Stalemate over plan for Henwick Lane housing

Development manager Nathan Craker said it was unlikely it would appeal West Berkshire Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for either 11 or 12 homes to be built on half-a-hectare of land to the rear of Henwick Lane and Roman Way.
He criticised councillors for “sterilising” the disused land, saying that the insistence of having a quota of affordable homes within such a small development meant that the site was no longer financially viable.
He said: “Putting in affordable housing reduces the income,” and added that although the firm was reviewing its position, it was likely they would pull out.
Initially, planners said that they would recommend that the application be granted with no need for affordable housing.
However, at the end of December, the council’s planning committee went against this recommendation and refused the two applications because Shanly Homes had not included provision for affordable homes.
The council’s Core Strategy – a document which outlines plans for 10,500 new homes to 2026 – states that developments between 10 to 14 properties should include 30 per cent affordable housing.
Thatcham Town Council backed the plan for 11 homes, subject to a number of conditions, having raised objections to the application for 12 houses because the density would have a detrimental impact on the established tree boundary.
At the time, town councillor Gary Johnson (Lib Dem, Thatcham West) said that he would be happy for the application to go through as he would prefer smaller developments dotted around the town rather than than major ones, such as the 300 homes proposed for Tull Way.
Talking this week, he said he still supported the idea of more smaller developments and it was a shame that the developer didn’t provide for affordable housing because there was a need within the area.
He added: “I’m disappointed because I was all for that land going through. But then again, who knows in the near future – somebody might come along and give it some extra thought.”
A plan for 10 homes on the site went through on appeal in 2004, on the grounds that the land was within a well-established residential area, but the permission has since run out.
It did not include provision for affordable homes, but was granted before the Core Strategy was launched in 2010.