News

Bulmershe redevelopment gets go ahead

By Jon Nurse
October 04, 2012

Hundreds of new homes will be built on the University of Reading's Bulmershe Campus after planning application was approved last night.

Wokingham Borough Council's planning committee gave plans the go ahead for the Woodley site despite several objections from councillors.

The approval is subject to a completion of a section 106 agreement and has also been referred to the National Planning Casework Unit, which could decide to call it in,

The university can now begin talks with developers for the empty academic buildings to be replaced with homes and for six of the student halls to be converted into apartments.

300 home Bulmershe plan to be decided

Close to 300 homes can be built on the 17-hectare site which will also have its playing fields enhanced and made available to the public.

A new sports pavilion, shops and a 60 to 80 bed care home are also planned for the site.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (11)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 11 of 11

Dudu, Reading, why is that good news? A genuine question, personally I reckon there's enough housing here...

N Tropy
08/10/2012 at 00:27

300 new houses is good news. Let's hope that the planners (miles away down in Wokingham) specify small properties, which are green in design, low-cost (mostly affordable or social housing) and either car-free or at least a maximum of one car per property.

Dudu, Reading
07/10/2012 at 22:26

The site had to go for housing, irrespective of what BCC intended in the 60's, because WBC has disposed of all its replaced schools (new on open space) for housing setting a planning precedent, but allowing them to spread the housing over current playing fields/open space and failing to provide the infrastructure in the form of a link road through to the A3290 to relieve the current and increasing traffic congestion on Woodlands Avenue and Church Road, is WBC incomptence. And no statement by the Council on where the considerable sec 106 'income' is to be spent (Wokingham?). Great pity, a bit of proper planning could have ensured this development did not add to current problems. Incidentally the Council used the same argument about traffic when I commented on Addington and Bulmershe changes/development. Clearly 'they' never ever drive down Woodlads Avenue at any time of day.

Old Man in the Moon, Woodley
05/10/2012 at 09:33

Are they going to turn woodlands avenue and Church Road into dual carriageways to be able to take the increase in traffic? Or build a road through Highwood and link it to the A329?

It may be needed and 300 houses but there is simply too much traffic in that area already, its a joke

whatshappenedtoReading
05/10/2012 at 09:01

As James says we need houses and even though the University is selling (and profiting from) land that was given to them by the community though Berkshire County Council most of the local councillors who spoke at the Planning Committee accepted the general concept of redeveloping of the existing "built area" for houses.

BUT

Woodley and Whitegates coucillors did object to the extension of the proposal onto the playing fields.

Personally I think the university is being greedy, but unfortunately WBC Planning Committee chose to cast aside their own policy to protect the green space between Earley and Woodley and gave approval

Olympic legacy?!?

The report from the Wokingham Borough Highway Officers made everyone at the meeting laugh when he said that a development of 300 houses will generate around 400 less cars leaving or arriving at the site between 8am and 9am each day than the university – Most students (and lecturers?) aren’t even awake at that time!”

Phil Challis, woodley
04/10/2012 at 15:22

Excellent news. Keep it coming though, many more houses required.

James Winfield
04/10/2012 at 13:11

Much the same as the 'educational covenant' which was on the old Highlands School buidings in Tilehurst. That plot has also now been sold to developers for housing.

Not worth the paper it's written on, unfortunately.