A CONTROVERSIAL proposal for 71 new homes in Malmesbury has been scrapped after the developer withdrew its appeal, in what is being hailed as the first victory for the town’s Neighbourhood Plan.

Gleeson had lodged the appeal after Wiltshire Council’s rejection of its application for 71 homes at Filands, which has been an ongoing source of fiery debate in Malmesbury for years.

The development, which would also have seen the creation of a children’s play area and cycleways on greenfield land alongside the B4014, was met with widespread opposition when plans were first submitted.

The plans were rejected by the council last October but in February this year, Gleeson submitted an appeal.

Those opposed to the development argued that it did not fall within the parameters set by the Neighbourhood Plan, which details how the town can accommodate more housing in line with Wiltshire Council’s Core Strategy.

The strategy states that Malmesbury must accommodate 885 new dwellings by 2026; with 702 of those having already been built or received planning permission.

The remaining 183 dwellings fall within the NP’s objective of building 270 new homes.

The Neighbourhood Plan, which was finalised in 2015, calls for more than the minimum set out in the Core Strategy in order to meet the needs of the elderly, downsizers and first time buyers but also states that ‘our future community resilience means the right growth has to take place in the right place’.

Sites allocated for the required 270 homes in the plan include 170 homes at Backbridge Farm and Punters Farm which is adjacent to Malmesbury Primary School, as well as 50 homes at Burnham Hill and the surrounding area and 50 homes at Burnham House.

Roger Budgen, chair of planning on Malmesbury Town Council, said: “I am absolutely delighted, it is just further evidence that the Neighbourhood Plan is a robust document and it will continue to protect the town from unwanted development until 2026.

“They have withdrawn the plan as clearly, after analysis of all the evidence, they’ve decided that the application was unlikely to succeed.

"We put together a very strong rebuttal of their case and we believe that on reflection they considered it not worth pursuing.”

A spokesperson for Gleeson said: “We are disappointed at the delay in providing much needed housing in Malmesbury and look forward to working with the council and the community to provide additional housing in the near future.”