500-home plan for Thatcham to go to appeal

Inquiry sought after Siege Cross proposal thrown out

DEVELOPERS have taken another shot at building nearly 500 homes in Thatcham.

A2Dominion has appealed against West Berkshire Council’s decision to turn down its plans to build up to 495 homes at Siege Cross Farm.

The application included building a new primary school and community building on the site, which would be accessed off Floral Way.

The developer proposed relocating part of Francis Baily Primary School to the new school, thus freeing up space for Kennet School to expand.

The council disagreed, however, and rejected the plans because of the “clear and demonstrable harm” it believed it would have on education provision in Thatcham.

The council said that the new proposal was not acceptable and would likely meet significant resistance from Francis Baily pupils’ parents.

It also said that the Kennet School site is “significantly undersized and cannot support further expansion”.

The council added that development at Siege Cross could not mitigate the impact on secondary education in the town.

The developer said that the council’s strong statements were not warranted.

Appeal information from planning agents Barton Willmore states that: “The council has known for many years that Kennet School occupies a site that does not meet government guidance in terms of its size relative to the existing number of pupils in the school.”

It continues that the council has recognised, but not acted on, the matter, apart from in documents from 2013 which are now outdated.

Meanwhile, the council has started reviewing its secondary school education strategy for Thatcham.

Arguing that it would be many years before additional secondary school demand could be attributed to Siege Cross, the agents said there is no reason to delay approving the plans on the basis of the supposed education constraint.

The developer had also challenged the council’s housing supply figures.

The council said, however, that it could demonstrate a five-year housing supply and that Siege Cross was unnecessary and contradicted its development plan.

The site is also not included in the council’s development plan document (DPD), which identifies preferred housing sites across the district.

A2Dominion has argued that the DPD fails to significantly boost the supply of housing in the district.

It added that an up-to-date housing plan for the district would not be published until 2019.

The council also said that Siege Cross would erode the identity of Thatcham and the surrounding rural settlements, while producing clear and demonstrable harm to the landscape.

A2Dominion argues this would not be the case as the woodland and fields surrounding the site created a “robust separation” between Thatcham and Upper Bucklebury.

Furthermore, it claims that the landscape would be enhanced through additional trees being planted.

The developer has asked for the appeal to be heard at a public inquiry, at a date yet to be confirmed.