PL/25/0731 (ADJ) (South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) ref P25/S1431/O) & PL/25/0691 (OUT) - Outline planning application for the development of up to 70 homes (including affordable housing), new vehicular access, associated parking and landscaping (all matters reserved except for access).

Further to Minute 36 held on 5 November 2025, the Committee received a report providing an update on the current situation with the above applications.

The purpose of the report that had been considered at the meeting held on 5 November 2025 had been to seek agreement for comments on the South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) application that Reading Borough Council (RBC) had subsequently submitted to SODC (see Minute 36) and to explain that an officer report with a recommended decision on the application site within Reading Borough would be held pending the outcome of SODC’s decision on the substantial part of the site located with South Oxfordshire.

The report explained that, on 3 December 2025, SODC’s Planning Committee had overturned SODC officers’ recommendation to grant planning permission for 25/S1431/O and set out the SODC Planning Committee’s reasons for refusal.

The report advised that, as a consequence of the SODC decision, the applicant had notified RBC of their intention to (i) appeal against SODC’s decision to refuse the application and (ii) appeal against RBC’s failure to reach a decision on the application located within Reading Borough within 13 weeks on 22 December 2025. The report stated that it was the applicant’s intention to ask for a Public Inquiry.

At the meeting the Committee was informed that that applicant had formally submitted their appeal to the Planning Inspectorate on 22 December 2025. The report stated that officers had understood that the applicant had accepted the sense in RBC delaying reaching a decision on its part of the application site within the RBC boundary until the outcome of the application within the SODC boundary was known and that therefore the applicant’s decision to include RBC in the appeal was disappointing. Nevertheless, the applicant was entitled to appeal for non-determination as formal agreement to extend the timeframe had not been made.

The report stated that if an appeal were submitted against RBC the Council’s ability to reach a planning decision would be removed. However, it was good practice for the Planning Applications Committee to make a resolution on the application to indicate the decision that it would have made had the application not been appealed for non-determination.

Legal advice had been sought and recommended that a resolution should be made as soon as possible to clarify the Council’s position and the extent of the Council’s involvement at the Public Inquiry. Doing so would help to reduce legal costs and would reduce the potential for the appellant to seek legal costs against the Council. Consequently, a report would be submitted to the meeting on 4 February 2026 setting out officers’ recommended decision.

Resolved –

That the report be noted.