Minutes:
Question
Wokingham Borough Council’s track record of winning planning appeals in Shinfield South is very poor and has resulted in the 2010 local plan number of 2,500 houses increasing to over 4,000. How do you propose to protect the sites owned by the University of Reading and others within Spencer’s Wood and Shinfield from being approved for development at future planning appeals?
Answer
There is no hiding that changes to the Government planning policy have unnecessarily and unacceptably undermined our local planning decision making. We continue to put considerable resources into defending our decisions and I am glad to say that we have won the majority of appeals involving developments in unplanned locations over the last few years.
In November this Council approved a £630,000 ‘fighting fund’ to help defend our decisions against speculative developers. For the current public inquiry at Cutbush Lane, Shinfield we have employed Neil Cameron QC, one of the Country’s top barristers to present our case.
As you know, the main defence against unplanned development is to have a local plan which ensures that our planning policies continue to be effective and demonstrates that we meet our planning development needs. The recommended Draft Plan consultation is a vital step to achieving this.
Without effective planning policies, there would be no real control or influence over the new housing and what type of development will take place. This is because our position to defend appeals becomes untenable.
Supplementary Question
Your answer reminds me of when I sat where you are today approving the 2010 Local Plan and I approved it on the basis that there was a limit in my ward of 2,500 houses. The system has not delivered and I am concerned. What guarantee does the residents of the area where I live, and also where all of you live? Where is the defence from Government and from yourselves for residents because as I said in my question from your track record I do not see you winning 50% in Shinfield for sure. The track record and Government policy leads me to be concerned, and you know this as I have said it to all of you, that we will end up with Grazeley plus 10,000 houses because you have allowed Grazeley to go ahead. They will say tick the box thank you very much and the other developers and land owners in Twyford or in Arborfield or Barkham will make good arguments at the public inquiry and the Inspector will look at his numbers and say how many can I get to the 300,000 a year. Oh I can get a bit more – tick box thank you very much.
My concern and my question to you is do not think that by approving Grazeley that actually you do a disservice to the Borough because you actually open the door to extra housing in all of your wards because the Government want to build houses and there is nothing in the last five years that I have seen that really protects this Council or the residents from excessive housing anywhere.
How are you going to protect us given that you have not managed to do it in the last five years?
Supplementary Answer
I think there is a lot there. If you look at the draft Plan there is a specific note around what we need to do for Shinfield, Three Mile Cross and Spencer’s Wood around a buffer zone to no development.
I think the big point will be at Grazeley and how that development is managed. I do not think it can be conventionally managed how other sites have been managed. I know we have got good and bad examples. I would say Arborfield is a great example. I would say some of our other SDLs are not because as you know you only need a big land owner or a Parish Council working against a previous local plan and it can go against you. You know better than me what has happened and that is why we have got the problems in Cutbush Lane.
I think having Grazeley and taking it down the route of a Council led or a development led approach may help us in making sure that we do not have these dips and there are people in the room tonight that know in the past the five year land supply has been our Achilles heal. That is now moving away and it is no longer our Achilles heal it is the fact that what has recently come out in one of the Inspector’s report is that if you do not have a Local Plan, that is within the last five years, it is deemed that you do not have a Plan. So that is now the latest argument. So by not having a Plan we are putting this Borough at risk.
I have had many conversations with you and I do take on board all of your points. We are going to have to fight and that is why this Council spent the extra money getting the best of the best to defend our unplanned development through appeal.