Letters of objection

69 letters received (although 3 properties have submitted two letters with different names) and the objections are summarised as follows:-

(1) Principle of development

1. The application for the science park and overbridge is premature because the Wokingham Core Strategy has not yet been accepted
2. No evidence to suggest that the Development SPD for the science park has been adopted
3. Development is contrary to the south east plan as it is not in a town centre or established employment area. There are sites such as Green Park and Suttons Business Park that are better located
4. Development will create jobs that will lead to more pressure on housing and commuting
5. New development will be highly visible and will reduce the green wedge between Shinfield and Lower Earley.
6. Don’t want any more development
7. Why are all phases of development not available for comment?
8. Change to character of landscape/ loss of countryside/agricultural land
9. Should stop building on greenfield and find suitable brownfield site
10. University has plenty of buildings that could be refurbished or demolished to provide science park
11. Back door for the council to build thousands more houses
12. 4 different proposals being shown
13. Landscape capacity study, landscape and gap should apply to science park as well as houses. Questionable how locating a science park beyond the ridgeline is consistent with the ridgeline is consistent with the councils assessment.
14. Not enough landscaping, should be more planting along the edges of roads and the bridge
15. Four storey development is contrary to the character of the village
16. University have totally ignored all suggestions and comments by local residents
17. Green Park still has vacant units and science park could be located there
18. Adequate room for the development at Whiteknights
19. Other possible sites for a science park
20. Residents do not want a Science Park with coffee houses and pizza parlours
21. Will the units actually get occupied given the recession
22. In spite of the fancy name this will become an industrial site of which there are enough already and many are standing empty

(2) Impact on amenity

1. Reduction in drainage and increase in flooding
2. More hardstanding and runoff will add to historic flood problems
3. More noise and air pollution
4. More light pollution
5. Views will be spoilt
6. Construction noise and dust over a 25 year period
7. View of three storey buildings will devalue house
8. Overlooking from new buildings
9. Buses will overlook into private houses in Cutbush Lane
10. Children safe in almost village location
11. Brought property because of semi rural location
12. Increase in crime
13. Stretched facilities eg, medical, educational and recreational
14. Concerns about health
15. Loss of value

3) Listed Buildings

1. Lane End Farm is a grade II Listed Building which will be located in the middle of a roundabout
2. Isolation of Lane End Farm inside a busy noisy fume generating gyratory system. Encircling a listed building with a road system is inappropriate and detrimental to the character of the village.
3. Development close to Badger Farm complex with its listed buildings
4. Badgers Farm Cottages do not have deep foundations and will suffer from traffic
5. Listed Buildings and ancient woodland should be preserved in a more sympathetic and respectful setting
6. Listed buildings in a state of disrepair  

4) Wildlife/Ecology

1. Impact on badger territory
2. Loss of wildlife and habitat
3. Hedgerow is rich in bird and insect life
4. Landscaping proposals introduce alien plant species
5. Proposed landscaping is inadequate
6. Loss of trees
7. Rabbits, badgers, bats and deer in the fields
8. Would like clarification on what badger foraging sward and open glades would look like
9. Concerns that flaws in methodology of environmental studies.
10. Environmental reports highlight a large number of wildlife and ecology issues

5) Highways

1. Impact on road safety
2. Increase in traffic causing delays for commuters travelling into Reading
3. Cutbush Lane is not wide enough to accommodate buses safely and totally inadequate for transport needs of the proposal
4. Black Boy roundabout congestion is already bad enough
5. Foot/cycle path shown on some plans with road as well – is it a path or road?
6. Dog walkers, cyclists. Pedestrians in Cutbush Lane will be affected by increase in traffic and loss of countryside
7. Car parking should be at least 10 minutes walk from the offices to discourage automatic use of cars
8. Where will bus stops along Cutbush Lane be located
9. New bridge over M4 is to open up large tracts of farm land for development
10. 2400 cars per day while current usage is 393 cars per day,  so 5 times the current level of traffic
11. Separate filter lane of roundabout to enter Cutbush Lane destroys more green space and breaks cycle/footpath
12. A pedestrian would have to cross 3 crossings to get to Black Boy pub
13. Road proposals far in excess of what is actually necessary
14. Proposed access via yet another motorway bridge outletting onto an already difficult and busy roundabout is unnecessary when there is already a disused bridge to the east
15. Do not want any buildings until a bypass is planned
16. Provisions to increase public transport, cycling etc will not reduce car trips
17. More traffic confusion
18. Phase 1 roundabout has a spur that goes into a field and has no use or purpose
19. Application for the Shinfield relief road has already been refused
20. Support the idea of a new M4 overbridge and a relief road but don’t believe the current plan offers the preferential placement for either.

