21 April 2026 – Minutes (draft)

THAME TOWN COUNCIL

Minutes of the Meeting of Thame Town Council held on 21 April 2026 at 6:30pm in the Upper Chamber, Town Hall, Thame.

Present:

Cllrs M Baines, D Bretherton, P Cowell, H Dollman, D Dodds, M Dyer, L Emery, A Gilbert (Town Mayor), C Jones, S McGarry, H Richards, P Swan, A Wainwright and W Wilde

Officers

M Sturdy, Town Clerk
G Markland, Neighbourhood Plan Continuity Officer
J Doherty, Committee Services Officer

1)         Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Dite (personal) and Dawson (personal).

RESOLVED:

i)  To accept the apologies and reason given from Cllrs Dite (personal) and Dawson (personal).

2)         Declarations of Interest and Dispensations

There were no declarations of interest.

Cllr Bretherton as SODC Cllr abstained from voting on items 5, 8, 10.

3)         Civic Announcements

Cllr Gilbert commented that Thame is a vibrant town, with an active community.

4)         Public Participation and Public Questions

There were no applications to address the Council.
There were no questions put to the Council.

5)         Planning Application – P26/S0864/FUL – Verge at Howland Road, Thame

Construction of a micro energy storage facility.

The Officer presented the report and highlighted key matters contained within report.  Since 2021/2022 the site has been managed for biodiversity and visual amenity purposes by Thame Town Council on behalf of Oxfordshire County Council.  Recent tree planting on the site (7 trees) and remaining verge was carried out by 21^st Century Thame in a way that supports the cut and collect mowing undertaken by Thame Town Council, chosen to develop a wildflower meadow without aggressive intervention.  The Officer highlighted the appearance of the proposed structure/store, advised the energy which the storage facility would store and the potential number of properties which could be powered from it.  The principles of the National Planning Policy Framework provides guidance, and details that this type of facility should be considered favourably, as part of the ambition to achieve net zero; however, the Framework also requires that local amenity should be given proper weight and consideration; and that the setback, the distance from nearby properties should be led by safety considerations.

A Cllr queried the location of the sub-station which the energy storage facility will feed into; the Officer advised this has not been identified by the applicant.

The Officer highlighted that the applicant’s evidence details the noise as 31 decibels at the closest property, what is unknown is the possibility of residents being affected by background electrical hum.  There is no recognised methodology for assessing such impact during the planning process.  The applicant’s methodology links to research that suggests that around 2% of the population can be affected by the low hum; this is a very genuine concern.  The Town Council do not have the expertise to comment on this risk meaning this is a matter for the District’s Environmental Protection Team.

The Officer highlighted that there is a potential health risk to residents should there be a fire, the guidance from the National Fire Chiefs Council, are not only concerned about a fire within the battery store, but that which could spread to or from it.  The high temperatures could cause fire to spread to neighbouring properties and there would be a risk of toxic fumes which the battery storage could generate.  The guidance primarily advises on schemes of 1MW upwards; however, this guidance should be considered for other schemes.  The guidance details that an area 3m around the perimeter of the structure should be cleared of vegetation, possibly as bare ground or cropped grass. Thame Town Council, with the support of 21^st Century Thame, are trying to make this area more attractive and encourage biodiversity, however, this proposal would not support this visually.  The water supply for firefighting purposes should be considered to reduce the risk of fire spreading.

Signage is an important matter which has not been addressed by the applicant.  The Council advise that signage must be read from a distance of 30 metres, detailing that this is a high voltage facility and include 24-hour-a-day emergency contact information.  Such information is missing from the application.

The Officer recommendation is to object to the planning application due to the unknowns of potential noise, visual impact, ongoing site management and lack of detail on how members of the public would be kept safe during construction and maintenance.

A Cllr asked what houses would benefit from the stored electricity, assuming that this is a profitable business proposition?  The Officer advised that this store would act as a battery, it would take electricity out of the grid during times where there is an excess, and store for use during peak demand hours.  Any property connected to the grid could benefit.

A Cllr considered that local energy storage will be increasingly important; to store the energy, however, the location does not appear to be ideal.  This is opposite a business park; can the company work with businesses, for example Windles, who have excess space on site and are looking at environmental projects?  AMP Energy have not contacted the Town Council.  The Officer could try to engage with AMP Energy; the Town Council have good connections with local businesses who might be willing to work with AMP and host such a facility.

