Agenda and minutes

The Chairman informed the Committee that the Councillor Owen the deputy chairman would take the Chair for the duration of Item 8.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 2 December 2013 (PN3) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting  held on 2 December 2013 were approved and signed subject to amending Minute 55/13 paragraph 28 as follows:

“Councillor Bartholomew referred to the impact from transport and vehicle movements not only from the extraction process but also from importation of backfill material and asked officers if they agreed that a very low level of confidence should be given to the figures set out in the transport assessment both in terms of a south/north split and the number of vehicle movements as they had been based on a number of assumptions as to where the inert waste would come from as no specific sites had been identified. He reiterated that local people would prefer water based restoration he was perplexed why an application hadn’t been submitted with that in mind as the backfill element seemed to be at the core of the concerns expressed by objectors. 

Ms Nixon agreed that the transport assessment had indeed been based on assumptions which indicated expected transport levels from the south at 75% and 25% from the north. The expected impact on Henley equated to 1.3 movements per hour and from the south to an additional 38 movementsequating to 1 every 15 minutes. That had not been considered significant.”

Minute 55/13 – Extension to Caversham sand and gravel quarry

Officers confirmed that no response had yet been received from the Secretary of State with regard to the application approved at the December meeting.

Minute 56/13 – Sutton Courtenay Waste Management Centre

Officers confirmed that appeals had been lodged against the two applications for this site which had been refused in September 2013.  The appeals would be considered at a formal hearing.

The extraction of sand, gravel and clay as an extension to the existing Gill Mill site with the retention of processing plant, offices with welfare accommodation, weighbridge, sheeting bay, maintenance and storage facilities, vehicle parking areas, fuel storage, conveyor and haul road system, and existing site access, with the crushing, screening, washing, grading and blending of products for sale, retention and extension of existing water management provision including clean water lagoons and silt ponds, retention and extension of stockpiling areas, merchanting of imported aggregates, a concrete products factory, aggregate bagging plant, installation of wheel wash, erection of concrete batching plant and erection of recycled aggregate plant and the import of inert materials for recycling and non-recyclable waste materials for restoration of worked out mineral voids and the manufacture and sale of soils from site and imported materials. Restoration to a combination of nature conservation, including reed bed, meadows and woodland areas, with ecotourism development and recreational uses including retention of existing office complex building and new footpath and bridleway links with the retention and adaptation of the farm buildings of the Beef Unit Farmstead to provide ancillary development for the management of the restored land as a management centre including offices, stores, educational facilities and provision for a small scale biomass energy plant primarily for biomass arising on site at Gill Mill Quarry, Ducklington – Application MW.0050/13.

Report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) (PN6).

This application is for the extraction of approximately 7.8 million tonnes of sand and gravel from an area adjacent and incorporating an existing part of Gill Mill Quarry near Ducklington in West Oxfordshire. The land would be restored to water based recreation, lowland meadow and nature conservation incorporating reedbeds, reedmarsh and wet woodland. The restoration would involve the use of approximately 1.25 million tonnes of imported inert waste material. Up to 100,000 tonnes per annum of clay would also be worked in response to local demand and for restoration purposes. Permission is sought for 30 years and it is anticipated that extraction would take 23 years and the completion of restoration a further 4 years. The quarry currently operates under an existing permission that allows extraction until 2020. Therefore, this development would extend operations for approximately a further 16-23 years.

The application is being reported to this Committee as the District Council have objected. No other objections have been received to this application either from consultees or neighbours. The applicant provided further information to address the District Council’s concerns. However, the District Council did not respond to this. Their areas of concern are that the application is premature ahead of a new Minerals Local Plan, the scale of the expansion, the impact on the landscape, dust, the protection of the SSSI, highway safety and potential for watercourse pollution. However, they support some aspects of the development such as the eco-tourism element to the restoration proposals and the proposal to use a routeing agreement to ensure HGVs travel north  ...  view the full agenda text for item 5/14

The Committee considered (PN6) an application for the extraction of approximately 7.8 million tonnes of sand and gravel from an area adjacent to and incorporating an existing part of Gill Mill Quarry, near Ducklington in West Oxfordshire.

