Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 9 July 2025.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2025 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 Justin Pemberton declared an interest in Agenda Item 4(1) as, in his position of Portfolio Holder for Economic Development and Regeneration, he held responsibility for setting Council policies around local business growth and rural economy. He 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.

(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 25/01035/FUL in respect of a change of use to allow retention of four and proposed siting of 20 additional storage containers for self storage at The Nurseries, Bath Road, Midgham.

2.      Emma Nutchey 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 report.

3.      The Chairman asked Paul Goddard whether he had any observations relating to the application. He informed the Committee of the following:

·       The site was to be used by 20 storage containers and was to be accessed via an existing access on the A4.

·     He expected vehicle usage was likely to be very low due to the nature of the proposed usage. No more than five vehicles in and out per day.

·     He believed it was difficult to sustain refusal on traffic or highways grounds.

·     The site was in a sustainable location with regular bus services.

4.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Louisa Hoe Yee Lai and Keith Rogers, objectors, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

5.      Louisa Hoe Yee Lai and Keith Rogers addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 6 August 2025 (15:26)

Member Questions to the Objector

6.      Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Louisa Hoe Yee Lai advised that the site was on a slope and as a result the entire site was visible from Church View Farm. A barn co owned by Church View Farm and the applicant was being used for storage and other activities by the applicant.

·       Louisa Hoe Yee Lai advised that the applicant’s submitted plans informed that it was a small agricultural business with operating hours of 7:30am to 5pm Mondays-Fridays with ad hoc emergency operations on weekends when required. She noted they were operating outside of the prescribed hours.

·       Louisa Hoe Yee Lai had raised with both the applicant and the Council the fact that the business was operating outside of its prescribed hours however, it had not ceased, and no action had been taken.

Ward Member Representation

7.      Councillor Christopher Read was unable to attend the Committee however, Councillor Richard Somner read a letter on his behalf. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 6 August 2025 (25:30)

Member Questions to Officers

8.      Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Paul Goddard advised that visits could be made to the storage containers without large items.

·       Paul Goddard was not aware of any previous planning application that promised to measure traffic patterns near the site of the proposal. Emma Nutchey advised she had seen nothing referring to this.

·       Emma Nutchey advised an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.(1)

19. The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 25/00732/HOUSE in respect of the erection of side extension to existing dwelling and internal alterations at Gardeners Cottage, Buckhold, Pangbourne, Reading, RG8 8QA. It was decided that Agenda Item 4(3)), concerning Planning Application 25/00733/LBC, would be considered under the same agenda item but with a separate vote.

20.   Simon Till 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 unsatisfactory in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons listed in the main report.

21.   In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Andrew House, Parish Council representative, andMiss Karen Lane-Standley, Mr Mark Pettitt and Mr Richard Massey, applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Parish/Town Council Representation

22.Andrew House addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 6 August 2025 (1:33:27) 

Member Questions to the Parish/Town Council

23.Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Applicant/Agent Representation

24.Miss Karen Lane-Standley, Mr Mark Pettitt and Mr Richard Massey addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 6 August 2025 (1:37:49)

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

25.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Ward Member Representation

26.Councillor Ross Mackinnon addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording:

Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 6 August 2025 (1:44:58)

Member Questions to the Ward Member

27.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

28. Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Simon Till advised Members that this was a tricky application to assess. He noted that the extension approved in 1996 created a single built form, and the combination of the historical core and the extension that was approved in 1996 had effectively doubled the size of the building. The issue with the proposal was that the guidance in relation to listed buildings maintained that the listed building needed to retain its significance within the site. He advised that there was no hard and fast rule but conservation officers tended to object to applications that were going to subsume the original building unless there was a public benefit to outweigh this.

·       Simon Till advised that any departure from policy had certain legislative requirements associated with it, but that overturning officer’s recommendation would not necessarily mean departing from policy in a case where design was the concern. He advised Members could take a view on all the circumstances and whether the proposal would do harm to the listed building.

·       Simon Till advised there was no concrete definition of what constituted harm to a listed building. He informed Members that they were expected to reach a conclusion based on whether they felt that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.(2)

The Committee considered this report (Agenda Item 4(3)), concerning Planning Application 25/00733/LBC, as part of the debate for Agenda Item 4(2).

Debate

38.Councillor Paul Kander proposed to reject Officer’s recommendation and grant listed building consent subject to conditions, including a condition that the property not be split into multiple properties. This was seconded by Councillor Clive Taylor.

39.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Kander, seconded by Councillor Taylor, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that Development Manager be authorised to grant conditional listed building consent which would include a condition that the property not be split into multiple properties.

Conditions

1.    Commencement

The works hereby granted listed building consent shall begin no later than three years from the date of this decision.

Reason: To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

2.    Approved plan

This listed building consent relates only to work described on the drawings/and/or/in the documents identified below:

231013-01 - Location Plan & Proposed Site Plan received on 27/03/2025

231013-02 - Proposed Site Plan received on 27/03/2025

231013-03 - Proposed North and West Elevation received on 27/03/2025

231013-03 - Proposed South and East Elevation received on 27/03/2025

Cover Letter received on 10/04/2025

Heritage Statement received on 31/03/2025

Design and Access Statement received on 10/04/2025

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Bat Roost Assessment) received on 27/03/2025

The works shall be carried out in strict conformity with the approved plans and associated approved submitted information.

Reason: To clarify what has been approved under this consent in order to protect the special architectural or historic interest of the building.

3.    Approved materials

The materials, finishes, new windows and doors to be used in the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the plans, within the Design and Access Heritage Statement, and the application forms. Where stated that materials shall match the existing, those materials shall match those on the existing development in colour, size, texture and bond.

Reason:   To ensure that the materials are appropriate to the special architectural or historic interest of the building.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies SP9, DM9 and DM10 of the West Berkshire Local Plan Review 2023-2041.

4.    Windows/doors

No new external doors and windows shall be fitted until working drawings (scale 1:20, 1:10, 1:5, half or full size etc.) fully detailing the new / or replacement windows and/or external doors (cross sections for full glazing bars, sills, heads etc.) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out using the approved specification and retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed works can be effected without detriment to the special architectural and historic interest of the heritage assets and to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies SP9, DM9 and DM10 of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.(3)