A Cllr queried the design of the storage and concerned with the risk of the fire; due to the vegetation surrounding.  Why is a brick surround not proposed here?  Who is responsible for keeping the surroundings of the structure clear of vegetation?  The Officer cannot comment, as it is unknown if this could be a different, enclosed surround.  Thame Town Council could try to seek this information from the company. 

A Cllr queried if there is evidence from the company of the model which is being proposed, to state how this model works in this capacity, and how this works in other towns, supporting additional information would be useful if this could be provided by the company.  This does not appear to be right.

A Cllr queried the air cooling, that this can generate noise, has this been factored into the noise pollution levels?  Particularly if two fans create interference.  The Officer advised that this can only be presumed, as we have not been provided with full information.  No information for the converted invertor, only information for the battery store, which is 50 decibels, the applicant’s data is predicting 31decibels at the nearest property.  With the potential for the low frequency noise, the hum could travel further. The data which was provided for that assessment was, however, from a different battery store.

A Cllr queried the trees which were planted in the area, and the recent vandalism which destroyed the trees.  The Officer advised that the trees which have been planted in the area would not have been mature or large enough to disrupt the application.  The loss of the trees is very sad; as the trees sited at this location would not have affected this application.

A Cllr commented that this application is commercial, with a business strategy to buy the energy and sell it back, at a higher cost when needed, this could be sited elsewhere, it does not need to at this location, near housing and Thame Town Council should object to this application.  However, should this go ahead, there needs to be detailed conditions which should be met should the BESS become redundant/removed.

A Cllr commented that the applicant has not provided enough information to support this application, many assumptions, no details regarding traffic during construction or the construction.  The fire association recommends further distance from properties which the applicant has ignored.  Thame Town Council should object to this application.

The Chair summarised that Thame Town Council recognises the importance of energy storage within the town, but felt this needs to be positioned in the right place, with proper consideration, with full information and meeting guidance received by Environmental Health and National Fire Chiefs Council.  This application and others had generated much commentary and there appeared to be confusion regarding the purpose of the officer report, which are written with expert knowledge and extensive research to enable complex matters to be considered carefully by Councillors.

RESOLVED:

To object to the planning application.

a) Since 2021 the site, which is highway amenity land, has been managed on behalf of Oxfordshire County Council by Thame Town Council to provide improved visual amenity and biodiversity gain. The proposal fails to identify the land’s use and that it is being actively managed to promote meadowland flora alongside appropriate native species trees.  In failing to recognise local character and its positive features the proposal is contrary to Thame Neighbourhood Plan (TNP2) Policy CPQ1 and 2035 Local Plan (LP 2035) Policies DES1 and DES2.

b) The proposal lacks information on how the public including road / footpath users would be kept safe during construction and any ensuing maintenance and is, therefore, contrary to LP 2035 Policy TRANS5.

c) The site is not recommended as suitable for Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) use within the evidence base and Policies Map submitted alongside the District Council’s emerging 2041 Joint Local Plan. Other than in identifying a possible grid connection, the proposal is contrary to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Paragraph 169 in failing to demonstrate how the site is suitable to host a BESS.

d) The Town Council notes the advice of the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) regarding BESS facilities and that the applicant has failed to demonstrate basic provision and details of how the site would be managed, post-completion.

i) The NFCC advice requires that vegetation is controlled / removed for at least 3m around the perimeter of the facility. This will extend the footprint of the development above the threshold at which Biodiversity Net Gain needs to be considered.  In failing to identify the land affected and provide for loss of biodiversity the proposal is contrary to TNP2 Policy NEB1 and LP 2035 Policy DES1.

ii) The requirement to manage the vegetation around the development risks harming the visual amenity of the area. The NFCC advice also requires that BESS are clearly signed with their function and with a 24-hour contact number for the operator, capable of being read at 30 metres’ distance.  Without further details on proposed management arrangements and signage the proposal is contrary to TNP2 Policy CPQ1 and LP 2035 Policies DES1 and DES2.

iii) The NFCC recommend that details of on-site / nearby water supply should be provided and that BESS facilities should be sited at least 30 metres from houses and workplaces to reduce risk during any fire event. The nearest dwellings and the grounds of Cuttlebrook Hall Care Home are within 30 metres of the site.  Without consideration of the effects of air pollution on nearby residents and workers during a fire, or the risk of any fire spreading from or to the facility the proposal would be contrary to LP 2035 Policies ENV12 and DES6.

e)  The proposal risks causing a noise nuisance through the emission of low frequency sound. The Town Council notes the uncertainties advised within the applicant’s Battery Noise Assessment (Revision 3) and the potential for the proposal to be contrary to LP 2035 Policies ENV12 and DES6.  It therefore objects on the grounds of noise, subject to the matter being addressed to the satisfaction of the District Council’s Environmental Protection Team.

f)  If approved by the District Council a planning condition should be secured to provide for arrangements to return the site to its original or accepted use and condition should the BESS become redundant or be removed.

