®Planning appeal decision
Land at the Rose Garden, Easthampstead Road, Wokingham, Berkshire, RG40 3AL
demolition of existing outbuilding and erection of a single detached dwellinghouse and car port
- Authority
- Wokingham Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Pipkin R
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the appeal site is a suitable location for a dwelling having regard to local and national planning policy for the delivery of housing
- the effect of the proposed development on a heritage asset
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
What decided it
The proposal would cause significant harm to the setting of a designated heritage asset and would constitute an isolated dwelling in the countryside contrary to the development plan, with no material considerations outweighing these conflicts.
The public benefits of providing one additional market dwelling are negligible and do not outweigh the less-than-substantial harm to the heritage asset; the tilted balance does not apply due to heritage harm; the proposal would result in a countryside dwelling with car dependency and significant harm to character and appearance.
Framework references: 11, 80, 202
Plan policies cited: Policy CP1, Policy CP3, Policy CP6, Policy CP9, Policy CP11, Policy CC01, Policy CC02, Policy CC03, Policy CC08, Policy TB21, Policy TB24
Judgments cited: Braintree DC v SSCLG, Greyread Ltd & Granville Developments Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 610; City & Country Bramshill Limited v SSHCLG and others [2021] EWCA Civ 320
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.