70 homes at Land West of Kidmore End Road, Emmer Green

70 new homes near Reading

Outline permission was sought for up to 70 homes, including affordable housing, with new access, parking and landscaping, on part of a former golf course next to Reading.

“Outline planning application for the development of up to 70 homes (including affordable housing), new vehicular access, associated parking and landscaping (all matters reserved except for access)”

“The site was located at the edge of the district, adjacent to Reading Borough Council. All proposed homes would be within South Oxfordshire, with vehicular access running through land in Reading. The site comprised part of a former golf course, with the Reading section having received permission for 223 homes in 2020, which were under construction by Bovis.”

Minutes

Open space and access plans

New homes would sit to the west, with sloping land to the east kept as public green space, accessed through the neighbouring Reading development.

“Officers explained that land in the same ownership as the applicant would be opened to the public for recreation. Plans indicated that new homes would be located to the west, while the sloping land to the east would remain as green space. Vehicular access would be via the Reading development, with an emergency access and pedestrian links identified.”

“Members were shown how the development would relate to existing housing in Reading and noted that the site was contained by a tree belt known as Cucumber Wood. An area to the north would be opened to the public with a circular walking route, secured through a Section 106 agreement. This would provide recreational benefits and up to 40%”

Minutes

Policy conflict against a housing shortfall

The scheme conflicted with the development and neighbourhood plans on landscape and settlement separation, but the council's housing land shortfall triggered a tilted balance in its favour.

“The scheme was contrary to the development plan and neighbourhood plan policies, as it was not an allocated site and conflicted with policies on infill, valued landscapes and settlement separation. However, the Council could not demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, meaning paragraph 11(d) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) applied. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF was also relevant but did not override the tilted balance.”

“Officers considered the site to have a strong relationship with Reading’s built-up area and to be in a sustainable location with access to services and transport. The delivery of affordable housing carried significant positive weight, alongside recreational and biodiversity benefits. Landscape impacts and limited reduction in physical separation between settlements weighed against the scheme, but officers concluded these could be mitigated.”

Minutes

Officers recommended approval

Officers concluded the scheme would deliver a sustainable pattern of growth and a valuable housing contribution, and recommended approval with conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

“In conclusion, officers advised that despite conflict with some policies, the development would provide a sustainable pattern of growth and make a valuable contribution to housing supply. Officers recommended approval subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement.”

Minutes

Parish council and the agent spoke

A councillor spoke for Kidmore End Parish Council and the applicant's agent spoke in support of the application.

Members weighed harm against housing need

Members questioned sustainability, infrastructure and biodiversity, then argued the proposal's harm to the landscape, settlement separation and the neighbourhood plan outweighed the housing benefits officers had identified.

“Members asked about the landscape impact and the relationship with the Kidmore End Neighbourhood Plan. Officers acknowledged that the site fell within a locally valued landscape and conflicted with policies on infill and settlement separation but considered that the site was well contained and mitigation measures would limit harm.”

“Members also asked about the planning balance and the weight given to housing need. Officers explained that the Council could not demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, meaning the tilted balance under paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF applied. While paragraph 14 offered additional protection for neighbourhood plans, it did not override the presumption in favour of sustainable development.”

Minutes

Permission refused on a vote

A motion to refuse the application was carried when put to the vote.

“A motion, moved and seconded to refuse application P25/S1431/O was carried on being put to the vote.”

Minutes

Why members went against officers

The committee refused the application because it was not infill, reduced the gap between settlements, harmed the area's landscape character, and lacked a nearby bus stop.

“That, the development is not in accordance with the Development Plan Policies as it is not an allocated site in the South Oxfordshire Local Plan (SOLP) or the Kidmore End Neighbourhood Plan. This is not infill development and will result in the separation of the settlement. This is contrary to advice set out in Paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework and policies in the development plan.”

“Having regard to the landscape setting this development would be detrimental to the character of the area. Contrary to SOLP policies in the Neighbourhood Plan.”

Minutes