6)         Report from County Councillors

Apologies received from Cllr Gregory and report from County Councillors noted.

Cllrs raised questions for Cllr Gregory.  Following the Fire & Rescue Service consultation, clarification sought regarding next steps, noted that there are financial implications to be considered. Is there a timeline, or clear plan with regards to the Fire & Rescue?  The increased housing proposals within Haddenham should be considered also.  The CSO will raise to Cllr Gregory.

7)         Reports from South Oxfordshire District Councillors

No reports available; noted that report was issued for 31 March 2026 meeting.  Verbal update provided regarding staffing, Head of Planning appointed, post holder in place 2 June 2026.

8)         South Oxfordshire District Council Car Parking and Off-Street Parking

Members discussed the consultation from South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) regarding proposed changes to car parking arrangements within Thame, including the introduction of a ticketless parking system.

The proposal includes consideration of introducing all-day parking at the Southern Road car park, which is currently designated as a short-stay car park.  Changes are also proposed to the layout of parking bays at the Cattle Market car park to allocate 15 spaces for users of the adjacent commercial building (Par72).  It was noted that the current provision of disabled parking bays would be maintained.

A Cllr requested that a comprehensive review of parking capacity across Thame be completed.  This should identify all parking locations, document the increase in parking on double yellow lines due to a lack of enforcement, and include evidence demonstrating that Southern Road car park is underused.  The review should include data and, if possible, visual evidence such as drone footage.  Members agreed that the Council wishes to encourage safe parking and support visitors to Thame.  The Officer commented that, should the Cattle Market car park be removed in the future, a comprehensive parking review would be required, as the site is referenced in the Neighbourhood Plan.

A Cllr expressed concern that reallocating 15 spaces at the Cattle Market car park for Par72 would reduce the number of spaces available to visitors and residents, despite these spaces being funded through parking charges.  A Cllr noted that planning permission has been granted for the Cattle Market to relocate to Land North of Rycote Lane and that future changes to the Cattle Market site may necessitate further rearrangement of parking provision.

A Cllr commented that, at Mayor on the Market, many reports are received regarding poor parking in the town centre, including pavement parking that restricts access for those with pushchairs or mobility aids.  The ongoing lack of enforcement of on-street parking regulations by the County Council was noted as being detrimental to safe parking within Thame.  It was agreed that any consultations relating to parking in Thame, where Thame Town Council is consulted, should receive a response.

A Cllr queried the proposed ticketless parking system and highlighted concerns that pre-payment for parking may be inconvenient where the length of a visit is unknown in advance.

A Cllr raised concerns that all-day parking at Southern Road car park could be detrimental to visitors to the High Street and the recreation ground.  It was noted that usage of the Southern Road car park is likely to increase following the redevelopment of the former Co‑Op building. However, members understood that the intention behind all-day parking is to increase overall usage of the car park, although current usage data is unclear.  It was further noted that the electric vehicle charging points at Southern Road car park were installed using Government funding.

A Cllr commented that there are three drone companies based in Thame who may be able to provide visual data on car park usage.  A Cllr asked whether a recent parking review has been undertaken in Thame.  The Officer advised that a Cllr had previously carried out a parking survey, which provided useful evidence including time logs and vehicle numbers.  A similar survey could be undertaken again, and it was recommended that weather conditions be recorded at the time of the survey.  It was suggested that SODC be asked to pause the current consultation while a wider, strategic review of car parking in Thame is undertaken.

The Officer advised that the consultation is currently under review; however, following government reorganisation, a car parking consultation may be more effective, given that car parks are owned by both South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) and Oxfordshire County Council (OCC).  It was noted that further clarity may be available once plans for the Cattle Market site are confirmed and progress on the former Co‑Op development is advanced.  However, the current consultation is seeking a response at this time.

RESOLVED:

i)  It was agreed that Thame Town Council will request additional information from South Oxfordshire District Council, including a strategic and holistic review of the capacity and usage of all car parks in Thame. This review should be undertaken at an appropriate time by SODC and should take into account the future development of the Cattle Market site and the anticipated increase in use of the Southern Road car park following completion of development at 6–8 High Street (former Co‑Op site).

ii)  The Council also requests that improved signage for the Southern Road car park be provided to support increased usage.

iii)  In addition, clarification is sought from SODC regarding the proposed removal of 15 parking spaces from public use at the Cattle Market car park.

