Agenda and minutes

Planning & Regulation Committee - Monday, 16 January 2012 2.00 pm

Venue: County Hall, New Road, Oxford

Contact: Graham Warrington  Tel: (01865) 815321; E-Mail:  graham.warrington@oxfordshire.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1/12

Apologies for Absence and Temporary Appointments

Minutes:

The Committee stood in silent tribute in memory of Councillor Roger Belson.

 

The Committee also wished Councillor Peter Jones a speedy recovery following his recent illness.

 

The following apologies for absence and temporary appointments were received:

 

Apology

 

Temporary Appointment

Councillor Alan Armitage

Councillor Peter Jones

Councillor George Reynolds

Councillor Jean Fooks

Councillor Patrick Greene

Councillor Lawrie Stratford

 

2/12

Declarations of Interest - see guidance note opposite

Minutes:

Councillor

Item

Nature of Interest

 

Councillor Mrs Fulljames

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item 3 – Minutes 41/11 and 50/11 – Energy from Waste application, Ardley.

 

 

 

 

Item 7 – Frank Wise school – Application No R3.0144/11.

Personal. In the event that the legal process in respect of the application was discussed.

 

 

 

Personal. Member of Cherwell District Council Planning Committee. She advised that she had not expressed an opinion on the application in that capacity and therefore intended to participate in discussion and voting on that item.  

 

3/12

Minutes pdf icon PDF 96 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2011 (PN3) and to receive information arising from them.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2011 were approved and signed by the Chairman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4/12

Chairman's Updates

Minutes:

Waterstock

 

Mr Hamilton advised that at the hearing in the High Court on 19 December the Wyatt Brothers had been allowed further time until 27 January 2012 to prepare an adequate specification for the removal of waste.

 

Energy from Waste, Ardley

 

Mr Hamilton advised that the Liaison Committee had held its inaugural meeting on 10 January 2012.  Membership had been extended to include Bucknell Parish Council and Cherwell District Council but proposals to further extend representation to some of the other 19 parishes also affected had been resisted.  However, those parish councils would be sent minutes of future meetings and given the opportunity to raise issues if necessary. Representatives of statutory undertakers could also be invited to address specific issues.

 

Councillor Mrs Fulljames thanked officers for their work in establishing the Liaison Committee.

 

Ashgrove Farm, Ardley

 

Mr Hamilton advised that the odour management plan was still with the Environment Agency for agreement.  The Agency were monitoring the site and Agrivert were already working to a number of principles set out in the plan, which included a reduction in  the size of windrows and levels of waste of 25% and a general improvement in working and management practices.

5/12

Petitions and Public Address

Minutes:

Speaker

Item

 

David Hignell (Sutton Courtenay Parish Council)

Dee McDonald (Hansons UK)

County Councillor Stewart Lilly

 

)

)

)6. Application No.11/02440/CM

)

 

6/12

To crush, screen, blend and stock reject building blocks, furnace bottom ash and reject materials from concrete making to make material for block making at Hanson's UK, Sutton Courtenay - Application No. 11/02440/CM pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Report by the Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) (PN6)

 

This is an application to import reject building blocks from three Blockworks, crush and screen them and mix them with other locally available materials and export the recycled product to Milton Blockworks to make more building blocks. The site is a 2.5 hectare area on a sand and gravel stocking area which is also part of the Sutton Courtenay mineral and waste management complex. The site is suitable for recycling use to 2030 as it is within a landfill that expires at that date and the site can then be restored as required by the Valeof White Horse District Council’s policy for protection of the landscape and countryside. It has good access to the Didcot perimeter road and lorries can then be routed to the A34. The site is several hundred metres from the closest villages of Sutton Courtenay and Appleford and would have no discernable effect on the amenity of residents there. Although reject blocks would be brought in from blockworks in Berkshire and Warwickshire policies allow some cross boundary movement of waste and the harm of long journeys would be outweighed by the opportunity to recycle material and offset the need for locally won sand and gravel. The report also outlines the consultation responses received, relevant Development Plan and other policies and key considerations for the committee to take account in determining the application and sets out the views and recommendation of the Deputy Director (Infrastructure & Growth).

 

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to compliance with the current site routeing agreement, a contribution of £7,804.84 (index linked) to Science Vale UK Strategic Schemes that planning permission be granted subject to conditions to be drawn up by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) but to include those matters set out below:

 

1.                  Detailed compliance condition

2.                  Operating hours – Mon – Fri 0700-1800 and Saturdays 0700-1300

3.                  No operation on Sunday and Bank  holiday

4.                  Operation to cease by end of 2030 with restoration to be completed by 2032

5.         Crushing of blocks for only 6 weeks a year.

6.         Details of mobile plant to be submitted and agreed.

7.         Restoration and aftercare to take place in accordance with Landfill and aftercare. permission restoration

8.         Steps to be taken to prevent any solid matter, reject block material, concrete waste of furnace bottom ash or excess amounts of suspended matter from passing into any water course

9.         No oil storage tanks to be sited.

10.       All stock piles not to exceed the height of the trees to the west of the site

11.       Effective silencers to be provided on plant, machineries and vehicles

12.       Reversing vehicles shall not emit warning noise that may have adverse impacts on neighbours or properties.

13.       No buildings, plant and machineries to be erected without consent

14.       No imported material to be deposited on the land except reject blocks from Coleshill, Thatcham and Milton, concrete waste from Concrete batching plants at Sutton  ...  view the full agenda text for item 6/12

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered (PN6) an application to import reject building blocks and to crush, screen and blend that material with other locally available materials to produce recycled material for block making for export.

