Planning appeal decision
Land at junction of Sawpit Road and School Road, Hurst, Reading, RG10 0DR
the erection of 2 detached four-bedroom dwellings and 2 semi-detached three-bedroom dwellings, together with associated site access, car parking, home offices and landscape
- Authority
- Wokingham Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Normington S
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposal is in a suitable location for housing having regard to national planning policies, the Council's spatial strategy for new housing and housing land supply
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
- Whether the proposal is in a suitable location for housing having regard to the accessibility of services, facilities and to the reliance on motor vehicles
- The effect of the proposed development on trees
- The effect of the proposed development on biodiversity
- Whether the proposed development makes sufficient provision for affordable housing
- Whether there are any material considerations which mean that the decision should be made otherwise than in accordance with the development plan (Planning Balance)
What decided it
The Council's inability to demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply, which triggered the tilted balance and meant that the benefits of housing delivery significantly outweighed the moderate harms to character, appearance and spatial strategy.
The benefits of delivering 4 new homes and a significant affordable housing contribution (£175,342.48) significantly outweigh the moderate harm to landscape character, visual impact and conflict with spatial strategy policies, in circumstances where the Council cannot demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply and the most important policies for determining the appeal are out-of-date
Framework references: 11, 48, 54, 56, 61, 64, 79, 174, 179, 180, 203
Plan policies cited: CS Policy CP1, CS Policy CP3, CS Policy CP5, CS Policy CP6, CS Policy CP7, CS Policy CP9, CS Policy CP11, MDD Policy CC02, MDD Policy CC03, MDD Policy TB21, MDD Policy TB23, MDD Policy TB26
Judgments cited: Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v SSE [JPL 1982P37]
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.
®