
And Rachel Yeomans, the Wiltshire Council planning case officer dealing with the application, has revealed doubts that exist within the council on the Manton Estate’s offer of a Nature Park to compensate the rebel residents for their loss of play facilities.
Ogbourne St Andrew Parish Council has told the council it opposes the change of use of what was agricultural land to a Nature Park and lists insufficient car parking, visitor safety and the fact that it is unknown who will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the site in the future.
“The site is a water meadow and floods at times,” the parish council adds. “We are concerned that any restrictions/works to the river Kennet could impact with flooding in the villages of Ogbourne Maizey and Ogbourne St Andrew.”
And it finally declares: “The general consensus of those at the meeting was that we would prefer that this site should be preserved in its natural habitat and left to nature.”
Mildenhall Parish Council, which had originally offered no objections to the multi-million pound scheme without knowing all the details, has since changed its mind.
Nigel Thompson, chairman of Mildenhall Parish Council, has now contacted planning officer Rachel Yeomans to object to the change of use of the agricultural land.
“We are delighted that both these Parish Councils have raised objections which confirm how flawed the whole proposal is,” Jayne Baker, spokeswoman for the Radley Wood residents, told Marlborough News Online.
“This shows that a wide range of people across the whole of Marlborough and the surrounding parishes are very concerned about this project.”
No date has yet been fixed for the Sangster scheme to be considered by Wiltshire’s Eastern Area Planning Committee, one reason being that the council is still awaiting to hear from other groups it has consulted, including more information from the council’s own legal team.
Rachel Yeomans, who was apparently unaware that the Manton Estate is currently up for sale at £26 million, points out the council’s Landscape Design Office had raised issues.
One comment on its response stated: “I remain to be convinced that the principle of changing the use from existing agricultural pasture to a Nature Park is either feasible or necessary.”










