Appeal 6004584

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are: • whether the development is subject to the [name] requirements; and • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

[name] (BNG) is required under a statutory framework introduced by Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as inserted by Schedule 14 of the Environment Act 2021). Under the statutory framework for BNG, subject to some exceptions, every grant of planning permission is deemed to have been granted subject to the condition that the biodiversity gain objective is met. One of the exemptions from BNG is the de minimis exemption where development would not impact a priority habitat, less than [address] metres of onsite habitat and 5 metres of linear habitats such as hedgerows.

The proposed development site would be approximately 47sq.m in area. This would be greater than the 25sq.m allowed under the exemption. As no valid exemption from the BNG requirements exist, the proposed development is subject to the biodiversity gain condition and the minimum information requirements.

[name] information is before me and in accordance with Schedule 7A, the information is required for determination of the planning application/appeal. Consequently, it is not possible to address the requirements through the use of planning conditions. Accordingly, there is insufficient information before me regarding BNG and the biodiversity gain objective would not be met.

Subsequently, the proposal also fails to accord with Policy 53 of the Bracknell Forest Local Plan (LP) which requires development to achieve a minimum 10% net gain for biodiversity and provide ecological survey information and assessment to establish biodiversity net gains prior to the determination of an application.

[site address] (No 2) is a two-storey end-of terrace dwelling that forms part of a pattern of staggered houses located within a wider housing estate. The appeal site is an area of green space located behind the rear garden area of No 2 that comprises several overgrown bushes, shrubs, and brambles. The site forms part of a wider green footpath network that links Hillberry and the wider housing estate to Hedgehog Park and [address] community facilities including a library, primary school and community centre and runs behind all the gardens belonging to dwellings in this part of Hillberry. A bus stop is located adjacent to the appeal site fronting Ringmead. Due to its location and relationship to the green footpath network, the appeal site makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

The proposal would involve the change of use of part of the open space to private garden area and its enclosure with a 1.83m tall fence with gated access. [name] note that the area appears unmanaged and overrun by brambles, the change of use would remove a verdant area of vegetation at the access to the green footpath network fronting Ringwood. Furthermore, despite its unmanaged appearance, the site performs an important visual role at the entrance to the green space and footpath network alongside the shrubs and bushes located to the rear of the adjacent dwellings in Hillberry. Its inclusion into private garden would harmfully change the openness and visual appearance of this section of footpath to its detriment and its loss would cause harm to, and be out of character with, the open and green nature of the footpath network and the wider housing estate.

The current staggered residential boundary would be aligned with its neighbours following the introduction of a new boundary. However, whilst the new fence may match that of neighbouring properties in terms of height and materials, it would create a dominant and unwelcome sense of enclosure at the footpath entrance that would also change the visibility of the footpath from the bus stop and vice versa.

For the reasons given above, the proposal would have a harmful and detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the area. Accordingly, the proposed development fails to accord with Polices 28 and 50 of the LP. These policies, amongst other things, require new development to achieve a high standard of design that positively contributes to placemaking, responds and enhances the appearance of the local area and retains existing assets that have a visual value in the local environment.

The evidence before me includes a personal statement from the appellant. I note that the appellant has undertaken a considerable amount of work to upgrade the property and that a larger garden would be beneficial to their living conditions. I also note that the Council, through pre-application discussions, initially appear to have supported the proposal. However, these matters have had no material bearing on my consideration of the proposal which has been assessed on its own merits based on the specific evidence before me.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.