SPENCERS WOOD residents have called for developers to leave their village alone, after plans for a 34 home development was submitted.
On Friday, March 20, Oakford Homes of Buckinghamshire applied to build 34 new homes with 96 parking spaces and a play area on the 7.3 acres of land adjacent to North Lodge, on Basingstoke Road.
The plans include a two-storey block of flats, as well two, three, four and five bedroom detached and semi-detached houses.
And four flats and 11 houses will be allocated for affordable housing. But since the application was processed, more than 50 residents from Spencers Wood have opposed the plans.
Many were frustrated that the developer had made a second application for the site, after the previous plans were refused.
Stanbury Park resident, Richard Alan Crowe said: “Just over a year ago I was pleased to receive notification that a Planning Application for 39 dwellings on the land adjacent to North Lodge had been refused by WBC.
“Unfortunately a revised plan has now been submitted for the erection of 34 dwellings on the same parcel of land but in my opinion nothing material has changed and the application should again be refused.”
Residents criticising the plans have cited traffic congestion, loss of green space, noise and pollution, and inadequate infrastructure as reasons for the borough council to reject the plans.
Included in those is Jim Frewin, independent councillor for Shinfield South.
Speaking to Wokingham.Today, Cllr Frewin said: “My main concerns are that over 70% of Wokingham borough development in the last five years has been in Shinfield. “The village has tripled in size.”
Cllr Frewin said: “Planning documents say that the Shinfield infrastructure and road networks can take a capacity of 2,500 house and their associated cars.
“But there are now 3,500 homes approved for Shinfield, and another 400 in the pipeline.”Cllr Frewin is also concerned about how schools and GP surgeries will cope with more residents.
“Shinfield St Mary’s Junior School has changed from a little village school, to people who live a few minutes away having to take their children to schools in Woodley as it’s too full.
“You just can’t keep adding to the village. Our local doctors are brilliant but we’ve had GPs resign and move out of the area due to the pressures and stresses.
“There are meant to be about 1,300 people per GPs, but in Shinfield there are more than 2,500 people to each GP.”
Cllr Frewin alleges that the borough council have dumped new developments in the village.
“Wokingham Borough Council have concentrated most of the development on Shinfield,” he said.
“There’s been one or two developments in Remenham, none in Twyford and a few in Wargrave — that’s where most of the ruling party are.
“This is the reason I stood as a councillor.
“Previous and existing councillors on the executive asked developers to bring forward developments in Shinfield to meet the five year land supply.
“They’ve sold Shinfield down the river.
“And one councillor told me ‘You’re only a resident, there’s nothing you can do’”.
“We will fight these developments, but we’re a small voice against the ruling party. And the planning process is biased towards the developer too.”
“We agreed a neighbourhood plan, but most of the development has been on top of the agreed number.”
But John Halsall, leader of the Borough Council disputes Cllr Frewin’s claim that they have dumped new developments on the village.
Cllr Halsall said: “The borough is unfortunate, there is 13% green belt and 87% unprotected land. And the Wokingham borough is land prime for development.
“Everyone in the borough doesn’t want development — including me.
“And we’re now winning appeals against developers. Historically, we lost two significant appeals in Shinfield, but that’s in the past.
“It’s the misfortune of the location, none of the land is protected at all.
“Jim is reflecting on the current situation and conflating it with a potential future one.
“We’re working our socks off to make the borough less vulnerable to developments.”
Cllr Halsall also called for Shinfield residents to join the campaign to rural areas across the borough.
He said: “People in Shinfield say ‘why don’t you build on the greenbelt?’ But why would you remove protection from the one place safe from development?
“It doesn’t benefit anyone in the borough. “And it wouldn’t make any difference to the building proposed for Shinfield.
“Instead, I would like Shinfield to join the campaign to protect rural Wokingham.”
But hoping to protect their rural village from development, residents responding to the planning application said the added traffic would make morning commutes even worse.
Wellington Court resident, Helen Bouchami said: “When it takes 40 minutes at peak time to reach the motorway — as I recently experienced — you might as well be coming from Newbury.
“With these ever-increasing queues of idling vehicles comes noise and air pollution, it is a public health issue.”
But for many, the loss of village life was an overriding concern.
Edward Crowe said: “Spencers Wood is no longer the village I grew up in. Far too many houses are being built and then staying empty, for example the redevelopment of the old office block into houses that went on sale — with none being sold and are now up for rent.
“It used to be a quiet village with open spaces and they have both gone with too much traffic and open space being built on.
“When will it stop and for developers to leave a once small village alone.”
The application also includes plans to remove some trees and work around others.
Another Wellington Court resident, Roobee Mootyen said: “The Wellingtonia all have Tree Preservation Orders and by definition this should be grounds enough to stop this — as the roots will be damaged due to the soil being affected and water drawn.
“There is no mention of a three metre deep root barrier so how can this be a feasible development to protect property and the trees to avoid breaking the TPOs?”
Other environmental concerns include the newly expanded emergency planning zone area for the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Burghfield.
Basingstoke Road resident, Justin Robertson said: “The site now lies within the Detailed Emergency Planning Zone so any statements to the previous zones are erroneous and misleading and out of date.”
Also among those objecting was Jackie Rance, Conservative candidate for Shinfield South. Ms Rance was concerned about the disruption more construction would cause to Shinfield.
She said: “When not in lockdown the Basingstoke Road is incredibly busy at any time and this working site will be catastrophic for commuters, as well as worsening air pollution.”
