Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 25 October 2010 and to receive for information any matters arising therefrom.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 October 2010 were approved and signed.

Update on Revocation of Regional Spatial Strategies

Mr Dance advised the Committee on the latest position regarding the decision of the High Court to quash the revocation by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government of the Regional Spatial Strategies, and the challenge by Cala Homes regarding the Secretary of State’s letter describing the government’s intention to revoke the RSSs as a material consideration. Pending a decision on that challenge it was important that the Committee gave due weight to the South East Plan when considering applications before it.

Minute 43/10 – Ashgrove Farm, Ardley

Following advice from Councillor Mrs Fulljames regarding ongoing odour issues at this site officers advised that the operators Agrivert had confirmed that the Cassington operation was now up and running and would eventually take all food waste which was currently being processed at Ashgrove Farm. That transfer of operation was ongoing but they expected the situation at Ashgrove Farm to improve within a few weeks.  Officers would continue to monitor the situation.

Minute 45/10 – Energy from Waste Facility, Ardley

Mr Dance advised that a decision was expected from the Secretary of State by 15 December 2010 on whether or not this application would be called in.

Dix Pit

Mr Dance advised that Controlled Reclamation Ltd had appealed a decision by the Planning & Regulation Committee taken in September 2009 to refuse an application at Dix Pit for installation and use of processing plant for making recycled aggregate from construction and demolition waste. The appeal had since been considered by an Inspector but no decision had yet been issued.  It was conceivable that a judgment had been delayed due to the challenge to the government’s proposals to revoke the South East Plan.  Officers also advised that they had that day written to the operator asking them to cease stockpiling material on the site.

Application 1- 10/01516/CM  to continue development without complying with condition A3 of planning permission reference APP/U3100/A/06/2030592 (to extract sand and gravel from land south-west of Finmere, including the relocation of plant and restoration of the quarry using imported inert waste to agriculture, woodland and grassland)for an extension of the life of the development of the consented extension to Finmere Quarry.

Application 2 – 10/01515/CM to continue development without complying with condition B3 of planning permission reference APP/U3100/A/06/2030619 (extraction of sand, gravel and clay from land south of the current Finmere Quarry landfill facility for use at the site for landfill engineering) for an extension of the life of the development of the consented extension to Finmere Quarry.

Report by Interim Head of Sustainable Development (PN5)

The report describes two applications to extend the end date of existing permissions at Finmere Quarry in Cherwell District. Planning permission has just been granted (in November 2010) to extend the period for commencement of these development by a further 3 years. Accordingly there is a need to extend the end date of existing permissions for application 1 by 3 years for application 2 by 5 years.  The report outlines the consultation responses received, comments from third parties, relevant development plan and other policies and key considerations.

Application 1

It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for Application 10/01516/CM be granted subject to the same conditions attached to the earlier consents and covering the following matters:

(1)               Detailed compliance condition;

(2)               Commencement date – 3 years (October 2012);

(3)               Extraction to cease by 2016 and deposit of waste cease by 2018;

(4)               Extraction limited to sand and gravel and no clay extraction;

(5)               Removal of buildings, plants and machinery within 1 year of cessation of mineral working;

(6)               No commencement of mineral extraction until approved pre-development works including diversion of Bridleway 4 had been carried out;

(7)               No construction of silt pond except in accordance with the approved plan;

(8)               Display of copy of the permission and approved plans in the operator’s office;

(9)               No importation of aggregate to the site except from the adjacent permitted land;

(10)          Restriction of permitted development rights;

(11)          Carrying out of operation according to agreed operating hours;

(12)          Use of access according to approved plans;

(13)          No mud on the public highway;

(14)          Carrying out of development in accordance with approved wheelwash system;

(15)          No development shall take place except in accordance with approved dust suppression measures;

(16)          Limitation on noise level (to agreed level);

(17)          Effective silencers to be provided on plant, machinery and vehicles;

(18)          Noise emitted from the site shall not contain any discrete continuous noise;

(19)          Reversing vehicles shall not emit warning noise that may have adverse impacts on neighbours or properties;

(20)          Chemical or fuel storage containers to be sited on impervious surface with bund walls;

(21)          Repair, maintenance and refuelling of plant and machinery to take place on an impervious surface drained to an interceptor;

(22)          No permanent dewatering of the Great  ...  view the full agenda text for item 50/10

In 2007 the Committee had granted permission for two applications at Finmere Quarry with conditions attached requiring a start date within three years.  Neither permission had yet been implemented.  In November 2010 consent had been granted under delegated powers to extend the period for commencement and the Committee were now being asked to extend the end date of the existing permissions.

Mr Kerford–Byrnes referred to the long history of problems at this site. A further extension would mean residents having to endure yet further intrusive operations at this site with restoration put back many years.  He considered the proposal contrary to Policy W7 and urged the Committee to refuse the applications.

Guy Titman stated that the extensions were required because of delays in implementation due to unexpected economic conditions and complications with land ownership.  The only change being sought to the original permission was the end date for each.  Many of the statutory consultees had not objected and Policy W7, referred to by Mr Kerford-Byrnes was not relevant.  There was a need for sand and gravel in order to meet Oxfordshire’s current landbank requirement and he urged the Committee to approve the application.

