PLANS to revitalise Corsham's town centre shopping precinct are set to be thrown out, because developers want to build a car park on a graveyard.

Planning officers at North Wiltshire District Council have recommended the plans be refused and councillors were due to make a decision at a meeting last night.

Officers were worried the construction of a car park and the removal of historic walls would spoil the setting of the Grade II listed former United Reformed Church.

Some residents had protested about the car park plan because they had family members buried in the graveyard.

But Coun Roger Fido, chairman of Corsham Town Council, said he was confident members would approve the plans.

"It's a storm in a teacup," he said.

"English Heritage has said it doesn't like it, but this needs to be put into perspective.

"It's only about a tenth of the area of the graveyard which would be used for the car park. It's just a tiny corner of it. Most will be made into a seating area. As far as I can see there is not a single tombstone in that area."

He said the car park plan would mean buried human remains would not be disturbed, as the digging required for a car park would not reach burial level.

Developers Castlefield Land and Springfield Properties have submitted an application to extend the Somerfields supermarket, including a lift access tower.

They want to convert the church into two food and drink outlets, to alter and extend the car park and build a new toilet block.

The plans also include building two new shops and extending another, with new shop fronts for the existing stores and glazed canopies over the precinct.

The Town Council wanted the plans approved but suggested amendments, including adding taxi ranks to Post Office Lane and relocating the toilets.

Corsham Civic Society was also concerned about the siting of the toilet block, and was unhappy at the removal of the graveyard walls.

Six local residents wrote to the district council, complaining that the Somerfield service area was exposed and the elevations were not attractive.

They protested about the loss of trees, and one resident objected to the building of the car park because of the burial of family members in the graveyard.

Planning officers were not enthusiastic about the scheme either, describing it in a report as 'more of the same.'

They said the large Somerfield extension presented a cheerless aspect to the car park.

In their report they suggest the scheme would enhance the Conservation Area only by refreshing the tired appearance of the existing buildings.