Agenda item

To review the report and recommendations of scoring made by officers.

Crowmarsh Parish Council

 

Councillor David Rowley, representative of Crowmarsh Parish Council, spoke in support of the application.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Crowmarsh Parish Council.

 

Watlington Parish Council

 

Councillor Andrew McAuley, representative of Watlington Parish Council, spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel asked a question to the speaker on the multi-use games area (MUGA), and whether gender had been considered in the planning of the MUGA to ensure it was accessible to both boys and girls. Councillor McAuley responded that the design was inclusive for both male and female and all physical abilities. The speaker added that the flood-lighting would make the site safer alongside CCTV. Additionally, Councillor McAuley added that MUGA was wheelchair accessible.

 

An additional question followed seeking clarification on the lighting considerations in relation to light pollution. The speaker responded that they were aware of the need to reduce ambient lighting and light pollution. Councillor McAuley confirmed the flood-lighting was being looked into to provide the best design and quality of lights to make a minimal impact on the surrounding area.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Watlington Parish Council.

 

Sonning Common Parish Council

 

Councillor Ros Varnes, representative of Sonning Common Parish Council, attended the meeting in order to respond to any questions from the panel.

 

The panel queried how Sonning Common Parish Council would minimise the impact of light pollution for the surrounding area. Councillor Varnes responded that their scheme was designed to minimise light pollution. The lighting scheme was described as allowing a safe use of the park whilst being mindful of the surrounding AONB. The speaker added that shields would be added to the wayfaring trackway which would prevent light spill. Additionally, the lighting system would be kept at a low level during the lighting level which would increase or decrease based on the user’s proximity to the lights.

 

Councillor Varnes provided an update to the panel that they had found a new competitive quote which would cost less than anticipated and the new cost was expected to cost between £56-60K excluding VAT. In response to this, the panel asked for confirmation on the scope of change in the application as a result of the new pricing. The speaker confirmed the scope of the application remained the same and clarified that they were therefore seeking 50 per cent of the £60,000.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Sonning Common Parish Council.

 

Millstream Day Centre

 

There was no speaker present for the application.

 

A concern was expressed by the panel on the connection between the climate emergency action and the scoring given. It was agreed this would be discussed following the conclusion of the public meeting.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Millstream Day Centre.

 

Holton Village Hall

 

There was no speaker present for the application.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Holton Village Hall.

 

SOFEA

 

James Plunket spoke in support of the application.

 

Mr Plunket was asked by the panel what the difference between the fifty learners and two-hundred trainees were. Mr Plunket responded that the learners came through an ‘Activate’ learning contract, with ‘Activate’ being a contractor of Oxford College. These would be 16-18 year olds excluded from formal education. The trainees were from the Department for Work and Pensions programmes and were more focused on learning skills to help them in the workplace.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of SOFEA.

 

Wheatley Parochial Church Council

 

Michael Worthington spoke in support of the application. In addition, Mr Worthington was accompanied by another speaker, but they did not provide their name.

 

The panel questioned how the renovation of the site would impact the historic fabric of the building. The response from the speaker was that discussion had taken place with English Heritage and the Victorian Society. The panel agreed with the interested parties that the preservation of the building was an important point. The majority of the building would remain untouched. A follow-up question from the panel sought clarification on the applicant’s aim of considering gas to be the only feasible option for the building. The speaker responded that they had completed an energy audit, and all the professionals agreed that the carbon footprint was higher for electricity compared to gas for the building. An additional question was then put forward by the panel on the climate emergency and how the organisation was looking into LED lighting and further works to mitigate climate impacts. The response from the speaker was that all lighting would be LED, and the lights would be strategically placed to provide the largest coverage in the most efficient manner.

 

The panel then asked for the speaker to breakdown the costs involved in the project. The other speaker explained that the existing floor had failed in both the tiled and wooden area. The long term plan would replace sections of the floor, but the Victorian tiles were not fit to be re-used due to the poor condition they were in. However, in agreement with the Victorian Society, they would be using modern equipment and designs to replicate the look of the tiles. The other speaker added that the situation did allow them to place underfloor heating which will improve the heating within the building. The panel asked for more specific details on the costs associated. The other speaker clarified that the underfloor heating was approximately £250,000 and the re-wiring of the building was £150,000. In addition, new drainage, and an additional toilet rounded to near £120,000 and then fixtures and fittings would also add costs.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Wheatley Parochial Church Council.

