Basingstoke & Dean Borough Council
Councillors:
54
Wards:
18
Committees:
22
Meetings (2025):
67
Meetings (2024):
72
Meeting
Cabinet - Basingstoke & Dean
Meeting Times
Scheduled Time
Start:
Tuesday, 7th January 2025
6:30 PM
Tuesday, 7th January 2025
6:30 PM
End:
Tuesday, 7th January 2025
8:00 PM
Tuesday, 7th January 2025
8:00 PM
Meeting Status
Status:
Confirmed
Confirmed
Date:
07 Jan 2025
07 Jan 2025
Location:
Committee Rooms 1 & 2 - Deanes
Committee Rooms 1 & 2 - Deanes
Webcast:
Available
Available
Meeting Attendees
Chair
Leader
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Major Projects and Regeneration
Committee Member
Co-Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Property
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Infrastructure
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Communities, Partnerships and Inclusion
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Climate and Ecological Emergency
Committee Member
Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing
Guest
Chair of the Development Control Committee
Agenda
1
Apologies for absence
Minutes
Apologies were received from Councillor Tomblin.
2
Declarations of interest
Minutes
There were no declarations of interest.
3
Urgent matters
To consider any items of business, other than those shown on this agenda and which, by reason of special circumstances to be stated at the meeting, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.
Minutes
There were no urgent items.
4
Minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2024
The Chair will move that the minutes of the meeting be signed as a correct record. The only part of the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.
Attachments:
- Document Printed minutes 10122024 1830 Cabinet 19 Dec 2024
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2024 were confirmed as an accurate record and signed by the Chair.
5
Leader and Portfolio Holders Announcements
Minutes
There were no announcements.
6
Basingstoke Golf Centre Re-provision Strategy
This report sets out a strategy for re-provision of golfing facilities should the existing Basingstoke Golf Centre be redeveloped by Great Wolf Resorts.
Recommendation from the Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture
Recommendation from the Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture
Attachments:
- Document Golf Reprovision Strategy - Cabinet Paper 07.01.2024_FINAL V9 19 Dec 2024
Minutes
The Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture presented a report which set out proposals for the re-provision of golfing facilities to replace the existing facilities should the existing Basingstoke Golf Centre be redeveloped by Great Wolf Resorts (GWR) as a waterpark and hotel complex. It was proposed that a replacement pitch and putt golf course be created at Down Grange with additional car parking and administrative facility. It was also proposed that, if feasible a golf-pod style driving range and adventure golf course be included at the same location, however it was recommended that a parcel of land at the Leisure Park be reserved should it not be possible to provide the facilities alongside the pitch and putt course.
Visiting speakers, Mr Beevers and Councillor McCormick were invited to address the meeting.
Mr Beevers requested Cabinet to reject or defer the proposal as inadequate. He stated there was no layout plan showing what would be lost at the Golf Centre or Down Grange or plans for other options and further referred to Section 10 of the Open Spaces Act. He suggested that restoring nature and other ecological services to more of Down Grange and the Golf Centre site would be more multi-functional, sustainable and beneficial to communities, wildlife and River Loddon than a water park and hotel which would increase traffic, air, noise and light pollution and add footfall and disturbance to remaining sites across town. He added there was more need for open space and all open space at Down Grange and the Golf Centre should remain green and mostly open.
Further comment was made regarding the use of appropriately qualified Trustees and communities to improve and preserve community spaces rather than the local authority.
With regard to Down Grange he referred to the biodiversity net gain rules to improve habitat but no replacement for land take which he considered insufficient. He added that diminished space for nature on small, fragmented sites without adequate compensation increased risks to species sustainability and reduced opportunities for species, diversity, abundance and mobility. Furthermore he felt it was unclear whether the council had an appropriate project framework for delivering biodiversity net gain and suggested it was another reason why communities, conservation groups and local social enterprises working with Natural Basingstoke should be part of the solution.
The Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture responded to the comments. He clarified that the decision previously made regarding GWR was separate to the matter under consideration. Regarding Down Grange he highlighted that the area under consideration for the provision of the pitch and putt was parkland and would remain parkland should it become a golf centre. Should the proposals progress, further assessment and engagement with Natural Basingstoke and others would be undertaken to ensure the delivery of 10% biodiversity net gain. He added there was the opportunity to increase biodiversity on the pitch and putt site and the adjacent meadow. He reiterated that the matter under consideration was the first step and if agreed further partnership working and engagement would take place in the future. He thanked Mr Beevers for his contribution.
