25 March 2025 – Minutes (draft)

THAME TOWN COUNCIL

Minutes of the Meeting of Thame Town Council held on 25 March 2025 at 7:15pm in the Upper Chamber, Town Hall, Thame.

Present:

Cllrs M Baines, D Bretherton, D Dawson (Deputy Mayor), A Dite, H Dollman, M Dyer, L Emery, A Gilbert (Town Mayor), C Jones, H Richards, P Swan, A Wainwright

Officers

M Sturdy, Town Clerk
A Oughton, Operations Manager
G Markland, Neighbourhood Plan Continuity Officer
L Fuller, Committee Services & Processes Officer

 

1) Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Cowell (personal), Dodds (personal) and McGarry (personal).

RESOLVED:

  1. To accept the apologies and reason given from Cllrs Cowell (personal), Dodds (personal), and McGarry (personal).

 

2) Declarations of Interest and Dispensations

Cllr Jones declared an interest in Items 5, 6 and 7 as a volunteer with Cuttle Brook Conservation Volunteers. This had already been declared on Cllr Jones’ register of interests, and does not preclude Cllr Jones from debating or voting on these items.

Cllr Jones declared an interest in Items 5, 6 and 7 as the council representative for Cuttle Brook Local Nature Reserve (CBLNR). Cllr Jones already has a dispensation to speak and vote on matters relating to the CBLNR along with other councillors in their respective roles as representatives on external organisations.

Cllr Emery declared an interest in Items 5, 6 and 7 as a member of the Chiltern Vale Residents Association. This had already been declared on Cllr Emery’s register of interests and does not preclude Cllr Emery from debating or voting on these items.

Cllrs Emery and Gilbert declared an interest in Item 5, 6 and 7 as residents with properties adjoining the CBLNR. As these had not previously been declared on their register of interests, the Town Clerk had taken advice prior to the meeting from the Oxfordshire Association of Local Councils and the Monitoring Officer, and a dispensation had been granted for both councillors to debate and vote on these items. Their advice was also that Cllr Gilbert should not chair the meeting during Item 6.

RESOLVED:

  1. That Cllr Dite, as Chairman of the Environment & Assets Committee, chairs the meeting up to the end of Item 6.

Cllr Dite took over as Chair from Cllr Gilbert.

 

3) Civic Announcements

The Mayor had no announcements to make.

 

4) Public Participation and Public Questions

As there were three speakers in relation to Item 6, it was suggested to suspend Standing Orders to increase the time permitted from 5 minutes to 10 minutes.

RESOLVED:

  1. To suspend Standing Order 8d to increase the time allocated for speakers on the same topic from 5 minutes to 10 minutes.

A resident of Sycamore Drive provided the council with a presentation, which included guidance from Natural England on creating scrapes and various images showing the area before and after the scrape was created and the view of the spoil from residential gardens. The scrape is believed to have been dug five times too deep, and this has generated a significant amount of excess soil. Although the spoil has since reduced in height, it continues to disturb residents’ views of the nature reserve. The works have been carried out unlawfully and without prior notification, and residents request that the spoil be moved.

A resident of Hawthorn Avenue shared the personal impact that the spoil placement has had on him, his wife, and two of their elderly neighbours. The spoil is causing great anxiety, and the residents would like it removed.

A resident whose property adjoins the Cuttle Brook called on the council to act in the interests of residents and all users of the CBLNR. The spoil has resulted in residents feeling confined, losing their view of the nature reserve, and worrying about their children playing outside. A letter from the Chiltern Vale Residents Association summarises the residents’ concerns. Town Council Minutes from 1978 show that the Cuttle Brook should be open to the community. Residents strongly feel that the spoil should be removed, and the area returned to its previous state.

The speakers were thanked for their presentations on the issue which had been well-documented.

A comment was made regarding residents unlawfully maintaining and accessing the CBLNR from their back gates. It was agreed to not discuss this further as it did not fall within the remit of Item 6.

 

5) Cuttle Brook Local Nature Reserve – Presentation from River Thame Conservation Trust

The council received a presentation from the CEO and Senior Project Officer (Hydrology Lead) of the River Thame Conservation Trust (RTCT), and a representative from the Cuttle Brook Volunteers, relating to recent scrape works on the Cuttle Brook Local Nature Reserve.