Martin Layer referred to the long history involved in bringing this project to this stage.  The Company through experts had undertaken exhaustive monitoring and modelling and addressed every potential environmental impact with the promise of intense detailed scrutiny.  There had been full dialogue at all levels in line with the Company’s statement of community engagement which has included county, district and parish councils, statutory consultees, conservation groups the wider local community and individuals. The environmental impact assessment has been used to inform the development and has been open to scrutiny bearing in mind that gravel can only be dug where it occurs.  The assessment has amended the original application from 9 to 5 million tonnes.  Relationships with Parish Councils had been positive throughout the process with issues worked through such as providing improved public access and the development will eventually deliver 11km of new paths where previously none existed including from the outset of the development a new 3.4 Km bridleway running across the valley which has required buying additional land and an exiting bridge over the Windrush. To meet concerns regarding increases in visitors from outside the area the Company are to fund construction of new parking places on land provided by Ducklington parish council, which is further evidence of positive joint working. The Company have worked hard to present a thorough and comprehensive proposal for a major minerals application, which has not apart from the District Council received any objections from any statutory consultee, community group or individual and which has been welcomed by those representing nature conservation interests. Approval will:

·                    Provide long term security for 40 direct jobs

·                    A long term framework for future investment decisions

·                    Provide a secure and steady supply of material to local markets and the wider Oxfordshire area maintaining existing infrastructure and supporting growth of the local economy

·                    The state of the art recycled aggregates washing plant will provide long term support for the supply of recycled construction materials

·                    Provide significant areas of priority habitat and major biodiversity gains building on the on the success already achieved at Gill Mill and helping to meet the ambitions of the government’s biodiversity strategy.

Gill Mill has supplied material since 1989 largely without problem or complaint and approval of this application will help maintain that supply of primary and recycled materials.  The company will continue to respect its agreement and create high quality restoration and support local liaison and he urged the Committee to support its officer recommendation to approve.

Mr Layer then responded to questions from:

Councillor Tanner – 22 hectares would be reinstated to agricultural land and the general view was that the gain through the provision of reed beds would outweigh the loss of 11 hectares.

Councillor Handley – there had been extensive discussions with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/14

Report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) (PN7).

The site including the access road has a total area of 1.27 hectares. It is proposed to construct a waste recycling shed which would be  an open-fronted steel-framed with steel cladding building measuring 50 metres long by 15 metres wide (750 m2 of new floorspace) with a ten metres extended roof overhang to the front. The building would be located in the south-eastern part of the main site and orientated south-west to north-east such that the open front would face towards the north-west. The roof height would be ten metres at the front sloping to eight metres at the back. It is required to meet Environment Agency permitting requirements that all processing of waste would take place within a building. This building would be used for sorting skip waste through a semi-automated system which would comprise a feed hopper, trommel screen, conveyor and elevated picking station with bins beneath.It is proposed that up to 35,000 tonnes of skip waste (10,000 tonnes of construction. Demolition and excavation waste and 25,000 tonnes of commercial and industrial waste) would be brought to the site for processing each year and that up to 90% of this would be recycled.  The waste would be tipped under cover in the waste recycling shed and then fed into the processing facility using a grab material handler. Excavators and/or loading shovels would also be used to load lorries for the removal of sorted materials from the site. 30 full-time members of staff would be employed, an increase of five on the applicant’s existing site at Slape Hill Quarry. The site lies in the open countryside and the Green Belt and so is a departure from development plan policies and so very special circumstances must be demonstrated if the application is to be approved.

