Campaigners in West Reading are celebrating this week’s news that Thames Water have withdrawn controversial plans to build over 100 homes on the site of the Bath Road reservoir in the face of sustained opposition from residents, local councillors and Reading West MP Martin Salter.

Plans due to be submitted to December’s planning committee of Reading Borough Council were hastily shelved when it became clear they would be rejected. Thames Water’s proposals far exceeded the original planning brief for the site, while the proposed development paid little attention to the environmental and biodiversity issues raised by the campaigners.

Local Councillor Paul Gittings said:

“This was a dogs dinner of an application which would have had an adverse impact on adjoining residents and was quite rightly recommended for refusal by RBC planners. If this is the best Thames Water can come up with I am very confident that any future plans will also be rejected.”

Martin Salter added:

“Back in March I put forward a compromise proposal to Thames Water which would have allowed some development on the front of the site where the existing buildings are located but retained the land at the rear as a wildlife reserve. Stupidly Thames Water rejected this idea in favour of trying to cram as many homes on to the land as possible.  I now trust that they will take a more reasonable approach and listen carefully to the views of local residents whose quality of life could be seriously affected by what eventually happens to this unique site.”

Mel Woodward from the Save the Bath Road Reservoir Committee said:

“The planning application contravened the planning brief for the site, rode roughshod over the feelings of the local community and went against views of all local councillors and MPs.

We are pleased that Thames Water have now withdrawn their application (though have some concerns that so much money raised from our water rates has been used in the process).

We would now like Thames Water to completely reconsider their plans for this unique site, and come back with a proposal which recognises the need for open green space in the area, the biodiversity of the site, and the views and wishes of the local community.

Hopefully this can be an example of the public’s views being respected and listened to.  Thames Water should now live up to their own statement of “putting the environment and the community at the heart of everything we do”.  We would be delighted to meet with Thames Water representatives to discuss future proposals for the site.”