Oak tree farm glamping

coleen 2026-11-06 10:14:16

This comment is awaiting moderation

JAMES 2026-11-01 20:44:49

I object to this application on the grounds of flood risk, additional traffic using unsafe access and the site being unsuitable as a campsite due to proximity to residential areas.
The field in the proposal regularly floods, when it does there is no warning so there will be no time to clear the site. Where the access track joins the highway there is not adequate visibility therefore no additional vehicles should be allowed at this location otherwise there is risk of a serious accident. There are gardens in very close proximity to this proposed location and it is completely unsuitable for a camp site. Please reject this application.

Simon 2026-10-25 12:59:10

chance we spotted the form, attached to Oaktree Farm gate post, which is set back off the road. Our understanding is, as part of the application process, nearby neighbours should be directly informed of the application details.

In conclusion if more detail on the proposal is communicated to the residents of Sandhurst, some of the above concerns may be alleviated. However the flood risk 3 area still stands.

Richard 2026-10-19 21:04:10

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of a glamping site comprising five shepherd’s huts in our village.
I have serious concerns regarding flood risk, inadequate infrastructure, highway safety, the impact on neighbouring residents and the potential risk to surrounding agricultural land.
1. Flood Risk – Flood Zone 3
The proposed development is situated within Flood Zone 3, an area identified as being at significant risk of flooding.
The introduction of overnight tourist accommodation in such a location raises serious concerns about visitor safety, particularly for people unfamiliar with the area who may be unaware of local flood risks. Flooding could affect access and escape routes, potentially making it difficult for visitors to leave the site safely during an emergency.
The owners have only owned the land for approximately one year. Their lack of personal experience of flooding during this short period does not demonstrate that the site is safe from flooding or that there is no history of flooding in the area.
The location of five holiday accommodation units within a high-risk flood zone presents serious concerns about the safety of visitors and the suitability of the site for this type of development.
2. Lack of Local Amenities
Our village has no local shops or other amenities to support visitors staying at the proposed site.
There are no conveniently accessible local pubs. One is approximately an hour and a half's walk away, while the other two are around 50 minutes' walk away along a busy county lane.
The lack of nearby amenities means visitors are likely to be heavily dependent on private vehicles to access shops, pubs and other facilities, increasing the number of journeys on the local road network.
3. Increased Traffic and Road Safety
The proposed five shepherd’s huts would generate additional traffic from visitors arriving and departing, deliveries and servicing.
The existing rural roads are not suitable for accommodating additional traffic without raising concerns about road safety. Busy country lanes may present hazards for pedestrians, cyclists and local residents, particularly where roads are narrow or lack suitable passing places and safe walking routes.
The absence of local amenities means visitors are likely to rely heavily on their cars, increasing traffic movements and placing additional pressure on the existing rural road network.
4. Noise, Smoke and Disturbance to Neighbouring Homes
Several local homes back directly onto the field where the proposed development would be situated.
The introduction of five holiday accommodation units could cause a significant increase in noise and disturbance for residents who currently enjoy the peace and quiet of a rural village.
Concerns include noise from groups of visitors, outdoor socialising, barbecues and the use of wood-fired hot tubs, particularly during the evenings and at night.
Smoke and odours from log-fuelled hot tubs and barbecues could also affect neighbouring homes and gardens, especially during hot weather when residents may have their windows open or wish to enjoy their outdoor spaces.
Existing residents should not have to endure an unreasonable loss of peace, comfort and enjoyment of their homes as a result of a commercial holiday development immediately adjoining their properties.
5. Risk to Surrounding Crops and Agricultural Land
The proposed use of the site could involve barbecues and outdoor heating equipment, creating a potential fire risk to surrounding agricultural land.
During hot, dry weather, sparks or improperly extinguished barbecues could ignite nearby crops and fields, potentially causing considerable damage to agricultural businesses and the surrounding countryside.
The introduction of these activities into a rural setting creates concerns about fire safety and the protection of neighbouring agricultural land.
6. Lack of Essential Services and Infrastructure
The site has no existing mains electricity, mains water or mains sewerage connections.
This raises serious concerns about how the proposed accommodation would be supplied with safe drinking water, electricity, sanitation and appropriate wastewater disposal.
The absence of established services raises questions about the reliability and adequacy of any alternative arrangements for water supply, electricity and sewage treatment.
There are also concerns about whether drainage and wastewater arrangements could operate safely given the site's location within Flood Zone 3, without causing pollution, flooding or harm to neighbouring land.
7. Impact on the Rural Character of the Village
The proposed development would introduce a commercial tourism use into a rural village with limited facilities and infrastructure.
The combined effects of additional traffic, visitor activity, noise, smoke, lighting, waste and servicing could adversely affect the peace and character of the village.
The development would change the nature of the field and its surroundings, with direct consequences for nearby residents and the existing rural environment.
Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, I strongly object to the proposed glamping development comprising five shepherd’s huts.
My objections relate to the site's location within Flood Zone 3, the lack of local amenities, increased traffic on rural roads, noise and smoke affecting neighbouring homes, potential fire risks to agricultural crops, and the absence of mains water, electricity and sewerage infrastructure.
I believe this development is unsuitable for the location and would have a detrimental impact on the safety, amenity and quality of life of existing residents, as well as the surrounding agricultural land and rural environment.
I therefore formally object to this planning application and request that it be refused

