THE
COOKHAM
SOCIETY
Cherishing the Past
Protecting the Future
What We Do
The Society takes an interest in all matters affecting Cookham. These include planning applications and development, Green Belt, Conservation Areas, public open spaces, roads and parking, bridges, bridleways and footpaths, the riverside, waterways and flood risk, tree preservation, the environment and local services.
31st August 2024
IMPORTANT
THE COOKHAM SOCIETY IS URGING ALL RESIDENTS TO RESPOND TO THE AMENDED BELLWAY HOMES APPLICATION (AUGUST 2024) FOR 200 HOUSES IN COOKHAM (AL37).
Bellway Homes have updated their planning application for the site at Lower Mount Farm, Cannondown Road, Cookham. This is being presented as a response to the many objections from the public, the Cookham Society, the Parish Council and the RBWM’s own highways department. Members will recall that following the public outcry, RBWM rejected the original application.
There is little publicity about this amended application, which the applicant thoughtfully submitted in the summer holiday period! Also there are now so many documents (over 800) to compare to the original application, that we fear few people will have enough time to evaluate it fully and there is a risk that this huge and poorly designed development could slip through without a full response from the local community.
The Cookham Society has looked very closely at the documents and can advise that Bellway Home’s latest application has not addressed our, the Parish Council’s or the public’s objections.
We have noted the following:-
· The revised scheme is almost identical to the original with the only visible changes being a height reduction in a few cases from 2.5 storeys to 2.0, cosmetic tinkering with porches and roofing materials, plus a couple of additional cycle and pedestrian routes. –
- There has been a slight enlargement of gardens to the minimum required size and confirmed bin access. However, Bellway Homes are planning to build exactly the same number of houses, so the site will be even more congested.
· Parking problems do not seem to have been addressed and this plan still features parking with up to three cars parked in lines between houses. There remains just one exit and entry point to Cannondown Road.
· Objections to overall Layout and Design, Site Access, Parking, Foul Drainage, Surface water Drainage, Tenure, Bus Service, Speed Limits, Sustainability, Food Production and Cookham Area Traffic Overload have all been ignored by Bellway.
Cookham Deserves Better Than This.
To date the Society has submitted four very comprehensive letters of objection about AL37 to RBWM planning department. We believe that they provide a detailed analysis of our responses. For convenience you can download and view them here:
1st Objection letter 23-10-2023
2nd Objection letter 14-05-2024
3rd Objection letter 03-07-2024
4th Objection letter 20-08-2024
Make your voice heard too. You can find the applications for this 200-home development on the RBWM planning website using the following link and reference numbers. Please note that for some reason, Bellway have split the development in two, so your objection should reference both, as they are similar designs.
https://www.rbwm.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/find-planning-application
Ref. No: 23/02019 for160 houses
Ref. No: 23/02022 for 40 houses
You can apply online using RBWM planning portal or email direct to planning@rbwm.gov.uk., in which case remember to include the application numbers and your full contact details. You can also write a letter if you prefer. The official deadline for comments and objections is 5th September, although objections will be accepted up until the deciding RBWM planning meeting later in the year, which we hope many people will want to attend to make their feelings heard. That date is to be confirmed.
Please note that if you submitted an objection to the previous scheme with RBWM, you need to submit a NEW objection to this REVISED scheme.
September 2024
PUBLIC ACCESS OVER ODNEY WEIR -
THE EA RENEGE ON PROMISES
Following long and tortuous negotiations with the EA, we had finally begun to believe that we had their agreement to re-open Lock Island to the public. Regrettably, at our last meeting in July, the EA rowed back on their previous commitment and said that no further progress towards reopening could be made without their building a very tall, steel palisade fence on Odney Common, on the downstream side of the weir. They said that without it, they would not reopen access to Lock Island and, to add insult to injury, said that nor could they give a commitment to opening, even if the fence was constructed! Stakeholders had previously all agreed that waist-high fencing was all that was needed to prevent anyone accidently falling into the weir channel.
However, apart from the sheer ugliness of the project, the EA face significant obstacles to their proposed fence. Firstly, the fence cannot be screwed into the wall because that would damage the structural integrity of the concrete. Secondly, if the EA build it on the common itself, they will have to obtain prior permission from the Commoners who retain grazing and harvesting rights. They would also need permission from the landowner and finally, they will have to seek the agreement of the Parish Council, whose byelaws prohibit such building work anyway.
