Agenda and draft minutes

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 Billy Drummond declared an interest in Agenda Item 3(1) by virtue of the fact that he had discussed the application at Newbury Town Council. Although he had been present when the application was discussed, he indicated that he would consider the application afresh. As his interest was personal and not a prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in debate and vote on the matter.

Councillors Adrian Abbs, Nigel Foot, Howard Woollaston, Dennis Benneyworth, Denise Gaines, Antony Amirtharaj, and Clive Hooker, declared that they had been lobbied on item 3(1) on the agenda.

Councillor Nigel Foot declared an interest in Agenda Item 3(1) by virtue of the fact that he was a Newbury Town Councillor and the Heritage Champion for West Berkshire Council. As his interest was personal and not a prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Tony Vickers declared an interest in Agenda item 3(1) by virtue of the fact that he was a member of Newbury Town Council’s Planning and Highways Committee. He had abstained from voting on the matter and indicated he would consider the application afresh. As his interest was personal and not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in debate and vote on the matter.

The Committee suspended Standing Orders to extend speaking time to 10 minutes for each group of speakers.

(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 3(1)) concerning Planning Application 25/00391/FULMAJ in respect of Full planning permission for the redevelopment of the Kennet Centre comprising the partial demolition of the existing building on site and the development of new residential dwellings (Use Class C3) and resident's ancillary facilities; commercial floorspace (Class E (a, b, c, d, e, f, and g)); access, parking, and cycle parking; landscaping and open space; sustainable energy installations; associated works, and alterations to the retained Vue Cinema block and additional floor to multi storey car park.The Mall, The Kennet Centre, Newbury, RG14 5EN

2.      Mr Matthew Shepherd, Principal Planning Officer, 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, and provided that a Section 106 Agreement had been completed within six months (or such longer period that may be authorised by the Development Manager, in consultation with the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Western Area Planning Committee).

3.      Or, if the Section 106 Agreement was not completed, to delegate to the Development Manager to refuse planning permission. 

4.      The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard, Highways Development Control Team Leader, if he had any observations relating to the application.

5.      Mr Goddard gave a presentation to the Committee, and highlighted the following points:

·       He raised no concerns regarding traffic generation, as traffic levels were expected to be lower than the historic peaks of the Kennet Centre. Construction traffic would be managed by a condition.

·       The proposal for 557 spaces (80 on-site and 477 in the multi-storey car park with an added floor) was compliant with standards and considered sufficient. Surveys from the previous application showed the existing car park was underutilised, and it was calculated that over 250 spaces would remain available on a busy Saturday.

·       A fire appliance could access all areas of the development within the required distances.

·       The application included new traffic signal junctions, resurfacing, a two-way cycle route on Bartholomew Street, a £70,000 contribution to improve pedestrian routes to the Market Street multi-storey car park as a precaution, and a comprehensive travel plan.

6.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Roger Hunneman, Town Council representative, Mr Richard Tait, objector, Mr Hugo Haig, Ms Sarah Ballantyne-Way and Mr Richard Farley, applicant/agent, and Councillor Louise Sturgess, Ward Member addressed the Committee on this application.

Parish/Town Council Representation

7.      Mr Hunneman addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee 10 September 2025 – Recording

Member Questions to the Parish/Town Council

8.      Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Objector Representation

9.      Mr Tait addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Special Western Area Planning Committee 10 September 2025 – Recording

 Member Questions to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.(1)