Councillor McCormick referred to the original plans for Down Grange as an area for organised sport, open space area for people to walk and a wild area which was now well established with sporting facilities and a conservation area and an area to be proud of. He asked how the area would change because of the proposals and what were the traffic implications for the A30 expected to carry traffic from new housing development, a new hospital and new industrial estate. He referenced previous rejected proposals for housing development and rehousing of Basingstoke Town Football Club on Down Grange where traffic concerns were cited and asked what had changed. He asked what proposals were being considered to upgrade the Beechdown Health Club junction on the A30 to cope with more traffic. He further asked what the impact on amenity value was in and around Down Grange and what was the effect to users of the area. Referring to the options analysis in the report for the golf facilities, he considered the proposals were a done deal. He was concerned that no layout of the proposals had been presented and vague financial calculations indicated that cost was a key concern. He asked what the response from England Golf was to the proposal and whether the 6 hole pitch and putt golf course and reduced driving range was viable. He suggested the proposals put before cabinet were premature and required further consideration.
Responding to Councillor McCormick’s comments, the Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture clarified there would be no restriction to access for dog walkers to paths and felt the area could be improved with paths through the woods which could be considered at the detailed design stage. He added that traffic concerns would be dealt with through the planning process and any upgrade to the junction highlighted would be a matter for Hampshire County Council. Furthermore he considered that most traffic would come from the opposite direction and parking at Down Grange could be improved to address any parking issues. He confirmed that England Golf supported reprovision to encourage and support participation in the sport and clarified that the proposal was for a pitch and putt course not a golf course. He concluded that it was important not to lose the facility.
Cabinet discussed the proposals. It was commented that the proposal was a sensible compromise between enhancing biodiversity and retaining as much open space as possible and shrinking the footprint for golf reprovision. A golf driving would require a much larger area of space and would restrict the amount of open space left for wilding.
It was further commented that the proposal would enable the reprovision of golf should the GWR development proceed whilst maintaining and improving Down Grange for those who use it and furthermore would strengthen the leisure offer for residents and encourage more people to the borough which would support the local economy and local businesses.
The Cabinet’s commitment to retaining golf facilities in the borough was reiterated. Following a review of landholdings by officers, it was clarified that suitable sites were all green open space areas with Down Grange being considered the most suitable site for the reprovision of golf facilities.
Referring to traffic issues comment was made that traffic impact of the golf facility was very different to that of a housing development or football stadium. It was also considered there would be minimal impact on traffic as there would be a flow of users throughout the day rather than at a specific time such as a rugby game.
It was also commented that this was a waypoint in a process which would involve future engagement, significant detailed design work and a process that would answer many questions that had been raised.
It was highlighted that advice from England Golf had been valuable in considering the options for golf re-provision. Furthermore future opportunities, not just at the Leisure Park, could be considered for the provision of a driving range and adventure golf course.
Thanks were expressed to the visiting speakers for their contributions. It was acknowledged that further representations had been made by residents and sports organisations, which were welcomed and would be responded to.
The recommendations put before Cabinet were agreed.
Resolved: Cabinet
1. Approve the preferred option for use of a site at Down Grange to provide a replacement pitch and putt golf course, additional car parking, and an administrative facility for the golf provision, and the inclusion of a modern golf-pod style driving range and adventure golf course at the same location if feasible, subject to the council obtaining any necessary planning permission(s).
2. Agree to reserve a parcel of land within the Leisure Park for the future provision of an adventure golf course and/or a golf-pod style driving range if both or either of these facilities cannot be provided alongside a pitch and putt course.
3. Delegate authority to the Director of Regeneration in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Sports Leisure and Cultureto:
a) following receipt of planning consultancy advice, finalise site selection for the reprovision of golfing facilities;
b) commission detailed designs for all the golf facilities, with and without the inclusion of a modern golf-pod style driving range and/or adventure golf course should both or either of these facilities be more feasibly located at the Leisure Park;
c) approve designs and apply for any necessary planning permission(s);
d) procure the construction of the facilities; and agree commercial terms with the appointed leisure operator or private sector provider(s) as necessary.
