MARLBOROUGH College headmaster Edward Gould and the school's council have been accused of using bullying tactics in their successful planning application for a new sports pavilion.

Kennet District Council voted by a majority decision by last Thursday in favour of the two-storey pavilion, which will be situated behind the existing cricket pavilion on playing fields in an area of outstanding natural beauty.

However, three councillors voted against the plan, accusing the school of a total lack of diplomacy over its refusal to back down on the positioning of the sports pavilion.

Several weeks earlier the town council had voted unanimously to object to the proposed siting of the pavilion, but its recommendation which carries no authority over the decision made by district council planners was overridden by Kennet.

The town council and other objectors, including some of the school's senior staff, had implored the public school to modify its plan by moving the new building to one side where its appearance would be lost against a background of trees.

The school which charges tuition fees of £19,000 a year agreed to modify its plans by adding a new gable and balcony to make the appearance of the building more interesting and lower the height by two and a half metres to that originally proposed.

It also conceded to some extent on the objection that it would be visually intrusive in the landscape and included soil banks and landscaping at the sides to partly screen it.

However, the college refused to resite the proposed building to a less conspicuous location which both Marlborough Town Council and Kennet's planning committees requested.

On Thursday, members of Kennet District Council's regulatory committee were upset by the school's threat that if its plans were refused it would lodge an appeal.

An officers' report to the committee stated: "Marlborough College recognises the sensitivity of the area of outstanding natural beauty and the open countryside location but considers that the playing fields are very much a man- made environment which in order to operate must be accompanied by attendant machinery stores, scoreboards, crickets covers, sight screens and pavilions which inevitably will, and do, result in an impact on the landscape.

"The college consider that moving the proposed pavilion to the location suggested will not meet their needs and as such request that the application is determined on the basis of the submitted drawings.

"If it is refused they have advised that they will appeal against the decision."

Councillors were aware that as their own officers had recommended granting consent for the new sports pavilion they would have very little chance of justifying a refusal at a planning appeal.

Coun Peter Colling said sportsfields needed pavilions where people could change and added: "I can't see any argument with this."

Coun Dominic Campbell said: "If we do go against the officers' recommendation there is a real threat of an appeal."

Coun Patricia Courtman said she did not like the direct threat from the school that if the council refused the plans it would lodge an appeal.

She said: "I am sorry our officers have not been a bit more tough with them. I do not like their attitude but it is, I am sorry to say, an attitude typical of this particular educational establishment."

Coun Jerry Kunkler said the council would always support the school's efforts to get better sporting facilities.

But he said in its proposed location the pavilion would "create a small scar on the landscape,"

He said: "What I do object to is that Marlborough College is trying to bully us with this threat that it will appeal if we do not agree."

Committee chairman John Booth said: "People's hackles do go up when someone says they will smack you unless you do as they say."

The planning committee voted with eight in favour of approving the college plan and three members, councillors Cavill, Courtman and Skittrall, objecting.