Return to Agenda

Return to ES9

COPY
ITEM EN9 - ANNEX 2

PLANNING & REGULATION COMMITTEE –
7 APRIL 2003

CONSTRUCTION OF NINE HOLE GOLF COURSE USING ALREADY DEPOSITED MATERIAL AT WATERSTOCK GOLF COURSE, PLANNING APPLICATION NUMBER P02/N0837/CM

CONSULTATION REPRESENTATIONS

Oxford Green Belt Network

Application should be refused. Little different from earlier one and no grounds for different line. Does little more than seek to rearrange unauthorised waste and suggest golf course can be satisfactorily built on top. Site is green belt, high landscape value, and adjoins conservation area recently extended. Contend that openness and amenity value of green belt damaged by waste, which has altered contours of landscape and interfered with drainage. Accept small amount imported material of appropriate kind may be needed to make satisfactory golf course, but this is totally different in nature and magnitude and not justified for needs of golf course. Long-running saga and regret that removal of waste not been achieved. Should not condone unauthorised damaging action of this kind in so sensitive and important green belt countryside.

Resident, By the Pond, Waterstock

Frequent applications seem to be way of avoiding complying with requirement to remove waste. No justification for it to remain and time wasted dealing with applications. No objection to principle of nine hole course, even importing material if proved necessary, but only after all illegal waste removed. Doubt that applicants would comply with new application, if continue not to comply with requirements of earlier ones. Request that it be rejected.

Resident, Park Farm House, Waterstock

Application should be rejected. 300,000 tons of waste (some toxic) illegally tipped and enforcement notices ignored. Obvious that tipped to make money. Developers originally stated that would use minimum amount imported material and respect lie of land. Now say ugly, un-environmentally friendly waste necessary for course. Removal should be enforced.

Resident, Riverside House, Waterstock

Owners again wanting to retain massive quantities of unlawful waste. Not a nine hole plan that respects lie of land and environment or makes any attempt to remove illegal waste. Enforcement action ignored and clear to local residents that not about constructing golf course, but highly profitable tipping operation. In principle most residents would welcome finished golf course, but only with minimum materials necessary for construction which least affects surrounding landscape and environment. One resident still very concerned about arsenic in waste and has had to remove vegetable garden. Proposing to build golf course extension on top of waste does not justify new application. Very questionable that material needed to improve drainage as claimed. Ground is now waterlogged in wet weather and lane into village regularly floods which did not previously happen. Strongly urge rejection of application, which is only marginally different to previous ones and hope inspector’s decision to remove waste pursued.

Roger T Bell, SODC District Councillor, Wheatley

Very surprised to see advert referring to effect on listed building of Waterstock Mill. First time used as objection to site and looks like attempt to introduce another reason to prevent project going ahead. Fully aware of history and unauthorised dumping to which the County Council and District Council rightly objected. Principle of 27 holes accepted by District Council many years ago and first 18 operating successfully for number years. Driving range lights problem to be resolved, but directly affect only handful properties in Waterstock and Waterperry in early evenings September to March for maximum 5 hours. Provision of golfing facilities next to motorway, thus protecting two villages is benefit, greatly appreciated by residents of Wheatley and surrounding area and want to see project finished.

As said in Hinksey Heights decision need to start from now and not look at past. Removal of material to somewhere like Ardley would cause considerable congestion and danger around entrance to Service Station with 7000 movements spilling material onto carriageway. Should accept moving material around site including provision of bunding to deal with lights is by far least harmful. Disturbance to neighbours virtually same as loading onto lorries. Latest plans give satisfactory layout and deal with footpath, that goes nowhere blocked by motorway.

Very special circumstances exist for overriding Green Belt and other policies, in particular chaos, disturbance and danger to users of public highway and MSA from massive movement of materials off site. Also proximity of golf course alongside small listed building not valid objection. Hope that officers will give a favourable recommendation, subject to problem of lights being sorted out.

Return to TOP