PARISH councillors in Heytesbury have rejected a call to set up a sub-committee of villagers to work with the Sassoon Estate Trust on plans for a new village hall and 23 homes.

Local resident Anthony Wilson suggested they establish a sub-committee, answerable to the Raymond Trust, which was set up after the last village hall was sold.

He wants to gain a consensus across Heytesbury, on which would sit representatives of various local groups, to negotiate with the Sassoon Trust for a new village hall.

Mr Wilson said the move may be the last chance to secure a new hall and sports pitches for the village, just off the A36 near Warminster.

He said: “This is the last chance to strike a deal with the Sassoon trustees to gain the maximum gain for the village.

“A favourable parish poll was the one thing that could persuade the Sassoon Trust to give the village one more chance to strike a favourable deal.

“I have suggested to the Sassoon Trust that any planning application should be made by the Raymond Trust and I think the Sassoon Trust will insist on this as a condition of co-operation.

“It is up to the Raymond Trust to work with the village on a scheme and with the Sassoon Trust. To that end I suggest additional experienced trustees should be appointed to the Raymond Trust."

But at a parish meeting last week, councillors rejected his suggestion, although they did agree to write to the Sassoon Trust asking for talks to be re-opened.

In a recent parish poll, residents voted 139-115 to instruct parish councillors, who are also trustees of the Raymond Trust, to re-open talks with the Sassoon Trust.

The Sassoon Trust has offered to give Heytesbury a new village hall and two sports fields on 12 acres north of Park Street.

In return, it wants the village to support its plans for an enabling development of 23 new homes south of Park Street.

The parish poll instructed that Raymond Trust trustees should work “proactively and constructively” with the Sassoon Trust to deliver the scheme, which has bitterly divided the village.

The Sassoon Trust said that unless the village was prepared to back the scheme, it would sell off the land and work with a national property developer to put it to other use.

In the poll on October 3, Heytesbury residents voted 128-113 in favour, while 11-12 Knook residents voted to support the question. The total turn-out was 58.49 per cent.

The Raymond Trust was unable to buy land at the west end of Heytesbury to build a new village hall because it had already been sold prior to a public auction on September 12.

Even though the Trust had completed due diligence for the prospective purchase, it had been advised by Wiltshire Council it would be unlikely to gain planning permission for a new hall on the land.

Some villagers and some parish council members have objected strongly to the 23 new homes, saying it is not certain the Sassoon Trust will gain planning permission for them.

Cllr Vanessa Sturmey said: “Although I welcome the parish council respecting the parish poll result and agreeing to write to the Sassoon Trust owners of the parkland, it was a little unclear to me exactly what was going to be written. It was agreed to bring a draft letter back to a future meeting for consideration.

 “Unfortunately, the council could not agree on setting up a sub-committee to work with local people in order to find a consensus.

 “I know some residents are concerned about houses being built in the village but our recently completed housing needs survey has shown a minimum need of 11 affordable homes over the next three years. The previous plan put forward by the owners in 2017 included seven social homes for local people.

 “The Sassoon Trust have previously told the parish council it was their preferred option to dispose of their land whilst giving benefit to the community by way of delivering a village hall and giving the 12 acres including the sports fields to the community forever. The downside was going to be 23 homes including the seven social ones.

“The Sassoon Trust has always been clear that if this could not be achieved with parish support then its other option was to work with a national developer. I think if this were to happen it would be a terrible shame.”