Plans to build a housing development in Wokingham Without have been refused as ‘inappropriate unplanned development’ in the countryside.
Property developer Ashridge Land wanted planning permission to build six new homes at St Sebastian’s Close, off Nine Mile Ride.
Council planning officers said: “The proposal represents inappropriate unplanned development outside of, and unconnected to, any development limits within the countryside.”
The officers also said the location was in an ‘unsustainable location’ residents would have to rely on cars.
Solve Planning Consultants argued the plans should be approved as the development is close to other housing, and that any loss of green field land would be on private property.
It said most trees would be retained, and there will only be ‘limited encroachment’ into the woods.
Solve also said the development would be sustainable, as it is near schools, doctors and transport links in Crowthorne.
It said the development would provide “much needed, sustainably located new market housing close to nearby settlements”.
It added the site was in “an established built-up area comprising predominantly residential development”.
And it argued that as the council doesn’t have a plan to supply houses over the next five years, it should add extra weight to approving the development.
National planning rules say if a council doesn’t have a five-year housing land supply it should only refuse permission if the harms ‘significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits’.
But planning officers said the reason Wokingham Borough Council doesn’t have a five-year supply is that it has over-delivered in previous years – meaning there are fewer remaining approved developments to come.
They said this”‘tempered’ the weight they should give towards approving the new application.”
The officers also said the development would mean a loss of trees, plants and the green gap between existing housing and the countryside.
They said: “The erection of six dwellings on this relatively small site is considered an overly intensive form of development in this countryside location.
“The development results in the substantial loss of vegetation and trees on site, and would effectively eliminate the green gap between the existing residential development and the recreational fields and open countryside further north.”
The officers also said access to facilities and services would be poor. They said: “The site is outside of and unconnected to any settlement. The nearest settlement is Crowthorne.
“The site is not within walking distance to any facilities within the settlement except for a primary/nursery school and a bus stop which has limited services.”
They added: “Alongside the fact that the majority of amenities and facilities are outside of walking distance from the site, the walking environment is also poor.”
The council formally refused to grant planning permission on Friday, June 7.