Working with the Parish Council and our RBWM Ward Councillors, we will continue to battle the Kafkaesque obstructiveness of the EA.
6th February 2024
UPDATE - BATTLEMEAD COMMON
Whereas last year's seasonal opening of the Causeway footpath from the West Field to the river was welcome the CS still has concerns with the management of Battlemead. We believe flooding risks are being created by the recent planting and fencing on the site. During flooding the White Brook which normally flows from the Thames to the Maidenhead Ditch and then into Maidenhead reverses and flows back across Widbrook Common and Battlemead and into the Thames. There are also large flows across the fields outside the White Brook channel. It is vital that this flow is unimpeded otherwise it raises flood water levels in the south of Cookham and particularly on the A4094 across Widbrook Common.
Unfortunately the recent January floods have proven that this build up of detritus really does hold back flow as the Society predicted.
We, in common with the Maidenhead Civic Society, are still concerned by the lack of availability of the site to the public for recreational purposes, and the lack of parking on site. We continue working for improvements.
April 2023
DESIGN AWARD 2022
Last year's Design Award winner was announced at the AGM. For report and pictures see the Design Award page.
May 2024
PROPOSED CREMATORIUM - THE SOCIETY RESPONDS STRONGLY
Architects Elegy Ltd have recently proposed building a crematorium at Long Lane, Cookham supposedly to serve the RBWM.
In a strongly worded letter to Elegy, the Society rejected the proposal, pointing out:-
-
No need for a crematorium was identified in the recent Borough Local Plan
-
Even if a need is proven, location in the furthest extremity of the Borough would be more than a little odd, encouraging yet more traffic movements in our area. We suggest a site near the new Oakley Green Cemetery between Maidenhead and Windsor would be more suitable.
-
Site access on Long Lane is inadequate especially cars using satnav from the west will use the single track with passing places.
-
The site is in a critically important part of the Green Belt where the narrow strip separating Cookham village from Maidenhead town is now under worrying pressure from nearby developments.
Finishing the letter, the Society requested Elegy not to waste our time and their own time in pursuing this inappropriate scheme any further
July 2024
AL37 BELLWAY SEWAGE COULD FLOOD COOKHAM HOUSES - UPDATE!
Well, well, following our post below and a couple of weeks after claiming that "the existing waste water infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate proposed flows from this development" Thames Water has responded to the Society's letter identifying a major fault with the system and has now admitted that the sewage Network is unable to support the new development.
That's a satisfying result but we will continue to monitor progress on this.
July 2024
AL37 BELLWAY SEWAGE COULD FLOOD COOKHAM HOUSES
The Cookham Society has identified a major problem with the application by Bellway to build 200 houses at Lower Mount Farm.
The RBWM Borough Local Plan contains a Site Specific Requirement to:-“Ensure that the sewer systems including treatment works will be reinforced prior to the occupation and use of the housing”.
Thames Water recently stated:- “Having reviewed the application and the latest drainage proposals, it has been determined that the existing waste water infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate the proposed flows from this development”.
However, we are aware of one major fault in the sewage system serving this site and that is the Lightlands Lane pumping station which serves the whole of Cookham but is currently only protected by sandbags!
It failed totally in the 2014 floods and again earlier this year. In both floods sewage backed up in the network causing loss of a functioning sewage system and escape of raw sewage. Low lying properties between AL37 and the pumping station are particularly vulnerable to sewage flooding, and this can only be worsened by an additional 200 houses discharging into the sewer system upstream of them.
Regrettably Thames Water confirm that no improvements to the pumping station flood resilience are currently planned and they are reluctant to even discuss technical issues with us.
The Cookham Society has now requested that RBWM forcibly challenge the statement given by Thames Water and ensure that the Site Specific Requirement for the sewer system is fully addressed prior to further consideration of the AL37 application.
*See update post above.
6th June 2022
APPLICATION 22/00343 - 25 DWELLINGS ON LAND EAST OF STRANDE PARK
The Cookham Society and many others have objected to this scheme for multiple reasons. Even RBWM’s flood advisors have recommended refusal of the scheme in its present form. We believe that this scheme should be totally withdrawn or very significantly modified by the developer before it is seriously considered for development.