Sarah 2026-10-18 21:28:01

My main concern is the existing flooding issues affecting this land and the potential consequences of introducing tourist accommodation and associated facilities to an area that already experiences problems with water accumulation and drainage.
I am also concerned about the introduction of commercial holiday accommodation within our village and the potential impact on its existing character and the quality of life of permanent residents.

The proposed shepherd’s huts would introduce a regular turnover of visitors who are unfamiliar with the local area. Depending on the scale and operation of the development, this could result in increased vehicle movements, additional noise, disturbance and a loss of privacy for neighbouring residents.

I believe it is important that the planning authority considers whether this type and scale of tourism development is appropriate for the location, taking into account the character of the village, the surrounding countryside, the existing road network and the needs of the people who live here permanently.

I am particularly concerned about the cumulative impact of additional visitor traffic on potentially narrow rural roads and whether the site is suitable for accommodating regular arrivals and departures, particularly during busy periods or adverse weather conditions.

I ask the planning authority to give proper consideration to the impact on existing residents and to whether the proposed development is appropriate in this location, rather than assuming that additional tourist accommodation would be suitable simply because the site is in the countryside.
I am concerned that the planning application refers to walks to local pubs as an attraction for visitors, when the nearest local pub is approximately an hour’s walk away.

I believe this raises questions about how accessible local amenities genuinely are from the proposed site and whether the application gives prospective visitors an accurate impression of the location.

An hour’s walk each way is a considerable distance, particularly in a rural village where routes may involve narrow roads, limited footpaths, poor lighting and potentially hazardous conditions during adverse weather. I ask the planning authority to consider whether safe and suitable pedestrian routes actually exist between the proposed accommodation and the nearest pub and other local amenities.
I am particularly concerned that the current owners have not been at the property for very long and may therefore be unaware of the history and extent of flooding affecting the field.

The fact that the current owners may not have personally witnessed flooding does not mean that the risk is absent. I believe it is essential that the planning authority considers the site’s historical flooding conditions and does not rely solely on the current owners’ knowledge or observations.

Before any decision is made, I ask you to investigate the site’s flooding history and obtain appropriate evidence regarding surface water drainage, water accumulation and the potential impact on neighbouring land and properties.

The proposed development must be assessed against the actual conditions of the site, including what happens during periods of prolonged or heavy rainfall. I am concerned that without a thorough assessment, the development could proceed without the full extent of the existing flood risk being understood.

I therefore request that you ensure that the relevant flood risk assessments and drainage proposals adequately address the site’s history and demonstrate that the development would not increase flood risk elsewhere.
The site is currently used as a livery yard, an established equestrian use. Introducing commercial holiday accommodation would fundamentally change the character and purpose of the site, potentially creating conflict between the needs of horse owners and visiting tourists.

Horses require a calm, predictable and safe environment. An increase in unfamiliar visitors, vehicle movements, noise and activity could cause unnecessary disturbance to the horses and affect the peaceful enjoyment of the existing equestrian facilities.

I ask you to carefully consider whether the proposed tourist accommodation is appropriate alongside the existing equestrian use and whether sufficient consideration has been given to the safety and welfare of the horses using the site.