4. Recommend to Council that they approve addition of a new scheme to the capital programme with a budget of £1.000M in 2027/28, to enable the construction of the new pitch and putt golf course and associated works as set out in Section 7 of the report.
Visiting speakers, Mr Beevers and Councillor McCormick were invited to address the meeting.
Mr Beevers requested Cabinet to reject or defer the proposal as inadequate. He stated there was no layout plan showing what would be lost at the Golf Centre or Down Grange or plans for other options and further referred to Section 10 of the Open Spaces Act. He suggested that restoring nature and other ecological services to more of Down Grange and the Golf Centre site would be more multi-functional, sustainable and beneficial to communities, wildlife and River Loddon than a water park and hotel which would increase traffic, air, noise and light pollution and add footfall and disturbance to remaining sites across town. He added there was more need for open space and all open space at Down Grange and the Golf Centre should remain green and mostly open.
Further comment was made regarding the use of appropriately qualified Trustees and communities to improve and preserve community spaces rather than the local authority.
With regard to Down Grange he referred to the biodiversity net gain rules to improve habitat but no replacement for land take which he considered insufficient. He added that diminished space for nature on small, fragmented sites without adequate compensation increased risks to species sustainability and reduced opportunities for species, diversity, abundance and mobility. Furthermore he felt it was unclear whether the council had an appropriate project framework for delivering biodiversity net gain and suggested it was another reason why communities, conservation groups and local social enterprises working with Natural Basingstoke should be part of the solution.
The Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture responded to the comments. He clarified that the decision previously made regarding GWR was separate to the matter under consideration. Regarding Down Grange he highlighted that the area under consideration for the provision of the pitch and putt was parkland and would remain parkland should it become a golf centre. Should the proposals progress, further assessment and engagement with Natural Basingstoke and others would be undertaken to ensure the delivery of 10% biodiversity net gain. He added there was the opportunity to increase biodiversity on the pitch and putt site and the adjacent meadow. He reiterated that the matter under consideration was the first step and if agreed further partnership working and engagement would take place in the future. He thanked Mr Beevers for his contribution.
Councillor McCormick referred to the original plans for Down Grange as an area for organised sport, open space area for people to walk and a wild area which was now well established with sporting facilities and a conservation area and an area to be proud of. He asked how the area would change because of the proposals and what were the traffic implications for the A30 expected to carry traffic from new housing development, a new hospital and new industrial estate. He referenced previous rejected proposals for housing development and rehousing of Basingstoke Town Football Club on Down Grange where traffic concerns were cited and asked what had changed. He asked what proposals were being considered to upgrade the Beechdown Health Club junction on the A30 to cope with more traffic. He further asked what the impact on amenity value was in and around Down Grange and what was the effect to users of the area. Referring to the options analysis in the report for the golf facilities, he considered the proposals were a done deal. He was concerned that no layout of the proposals had been presented and vague financial calculations indicated that cost was a key concern. He asked what the response from England Golf was to the proposal and whether the 6 hole pitch and putt golf course and reduced driving range was viable. He suggested the proposals put before cabinet were premature and required further consideration.
Responding to Councillor McCormick’s comments, the Cabinet Member for Sports, Leisure and Culture clarified there would be no restriction to access for dog walkers to paths and felt the area could be improved with paths through the woods which could be considered at the detailed design stage. He added that traffic concerns would be dealt with through the planning process and any upgrade to the junction highlighted would be a matter for Hampshire County Council. Furthermore he considered that most traffic would come from the opposite direction and parking at Down Grange could be improved to address any parking issues. He confirmed that England Golf supported reprovision to encourage and support participation in the sport and clarified that the proposal was for a pitch and putt course not a golf course. He concluded that it was important not to lose the facility.
Cabinet discussed the proposals. It was commented that the proposal was a sensible compromise between enhancing biodiversity and retaining as much open space as possible and shrinking the footprint for golf reprovision. A golf driving would require a much larger area of space and would restrict the amount of open space left for wilding.
It was further commented that the proposal would enable the reprovision of golf should the GWR development proceed whilst maintaining and improving Down Grange for those who use it and furthermore would strengthen the leisure offer for residents and encourage more people to the borough which would support the local economy and local businesses.