It is RECOMMENDED that Application  MW.0103/13 (13/01217/CM) be refused planning permission for the following reasons:

i)                   The development would be inappropriate in and would affect the openness of the Oxford Green Belt contrary to the provisions of policy GB1 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996, paragraphs 87 & 88 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policy GB1 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan and policy ESD14 of the Emerging Cherwell Local Plan (ECLP) 2006-2031 (Proposed Submission Draft). The applicant has not demonstrated that the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness is clearly outweighed by other considerations. Very special circumstances do not therefore exist to justify making an exception to these policies;

ii)                 The development would be on a green field site in the open countryside contrary to the provisions of policy W4 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan 1996.

iii)               The development would be sporadic development in the open countryside contrary to the provisions of policy C8 of the  Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and policy EN30 of the Cherwell Non-Statutory Local Plan.

iv)               The application site lies within a relatively narrow ribbon of  ...  view the full agenda text for item 6/14

The Committee considered (PN7) an application to erect a waste recycling shed adjacent to an existing landfill site.

Mr Periam referred to an email from the applicant to all members of the Committee which had detailed a number of similar sites which had been permitted in the green belt.  He explained the different elements in respect of those sites and the need to display very special circumstances to allow development in the green belt.  It remained the officer view that this application did not do that and the sites listed did not set a precedent to allow this development.  He then presented the report referring to additional information set out in the addenda.

Suzi Coyne spoke on behalf of the applicant. She pointed out that the development was next to an existing landfill site and that a search of over 60 alternative sites had not identified a more suitable site. If there had been it would have been pursued. There was no commercial recycling facility in Oxford or the surrounding urban areas and glass for example had to be transported long distances and it was imperative that a replacement site for Slape Hill was found as soon as possible.  It would be difficult to find any site other than a green field one and whilst this site was in the green belt its impact would be lessened because of its situation.  There were no highway concerns, it was away from residential areas, well screened and served local markets.  A site here would save the transport of material along the A34 which currently went to Slape Hill.  This was an opportunity to find a suitable replacement facility with waste expertise and one which safeguarded employment.  She urged the Committee to give fair consideration to the application and in the same way which had allowed the development in the green belt and confirmed the applicants were willing to accept a 10 year permission.

Responding to a question from Councillor Cherry she confirmed that the two accidents referred to in the report could not be attributed to this site.

Councillor Tanner understood the reason for the officer recommendation to refuse but did not consider it to be the right one. The site was well screened and the benefits of a site here would be significant.  He accepted it was in the green belt but he considered there were good reason to allow the development and he moved the application be approved on the grounds of overriding need.  Councillor Cherry seconded.

Councillor Bartholomew disagreed and felt that if this were allowed there would undoubtedly be a further application to extend and enlarge the site.  The County Council had a duty to protect the green belt.

Councillor Owen considered the green belt was not altogether sacrosanct and whilst Councillor Tanner had a point he felt that plans and policies could not just be ignored without good and substantial reasons.

Councillor Purse agreed that vigilance was needed to protect the green belt which was about openness  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/14

Report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) (PN8)

This is a ‘details pursuant’ application providing details required by a condition on an existing planning consent. Condition 31 on the planning permission for an Energy from Waste plant at Ardley landfill site requires that the applicant provide details of the external lighting for the plant, for approval by the Waste Planning Authority. The applicant has submitted a scheme, however some concerns have been raised by local residents and Parish Councils.

Following comments from a specialist lighting consultant, the applicant amended the scheme and provided a series of photomontages to show how the proposed lighting would look from a number of viewpoints. There is no objection from the consultant providing lighting advice. Therefore, it is considered that the lighting scheme submitted would provide the appropriate level of lighting for the permitted development whilst ensuring that light spillage beyond the boundary of the site is minimised in the interests of the residents in the locality, as required by the condition.

It is RECOMMENDED that Application MW.0067/13 be approved.

The Committee considered (PN8) a details pursuant application providing details required by a condition on an existing planning consent for the applicant to provide details of external lighting for the energy from waste plant for approval by the waste planning authority.

Councillor Owen took the Chair for the duration of this item.

Mary Thompson presented the report and advised that Anthony Potts from Atkins was available to answer questions.

