GAMA plans refused by councillors
District councillors have refused plans to allow permanent car storage at an historic part of Greenham Common
PLANS to allow permanent car storage on an historic part of Greenham Common have been thrown out by West Berkshire councillors.
Last night (Tuesday), members of the district planning committee refused plans to allow the permanent storage of up to 6,000 cars at the former Ground Launch Cruise Missile Alert and Maintenance Area (GAMA) site, which is home to Cold War missile silos and bunkers that are protected as a ‘scheduled monument' – a nationally important archaeological site that is given protection against unauthorised change.
English Heritage, Greenham Parish Council, Burghclere Parish Council and Kingsclere Parish Council all strongly objected to the plans on the grounds of the historic significance of the scheduled monument and the significant harm the proposals would cause it, the impact on local traffic and the predicted increase in air, light and noise pollution at the site.
And planning officers recommended the plans for refusal on the grounds of the site's historic significance and because it was said to undermine planning policy and cause demonstrable harm.
However, the owners of the site, Flying A Services, had said that after extensive marketing, permanent car storage was the only viable option to obtain income to help secure the site's long term maintenance and preservation.
At the meeting, councillors heard from several objectors, including representatives from Greenham Parish Council and English Heritage, a former US Air Force veteran and the applicants themselves.
West Berkshire councillor for the Greenham ward, Julian Swift-Hook (Lib Dem), who also sits on Greenham Parish Council, presented a petition containing 539 signatures against the plans and delivered a strong objection himself.
Subsequently, councillors opted to support the officer recommendations and refuse the plans, with Brian Bedwell (Con, Calcot) describing the concept of allowing permanent storage of cars at the site as “absolutely ridiculous.”
Nine councillors voted to refuse the plans, while two voted against the recommendation.
However, despite the refusal, the owners of the site, Flying A Services, still have an existing planning permission to allow temporary car storage on the site for a period of up to ten years.
This is provided that the owners carry out essential highways works to improve access to the site, which has to be done before the consent expires in September.
After the meeting, David Arnold, of Flying A Services, said he was disappointed with the outcome of the meeting and said the owners would now have to consider their options before deciding what they would do.
