Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To receive any declarations of interest from Members.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Proposal:    New Premises License

Location:     Benham Park House, Speen, Newbury, West Berkshire, RG20 8LU

Applicant:   Benham Park Enterprises Ltd

NOTICE OF DECISION

The Licensing Sub-Committee of West Berkshire Council (the “Panel”) met on 13 April 2026 and considered the application for a Premise License in respect of premises known as Benham Park House, Speen, Newbury, West Berkshire, RG20 8LU (the “Premises”) submitted by Benham Park Enterprises Ltd on 16 February 2026.

In coming to their decision, the Panel had regard to the four licensing objectives, which are:

1.     the prevention of crime and disorder;

2.     public safety;

3.     the prevention of public nuisance; and

4.     the protection of children from harm.

The Panel also considered the Department of Culture, Media and Sport Guidance on the Licensing Act 2003 and West Berkshire Council’s licensing policy.

The Panel heard representations made by:

1.               The Applicant and supporters: Mark Scholfield, Guy Rodger, Anthony Becher, (represented by Rob Sutherland)

2.               The Objectors: Nicholas Cottam, Sarah Cottam, Angie Vokins, Paul Mason, Steve Stillman Hurst, Olivia Allin, Matthew Allin, Alison Power, Ed Austin, Jane Ward, Julie Wetherell, Peter Wetherell, Anthony Ward, Alice Stillman-Hurst, and Ben Morton (online) (represented by Marcus Lavell and supported by David Nevitt)

3.               The Responsible Licensing Authority: Mark Groves (Lead Licensing Officer)

4.               Environmental Health: Jodie Wilson (Environmental Health Officer)

5.               Ward Member: Councillor Antony Amirtharaj

The Panel also considered the representations of the following who did not attend or speak:

Having taken those representations into account, the Panel RESOLVED that the application be approved with immediate effect, with the conditions proposed below (the “Proposed Conditions”).

The Panel also gave the reasons for their decision, which are highlighted below and set after each Condition:

1. Condition:

That the operating schedule be as follows:

Reason:

This condition would limit the licensable activity in order to best promote the Licensing Objectives whilst being proportionate and reasonable.          

2. Condition:

The premises shall be operated solely as an exclusive-use, pre-booked, invitation-only venue.  There shall be no ticketed events, no events advertised to the general public, no festivals, and no walk-in trade. 

          Reason:

This condition would limit the type of events able to be put on, best promoting the Licensing Objectives whilst being proportionate and reasonable.  

3. Condition:

The maximum number of persons on the premises at any one time for licensable activities shall not exceed 250, excluding staff, contractors, and performers.

Reason:

This condition would put an upper limit on the number of guest able to attend a licensable event, best promoting the Licensing Objectives whilst being proportionate and reasonable.     

4. Condition:

That  ...  view the full decision text for item 2.

The Licensing Sub-Committee (the Panel) considered a report (Agenda Item 2(1)) concerning Licensing Application No. 29442 in respect of the premises license for Benham Park House, Newbury, West Berkshire, RG20 8LU.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mark Groves (Licensing Officer, West Berkshire Council), Jodie Wilson (Environmental Health Officer, West Berkshire Council), Mark Scholfield, Guy Rodger, Anthony Becher, Rob Sutherland (Applicant and Supporters), and Nicholas Cottam, Sarah Cottam, Angie Vokins, Paul Mason, Steve Stillman Hurst, Olivia Allin, Matthew Allin, Alison Power, Ed Austin, Jane Ward, Julie Wetherell, Peter Wetherell, Alice Stillman Hurst, and Ben Morton (online) (represented by Marcus Lavell and David Nevitt) (Objectors), and Councillor Antony Amirtharaj (Ward Member) addressed the Panel on this application.

The Applicant and Supporters indicated that, with some time for discussions with the Objectors and their representatives, a mutually agreeable solution to several of the points in contention with the application could be found. With the agreement of all parties, the Chairman adjourned the Panel for 20 minutes.

Upon resumption of the hearing, the Applicant and supporters indicated that they would be open to an amendment to the licensable area. In order for the Objectors and their representatives to consider this proposed amendment, with the agreement of all parties, the Chairman adjourned the Panel for a further 10 minutes.

Upon the resumption of the hearing, all parties confirmed that they had reached an agreement to restrict the sale of alcohol to the inside of Beenham House and that a new red line map would be produced for the Panel to consider in their deliberations.

With the consent of all parties, all the late notice documents submitted and the agreement that had just been reach were agreed to be reasonable and appropriate for the Panel to consider.

All parties to the hearing were provided the opportunity to give evidence and ask questions of the other parties.

When the evidence had been presented and questions concluded, all parties confirmed that they were satisfied that they had been provided a reasonable opportunity to present their case. 

The Panel then retired at 1.13pm to make their decision.

In considering the application, the Panel agreed that the central issues raised by the Objectors were around the Licensing Objective of the prevention of public nuisance. In light of this, and the general agreement of the Panel that the application was acceptable, the Panel considered possible conditions that should be applied to the approval.

The Panel agreed to apply 19 conditions to the approval of the application which included the operating schedule and revised site map showing areas of licensable activity. These conditions were considered to be reasonable and proportionate, whilst best promoting the Licensing Objectives.

Having taken the representations into account, including the written representations, the Panel RESOLVED that Application No. 29442 be granted, subject to the proposed conditions outlined in the Decision Notice.