191 homes at Land to the north of Arborfield Road west of Shinfield Eastern Relief Road
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Wokingham Planning Committee on 11 Mar 2026.
What was proposed
The application sought 191 homes with open space, landscaping, drainage, parking, access, infrastructure and associated works, including 76 affordable homes.
“Applicant Bellway Homes Limited and the University of Reading Site Address Land to the north of Arborfield Road, west of Shinfield Eastern Relief Road Proposal Full application for the erection of 191 dwellings, open space, landscaping, supporting infrastructure and associated works. Type Full Officer Adriana Gonzalez Reason for determination by committee Major application…”
“The application site comprises a field of circa 7 Ha located on the northern side of Arborfield Road, to the west of the Eastern Relief Road, in Shinfield. The proposal seeks full planning permission for the erection of 191 residential dwellings (Use Class C3), along with public open space, landscaping, drainage infrastructure, parking and access. This will comprise provision for 40% affordable dwellings on site, in this case 76 units.”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The approximately seven-hectare grassland site lies beside existing housing, the Eastern Relief Road and Arborfield Road, near Shinfield.
“The application site extends to approximately 7Ha and currently comprises grassland previously used for agriculture, bounded to the north by the residential estate immediately south of Cutbush Lane (Phase 1) and a permissive footpath located towards the northern boundary. To the east is the Eastern Relief Road (ERR). To the west is existing housing on Oatlands Road which back onto the site and footpath 7.”
“The site is broadly flat, very slightly undulating with land sloping gently from the high point in the north-west towards the south-east and more discrete levels from south- east to the north-west. The ERR which borders the site to the east is sited slightly above the site level, with its bank running along the eastern site boundary.”
Officer report
Why officers recommended approval
Officers considered the scheme sustainable, well designed and acceptably connected, with no unacceptable effects on neighbours, highways, biodiversity, drainage or landscape.
“In this context, it is considered that the development would be a sustainable urban extension to the existing settlement whereby residents would have good access to services and facilities. The masterplan depicts a scheme that makes effective use of the land whilst maintaining/ enhancing the high quality of the environment, and represents sound urban design principles with dwellings fronting the streets which will maximise natural surveillance to the public realm.”
“The proposed development would not result in unacceptable loss of light, outlook or overbearing impact to neighbouring occupiers, and all proposed houses/flats meet Nationally Described Space Standards with satisfactory external amenity provision.”
Officer report
What members debated
Members discussed flood risk, climate change, roundabout and other highway improvements, traffic modelling, nursery parking, buses and walking and cycling links.
“The proximity of Flood Zones 2 and 3 to the proposed dwellings and whether climate change could alter risk. • Clarification was sought as to the improvements to Black Boy roundabout and other highways improvements. • Traffic modelling evidence and how the cumulative impact of additional dwellings would be assessed. • Clarification was sought around parking at the nursery. • Cycle/pedestrian connection.”
“Officers advised the submitted plan and Flood Risk Assessment showed the built development within Flood Zone 1, with Flood Zones 2 and 3 located within land proposed as public open space and landscaping. Flood Zone 2 would be over 50m from the back of the dwellings on the eastern side. The public open space was mainly landscaping and was not considered vulnerable. It was noted that an attenuation basin was proposed as part of the Sustainable Drainage Strategy for the site.”
Minutes
The vote and decision
The committee approved the application subject to a legal agreement, conditions, updated conditions 9 and 12, and possible refusal if the agreement was not completed within six months.
“It was proposed by Councillor Andrea and seconded by Councillor Wayne Smith that the application be approved subject to the inclusion of updated conditions 9 and 12.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
“Members noted that the spine road was potentially capable of accommodating buses and raised concerns about on-street parking affecting buses.”
Minutes
Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.
Sources
- Wokingham Planning Committee minutes, 11 March 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Wokingham's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Wokingham Planning Committee
- Council
- Wokingham
- Date
- Wednesday 11 March 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Wokingham committee decisions →
This committee's year
16 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.