Thatcham planning news in brief

Plans for a new takeaway, 12 homes at the "gateway" to the town and five houses on farmland have all been refused

THATCHAM is not getting another takeaway after planning permission was refused by West Berkshire Council.

David Snell Planning on behalf of Arda Turan applied for permission to turn a taxi office into a hot food takeaway at 34 High Street, Thatcham.

After being referred to West Berkshire Council's Eastern Area planning committee because there were 10 letters of objection, it was refused on the grounds that it lies directly below a residential property, because the position of the flue would be harmful to living conditions

because of fumes and that the noise was recorded as nine decibels above the background noise.

PLANS for 12 homes at the "gateway" to Thatcham have been refused by West Berkshire Council.

The plans were submitted by Ressance (formerly Renaissance Habitat Ltd) to demolish a building in Bath Road and build 12 flats.

West Berkshire Council refused the application, however, owing to the size of the development, which it said extends beyond local planning policy and would lead to an element of overshadowing of the key amenity space in the late afternoon.

Thatcham Town Council had also objected to the development on the grounds that they considered it an overdevelopment, out of keeping with the setting and character of the entrance to Thatcham, detrimental to highway safety and because there would be a lack of private space.

Five letters of objection were submitted by members of the public and their concerns included loss of trees, increase in noise and intrusion of privacy.

PLANS for a courtyard development of five detached houses in Thatcham have been refused. Members of West Berkshire Council's Eastern Area Planning Committee agreed with planners recommendations to refuse the development at Elizabeth Farm, Thornford Road, which is to include garages/home offices.

Grounds for refusal included concerns for the sustainability of the site given its location and

because of its scale, bulk and overall appearance.

Five letters of objection were submitted with concerns including that it would be overdevelopment and inappropriate.

Eight letters of support were received.

Previously, an application to build three houses on the same site had been approved.