Mark Ellis a local resident tabled a set of photographs which he considered represented more clearly the exact situation with regard to lighting at the site. There had been no sky glow illustrated on the photographs with the Atkins consultation plan. The present intrusion from the construction phase obscured at least 20% of the previously visible star field - and the proposed lighting plan had even greater numbers of lights. The direct lighting either through or reflecting from the front panels was highly intrusive to his property, and dominated their view of the horizon. There seemed to be no purpose to these lights other than decorative, unless people were going to be working on that vertical wall and he asked that they be removed from the plan.  The chimney was lit from the bottom which made it appear as though a space rocket was about to lift off, and expanded the intrusion of the EfW site considerably. If that was unlit, then only the building and the red light at the chimney tip would appear. The visible night time footprint would therefore be less than half of what it was presently. There were a cluster of bright warning lights on top of the narrow chimney. Having looked around the country it appeared that all other antennae and chimneys had just one, and he asked if those could be replaced with similar.  

The lighting risk assessment document had the following statement which referred to lighting between 20:30 and 23:00, for 5-10 staff. At this point 2/3 of the lights would still be on. There would be no waste or consumable delivery vehicles or members of the public on site during those times. There would also be no movements of plant vehicles, fork lift etc during that time period. The lighting on the site roadways would be significantly higher than on the B430 immediately after leaving the site. 

He asked that lighting move to 1/3 from 20:30 for the following reason. With 1/3 lighting the document states "The lighting on the site roadways will be higher than on the B430 immediately after leaving the site. Lights can be switched on manually if required – for example emergency services.”

Reducing the lighting at these times would significantly address the intrusion of the site on his property and allow his children to see significantly more of the star field before bed time.

Finally he pointed out that Cherwell Valley Services was less than 1/3 of the distance from his property than the EfW plant and the light pollution was virtually insignificant. He failed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/14

Report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning (PN9)

This is an application is for a remote park and ride car park to allow users to park their cars or cycles and catch a bus to either Oxford or Bicester and to provide overflow parking for Bicester Village shopping centre. The development is located to the south west of Bicester adjacent to the A41.

The application is being reported to committee because 13 letters of representation have been received from neighbours. Only one of these letters stated that it was an objection, but others raised comments and concerns. Two letters stated that they supported the development.

The proposed development would provide a new interchange facility which would make it easier for people to use public transport for part of their journey to Bicester or Oxford. The proposals are acceptable in terms of policy relating to transport, amenity, biodiversity, historic environment, landscape and drainage. Policy does not fully support the location in the open countryside, however the specific locational requirements of park and ride sites and the policy support for development encouraging the use of public transport are considered to outweigh this.

It is RECOMMENDED that Application  R3.0146/13 be approved subject to the conditions to be determined by the Deputy Director (Strategy and Infrastructure Planning) but in accordance with those set out below:

Heads of Conditions

1.             Complete accordance with plans

2.             Commencement within 3 years

3.            No use of the site until the parking, access and manoeuvring areas are laid out as per approved plans

4.            Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation to be submitted prior to commencement

5.             Implementation of Written Scheme of Investigation

6.             Ecological mitigation measures as proposed to be implemented

7.             Submission of a detailed landscaping plan

8.             Protection of trees and hedges to be retained

9.            Submission, approval and implementation of a Construction Travel and Management Plan

10.       Development to be carried out in accordance with approved Flood Risk Assessment

11.        Implementation of surface water management scheme

12.        Submission of full details of lighting programme

13.        Ducting for electric charging points

14.       Submission of management plan to cover day to day running for the site

15.        Submission of final details of bus stands

The Committee considered (PN9) an application for a remote park and ride site located to the south west of Bicester adjacent to the A41.

Mary Thompson presented the report and referred to a late representation from WSP which had been tabled in the addenda sheet.

County Councillor Sibley (Bicester West) supported the application in principle but expressed a number of concerns. Regarding access to the site, which would be very close to Vendee Drive, he would welcome a separate pedestrian and cycle access and drop off area as it was a long way out of the town. It would be essential to provide a long run in to the site as this was a very busy area and congestion on the roundabout needed to be avoided. Traffic into the site needed to flow freely with a possible ghost lane as provided on the Botley Road site.  He wished to see a reduction in speed of traffic approaching the roundabout.  Some consideration should be given to providing street lighting and cat eye provision on Vendee Drive as this was a difficult road to negotiate at night and in foggy conditions.  Also some consideration perhaps to improved bus services and he mentioned specifically diverting one of the London airport services and direct links to hospitals in Oxford and Banbury. There were also some flooding issues. 

