Agenda and minutes

Nominations for election of Chairman were as follows:

Councillor Armitage (nominated by Councillor Tanner and seconded by Councillor Sanders)

Councillor Hayward (nominated by Councillor Jones and seconded by Councillor Jelf)

By 10 votes to 4 Councillor Hayward was elected Chairman for the Council year.

Nominations for election of Deputy Chairman were as follows:

Councillor Sanders (nominated by Councillor Armitage and seconded by Councillor Tanner)

Councillor Mrs Fulljames (nominated by Councillor Fitzgerald-O’Connor and seconded by Councillor Nimmo-Smith)

By 10 votes to 4 Councillor Mrs Fulljames was elected Deputy Chairman for the Council year.

Councillor Hudspeth advised that he would leave the meeting for the duration of Item 7 on the grounds that he might have predetermined the application as part of his responsibilities as the former Cabinet Member for Growth & Infrastructure.

To approve the minutes (PN5) of the meeting held on 11 April 2011 and to receive for information any matters arising therefrom.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 April 2011 were approved and signed subject to amending “limits” to read “levels” in paragraph (b) of the resolution to Minute 12/11.

Updates

Mr Dance advised that the Monitoring Officer had completed his investigations into the process leading up to approval by the Committee of applications at Cassington Quarry and the slurry lagoon at Worton Farm. He had concluded that in both cases the County Council had complied with due process and that both decisions had therefore been soundly made.  However, he had suggested that with regard to the Cassington Quarry application it would have been good practice to have consulted Eynsham Parish Council.  The Monitoring Officer had written to planning officers to encourage, where appropriate, wider parish consultation.

Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) (PN7).

Planning permission for the Cogges Link Road at Witney was granted in April 2009.  Work on the scheme has not yet commenced.  In the meantime further work has been undertaken to assess the potential for improvements to the traffic signal controlled junction at Oxford Hill/Jubilee Way (the north-eastern end of the Cogges Link Road).  As a result of that work, a roundabout is now considered to be the preferred solution for managing traffic movements at this junction.  This report describes the planning application that has now been submitted for the roundabout.  The application is being reported to this committee as objections have been received to the proposal.

Some of the comments received repeat objections to the Cogges Link Road that have already been considered and the principle of the Cogges Link Road is not up for consideration as part of this proposal.

The report describes the proposed development and its background, sets out the comments and representations received, and outlines the views of the Deputy Director (Growth & Infrastructure).

It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission be granted for the development proposed in Application No. R3.0039/11 subject to conditions to be determined by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) to include the following matters:

1.                  Detailed compliance – development to be carried out strictly in accordance with the particulars contained in the application and plans.

2.                  Detailed duration – development to commence within 3 years.

3.                  Landscaping scheme to be submitted and agreed.

4.                  Landscaping scheme to be implemented.

5.                  Retained trees/hedges to be protected during construction.

6.                  Agreement and implementation of an archaeological mitigation strategy.

7.                  Details of lighting to be submitted and agreed.

8.                  Surface water drainage scheme to be approved.

9.                  Details of ecological mitigation measures (including measures already agreed as part of the CLR approval) to be submitted and agreed.

10.             Final details of cycleway provision to be agreed.

11.             Existing footpaths and cycleways to be made good following completion of works.

12.             Details of proposed working hours during construction to be agreed.

13.             All plant and equipment to be used in pond construction to be designed and maintained to reduce noise levels to a minimum.

14.             Road to be constructed using a low road noise surface material.

15.             A scheme for routeing and control of construction traffic to be approved.

16.             No vehicles used in construction works shall enter the public highway unless its wheels and chassis are cleaned.

17.             Measures to be adopted to prevent dust nuisance.

Informatives

1.                  Requirement for a Site Waste Management Plan.

2.                  Diversion required for any Thames Water Main that crosses the site.

Planning permission had been granted for the Cogges Link Road at Witney in April 2009.  In the meantime further work had been undertaken to assess the potential for improvements as a result of which the Committee were now asked to consider an application for the provision of a roundabout to replace the current signal controlled junction at Oxford Hill/Jubilee Way.

Through his public address Mr Condon advised that the revised proposal did not meet safety requirements as laid down in the Highway Agency’s 2007 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges.  TD/50 of the manual did not give guidance on signal controlled junctions on gradients and TD16/07 advised that steep gradients should be avoided at roundabout approaches or flattened to a maximum 2% before entry.  The minimum achieved by this arrangement was 4.2% which meant there were potentially serious issues of large vehicles overturning.  The design manual further advised that roundabouts should preferably be sited on level ground and not sited at the bottom of or on long descents.  According to County Council figures the gradient here ranged from 4% to 6.5% over a distance of 200 metres with a downward incline starting at 350 metres before the roundabout.  He drew particular attention to the dangers of large vehicles entering the roundabout from the south and exiting east onto Jubilee Way.  There were further issues of safety for cyclists and motorcyclists arising from the rate of change in camber, which could result in a loss of grip.  He urged the Committee to defer the application to allow these and other issues connected with this scheme to be addressed.

