Bridge row rumbles on
West Berkshire Council has made a U-turn on its stance over the construction of a new bridge from Hambridge Road
THE row over the construction date of a new bridge from Hambridge Lane to the proposed new housing development at Newbury Racecourse, refuses to die down.
The latest development in the long dispute is that West Berkshire Council, which had originally sided with the developer, David Wilson Homes, has this week performed a u-turn and now appears to side with the detractors, including West Berkshire councillor Roger Hunneman (Lib Dem, Victoria) and Greenham Parish Council.
The construction of the bridge, seen as vital to alleviate construction and other traffic generated by the new housing development planned at the racecourse, was stipulated as a planning condition on the development, which will consist of 1,500 homes and a hotel.
The developer, however, claims the bridge does not have to be open until more than 250 homes are occupied, while the other side believes it has to be done at an earlier date, when the construction of the first 250 homes have been completed.
On April 19, West Berkshire Council spokesman Phil Spray said the council was firmly in agreement with the developers, saying: “The bridge will be completed prior to occupation of the first 250 houses.”
However, by Wednesday of this week, the council stance changed dramatically as Mr Spray confirmed to Newburytoday.co.uk that the condition placed on the planning application meant that the bridge had to be completed before 250 houses were constructed, rather than occupied.
There have long been concerns over the impact the development would have on local roads, with some Newbury town councillors in the past describing the potential congestion as “horrendous” and Greenham Parish Council accusing the developer of attempting to get out of the obligation to construct the bridge.
The developers appear to be sticking to their guns with spokeswoman Anne Toomey saying on Tuesday: “No more than 250 of the properties in the first phase will be occupied until the planned new bridge is opened.”
Mr Hunneman urged the council to make sure the terms are clear. He said: “The planning and legal department will have to clarify this with them (the developer), clearly there has got to be clarity on this important issue.”
The developer has so far declined to provide a firm date for the completion of the construction of the bridge, or even when the phase plan will be submitted and West Berkshire Council declined to comment on what steps will be taken to enforce the condition.