Responding to Councillor Bartholomew Councillor Sibley confirmed that officers were aware of lots of these issues but he wanted to highlight some specific issues and opportunities.

Aaron Wisdom stated that the site access was close to Vendee drive but nothing had been picked up on the road safety audit. A further road safety audit would be carried out on completion of the facility which could highlight further issues.

The County Council could investigate the provision of a drop-off area but this could also be achieved within the proposed layout as it was the intention to provide free parking therefore there would not be a restriction on vehicles entering or leaving the site to drop-off or pick-up.

Speed limits were not part of this application. The limit had been reduced to 40 mph and accidents had also reduced. 

A dedicated ghost lane had not been considered as part of this application but could be considered later although that could affect congestion levels by taking away one lane.

Not connected to this application but Vendee Drive had not been adopted so lighting etc could not be considered at this stage.

As commercial services the County Council had very little influence so any changes to bus services would need to be subject to negotiation with operators. 

Mr Wisdom then responded to questions from:

Councillor Purse – in response to Cherwell District Council’s request for more cycle spaces there would be more than 10% of cycle parking spaces as a proportion of car parking spaces. This was a higher proportion than at Thornhill where current cycle parking spaces were underused. The situation would however be monitored and additional space allocated if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8/14

Report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) (PN10).

Central government has published a national list of planning application requirements. No planning application will be valid unless it includes the relevant information set out in this list. Central government has also advised that local authorities are also encouraged to consult on and adopt their own Local List of information requirements for planning applications and has published guidance as to how this should be carried out emphasising the need to take account of national  and local planning policies. It is also recommended that appropriate links to further guidance be included in the list, including website hyperlinks. There is no legal requirement setting out a time period for a local authority to adopt such a Local List, but if they do then applicants will also be required to provide the information set out in them before their applications will be validated by the local authority. In the absence of such a Local List, then provided an applicant has met the national requirements list, the local authority would be obliged to validate the application. The adopted Local List should be regularly reviewed such that it can be used for the validation of planning applications if they are submitted within two years of its being published or re-published.

The County Council has a Local List of information requirements which was adopted at the meeting of the Planning and Regulation Committee on 21st July following a six week consultation period. It is now over five years on from then and officers have reviewed it. Due to the passage of time and significant changes since then, particularly the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework and its accompanying Technical Guidance and consequent deletion of much of the previous central government Planning Policy Statements and Guidance,  it is considered  that the draft Local List appended to the report should be regarded as a replacement for the existing Local List as opposed to a revision of it. The draft local list has now undergone a period of consultation and it is now proposed for approval and adoption subject to minor amendments.

Alongside the provision of pre-application advice, the adoption of an up-to-date Local List  enables the County Planning Authority to better engage with applicants at an early stage and assist them to submit more accurate and comprehensive planning applications from the start of the planning application process, thus facilitating their processing more efficiently

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to approve and adopt for publication the Local List of Information Requirements for validation of planning and related applications set out in Annex 2 to this report.

The Committee considered (PN10) a revised local list of information requirements for approval and adoption to replace the list agreed 5 years previously.  The revised list had taken into account significant changes which had occurred during that time, particularly publication of the national planning policy framework and its accompanying technical guidance and consequent deletion of much of the previous central government planning policy statements and guidance.

Mr Periam confirmed that any dinosaur footprints discovered would be protected (reference page 241) and with regard to pre-application discussions (reference page 126) the OCC response should read “… will provide parish councils with copies of any pre-application advice for sites in their respective parish.”

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Tanner, seconded by Councillor Cherry and carried nem con) to approve and adopt for publication the Local List of Information Requirements for validation of planning and related applications set out in Annex 2 to the report PN10.