Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Allowed4 August 20223280255

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Council cannot demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply and the most important policies for determining the appeal are out-of-date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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.