Barn extension at Woodcote Sawmill Pot Kiln Lane, Goring Heath

What was proposed

An extension to an existing storage building to provide covered storage for HGVs being maintained on site.

“Single storey barn / outbuilding extension. (As amplified by information received 12 February 2026.)”

“The planning officer presented the report. The application was referred to the committee as the recommendation for approval was in conflict with the view of the Parish Council. The application was for an extension to an existing storage building in order to provide covered storage for HGVs being maintained on the site.”

Minutes

The site

The site was mostly hardstanding with commercial buildings, and the roof was visible only from a localised viewpoint.

“The site was mostly covered with hardstanding with commercial buildings close to the perimeter. The existing building was a modest structure of single-storey construction finished in timber cladding with a corrugated roof. The proposed extension would also be single-storey and would match the existing ridge and eaves heights.”

“Proposed plans and elevations were shown along with photos of the site from various viewpoints. Committee were shown that the roof of the existing building was visible from a localised viewpoint through the industrial site entrance.”

Minutes

What consultees found

The Highways Authority raised no objection, expecting no significant increase in transport activity at the site.

“There had been no objection from the Highways Authority who had considered that it would be unlikely that there would be any significant intensification of transport activity at the site.”

Minutes

What officers recommended

Officers found the scale and design appropriate, with no technical objections, and recommended approval.

“The site had a commercial character which did not contribute positively to the natural scenic beauty of the wider landscape. The proposed extension would be away from public views and would not be a dominant feature within the site. The extension would provide storage under cover for vehicles, which would be of particular benefit during winter months.”

“The scale and design of the proposal were appropriate within the context of the site and there would not be an adverse change to the overall character of the site or its visual relationship with the wider landscape. There were no objections from technical consultees. Drainage matters and biodiversity enhancements could be appropriately addressed through conditions. The proposal was recommended for approval.”

Minutes

Who spoke

A ward councillor spoke on the application.

What members discussed

Members confirmed there were no current enforcement issues, no resident objections, and noted the parish council had not attended to speak.

“A member asked about the current use of the site and whether there were enforcement issues. The Committee were advised that it had been used for storage and maintenance of vehicles for more than 10 years with no current enforcement investigations. The Council had investigated the site and concluded that the use was B2, light industrial use. The proposed building would be consistent with that use.”

“Members noted that while the Parish Council had objected to the application they had not attend committee to speak on the item.”

Minutes

What was decided

The committee approved the application subject to the conditions listed, including drainage and biodiversity measures.

“A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was carried on being put to the vote.”

“RESOLVED: to approve planning application P25/S2648/FUL subject to the following conditions: Commencement 3 years – Full Planning Permission 2. Approved plans 3. Materials as on plan 4. Unsuspected Contaminated Land Condition 5. Surface Water Drainage 6. Integrated Biodiversity Enhancements (prior to slab level) 7. Restriction on use of building for purposes specified within submission 8. Drainage information 9. Highways informatives…”

Minutes