Agenda and minutes

The Minutes of the meeting held on 4 October 2024 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Richard Somner declared an interest in Agenda Item 2, as he was a the shadow portfolio holder and was a supporter of the scheme, however he was not involved in the detail so reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable  interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Jeremy Cottam declared an interest in Agenda Item 2, as he was a Thatcham Town Councillor, but reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Justin Pemberton declared an interest in Agenda Item 2, as he was a Thatcham Town Councillor, but reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Vicky Poole declared an interest in Agenda Item 1, as she had ran ‘Councillor Surgeries’ on the matter, but reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Alan Macro declared he had been lobbied on Agenda Item 2.

(Note: The Chairman, with the consent of the Committee, reserves the right to alter the order of business on this agenda based on public interest and participation in individual applications).

1.     The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 23/01552/REG3 in respect of replacing the existing permanent 18 pitch Gypsy caravan site with a new 17 permanent pitch Gypsy caravan site. Each pitch was to consist of a hard standing area large enough for two twin axle caravans, car parking for two vehicles and a 30 sq m amenity building consisting of a kitchen/dayroom, bathroom, separate WC and utility area. In addition to the amenity buildings a recycle storage facility, children play area and sewerage treatment plant are to be located within the site. Four Houses Corner Caravan Site, Reading Road, Ufton Nervet, Reading, Stratfield Mortimer.

2.     Mr Simon Till introduced the item by stating that West Berkshire Council (the Council) and its officers fully recognised the tragic events surrounding the death of PC Harper in 2019. Mr Till expressed, on behalf of the Council, the deepest sympathy with all those effected by this tragedy.  He explained that while objections had been raised on the application as a result of this tragedy, the purpose of the item was to only consider the planning merits of the application.

3.     Mr Michael Butler introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Control Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports. Mr Butler noted that there had been several late consultations and explained that an issue raised over the lack of the Fire Authority response was not because they had not been consulted. It was also explained that sewage was not to be stored on site, but to be disposed of via the mains.

4.     The Chairman asked Mr Gareth Dowding if he had any observations relating to the application and he did not.

5.     In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Graham Bridgman Parish Council representative, Ms Deborah Adlam, objector, Mr Bill Bagnall, applicant/agent and Councillor Nick Carter, Ward Member, addressed the Committee on this application.

Parish Council Representation

6.     Mr Bridgman in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         The issues raised over, drainage and consultation, at the previous meeting had been addressed.

·         It was never up to the Parish Council to consult residents.

·         The objections raised by Thames Valley Police were late but reflected residents’ concerns.

·         Robust management of the site would be necessary to prevent further criminality.

Member Questions to the Parish Council

7.     Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Objector Representation

8.     Ms Adlam in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         Whether there had been any other alternatives considered for the site.

·         The reopening of the site would increase concerns over the welfare of the police.

·         Whether the issues with the entry points been considered.

Member Questions to the Objector

9.     Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Applicant/Agent Representation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.(1)

1.     The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 23/02187/FULMAJ in respect of a Flood Alleviation Scheme including detention basin and swale. New cricket facilities to replace those lost by the scheme Thatcham Memorial Playing Fields, Brownsfield Road, Thatcham.

2.     Ms Gemma Kirk introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

3.     The Chairman asked Mr Dowding if he had any highway observations relating to the application. Mr Dowding made no comment.

4.     In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Simon Pike, Town Council representative, Rosalind Lewis, objector, Mr Brian Woodham, Councillor Iain Cottingham, supporters Mr Brian Cafferkey, agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Town Council Representation

5.     Mr Pike in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         The scheme was the final piece of a larger scheme that would alleviate future flood concerns within Thatcham.

·         Thatcham Town Council supported the principle of the application subject to a number of reservations expressed as objections.

·         The scheme was complex due location in the heart of the town and the multitude of its uses.

·         The Town Council accepted that during construction It would have a negative impact on the area and negatively impact those who use the site.

·         Conditions proposed alleviated reservations. The consultation and planned compensation were addressed outside of the planning process. Support from Town Council was without reservation.

·         Noted the impact of the scheme but looked to the flood risk benefits of the scheme and requested that the Committee approve the application subject to the proposed conditions.

Member Questions to the Town Council

6.     Councillor Mayes queried the status of the other existing sites and Mr Pike explained that they three were under construction, but emphasised he was not sure. Mr Pike advised that the scheme had a different purpose to the others.

Objector Representation

7.     Ms Lewis in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         The site could become unsightly and lead to flooding issues if not properly maintained.

Member Questions to the Objector

8.     Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Supporter Representation

9.     Mr Woodham and Councillor Cottingham in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         This was not a standalone scheme, and this was the last of the applications.

·         The scheme would help mitigate events such as the 2007 floods.

·         The application would take urban runoff to the river below. To protect properties south of the A4.

• Mr Woodham advised that work must start this month.

·         The cricket club supported the application and although the club was due to lose land it was being compensated with new cricket nets.

·         The cricket club raised concerns that not all the tree protective fencing was required.

·         The cricket club would like to be involved in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.