(6) Conditions requested should development be allowed

1. No development should take place until new motorway bridge and associated road structure has been completed
2. Highways Agency agreement to the bridge and a firm contract date for completion
3. Any gyratory system scheme to fit with the motorway crossing
4. No construction traffic should be allowed to enter the site through the village or via the Cutbush Lane/Brookers Hill junction. All construction traffic should enter the site via a dedicated access rout and there should be restriction to prevent this during peak hours (07:30 -09:00 and 17:00 – 18.30)
5. No construction vehicles to use Shinfield Road/ Cutbush Lane
6. The construction hours should be reduced to 08:00 – 17:30 Monday to Friday and no construction on Saturday.
7. Suitable landscaping and sound barriers to be provided to the residents of the David Wilson Homes built in 2005 on land previously owned by the university
8. Suitable landscaping should be provided for existing residents to minimise the impact and reduce noise and loss of privacy
9. No building higher than 2 storeys – in keeping with Parish and residents wishes

Letters of support

2 letters of support received and the comments are summarised as follows:-

1. College of Estate Management (CEM) has students specialising in estate management and whilst independent, the college has a close relationship with the University of Reading and fully supports the proposals
2. The proposals is consistent with the recently approved Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East Region and the emerging Wokingham Core Strategy
3. It will provide the University with the opportunity to develop a strong interface between academic research and business, this will not only make sound sense in terms of the research base of the University but will bring important economic spinoff benefits to the Thames Valley economy
4. Consider that with its associated works to provide a new bridge over the M4 the site at Cutbush Lane is ideally located in terms of access to the main university campus, the centre of Reading (via enhanced public transport) and the wider motorway network
5. Also benefits in the establishment of a Science and Innovation Park adjoining Shinfield Grange which is used by the college for face to face teaching and short courses for distance learning students and it would enhance the attraction of the location if it is situated next to the Science Park with its range of services, facilities and enhanced public transport
6. See the Science Park and the existing CEM facilities at Shinfield Grange becoming an education and business hub focussed on Cutbush Lane. Such an outcome would accord with the medium term objectives of CEM to expand and upgrade its premises at the Shinfield Grange campus to meet the growing demand for real estate and construction education in the 21st century.
7. Support this application to bring new jobs to Reading. In addition it does not seem inappropriate given the surroundings

Shinfield Parish Council
Comments as follows:-

1. Fully support the Core Strategy policy of retaining the separation of settlements and concerned at siting of such a significant development in the green gap separating Shinfield Village and Lower Earley
2. Consultation Draft Parish Plan provides plentiful evidence of our communities support fro retaining such separation of settlements and understood it to be a key element of WBC’s Core Strategy
3. Appears from the phasing programme that the proposed building of the new link over the M4 to the Black Boy roundabout will follow on some months after the commencement of construction and call for this infrastructure provision to precede such major construction activity to mitigate the adverse impact of construction traffic on the residents of Cutbush Lane
4. Call for a condition for the start time of construction activities to be 8am not 7am
5. Concerns expressed by local residents at the apparent proposal for the routing of buses past Cutbush, a listed building with foundations that are unlikely to survive such inappropriate abuse
6. Local residents are also claiming that paragraph 4.76 of CP17 of the WBC Core Strategy has not been fulfilled with regard to pre application consultation
7. A further major concern expressed by members is the proposed level of the roundabout linkage to the prospective eastern relief road. Were this to materialise at some future date it is most important that proposed levels of this early element of such a scheme should not compromise the crossing of Cutbush Lane. Past proposals for a relief road had to be modified in order to accommodate a satisfactory intersection and our members are most anxious that the highway team take this into account in their assessment of this particular proposal
8. Call for the assessment team to ensure that the integrity of the local footpath and cycleway network is enhanced rather than compromised by these proposals
9. Given the extent of buildings and car parking areas anxious that there is careful assessment of run-off provision for rainwater to mitigate the impact and minimise the risk of flooding in the wider susceptible area adjoining the Lodden
10. Anxious that the integrity of Lane End Farm is not compromised both with regard to the Listed farmhouse itself as well as the fine brick built buildings within its curtilage

Earley Parish Council
- No specific comments to make but remain extremely concerned about the additional traffic which will be generated by all the new development proposed in this area

If you think anything has been missed, then please add you comment below or email SRAG directly