He responded to questions from:

Councillor Seale – restoration of the sand and gravel site would be to agriculture, wetlands and woodland and the clay extraction site to agriculture.

Councillor Sanders – refusal could jeopardise restoration.  The applicant had wanted to complete the work within the originally agreed timescales but had not foreseen the economic downturn or problems of land ownership.  He could not guarantee that there would be no further applications for extensions.

Councillor Mathew – the economic downturn could not have been foreseen and if the permission for sand and gravel extraction had lapsed a valuable mineral resource would have been lost. Land ownership complications had affected renegotiation of the contract.

Councillor Mrs Fulljames referred to the long history of non-compliance at this site and advised that she would not be supporting the applications.

Councillor Mathew considered the reasons given for the delay were ultimately commercial risks and did not in themselves justify changes to the original conditions.

Councillor Tanner considered that there were no planning reasons sufficient to warrant refusal of the applications and he moved and Councillor Hannaby seconded that the recommendations as set out in the officer report be approved.

The motion was put to the Committee and –

RESOLVED (by 11 votes to 3) that:

(a)       that planning permission for Application 10/01516/CM be granted subject to the same conditions attached to the earlier consents and covering the following matters:

(1)               Detailed compliance condition;

(2)               Commencement date – 3 years (October 2012);

(3)               Extraction to cease by 2016 and deposit of waste by 2018;

(4)               Extraction limited to sand and gravel and no clay extraction;

(5)               Removal of buildings, plants and machinery within 1 year of cessation of mineral working;

(6)               No commencement of mineral extraction until approved pre-development works including diversion of Bridleway 4 had been carried out;

(7)               No construction  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50/10

Change of use of parking/industrial area to a recycling/distribution area for paper, kitchen waste, glass, plastics, cans and cardboard including the sorting and baling of plastics, cans and cardboard. The construction of open bays for recyclables and three sided, open fronted structure to house bales and roof structure for kitchen waste. Erection of lighting columns. Erection of two portable buildings and one modular building to be used as offices, toilets and welfare facilities. Provision of parking for staff & visitors  vehicles and refuse & recycling vehicles.

Report by Interim Head of Sustainable Development (PN6)

This is an application for a recycling depot on an industrial estate on Down’s Road in Witney. Recyclable waste collected from West Oxfordshire would be brought to the site to be sorted, stored and baled before being sent on for recycling at other facilities. Materials brought to the site would include glass, plastics, cans, cardboard and kitchen waste.  The proposal complies with waste management policy and there have been no objections from statutory consultees. However, objections have been received from local residents and industrial unit occupants on the basis of the amenity impacts including noise, traffic, odour, pests. The Environmental Health Officer has asked for further work to be done on noise which has led to changes to the layout and the addition of a noise barrier. The consultation on these amendments was ongoing at the time of writing the report. The final conclusions and a recommendation on the development will be set out in an addendum.

Final conclusions and a recommendation will follow in an addendum.

The Committee considered an application for a recycling depot on the Downs Road industrial site in Witney.

The Chairman vacated the Chair and left the meeting for the duration of the item.  Councillor Mrs Fulljames took the Chair.

Mr Criscuolo commended the proposal to the Committee.  The site had been selected on grounds of proximity to markets,  suitability of the adjacent road network and the surrounding industrial site.  The applicants had undertaken extensive noise, odour and vermin control measures.  This proposal would also afford some control over vehicle movements as the site currently had permission for parked vehicles with no control limits. The applicant currently operated 13 other sites and had extensive expertise in this field of operations which would enable more waste to be diverted from landfill and offer local employment opportunities.

He responded to questions from:

Councillor Armitage – food waste would not be collected and taken to processing sites separately but would be delivered to the Downs Road site, transferred to one large vehicle and taken from there to a processing site on a generally daily basis.

Councillor Seale – the development would allow waste collected within West Oxfordshire to be dealt with within the district and the contract was solely for West Oxfordshire waste.

Councillor Mrs Fulljames – food waste containers would be sealed and collected daily. This would help eliminate odour problems.  The applicant would if necessary spray the containers with industrial deodorizers.

Councillor Owen then moved and Councillor Armitage seconded that the  recommendation as set out in the addenda sheet be approved.

Following discussion regarding vehicle reversing systems officers undertook to explore the scope to achieve low noise lorry reversing warnings whilst meeting health and safety standards, and to include if possible appropriate control through a condition.

Councillor Crabbe then moved an amendment to add the following condition: subject to a reasonable weekly limit of vehicle movements to be agreed with the developer.

The amendment, seconded by Councillor Mathew was put to the Committee and lost by 8 votes to 5.

The original motion was then put to the Committee and –

RESOLVED (by 12 votes to 1, with one abstention)that subject to a routeing agreement to ensure that vehicles collecting material from the site must not use the B4477 to access the A40 and should turn left out of the site and left on the B4047 and onto the A40 and waste collection vehicles delivering to the site must not use the B4477 for any other purpose other than to collect from properties in and immediately adjacent to Minster Lovell village and not as a through route or short cut the development described in application 10/1451/P/CM  be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Deputy Director (Growth & Infrastructure) to cover matters to include the following:

1.                        Development in complete accordance with plans and details

2.                        Development to commence within 3 years

3.                        Submission, approval and implementation of surface water drainage scheme

4.                        Submission, approval and implementation of a scheme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51/10