Councillor hopes for a 'quick resolution' for Lawrences Lane as defendants given two months to lodge appeal
An injunction on the Lawrences Lane development in Thatcham has been granted a ‘continuation’ in a new deal which gives the defendants two months to submit an appeal.
However residents have been reassured that despite an appeal being in the works, the original “reasons for refusal” from the local authorities are “clear”.
West Berkshire Council was granted a continuation of the interim injunction on Wednesday, December 8, by Margaret Obi - sitting as a judge of the High Court - preventing any further unauthorised development on the land.
The injunction states that no residential occupation will be permitted, beyond which was agreed in the previous order, no further portable structures can be brought onto the land in breach of planning control, no waste, hardcore or similar material can be brought onto the land in breach of planning control and no further works can be undertaken at the site.
The defendants have been given no more than two months to submit their appeal against the refusal of the planning application.
This is four months less than what is normally given and if the defendants fail to submit the appeal in this allocated time, they will have to vacate the land before April 8, 2022, two months after their appeal deadline.
They will have to cease the residential use and remove their caravans and residential paraphernalia from the land within two months of the final determination of the appeal, if they are unsuccessful.
Any breach from the defendants could amount to a contempt of court which is punishable by a fine, imprisonment or the seizure of assets.
Councillor Lee Dillon (Lib Dem, Thatcham North East) welcomed the continuation of the injunction and said that residents should feel “reassured” with the additional grounds secured in the site being vacated should the appeal not be submitted in the allocated timeframe.
He said: “The most important thing with Lawrences Lane is that we get a quick resolution as soon as possible.
“In terms of resolutions for the local community on the appeal, it has to be put in quicker than the full six months that's normally given.
“If [the defendants] don’t do that, the courts say [the land] needs to be put back as it was.”
He said that it is “what the local community wish to see” and reassured them that it “was clear in the way that [councillors] have voted.”
He added: “The appeal will be considered under planning guidelines, we believe the reasons for refusal are clear.”
Executive member for planning, transport and countryside at West Berkshire Council, Richard Somner (Con, Tilehurst South and Holybrook), called this the “next big step” in ensuring no unauthorised work continues on the site.
He said: “If the defendants are not successful at appeal, it will also secure the termination of residential occupation of the land within two months of the closure of the appeal.
“The council’s actions to date have successfully limited the extent and impact of the unauthorised development at the site such as no more day rooms, no more hardstandings and stopping further caravans on site.
“Although the matter hasn’t been concluded, the council has moved swiftly. The planning appeal process will now guide the next steps, the timescales of which will be informed by the Planning Inspectorate.”
The council will continue to monitor activity at the site with regard to the new requirements set out by the court.
It will also publicise the receipt of the appeal once it has been made, on or before February 8, and will give guidance on how it will be dealt with.