 

Mr Hignell referred to the general concern felt by residents in Sutton Courtenay, which primarily revolved around the laissez faire attitude of the 2 main operators on the landfill site and the general perception locally that due to the character and appearance of the site there seemed to be little support from the regulatory authorities.  The cumulative effect of many individual applications now gave the appearance of an industrial and commercial waste land, which conflicted with the provisions of the Vale of White Horse District Council’s Adopted Local Plan.  Noise, dust, light and odour pollution and infestation of flies from the site continually affected the quality of life and had, over time, gradually eroded local amenities.  The parish council acknowledged that not all of these problems were caused by this particular operation and that the application needed to be considered on its merits and against development plan policies. However, the cumulative impact of successive developments should be a material consideration and at very least have warranted an environmental impact analysis.  There were questions over the sustainability of the application regarding traffic/vehicle generation, particularly as material was not sourced locally, the amount of material to be stockpiled when crushing would only take place for 6 weeks of the year and its potential effect on surface water drainage.  The proposals could also affect the Millennium Common area and local footpath network.  The parish council felt that enough was enough and were asking the county council to seriously consider their objection and the further imposition which would be placed on the local community.

 

Responding to Councillor Crabbe he advised that the concern of the parish council revolved around the cumulative effect of developments and not the retrospective nature of the application itself. 

 

Dee McDonald advised that the site was in the right location and appropriate for this type of operation.  It was a designated aggregate stock piling area well screened and some distance from existing settlements. It had good access to the local road network and the company were willing to continue operating within the provisions of the current routeing agreement, which would help protect local communities from traffic.  The operation contributed to the local economy realising a £5,500 business rate and if permission was granted the company would make a contribution to the Science Vale UK Strategic Schemes.  The proposal also realised the need to divert waste from landfill and by securing production of secondary and recycled aggregate on a site, which was part of an existing mineral extraction and landfill site and close to the market for the recycled material, it conformed with policies W3 and W4 of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan.  As far as she was aware there had been no complaints raised at the Millennium Common steering group as a result of this operation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/12

7/12

Retention and continued use of a triple relocatable building, unit ref E241 (T2) for a further period of 5 years at Frank Wise School, Banbury - Application R3.0144/11 pdf icon PDF 77 KB

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

 

This application is for the retention and continued use of a temporary building for a further period of five years.  The application is being reported to this Committee as objections have been received to the proposal.

 

The report describes why the school are applying to renew planning permission and outlines the objections and other responses to the application.  Relevant planning policies are included along with the comments and recommendation of the Deputy Director (Growth and Infrastructure) on the proposal.

 

It is RECOMMENDED that Application No. R3.0144/11  be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Deputy Director (Growth & Infrastructure) 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.                        Temporary building to be removed by 31 January 2017.

3.                        School travel plan to be revisited within 3 months with a view to reducing local congestion around the school site.  Revised travel plan to be implemented within 6 months.

4.                        Reinstatement of the playing field within 3 months of the removal of the building.

5.                        Restoration of netball court to its original position once the temporary building is removed on 31 January 2017.

6.                        Submission of a landscaping scheme

7.                        Implementation of the approved landscaping scheme.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered (PN7) an application for the retention and continued use of a temporary building for a further period of five years at Frank Wise School, Banbury.

 

Councillor Stratford referred to the good reputation enjoyed by the school and moved the officer recommendation.

 

Councillor Tanner however felt the school needed a permanent building and that a permission granted for 5 years would not exert enough pressure for that to happen.  He moved an amendment that planning permission be granted for a period of 2 years and not 5.  The amendment seconded by Councillor Sanders was put to the Committee and lost by 12 votes to 2.

 

The original motion was then put to the Committee and carried by 13 votes to 1.

 

RESOLVED:  that Application No. R3.0144/11  be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Growth & Infrastructure) 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.                        Temporary building to be removed by 31 January 2017.

3.                        School travel plan to be revisited within 3 months with a view to reducing local congestion around the school site.  Revised travel plan to be implemented within 6 months.

4.                        Reinstatement of the playing field within 3 months of the removal of the building.

5.                        Restoration of netball court to its original position once the temporary building had been removed on 31 January 2017.

6.                        Submission of a landscaping scheme.

7.                        Implementation of the approved landscaping scheme.