The speakers shared the aims and objectives of the RTCT generally, and ways they have worked with the Town Council on the Cuttle Brook. The recent scrape project aimed to address the aspirations of the District’s Local Plan, Thame Green Living Plan, and the Cuttle Brook Management Plan. Environment Agency (EA) funding has been secured for works in the CBLNR; this includes removing a dilapidated weir which has already improved drainage.

The recent scrape was made to create ecological benefits; however, it was admitted that the scrape was dug deeper than the guidance and undertaken beyond the scope of the permitted development rights. The following concerns have been raised by residents:

  • Flooding – The scrape and spoil will not increase flood risk in Thame.
  • Safety – There are not believed to be any safety risks, and fencing is planned to be erected to protect wildlife and people, which would also allay concerns regarding safety.
  • Volume of scrape and subsequent spoil – Whilst this exceeded what was anticipated, the spoil can be distributed across the reserve and managed with seeding and landscaping. Evidence from similar projects elsewhere has shown this significantly improves the appearance of the spoil after a few months.

RTCT values its partnerships with the Town Council and residents and takes the issues that have arisen seriously. Lessons have been learnt regarding the planning process, on-site meetings with contractors, and proactively engaging with residents.

What was the process that resulted in the scrape being dug deeper than intended? The proposed scrape area was marked out prior to digging and took account of the undulations in the land. The site of the scrape is over an existing depression.  The contractor was made aware of the scrape guidance, however the contractor has some latitude. Whilst a deeper scrape does have better ecological outcomes, RTCT could have been more constraining.

What would be the plan for spreading the spoil around the nature reserve? The spoil could be moved along the boundary behind taller fences to reduce the impact on residential amenity. In addition to this, all areas of spoil would be landscaped and planted with wildflowers to improve biodiversity and the visual appearance. The spoil will naturally reduce in height with rainfall, too.

What advice did RTCT receive from the EA? Over a period of 2 and a half years, RTCT have been in discussions with the EA about the various works in the CBLNR, which included site visits, surveys, developing a flood risk appraisal, and applying for a Flood Risk Activity Permit (FRAP). The EA awarded a FRAP for all the works except the scrape which was exempt due to its proposed size and that the spoil would be placed away from the floodplain. Despite extensive dialogue, there was an anomaly between the FRAP and the planning process.

What are the costs around redistributing the spoil? RTCT estimated this to be £8,000.

 

6) Cuttle Brook Local Nature Reserve – Recent Works

The Chairman requested that the representatives from RTCT and Cuttle Brook Volunteers remain at the table for Item 6 to answer any questions as experts.

The council received a report produced by Officers of the Council, detailing the project’s history and outlining options for the course of action based on specialist advice, as follows:

  1. Do nothing (other than retrospective planning and EA approval for works to date).
  2. Move as much of the spoil that can be accommodated away from the affected houses to areas within the CBLNR under the guidance of the EA Biodiversity Technical Officer and SODC’s Ecologist, with the remaining spoil being spread further out and landscaped and adding native seeds to expediate regrowth.
  3. The same as Option 2 but wait for planning approval.
  4. Put some or all of the spoil back into the scrape (the EA have stated this cannot be done under any circumstances).
  5. Move the spoil off site.

In any case the council will need to apply for retrospective planning permission. This may be able to be turned around quickly as many of the reports and surveys have already been prepared.

The Neighbourhood Plan Continuity Officer (NPCO) advised that due to the scrape size exceeding permitted development rights, TTC had self-reported to SODC Planning Enforcement. Planning permission will be required but it is likely that SODC will view the scrape in its current form acceptable as they are familiar with the CBLNR and the EA ecologist is in support. However, SODC’s ecologists will have the final decision. It is recommended that TTC seek initial support from SODC’s Ecologist to understand if they are of the same view as the EA, if so, TTC should seek the move of some or all of the spoil as soon as possible whilst the planning application is progressed. The spoil should not be moved until SODC’s ecologist has given firm support, but even with their approval there is a risk that the spoil may have to be moved again if required by SODC through the formal planning process.

