![Reading Festival has laid out its Look Out For The Planet pledge ahead of its return next week, bringing measures set to promote sustainability. Picture: Luke Dyson [LukeDyson.com]](https://wokingham.today/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Img1871502-360x180.jpg)
Councils in Berkshire should NOT be planning to build thousands of new houses in the countryside – that’s the claim made by countryside charity CPRE, writes Niki Hinman, local democracy reporter.
New research says Reading has 140 brownfield sites, 126.35 hectares, sufficient for 10,124 houses – the largest housing capacity in the county.
In rural West Berkshire, there are around 53 brownfield sites totalling 46.54 hectares, which it is claimed would allow building of 2,837 new homes without the need to build on any farmland or countryside at all.
And across Berkshire there are 359 such sites, which would be sufficient to build at least 21,000 homes.
In all the areas CPRE investigated, most brownfield sites either had no current planning permission for housing or, if they had permission, homes were not being built fast enough.
CPRE research shows that there are already more than enough brownfield (previously developed) sites in Berkshire to meet local housing needs, without the need to build on any farmland or countryside.
Its research says these sites have been logged by local councils in their Brownfield Registers, and yet several of Berkshire’s councils are still allocating large areas of countryside including Green Belt open spaces and farmland for housebuilding.
For example, Bracknell Forest Council has 22 brownfield sites on its register, 11 of which already have planning permission for housebuilding.
The amount of brownfield land totals 40.75 hectares in the district. This, says CPRE, is sufficient for 2,608 new houses; 1,580 already have planning permission.
The borough of Windsor & Maidenhead has 32 brownfield sites registered, covering 72 hectares, enough to build 1,808 new homes.
The charity also points out that the housing targets currently used by councils are no longer binding on them, due to a recent change of government policy.
This follows the statement in December by Levelling-Up and Communities Secretary Michael Gove that the Government no longer intends for its housing targets to be mandatory, merely ‘advisory’.
He committed to allow communities a bigger say on how many new houses are to be built in their areas, and where these houses should be built.
“When the housing numbers are no longer mandatory, and when there is already considerable potential for new homes to be built on brownfield sites, it is clearly wrong for local councils in our county to be offering up vast swathes of countryside to developers, especially Green Belt land and protected landscapes such as AONB [Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty],” said Greg Wilkinson, chairman of CPRE Berkshire.
“Despite developers pretending that planning constraints such as Green Belt are the obstacle to building the homes that people need, it is apparent from the latest CPRE report that this is not the case. The problem is that developers are just not interested in building houses on brownfield sites.”
Mr Wilkinson also pointed to the recently published report by the House of Lords committee on land use in England which had called for a national strategy and framework to make more efficient use of available land in town and country and to achieve a better balance between development and the environment.
CPRE’s State of Brownfield report calls for a range of measures to protect green fields, farmland and countryside, while boosting the development of social and truly affordable homes in areas where it is most needed.
Previous research has shown that development of the highest quality farmland has soared 1,000-fold in 10 years, while brownfield sites wait for regeneration.
Meanwhile, the demand for social housing is growing six times faster than the rate of supply in rural areas.
The West Berkshire Brownfield Register has a list of previously developed sites that are available and potentially suitable for housing development across the district.
“We note, and support, the preference for ‘brownfield first’,” said a spokesperson.
“The district does not benefit from vast quantities of brownfield, but since 2006 we have delivered 82 per cent of new development on brownfield land.
“Other brownfield land that does exist, such as that at Colthrop, has been fully investigated and found at this time to be unsuitable for development.”
What is a brownfield site?
Brownfield sites are land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. This excludes:
• Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings.
• Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures.
• Land in built-up areas such as private residential gardens, parks, recreation grounds and allotments.
• Land that was previously developed, but where the remains of the permanent structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time.
How is housing location allocated?
Brownfield sites sit under the council’s Housing Site Allocations framework –allocating non-strategic housing sites across West Berkshire.
It also shows two sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople (in Enborne and Aldermaston) and sets out residential parking standards and policies to guide housing development in the countryside.
It documents 26 allocated housing development sites across the district.
This forms part of the emerging and near complete Local Plan which is now out for public consultation for the last time.
Richard Somner (Con, Tilehurst South and Holybrook), executive member for planning, transport and countryside, said: “This plan is a green plan, a business friendly plan, a housing plan for our children and future residents and a good plan for West Berkshire.”
But opposition councillors think the plan is flawed, and being rushed through ahead of local government elections in May, which they say the current Tory administration in West Berkshire will lose.
The headlines are there are 9,000 new homes planned for West Berkshire in the timeframe of the plan, 1,500 of those in Thatcham.
The CPRE says the Green Belt and AONB should be protected and says councils should urgently revise housing numbers in their local plans.
West Berkshire Council welcomed the recognition by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities that genuine constraints in some local authority areas, such as West Berkshire, reduce the ability to deliver high numbers of new homes.
“Establishing a more reasonable housing target to reflect local constraints is a point which we have already successfully argued, and is reflected in a reduction of the district’s housing requirements by around 100 dwellings per year since 2009,” it said. “This equates to a reduction of more than 1,500 additional homes in the next Local Plan period.”
All site allocations are subject to a planning application. They mostly tack on to existing villages or areas of the district’s towns.
An example of one of the more rural settings is in Lambourn.
The council says the provision of approximately 60 dwellings off Lynch Lane are to be delivered at a low density in keeping with the surrounding area.
It says the development should ensure a mix and type of dwellings appropriate for the local area, taking into account the needs of the racehorse industry which has a specific need for affordable single person accommodation.
Then there are another five homes allocated to another patch of land on the edge of Lambourn, and up the road in Pangbourne another 35 homes.
Add another 30 on for the spot designtated for more homes in Woolhampton, 10 in Bradfield, 25 in Hermitage and so on and you get the picture.
Then there are the bigger developments in what might be considered rural villages, such as 140 homes on the former Pirbright site in Compton – which is a brownfield site. Plus, the infill ones, such as land at Speen in Newbury – big enough for another 100 homes.
West Berkshire Council says there is a presumption in favour of development and redevelopment within the countryside settlement boundaries of 40 settlements in the district – alphabetically from Aldermaston to Yattendon.
It presumes against new residential development outside of the settlement boundaries but says planning permission will not be granted where a proposal harms or undermines the existing relationship of the settlement within the open countryside
Exceptions to this are limited to rural exception housing schemes, conversion of redundant buildings, housing to accommodate rural workers, extension to or replacement of existing residential units and limited infill in settlements in the countryside with no defined settlement boundary.
The Local Plan Review is a long-term strategic document used to set out the vision and framework for the area’s future development for the next 25 or so years and in West Berkshire, it will be open for public consultation beginning on January 6, 2023, for six weeks.