 

Chinnor RFC – Thame

 

Alex Bond spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel queried the speaker on the community reach of the application. Mr Bond responded by explaining that the users of the club were predominantly from other clubs within Oxfordshire and also from Buckinghamshire. The speaker added that they also had a wider use of the club beyond Rugby with other groups using the clubhouse. In addition to this, the speaker also informed the committee that a downstairs disabled toilet was now also being proposed as part of the application.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Chinnor RFC – Thame.

 

Long Wittenham Athletic Club

 

Ian Burton spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel asked whether the pavilion would be hired out to people from outside the village. Mr Burton responded that they would tend not to but would if it was from a member of the club or their friends and family. Mr Burton added that the pavilion was not a large building and the club had not ventured to a larger scope in allowing public use.

 

A second question followed from the panel on whether there were currently existing public toilets in Long Wittenham and whether the club would consider allowing their toilets to be used by the public. The response was that while this had not previously been considered, they could consider this.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Long Wittenham Athletic Club.

 

Culham Parish Council

 

Antoinette Powell and Councillor Sam Casey-Rerhaye spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel asked how the parish had sought to make the application inclusive to both gender and age groups. The response from the speakers was that they were looking to have swings, picnic benches, and adult facilities which would provide a variety of facilities for different people. Councillor Rerhaye also added that the final design could also be flexible depending on the funding level received. In addition, the parish also had a maintenance budget which would enable the parish to look after the facilities after their construction.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Culham Parish Council.

 

Thame Shed

 

There was no speaker present for the application.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Thame Shed.

 

Woodcote Parish Council

 

Councillor Malcolm Smith, representative of Woodcote Parish Council, spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel sought clarification on whether the path would be wide enough to allow buggies and mobility scooters to pass each other when going in opposite directions. The response from Councillor Smith was that it was not.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Woodcote Parish Council.

 

Goring and Almshouses Bowls Club

 

David Watson spoke in support of the application.

 

The speaker received a question on the age group of the users of the bowls club. Mr Watson responded and stated that the youngest was around sixty with their oldest member near ninety. The speaker added that they would like to see younger members but currently do not have any who would fit the young demographic. In addition, Mr Watson added that the funding was key for their proposal and that if they received no funding, they would be unable to proceed with their plans.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Goring and Almshouses Bowls Club.

 

Sonning Common and District Tennis Club

 

Mike Casserley spoke in support of the application.

 

A question was asked on whether the organisation had applied for funding from the tennis authorities. Mr Casserley responded that they had been directed to their website but had not met the criteria of the Lawn Tennis Association.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Sonning Common and District Tennis Club.

 

Berinsfield Information and Volunteer Centre

 

Pam Brennon spoke in support of the application.

 

The panel asked what type of printer the organisation was seeking to acquire. Ms Brennon responded that they were aiming for a robust printer capable of both colour and black and white printing. Additionally, they wanted a printer that could connect to laptops, which their previous printer was not capable of doing. A follow-up question from the panel sought clarification on what the organisation would do if they did not get the funding requested. The response by the speaker was that they would have to manage with their current printer whilst looking for other opportunities for funding, although they had not identified any other options at the time of the panel.

 

The speaker was also asked if they had considered renting the use of a printer. The response from Ms Brennon was that they had looked before, but historically they had issues with using rented printing services. The speaker clarified that they would be willing to look into rented printing services, but they would still need to find money to cover the costs associated with this.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Berinsfield Information and Volunteer Centre.

Aston Rowant Parish Council

 

There was no speaker present for the application.

 

The panel expressed that they would like to discuss scoring further on this item. It was agreed this would be done following the conclusion of the public meeting.

 

RESOLVED: to note the application of Aston Rowant Parish Council.