'Significant degree of harm' if new houses built in Fifield greenbelt, inspector rules

Four new homes on greenbelt land in Fifield would cause a ‘significant degree of harm’ to the area’s rural character, a Government planning inspector has ruled.

A planning battle has been ongoing over the homes planned for an agricultural yard in Green Lane since 2024.

The yard is surrounded by fields and is situated in a country lane, neighboured by one other property – a two-storey home called Orchard Cottage.

RBWM council had given permission for the developer St John Homes (Thames Valley) Ltd to convert agricultural barns at the appeal site into five homes in 2023.

The company then lodged a renewed bid to demolish the barns and replace them with four new homes in 2024.

The 2024 plans included two detached four and five-bedroom houses, and two three-bedroom semi-detached homes.

A statement said: “The proposals present a high-quality bespoke architectural scheme on a brownfield site, that successfully integrates new dwellings into the landscape setting.”

But that plan was met by objections from the Royal Borough and parish councils.

The Royal Borough council refused permission in July 2024. Its decision said the homes would be ‘out of keeping with the character of the area’ and ‘visually dominant’.

Bray Parish Council had also recommended the homes be refused and cited ‘inappropriate development in the greenbelt with no very special circumstances’.

St John Homes appealed the refusal to the Planning Inspectorate - a government organisation that rules on planning disputes.

A statement from Jake Collinge Planning Consultancy Ltd, on behalf of the developer, hit back at problems flagged in the council’s objection.

It claimed the new homes would be ‘complementary to the site and surroundings’ and represent a ‘reduction in intensity’ compared to the working uses of the agricultural site.

It added, while one function of greenbelt land was to stop towns merging, Fifield was a village and therefore ‘the appeal site forms no function in preventing neighbouring towns merging’.

Inspector Barton though, ruled that harm to the greenbelt should be given ‘substantial weight’ in the appeal decision.  

Due to existing development at the farm site, the inspector considered it did meet the criteria for greybelt land. Greybelt land is defined as already developed areas in the greenbelt.  

However, the inspector said problems with transport to and from the site meant 'the proposed houses would not be in a sustainable location’ and was ‘inappropriate development in the greenbelt’.

The decision notice added: “I have found that there would be harm to the green belt by reason of the proposed development’s inappropriateness and its effect on openness.

“There would also be harm to the character and appearance of the area.

“I have found that the degree of harm would be significant.”

Resolving to dismiss the appeal, Inspector Barton said ‘social and economic benefits’ of approving the plans were ‘not sufficient… to justify this development’.