, when the Proof concludes “…that the site is an eminently suitable site for development” and it should be a question not should this site come forward for development but rather “…a matter of when the site comes forward…” it is suggesting a context that the evidence simply does not support. 18. How many times do we have to listen to the raising of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South West at these appeals? The RSS was revoked in May this year and no longer forms part of the Development Plan. 2 | P a g e Land at Widham Farm, Purton Evidence provided by Dr Richard Pagett, Huntersbrook House, Hoggs Lane, Purton, Wiltshire SN5 4HQ Yet the Proof clutches at the evidence straw that although the emerging RSS has clearly been buried, the evidence base which underpinned the policies of the RSS is still valid. I attended the Examination in Public in Exeter when the RSS was being tested. It was full of flaws and at the time of the demise of the RSS there were still several thousand objections to the Strategy, many of which referred to the evidence base. 19. The Proof argues that the timing of the emerging Wiltshire Core Strategy should be a key factor in this appeal. The Proof complains about the length of the process and that it is unlikely to be adopted until late 2013/early 2014. It then speaks to the Neighbourhood Plan and the likely timescales for that. If the applicant was genuinely interested in “sustainable” approaches to community development, it would simply put its interests on hold and await the emergent Core Strategy and a fully-fledged Neighbourhood Plan. It would then have a robust basis for putting forward its housing interests. However, the applicant does not do this, rather it tries to push forward a development that no one in the parish actually wants before the Core Strategy and before the Neighbourhood Plan are compete. Now, why is that? 20. If the applicant is genuinely interested in community development, the applicant would stand up now and withdraw from this appeal [pause awaiting the applicant].