9)         Street Design Code

The Beta draft of the Street Design Code is yet to be received.

RESOLVED:

i)  Agreed that the Beta draft of the Street Design Code will be circulated (once received) to all for feedback; for feedback to be received by the NPCO at a date to be determined when the Street Design Code has been received.

10)      Project Link – Demolition of the Changing Rooms

The Clerk presented the report relating to the proposed demolition of the changing rooms at Southern Road Recreation Ground.  It was noted that the demolition will mark a significant initial stage of Project Link.

To comply with planning requirements, the demolition works must commence on or before 16 July 2026, and the relevant planning conditions set out in the report must be discharged.  Members were advised that this work represents Phase 1 only.  A decision to proceed with the main build contract, including approval of costs, contingencies and contractor details, will be brought back to Full Council later in the year once tenders have been received and funding is confirmed.  This is anticipated to be around July.

The Clerk outlined the procurement process undertaken to appoint a demolition contractor, as detailed in the report.  Quotations received were reviewed with members of the Project and Design Team.  Based on both quality and cost, the Officer recommended that Company C be appointed to carry out the demolition of the changing rooms.

The Clerk emphasised that the next steps will be critical in working closely with the successful contractor to ensure that all required reports are submitted in a timely manner and that the contractor works effectively with the Town Council.  A communications plan will be implemented, setting out when the works will take place and how disruption to park users and local residents will be minimised during the anticipated two‑week demolition period.

A Cllr sought assurance that the recommended contractor would be able to meet the project deadlines and requirements.  The Clerk gave examples of due diligence carried out when the quotations were reviewed.

A Cllr queried the cost of disconnecting utilities.  The Officer advised that utility disconnections were not included within the demolition quotations.  Thame Town Council will arrange for utilities to be disconnected, with the current requirement being to make them safe.

RESOLVED:

i)  It is approved that Company C is contracted to undertake the demolition of the changing room block at Southern Road Recreation Ground.

A Cllr sought an update on the Lime Tree at Southern Road.  The Clerk advised that the Lime tree at Southern Road Recreation Ground will only be removed after the nesting season, and once the necessary planning conditions have been discharged.  The lime tree will not affect the demolition of the changing room block.

11)      Thame Football Club Lease Change

This will be deferred and brought to Full Council for consideration in May or June. 

12)      Thame Fire Station

It was noted that the Oxfordshire County Council Cabinet Committee meeting held on 21 April 2026 considered a report on the Fire and Rescue Service Consultation.  The Cabinet agreed with the report’s recommendation, and the proposed removal of the second fire engine from Thame Fire Station has been withdrawn.

13)      Town Mayor Designate

The Chair called for nominations for the position of Town Mayor Designate.  Cllr Gilbert wished to be considered for the position of Town Mayor Designate for 2026-27, for the continuation of the role.

On being put to the vote it was:

RESOLVED that:

i)  Cllr Gilbert be elected Town Mayor Designate for the ensuing year.

Upon being elected as Town Mayor Designate, Cllr Gilbert spoke.  Cllr Gilbert is proud to represent the Town, and the council, and cannot remember a time when we, as 16 Councillors, do not reach a sensible agreement; this is a good Town Council to have, thanks were expressed to all the Councillors.

14)      Deputy Town Mayor Designate

The Chair called for nominations for the position of Deputy Town Mayor Designate.  Cllr Wainwright wished to be considered for this position.

Cllr Wainwright spoke in support of the nomination; Thame is a wonderful, vibrant community.  With retirement from the NHS approaching, Cllr Wainwright will have time, capacity and energy to devote to support the community in Thame, if the nomination is supported.  

On being put to the vote it was:

RESOLVED that:

i)  Cllr Wainwright be elected Deputy Town Mayor Designate for the ensuing year.

15)      Members Questions (under Standing Order 11)

No questions raised.

16)      Minutes

The Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 31 March 2026 were received.

RESOLVED that:

i)  The minutes of the meeting held on 31 March 2026 are confirmed as a correct record, and signed by the Chair

17)      Planning Committee

The minutes from the meeting held on 7 April 2026 were noted.

18)      Annual Town Meeting

The minutes from the meeting held on 18 March 2026 were noted.

19)      Public Town Meeting – Project Link

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 February 2026 were noted.  A Cllr raised two queries regarding responses minuted.  The CSO will review and issue an update as necessary.

The meeting concluded at 7.39pm.

Signed ………………………

Chair, 12 May 2026