29 July 2014 – Minutes
THAME TOWN COUNCIL
Minutes of the Meeting of Thame Town Council held on 29 July 2014 at 6.30pm in the Upper Chamber, Thame Town Hall
Cllr D Bretherton, D Butler, N Champken-Woods, A Dite, M Dyer, H Fickling, V Humphries, P Lambert, D Laver, J Matelot Green (Town Mayor), M Stiles and M Welply.
H Stewart, Town Clerk
A Oughton, Committee Services Officer
1 Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Dixon (Holiday), Dodds (Personal) and Emery (Holiday).
2 Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest.
3 Public Participation
There were no applications to address the Council.
4 Signing of Agreement
The Fair Agreement was duly signed by the Mayor and the Town Clerk.
5 Skipton Visit
A report was presented to Council by a group of Town Councillors who made a fact finding visit to the Livestock Market and Mart Theatre in Skipton, Yorkshire. The Skipton Auction Mart was built in the 1990s and was a traditional livestock market holding weekly cattle and sheep auctions. The Mart Theatre was created in the mid 2000’s with the help of Arts Council funding to create a theatre and arts venue in the town making use of the existing cattle auction ring.
It was felt the multi use building that provided a venue for the market and the theatre worked well and was worth considering if such a proposal was put forward in Thame.
6 Armorial Bearings
Discussion took place around the need for the Council to have a unique emblem. Thame’s emblem was widely regarded as the logo for the Council however it was never granted to the Council and was not protected under the law. As a consequence the emblem was used freely by other organisations.
Three options were put forward for consideration; to petition for new Arms the design of which could be closely based on the existing emblem. The Arms would be legally protected. The second option would be for the Council to create its own logo which would be the subject of Copyright and a registered Trademark. The third option would be to do nothing.
Members thought a logo specifically registered for use only by the Council to give a clear identity was a good idea and that work should be undertaken to produce a design that was of a contemporary nature but would include the two bar cross.
i) Option 2 in the attached report be agreed.
7 Ham Wood
This item was deferred pending receipt of further information from the Woodland Trust.
8 Life Education Centres
A question had been raised regarding the decision not to award grant funding to the Life Education Centres for 2014-2015. The criteria for not receiving the grant had been sent to the applicant who fully understood and accepted the circumstances. This decision would not preclude the applicant from applying for grant funding in the future.
9 Councillor Vacancy
The Returning Officer at the District Council had informed the Clerk that there had been no claim for a Poll. The vacancy would therefore be filled by co-option and an advertisement placed on the website and notice boards inviting interested candidates to apply. An additional meeting of the Council would take place on Tuesday 2 September 2014 to consider the applications that had been received.
10 P14/S2001/RM – Land off Jane Morbey Road
Application for reserved matters (following outline permission P13/S1481/O) for erection of 18 dwellings with parking, access and amenity space.
- That the proposed housing mix would fail to provide an appropriate mix of units, especially in respect of the private units, and did not demonstrably follow a Thame-specific study, contrary to the requirements of the Neighbourhood Plan.
- That the layout of the proposed scheme failed to have appropriate regard to, or co-ordinate with, the masterplan proposals for the remainder of the development on Site D.
- That the design and scale of the proposed dwellings did not demonstrate sufficient regard has been had to the distinctive design qualities of Thame, nor have detailed elements of the design process (including bin storage and landscaping) been appropriately considered.
- That the layout of the proposed development would fail to provide appropriate standards of amenity for future occupiers having regard to issues of privacy and overlooking and insufficient provision of private amenity space.
- That insufficient parking would be provided, especially for the larger (four bedroom +) units, leading to on-street parking that would detract from the character and quality of the development.
11 P14/S1347/FUL – Land at Cotmore Wells Farm
The erection of two industrial units (Class B1/B2/B8) and formation of two new accesses, car parking, landscape planting, formation of a landscape bund and associated infrastructure including drainage features.
The Council resolved to continue to support the proposals for the reasons set out in detail in the response to the District Council dated 12 June 2014 subject to:
Full consideration of the other outstanding matters in the response of 12 June 2014.
Written confirmation from the District Council that the scale and form of proposed landscaping provided an appropriate level of visual mitigation for the development.
12 R3.0086/14 – Residential Care Provision at Glebe Land, Thame
Planning application by Oxfordshire County Council for planning permission for the Construction of Residential Childrens Home – New Assessment Centre building and associated external recreation areas, car parking and new vehicular entrance off the highway. Change of use from Farmland to Residential care provision at Glebe Lane, Thame.
Members considered that insufficient evidence had been submitted with the application in order to justify a Departure from the Development Plan, namely the policies contained in the Neighbourhood Plan and the South Oxfordshire Local Plan (as Saved). In particular, Members considered that additional evidence was required in respect of the range of options considered, the site selection process, and the locational criteria for such centres, much of which had been discussed at pre-application stage but was not reflected in the formal application.
As such, further supporting evidence and justification should be provided in respect of each of these matters. Should such material not be forthcoming for consideration by the Town Council, the Council has resolved to object to the application and recommend refusal of the proposal. In doing so, the Council trusts that the County Council will recognise the importance and weight to be attributed to the policies of the Neighbourhood Plan.
Subject to supporting evidence, as detailed above, being included in the planning application.
The meeting concluded at 7.45pm
Chairman, 2 September 2014