The Cabinet’s commitment to retaining golf facilities in the borough was reiterated. Following a review of landholdings by officers, it was clarified that suitable sites were all green open space areas with Down Grange being considered the most suitable site for the reprovision of golf facilities.
Referring to traffic issues comment was made that traffic impact of the golf facility was very different to that of a housing development or football stadium. It was also considered there would be minimal impact on traffic as there would be a flow of users throughout the day rather than at a specific time such as a rugby game.
It was also commented that this was a waypoint in a process which would involve future engagement, significant detailed design work and a process that would answer many questions that had been raised.
It was highlighted that advice from England Golf had been valuable in considering the options for golf re-provision. Furthermore future opportunities, not just at the Leisure Park, could be considered for the provision of a driving range and adventure golf course.
Thanks were expressed to the visiting speakers for their contributions. It was acknowledged that further representations had been made by residents and sports organisations, which were welcomed and would be responded to.
The recommendations put before Cabinet were agreed.
Resolved: Cabinet
1. Approve the preferred option for use of a site at Down Grange to provide a replacement pitch and putt golf course, additional car parking, and an administrative facility for the golf provision, and the inclusion of a modern golf-pod style driving range and adventure golf course at the same location if feasible, subject to the council obtaining any necessary planning permission(s).
2. Agree to reserve a parcel of land within the Leisure Park for the future provision of an adventure golf course and/or a golf-pod style driving range if both or either of these facilities cannot be provided alongside a pitch and putt course.
3. Delegate authority to the Director of Regeneration in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Sports Leisure and Cultureto:
a) following receipt of planning consultancy advice, finalise site selection for the reprovision of golfing facilities;
b) commission detailed designs for all the golf facilities, with and without the inclusion of a modern golf-pod style driving range and/or adventure golf course should both or either of these facilities be more feasibly located at the Leisure Park;
c) approve designs and apply for any necessary planning permission(s);
d) procure the construction of the facilities; and agree commercial terms with the appointed leisure operator or private sector provider(s) as necessary.
4. Recommend to Council that they approve addition of a new scheme to the capital programme with a budget of £1.000M in 2027/28, to enable the construction of the new pitch and putt golf course and associated works as set out in Section 7 of the report.
7
Review of the Hackney Carriage Fares
This report sets out proposals to increase the Hackney Carriage Fare tariff.
Recommendation from the Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing
Recommendation from the Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing
Attachments:
- Document Review of the Hackney Carriage Fares 2024 19 Dec 2024
- Document Appendix 1 Hackney Carriage fare table Current 19 Dec 2024
- Document Appendix 2 Proposed Hackney Carriage fare table 19 Dec 2024
- Document Appendix 3 Hackney Tariff Review Report Licensing Committee 19 Dec 2024
Minutes
The Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing presented a report which proposed a tariff increase to Hackney Carriage Vehicle (HCV) fares. It was explained that a request for the increase of an additional £1 to the flag fare had been made by the taxi federation which had been supported by more than 75% of its drivers. Furthermore officers met with taxi drivers to discuss the proposal and to develop a simplified fare tariff. The Licensing Committee had endorsed the fare increase and simplified tariff. Further consultation on the proposals had been undertaken and no objections had been received.
The Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing acknowledged the concerns of residents regarding the provision of taxi services but highlighted that the service was in a more positive position with 328 private hire taxi’s, 76 HCV’s, an increase in electric vehicle taxi’s and increase in driver applications.
Visiting speaker, Councillor McCormick, addressed the meeting with his concerns. He expressed shock at the increase being proposed and cited an increase in HCV fares of 33%. He felt that an increase to HCV fares would encourage an increase in private hire fares. He further referred to increases in tariff fares citing increases of between 20% and 34%. With inflation at around 2.6% and wages averaging a 5% increase he asked what the justification was for increasing fares by as much as 33% and why now when fuel prices were at their lowest since September 2021.
The Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing responded to the comments made. She reiterated that the request to increase fares had been submitted by the taxi federation and it was only right that the request be considered. She added that the borough had a need for taxi’s particularly HCVs which were the only vehicles suitable for wheelchair users. She also referred to the expensive running costs of HCVs such as diesel costs, lifetime of vehicles and replacement and insurance costs. She clarified that the increase to the flag fare was £0.20 not £1 as had been requested and questioned the accuracy of percentage increases cited by Councillor McCormick. She added that the proposed tariffs were not unreasonable and were comparable with private hire fares. Furthermore, the Licensing Committee had considered the proposal and endorsed the fare increases.
