A 350-home plan in Barkham that attracted more than 1,000 objections has been refused by Wokingham Borough Council’s planning committee.
Developer Berkley Strategic Land wanted to build 350 homes and provide land for a care home for council use on land off Blagrove Lane in Barkham.
The proposal was discussed and voted on by members of Wokingham Borough Council’s planning committee for almost three hours last night (September 11).
The meeting was also attended by many local residents part of the ‘Save Blagrove’ campaign, who had presented their objections to the plans.
A unanimous decision to block plans to build the homes was taken despite a recommendation for approval by council officers, who argued that although the location of the development was ‘not the most sustainable’ it also wasn’t ‘the least’.
Addressing the committee, Warren Dixon from Wokingham town council said: “As shown by the number of responses and attendance this evening, the town and local community oppose this development.”
The town councillor branded the application as ‘opportunistic’ and raised concerns that the development ‘substantially’ eroded the boundaries between Wokingham, Barkham, and Finchampstead.
Paul Tolen, speaking on behalf of the ‘Save Blagrove’ campaign, agreed that there was ‘huge resistance’ to the development in the Barkham area.
He said it was ‘baffling’ that officers were recommending approval – albeit conditional on a wide range of mitigation measures – and claimed that this was based on a ‘fear of the legal costs of an appeal’.
Council officers continually argued that the benefits of the scheme, which would provide affordable homes, a care home, and the retention of 26-football pitches worth of green space outweighed the negative impacts.
Elkie Russell, managing director of Berkley Homes, said that the 350 homes were ‘much-needed’ for Wokingham, and that they would be delivered as a ‘thriving new neighbourhood’.
Discussions by committee members centered around a large number of concerns.
One focused on transport and the potential reliance on cars, and the consequences this would have on surrounding roads.
Further debates were had over the fact that the site was not included in the council’s five year land supply – which sets out all of the areas the authority will build on.
But councillor Sam Akthar noted that if the committee refused the plans, they would be ‘turning away potentially families who need affordable housing’.
Eventually, the refusal decision was based on three concerns: impact on the countryside landscape, erosion between settlements, and the ‘principle’ of the development.
Following the meeting, a spokesperson for Berkley Homes said: “We are disappointed that the application was refused against officer advice and we are now reviewing our next steps, including whether to appeal.”
