WOKINGHAM will continue to fight unwanted developments despite a planning inspector recently declaring the council did not have a five-year land supply.
The decision was revealed when they approved an appeal to build four homes in Hurst, leading to fears that it could give developers open season on building homes in the borough.
Councils need to prove they have allocated enough housing to meet government targets for a five-year period as part of the local plan process. If they cannot, often the planning inspector will rule in favour of the developer.
Wokingham Borough Council is in the process of updating its local plan, detailing where developments will go up to the year 2036.
However, the plan has faced difficulties.
Originally, it had been hoped to build a garden town in Grazeley, on land that Sir John Redwood once planted an oak tree as a sign that the village would never be developed on.
But the Ministry of Defence rejected the plan as the site would be too close to the AWE plant in Burghfield.
A new plan was unveiled, including building homes on Hall Farm in Shinfield, and underwent its first round of consultation earlier this year. This plan was devised by the Conservatives and included many controversial sites, including Rooks Nest in Finchampstead, and mentioning Pinewood Leisure Centre in Wokingham Without, leading to speculation that it could be developed, something former council leader Cllr John Halsall denied at the time.
The new Lib Dem-led minority administration is now working on a revised local plan, with residents campaigning against Halls Farm calling for the land to be written out altogether.
Cllr Lindsay Ferris, Wokingham Borough Council’s executive member for planning and local plan, said the absence of a five-year housing land supply doesn’t mean the council had no ability to resist inappropriate development.
“In this situation, if areas aren’t specially protected by national planning policy, national policy says that planning applications should be approved unless their adverse effects would ‘significantly and demonstrably’ outweigh the benefits,” he said.
“We’ve got to bear this in mind when deciding applications or defending appeals against our refusals, of course, but it doesn’t mean we can never refuse development – nor that we’re certain to lose planning appeals from now on.”
He added that the approval for the four homes in Hurst was “deeply disappointing”, but the council had won appeals in Shinfield and Arborfield.
“Nonetheless, this scenario shows why the planning system needs reform, which we’re lobbying the Government very hard for. Far from having failed to plan for new housing, the amount of housing completed across the borough has met all requirements,” Cllr Ferris said.
“Unfortunately, much of this has been completed earlier than we wanted, so our supply of land with outstanding planning permission has been reduced. Because national planning rules won’t let us take this into account when calculating what’s likely to be built in the next five years, we’re effectively being penalised for delivering housing ahead of schedule.
“This cannot be right, which is why our main focus is on reforming the system so all communities are treated fairly. We’re urging Greg Clark MP, Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, to visit us and discuss these issues in person after his predecessor Michael Gove promised to do so earlier this year.
“We know we must plan for some new housing in the borough to meet our communities’ needs and aren’t opposing it entirely. Residents should be assured that we’re doing all we can to make the planning system better and new development work in their favour.”
