A barrister supporting a new building scheme says the number of affordable homes going up in Wokingham borough is far behind what is needed.
Rupert Warren was speaking for developers who want to build 200 homes on a green field in Hurst. Eighty of them would be ‘affordable homes’. He told the planning inquiry into the scheme:
“In Hurst there are hardly any dedicated affordable homes … and far from a mixed, rural community encompassing all kinds of socio-economic groups, it has moved far along the spectrum towards being a preserve of only a few.”
Wokingham Borough Council’s register last year showed 353 households were threatened with homelessness, and the council had 77 households in temporary accommodation, 57% up on the previous year, he said.
The number of affordable homes going up in the borough ‘lagged markedly’ behind what was needed. He said the Hurst plan’s affordable homes would be about 25% of the borough’s annual need.
The builders, Mactaggart and Mickel, are appealing against Wokingham Borough Council’s refusal of planning permission for the homes between Tape Lane and Lodge Road. The eight day inquiry finished last Friday. The appeal inspector’s decision is expected on or before April 3.
Over 400 people objected to the plan. Up to 50 Hurst residents a day went to listen to the arguments presented to the inquiry. Hurst Parish Council also objected to the plan.
Last Friday Mr Warren and the barristers for the parish and borough councils made their closing remarks.
Alex Shattock for the parish council said “Wokingham is doing very well at building the homes it needs. . .Wokingham has significantly boosted the supply of homes, in line with the government’s objectives.”
Large sites were coming forward in appropriate places. Bridge Farm in Twyford, a major development area, had just been approved for 200 homes. Wokingham had overdelivered homes in the past.
A plan for five homes at Lodge Road was rejected on appeal in 2020. The inspector then said it was “the wrong development in the wrong place”.
Mr Shattock said that if this was correct for five homes, it applied with more force to the 200 homes proposal.
The 200 Hurst homes would be eight times the number of new homes allowed in a limited development area like Hurst. It was the most inappropriate place for such a scheme, according to the borough’s development plan.
Mr Shattock said the only realistic travel option for many Hurst people was by car [which is discouraged by the Government]. The limited bus service was poor and unreliable and the new Elizabeth Line into London was slower than the usual train. The village had limited services and no doctor, dentist or large retail shop.
He said the harms of the new homes would significantly outweigh the benefits. Mr Warren disagreed with that, adding:
“The scheme would be a material change in Hurst, but the village would remain a wonderful place to live. It would just be that up to 200 more households, including 80 who at the moment would stand no chance of being able to live in Hurst, would be able to enjoy the place.”