The Co-Leader and Cabinet member for Finance and Property was pleased to see an increase in the number of taxi drivers following years of decline and expressed how important the taxi service was as a method of travel particularly when bus services don’t link up and at nighttime. He considered the fare increases reached through a consultation process were balanced and fair and reflected the desire to attract more drivers to the industry. Furthermore drivers would want to charge a fair price without overpricing to encourage customers as without customers they had no business. He added he did not see any significant fare increases in terms of the 33% quoted by Councillor McCormick. He considered the proposals a good news story and welcomed increasing taxi trade particularly for the nighttime economy.
The Leader of the Council moved an amendment to the recommendation, which was agreed, to amend the date that the fares would take effect from the 8 January to 15 January to allow the decision to go through the appropriate process. It was noted the proposals had been consulted upon and supported by the Licensing Committee and taxi drivers and highlighted that following public consultation no objections had been received. The change to the tariff calculations to simply the fares was also noted. Furthermore it was considered important to recognise the important role of the taxi trade and support the drivers many of whom were self-employed and small local businesses.
The recommendations as amended were approved.
Resolved: To agree
1. The proposed fare increase and proposal in Appendix 2 of the report
2. That the table of fares will come into effect on the 15 January or as soon as it is reasonably practicable to update vehicle fare meters.
The Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing acknowledged the concerns of residents regarding the provision of taxi services but highlighted that the service was in a more positive position with 328 private hire taxi’s, 76 HCV’s, an increase in electric vehicle taxi’s and increase in driver applications.
Visiting speaker, Councillor McCormick, addressed the meeting with his concerns. He expressed shock at the increase being proposed and cited an increase in HCV fares of 33%. He felt that an increase to HCV fares would encourage an increase in private hire fares. He further referred to increases in tariff fares citing increases of between 20% and 34%. With inflation at around 2.6% and wages averaging a 5% increase he asked what the justification was for increasing fares by as much as 33% and why now when fuel prices were at their lowest since September 2021.
The Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing responded to the comments made. She reiterated that the request to increase fares had been submitted by the taxi federation and it was only right that the request be considered. She added that the borough had a need for taxi’s particularly HCVs which were the only vehicles suitable for wheelchair users. She also referred to the expensive running costs of HCVs such as diesel costs, lifetime of vehicles and replacement and insurance costs. She clarified that the increase to the flag fare was £0.20 not £1 as had been requested and questioned the accuracy of percentage increases cited by Councillor McCormick. She added that the proposed tariffs were not unreasonable and were comparable with private hire fares. Furthermore, the Licensing Committee had considered the proposal and endorsed the fare increases.
The Co-Leader and Cabinet member for Finance and Property was pleased to see an increase in the number of taxi drivers following years of decline and expressed how important the taxi service was as a method of travel particularly when bus services don’t link up and at nighttime. He considered the fare increases reached through a consultation process were balanced and fair and reflected the desire to attract more drivers to the industry. Furthermore drivers would want to charge a fair price without overpricing to encourage customers as without customers they had no business. He added he did not see any significant fare increases in terms of the 33% quoted by Councillor McCormick. He considered the proposals a good news story and welcomed increasing taxi trade particularly for the nighttime economy.
The Leader of the Council moved an amendment to the recommendation, which was agreed, to amend the date that the fares would take effect from the 8 January to 15 January to allow the decision to go through the appropriate process. It was noted the proposals had been consulted upon and supported by the Licensing Committee and taxi drivers and highlighted that following public consultation no objections had been received. The change to the tariff calculations to simply the fares was also noted. Furthermore it was considered important to recognise the important role of the taxi trade and support the drivers many of whom were self-employed and small local businesses.
The recommendations as amended were approved.
Resolved: To agree
1. The proposed fare increase and proposal in Appendix 2 of the report
2. That the table of fares will come into effect on the 15 January or as soon as it is reasonably practicable to update vehicle fare meters.
Previous Meetings
Join the Discussion
You need to be signed in to comment.
Sign in