Will moving the spoil cover more wildflower area? The area the spoil is on now, and potential areas for relocating the spoil, were / are not subject to the management which encourages biodiversity, and many areas have non-native, invasive species.

Will machinery be required to move the spoil? It is likely that diggers will be needed but this would be a smaller job than the scrape creation.

RESOLVED:

  1. To note the need for retrospective Planning Permission for the Scrape.
  2. To move as soon as possible as much of the spoil that can be accommodated away from the affected houses to areas within the CBLNR under the guidance of the EA Biodiversity Technical Officer and SODC’s Ecologist, with the remaining spoil being spread further out and landscaped and adding native seeds to expediate regrowth.

 

7) Cuttle Brook Local Nature Reserve – Flood Alleviation Works

Cllr Gilbert took over as Chair from Cllr Dite.

The council received an update on planned work to help alleviate the risk of flooding to residential properties in Cedar Crescent.  Works are being carried out in partnership with the Flood Risk and Drainage Engineer at South Oxfordshire District Council, and part-funded by the Lead Local Flood Authority. Since the agenda was published, Officers took the decision to pause works until the council had resolved whether to proceed. A summary of the timeline of events is as follows:

  • End of 2023 – Flooding affects residential properties on Cedar Crescent. TTC works with SODC to find a solution.
  • Spring 2024 – Works carried out on watercourses 1 and 2. TTC and SODC consider an engineering solution which may involve a bund at the rear of homes, and valves to control water flow.
  • September 2024 – Major flooding event in Thame, with previously affected homes seeing higher levels of surface water flooding.
  • November 2024 – Informal meeting with affected residents and SODC Flood Engineer to share concerns and initial plans for a bund. Advised that planning permission would be required.
  • 22 January 2025 – Affected/neighbouring residents emailed about the bund and one-way valve project.
  • 3 February 2025 – TTC met with SODC’s Flood Engineers and Contractor. Agreed to focus on the one-way valve project, as to speed up alleviation works and protect residential properties, and that this element should not require planning permission.
  • February / March 2025 – Funding and Land Drainage Consent approved quicker than anticipated. Start date given as 24 March 2025. Verbal confirmation that planning permission not required, and request made for written confirmation.
  • 20 March 2025 – Residents emailed about upcoming works. Residents feel insufficient notice given.
  • 21 March 2025 – Written confirmation of whether planning permission required not available until w/c 24 March. Officers make decision to pause the works.
  • 24 March 2025 – SODC advised that the works fall under Permitted Development rights afforded to local authorities and would not require planning permission. If anything more definitive is required, then a lawful development application will be required, which could take 6-8weeks.

Due to the scale of the works, and the conversations with the flood and planning officers at SODC, the likelihood that planning permission would be required is considered low.

The council felt it important to progress the works to the water courses to protect residential properties from further flooding.

The Town Clerk advised that residents will be notified.

RESOLVED:

  1. To resume the flood alleviation works.

 

8) Thame Sportive

The council received a report from the Community Services Manager, and an event proposal for a Thame Sportive event to be held on Sunday 15 June 2025. The event will see a series of cycling events of varying lengths, including a family-friendly route, start and finish from the Town Hall. The event is a partnership event between Thame Cycles and Thame Cycling Club. A website has been created, and £2,500 sponsorship has been secured. The event is unlikely to impact on TTC’s funds or Officer time.

Similar events happen around the UK, but this will be the first in Thame. The event will be delivered by the community, and town centre businesses will be notified for commercial benefit. The event will be an opportunity to campaign for a cycle route to Haddenham and Thame Parkway Station, and to promote Thame to other areas. The event organisers will take out third-party liability insurance. The event seeks to cover its costs, with any profits donated to charities as listed on the event’s website.

RESOLVED:

  1. To support the event and approve that Officers provide administrative and operational support to Cllr Gilbert.

 

9) Minutes

The Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 4 March 2025 were received.

RESOLVED that:

  1. The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2025 are confirmed as a correct record, and signed by the Chairman.

 

10) Planning Committee

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 March 2025 were noted.

 

11) Annual Town Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 March 2025 were unavailable and would be noted at the next Full Council meeting.

 

The meeting concluded at 8:57pm.

 

Signed ………………………

Chairman, 29 April 2025