Later living: Promotion of an extra-care retirement village
The Challenge
ET Planning was appointed to support the promotion of a proposed extra-care retirement village at Murrell Hill Grange, Bracknell. The aim was to secure policy support for a 150-unit later living development that would provide tailored care while preserving residents’ independence. However, the Draft Bracknell Local Plan posed a significant barrier. Policy LP19 proposed a Strategic Gap designation covering the site, intended to prevent settlement coalescence between Bracknell and Wokingham. This designation threatened to undermine the principle of development and conflicted with the Plan’s own policies for meeting older persons’ housing needs. The key planning challenges were: The site was included in a proposed strategic gap despite being partially enclosed by built form. The Strategic Gap designation appeared to duplicate countryside protection policies already in place. The policy conflicted with the council’s duty to plan positively for later living housing. National policy required a more site-responsive and flexible approach.
Our Approach
ET Planning made written representations to Bracknell Forest Council and appeared at the Examination in Public to contest the proposed designation. Our strategy focused on policy clarity, soundness, and alignment with national planning objectives. Strategic evidence review: We analysed the site’s actual contribution to settlement separation. At 660 metres from Wokingham, the site did not materially reduce the Bracknell–Wokingham gap, especially when compared with more developed locations such as Amen Corner. Policy conflict identification: We demonstrated that Policy LP19 contradicted both the Local Plan’s countryside policy and its later living strategy, undermining coherent plan-making. Sustainability case: We showed how the proposal aligned with national policy by responding to demographic needs and enabling sustainable development. Contextual change analysis: We presented evidence of wider urbanisation in the area—including Amen Corner—that had already altered the strategic role of the land. Soundness tests: We structured our argument around Paragraph 35 of the NPPF, showing how the policy failed the tests of being positively prepared, justified, effective, and consistent with national policy. The Inspector accepted our case, and in March 2024, the Council adopted an amended Local Plan which removed the Local Gaps policy. The site is no longer constrained by the Strategic Gap designation, and we continue to promote it through the planning system. Need help promoting a Later Living scheme? Please contact David Wetherill (Associate Director) David.Wetherill@etplanning.co.uk Images courtesy of EPR Architects
Facing a Similar Challenge?
Speak with our team about your project requirements. We provide clear, practical advice tailored to your situation.