Through his public address Mr Wilcock advised that 18 years ago he had opposed the proposed routeing of the Cogges Link through the Cogges estate. The revised scheme had avoided the estate but had retained northern and southern accesses, which were later dropped, meaning all traffic entering or leaving the Cogges estate would be obliged to use the northern access.  In 2008 concern had been expressed that this single junction would be able to cope but assurances had been given that a controlled T-junction between Cogges Hill Road and the Cogges Link Road and a 4 way light controlled junction on Oxford Hill would provide safe access.  However, those proposals were now to be amended by replacing the former with an uncontrolled junction and a roundabout at the latter.  These proposals contravened Local Plan Policy T6 insofar as they would increase the potential for traffic conflict and did not provide adequate safety for pedestrians (including schoolchildren) and cyclists.  Pedestrian refuges were inadequate and traffic conflict would increase with heightened accident potential for right turning traffic. He did not consider that these issues had been given enough weight in Jacobs’ report which also inferred that additional land would be required. He had had no response to his suggestion for provision of a 5 limb roundabout.  The marginal flow improvements for traffic did not justify the hazards this application would generate in contrast to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19/11

Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) (PN8).

The proposal is to convert an existing footpath route into a combined pedestrian/cycle track. The application includes the creation of some new steps, two cycle ramps and seven new lighting columns. The application is being reported to this Committee as an objection has been received to the proposal.

The report describes the development and outlines the objection and other responses to the application. Relevant planning policies are included along with the comments and recommendation of the Deputy Director (Growth and Infrastructure).

It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission be granted for the development proposed in Application No. R3.0043/11 subject to conditions to be determined by the Head of Sustainable Development to include the following matters:

1.            The development must be carried out strictly in accordance with the particulars contained in the application and the plans.

2.            Commencement of the development within 3 years.

3.            Submission and agreement of the external material proposed for the retaining walls.

4.            Retained trees to be protected during construction works.

5.            Submission and agreement of a landscaping scheme - to include replacement planting.

6.            Landscaping scheme to be implemented within first planting season following the completion of the development.

7.            Tree removal to be carried out outside of the bird breeding season.

8.            Site assessment of lighting levels from the new lights and implementation of any remedial action that may be required.

9.      Submission and agreement of a construction traffic management plan (to include contractors working hours, delivery times of materials and site compound).

The Committee considered an application to convert an existing footpath into a combined pedestrian/cycle track.

RESOLVED (on a motion by Councillor Reynolds, seconded by Councillor Jelf and carried unanimously): that planning permission be granted for the development in Application No. R3.0043/11 subject to conditions to be determined by the Head of Sustainable Development to include the following matters:

1.                  The development must be carried out strictly in accordance with the particulars contained in the application and the plans.

2.                  Commencement of the development within 3 years.

3.                  Submission and agreement of the external material proposed for the retaining walls.

4.                  Retained trees to be protected during construction works.

5.                  Submission and agreement of a landscaping scheme - to include replacement planting.

6.                  Landscaping scheme to be implemented within first planting season following the completion of the development.

7.                  Tree removal to be carried out outside of the bird breeding season.

8.                  Site assessment of lighting levels from the new lights and implementation of any remedial action that may be required.

9.         Submission and agreement of a construction traffic management plan (to include contractors working hours, delivery times of materials and site compound).

Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) (PN9).

The report updates the Committee on regular monitoring of minerals and waste planning permissions and progress on enforcement cases.

It is RECOMMENDED that the Schedule of Compliance Monitoring Visits in Annex 1 and the Schedule of Enforcement Cases in Annex 2 to the report PN9 be noted.

The Committee considered a report which gave an update on regular monitoring of minerals and waste planning permissions and progress on enforcement cases.

The Chairman advised that the purpose of the report was to update Committee members on monitoring of waste and mineral sites and progress of enforcement by the Council.  The report was for information only and there were no decisions requested of the Committee in relation to the report or in relation to any of the sites reported in it.  An application had been made by Mr Ron Wyatt to address the Committee in respect of one of the enforcement sites included within the report.  Whilst Mr Wyatt could address the Committee, it was important that all parties appreciated that this matter was presently with the County Council’s solicitor and the courts, and the position as set out in the report, was one which the Committee were being asked to note.  There was no substantive decision to be made.

Mr Wyatt stated that he and his brother disputed the claim that no realistic efforts had been made to comply with the Court order and outlined what had been done including commissioning the services of a reputable landscape company to carry out the works required whilst establishing an accurate record of existing and pre-existing levels, which had been reported to the Council’s monitoring officers.  He maintained that County officers had concurred with the results of the survey.  On the instruction of County officers further excavations had been carried out over an area of 4/5 acres which were recorded and no identifiable waste had been found.  No further instructions had been given to excavate other than in an area under the control of the Environment Agency who had confirmed the view that levels in that area had not changed.  He expressed disappointment that members of the Committee had not had the opportunity to see for themselves the realistic efforts which had been made and what had been achieved.  He felt that the true facts had not always been reported and regretted the £2m costs which had been incurred as result of the dispute. He felt his company had worked hard with officers to resolve this issue and his view now, and he believed that County officers held a similar view, was that the enforcement plan was now no longer suitable for measuring compliance and to take any more material off site would then necessitate importation of material back into the site to maintain existing levels.  He believed they had acted reasonably and realistically in returning the land to as close as possible to its original form and he hoped officers would confirm that. He showed 2 photographs comparing the same bridleway some 20 years apart which he felt illustrated that levels had remained roughly the same.  However, the enforcement plan had required land adjacent to the bridleway to be lowered by an average of 2 metres, a discrepancy replicated across the site.  The photographed bridleway also happened to be the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21/11