PLANS to demolish two houses in Chilmark and replace them with six houses have been turned down by Wiltshire Council.

The plans involved the demolition of two large detached houses in Cow Drove that date from the 1960s and the construction of four five-bedroom homes and a pair of three-bedroom semi-detached homes.

Councillors at the Southern Area Planning Committee on Thursday said it was “overdevelopment” of the site and in refusing the application went against the planning officer’s recommendation for approval.

The application, submitted by Andrew Bracey, provoked strong opposition in the village with 61 representations against the development compared to two in support of the scheme.

Objections included flooding concerns, a lack of justification for the demolition of the two houses on site, the executive-style housing and the lack of infrastructure and amenities to support a new development.

In raising their concerns to Wiltshire Council, Chilmark Parish Council states: “Given Chilmark’s uncontested status as a small, unsustainable village it is clear from the developing thrust of Wiltshire Council planning strategy that development in the village should be limited to infill.

“Such a proposal as this could not be described or defined as ‘infill’. Infill should normally involve the addition of one dwelling between two houses not a net addition of four houses in relation to only two ones.”

Those in support of the plans highlighted the traditional design of the proposed new housing which would replace the “poorly designed” existing homes on an “under-utilised” site.

Mr Bracey told councillors each plot would be a third of an acre in size and that the development was sustainable due to the existence of a primary school, a church, a pub and bus stops.

In a report on the application prepared by Wiltshire Council case officer Lucy Minting, it states the proposed re-development of the site would “maintain the special and verdant rural character of the site” and prominence of the nearby Grade-II listed Black Dog Inn.

However councillors who voted against the plans seven to three said it could not be regarded as infill and was overdevelopment.