Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2016 (PN3) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2016 were approved and signed.

Report by the Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Commercial) (PN6).

As part of a significant project to reduce energy costs the Oxford University Hospital Trust (OUHT) are proposing to upgrade their heating and hot water systems at the John Radcliffe and Churchill Hospitals. This innovative scheme seeks to transfer heating via new pipelines along the public highway connecting the two sites.  In June this year the County Council received an application from Vital Energi, working for OUHT, for installation of 150 mm diameter district heating pre-insulated pipes on roads between and including the John Radcliffe Hospital and the Churchill Hospital. The application information is set out in the report and its annexes.

The specific route of the proposed pipe is approximately 1.5 Km long and runs along (North to South) Woodlands Road, Sandfield Road, A420 London Road, Latimer Road, All Saints Road, Lime Walk, Old Road, and Churchill Drive.

A planning application for these works has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority (Oxford City Council) and this is currently programmed to be considered on the 7^th September 2016.  The result of the City’s Planning Committee decision, or any relevant conditions imposed, will not be known before this Committee. However, recommendations of the relevant report will be reported orally at the meeting.

The County Council has recently changed its process for approval of Section 50 Licences for installation of apparatus that will have a significant impact on the transport network. Whilst statutory undertakers have a legal right to implement plant in the public highway, non-statutory undertakers are legally required to obtain authorisation from the Street Authority (for Oxfordshire this is the County Council). Approval to grant the Section 50 Licence for this scale of works is now to be determined by the Planning and Regulation Committee. 

It is RECOMMENDED that a New Roads and Street Works Act Section 50 Licence, subject to the proposed Conditions and Reasons (i) to (v) as detailed in para 26 and in Annex 8 to the report, be granted to the applicant, Vital Energi, for the street works related to installation of a district heating pipe as described in the application made and details thereof attached in Annexes 1-6 to the report.

As part of a significant project to reduce energy costs the Oxford University Hospital Trust (OUHT) proposed upgrading their heating and hot water systems at the John Radcliffe and Churchill Hospitals by transferring heat via new pipelines which would be placed in the public highway connecting the two sites.  In June this year the County Council had received an application from Vital Energi, working for OUHT, for installation of 150 mm diameter district heating pre-insulated pipes on roads between and including the John Radcliffe Hospital and the Churchill Hospital. The Committee now considered (PN6) a report setting out the application information including details of the specific route along (North to South) Woodlands Road, Sandfield Road, A420 London Road, Latimer Road, All Saints Road, Lime Walk, Old Road, and Churchill Drive. A planning application for the works was to be considered by the City Council on 7 September 2016. 

The County Council had recently changed its processes for approval of Section 50 licences for installation of apparatus with a significant impact on the transport network and whilst statutory undertakers had a legal right to implement plant in the public highway, non-statutory undertakers were legally required to obtain authorisation from the Street Authority (for Oxfordshire this was the County Council) with specific approval to grant licences for this scale of works now to be determined by the Planning & Regulation Committee.

Mr Serocynski introduced the report. He tabled a clearer plan of the route and highlighted amendments to paragraphs 28 and 30 of the report.  He confirmed that the City Council would be considering the planning application on 7 September 2016 and in the event that that was approved the County Council then had a duty to co-ordinate the works effectively to ensure safety, minimal disruption and protection of existing services in the highway and in order to do that a Section 50 licence under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 would be required.  Officers had engaged with the applicants and were satisfied that what had been proposed would achieve those aims. Discussions would continue regarding the co-ordination of works with regard to proposals relating specifically to Access to Headington.  Conditions had been proposed to be applied to the licence if agreed and officers were recommending approval.

Officers then responded to questions from:

Councillor Johnston – Mrs Crouch confirmed that if the application were refused then the applicants could apply for Judicial Review of that decision. There was no appeal process as with a planning application.

Councillor Bartholomew – Mrs Crouch could not give an exact timeframe for a Judicial Review process other than an application would need to be made within 12 weeks.  The process would then be in the hands of the Court and although the applicants could ask for the application to be expedited quickly it seemed reasonable to expect that the scheme would be substantially delayed.

Councillor Lilly – Mrs Crouch could not give an exact figure as to the possible costs to the County Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35/16

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

This is an application to amend the conditions on the consent for rail sidings at Sutton Courtenay to allow the unloading of trains until 10pm rather than 6pm Mondays to Fridays. There has been an objection from the Environmental Health Officer and three local residents, due to the potential noise impacts. Sutton Courtenay Parish Council and Appleford Parish Council have also objected due to potential noise nuisance. There has also been an objection from the Ecologist Planner as no information has been provided about the impact on ecology.

The report assesses the proposals against the relevant planning policy and sets out a recommendation on whether permission should be granted.

It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for application MW.0025/16 be refused for the following reasons:

a)       The unloading of trains after 6.00 pm in the evening would cause noise impact which is likely to represent a significant loss of amenity for local residents, contrary to OMWLP policy PE18, VLP policy DC9 and draft OMWCS policy C5.

b)      It has not been demonstrated that the impacts of the extended  hours on wildlife would not cause significant harm to biodiversity, contrary to the NPPF paragraph 118 and VLP 2031 Core Policy 46.

Application withdrawn on request of the applicant.

The Committee supported a suggestion by Councillor Johnston that the applicants might wish to consider submitting an ecological assessment to address the issue of potential impact on ground nesting birds. He felt that was unlikely to be an issue with regard to this application.

Officers undertook to contact the applicants.

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

This report proposes the adoption of a lorry routeing protocol further to minute 17/16 of the meeting of County Council on 5 April 2016.

It is RECOMMENDED that the Lorry Routeing Protocol set out in Annex 1 to the report PN8 be adopted.

The Committee considered a lorry routeing protocol drafted by officers in response to a motion by Councillor Stewart Lilly which had been unanimously approved by Council on 5 April 2016.

Mr Periam presented the report.

Councillor Lilly felt the protocol was a good start and hoped the Committee would support it.  However, he was keen for the issue of penal charges to be pursued further.

Councillor Mills felt the protocol would go some way to clarifying the situation but considered that the County Council should be able to prosecute operators for damages caused to the highway.  He also sought clarification of the statement “freely entered…” in paragraph 1 of Annex 1; references to global positioning system tracking devices in point 2 and use of index linking to cover costs.

Mrs Crouch agreed that prosecuting operators could be an option but the County Council would need to demonstrate financial damage.  That she felt would be difficult to prove.  Use of an index link could be achieved in order to preserve value.

Mr Periam confirmed that the phrase “freely entered…” had been used where an application was likely to be refused due to a highway objection unless the applicant was willing to enter into an agreement.  It was felt provision of GPS tracking devices was reasonable.

Councillor Phillips pointed out that points 1, 2 and 3 were a clear cost to the developer and that points 5 and 6 had factored in the recovery of costs incurred by the MPA. However, point 4 did not have a specific stipulation to that effect and she moved the recommendation but with the addition of the following italicized text to Point 4 which would then read as follows “To provide an index linked sum to cover the cost to the County Council of traffic surveys to be undertaken on behalf of the MPA”.  The motion was seconded by Councillor Johnston.

Councillor Mrs Fulljames expressed some misgivings regarding the propriety of some companies and also the attitude of some sub-contractors but agreed it was a good first step.

RESOLVED: (unanimously) that the Lorry Routeing Protocol set out in Annex 1 to the report PN8 be adopted subject to point 4 in the protocol being amended to read as follows:

“To provide an index linked sum to cover the cost to the County Council of traffic surveys to be undertaken on behalf of the MPA.”