Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2020 (PN3) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2020 were approved.

21/20 – Serving of the Prohibition Order for the Review of the Mineral Planning Permission (ROMP) at Thrupp farm and Thrupp Lane, Radley

On the advice of Counsel officers advised that they would be meeting with the operators to establish progress with regard to an application for the review of old mineral permission conditions.  The application for the conveyor belt, processing plant and bailey bridge etc to take away mineral that might be extracted from the ROMP area had been validated and was now out for consultation.  As part of that process officers had carried out a screening opinion to see if it constituted environmental impact assessment development and therefore required an environmental impact statement and had concluded  that due to potential environmental impact with the ROMP area, which was a Schedule 1 Development in its own right an EIS would be required.  The applicants had responded that they were in turn seeking a screening direction from the Secretary of State to the effect that it was not environmental impact assessment development and required no statement.  It was hoped to report in September.

This Planning & Regulation Committee will be held virtually in order to conform with current guidelines regarding social distancing.  Normally requests to speak at this public meeting are required by 9 am on the day preceding the published date of the meeting.  However, during the current situation and to facilitate these new arrangements we are asking that requests to speak are submitted by no later than 9am four working days before the meeting i.e. 9 am on Tuesday 14^th July. Requests to speak should be sent to graham.warrington@oxfordshire.gov.uk together with a written statement of your presentation to ensure that if the technology fails then your views can still be taken into account. A written copy of your statement can be provided no later than 9 am 2 working days before the meeting (Thursday 16 July).

Where a meeting is held virtually and the addressee is unable to participate remotely their written submission will be accepted.

Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

Application A: Retrospective planning application to extend recycled soil and aggregate area to NAP Grab Hire Ltd.’s adjacent site permitted under P11/V0615/CM/ 11/00615/CM (MW.0049/11); and

Application B: Retrospective Section 73 application for change of use from agriculture to site for the import, storage and screening of waste soils to create topsoil, without complying with conditions 5, 10, 13 and 15 of permission P11/V0615/CM/ 11/00615/CM (MW.0049/11)

Report by the Director for Planning & Place (PN6).

This report relates to two interlinked applications. The first application  considers whether permission should be granted for a screened soil storage extension area to the waste soils operation granted under planning permission MW.0049/11. The second considers if permission should be granted to vary conditions 5, 10, 13 and 15, to regularise the current operations on site and allow for aggregate crushing, increase stockpile heights, amend the existing boundary planting and increase HGV movements, contrary to permission MW0049/11.

The application is being reported to Committee at the request of the County Councillor, due to objections raised by three parish councils and various local residents. There are concerns that the request for variation to the requested conditions due to the increased operations and therefore consequent HGV movements will impact adversely on the local highways network and impact adversely on the amenity of local residents.

The report outlines further comments received along with the recommendation of the Director for Planning and Place.

The development accords with the Development Plan as a whole and with individual policies within it, as well as with the NPPF. The proposals are to regularise the existing operations on site, for the extended site area, crushing, increased stockpile heights, reduced vegetation and increased HGV movements.

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to the applicant entering into a routeing agreement to require vehicles to be routed to and from the A34 via the A338 and the A420, to avoid the A415 the Director for Planning and Place be authorised to:

i)          APPROVE application no. MW.0134/19 subject to conditions the detailed wording of which to be determined by the Director of Planning and Place including the conditions set out in Annex 2 to the report PN6; and

ii)        APPROVE application MW.0135/19 subject to conditions the detailed wording of which to be determined by the Director of Planning and Place including the conditions set out in Annex 3 to the report PN6.

The Committee considered a report (PN6) relating to two interlinked applications. The first considered whether permission should be granted for a screened soil storage extension area to the waste soils operation granted under planning permission MW.0049/11. The second if permission should be granted to vary conditions 5, 10, 13 and 15 in order to regularise current operations on site and allow for aggregate crushing, increase stockpile heights, amend the existing boundary planting and increase HGV movements, contrary to permission MW0049/11.  The application had been reported to Committee at the request of the County Councillor due to objections raised by three parish councils and various local residents raising concerns that the request for variation to the requested conditions due to the increased operations and therefore consequent HGV movements would impact adversely on the local highways network and amenity of local residents.

Ms Bolster presented the report and responded to questions from:

Councillor Sanders – the reference to green soil inferred that this was a contribution to more secondary aggregate provision by importing rubble from building sites and screening out anything that was reusable such as soil with  rocks sent away to be crushed.  Anything remaining would be diverted to landfill.  There was no excavation and the applicant was now seeking to crush material on site.

Councillor Roberts – annual site visits had been carried out since 2011. That had resulted in higher stock piles being observed and reported to the applicants. The last occasion had been January and the piles had been reduced. There was evidence to suggest unauthorised crushing had taken place.  The right of way would not be affected by these applications.

Councillor Johnston – Mr Periam advised that the applicants had been instructed either to seek to regularise activities on site or enforcement action would be required.  A view had to be taken which course of action was best.  If the application currently before the Committee was refused then enforcement action would need to be taken.

David Warr (chair of the Kingston Bagpuize and Southmoor planning sub-committee). Reinforcing his council’s view about this retrospective application  and the series of breaches of conditions over the past few years with regard to the 2011 permission they had serious questions about what had changed since then to persuade the County Council to now recommend approval when in terms of policy and planning law nothing had changed except for an increased target imposed on the County to deal with waste recycling.  In the time since the first approval, Kingston Bagpuize and Southmoor had grown from a settlement of some 800 dwellings to what it is today – 2,175 with attendant increases in traffic volumes and environmental impacts upon an expanding community.  Within the next few years that would increase by a further 700 dwellings if the Lioncourt development were to proceed.  The Parish Council was not convinced by the reporting of traffic flows in and out of the site as it seemed that the County Council had relied on the applicant’s figures,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26/20

Report by Director for Planning & Place (PN7).

The application seeks permission for the provision of a new permanent aggregate unloading and storage facility which will serve:

• the High Speed 2 (HS2) development;

• the existing onsite asphalt and concrete batching plant; and

• various national and local infrastructure projects in the surrounding area.

The local member has requested that the application be determined by the Planning & Regulation Committee.  Objections have been received from Banbury Town Council due to the transport, dust and noise and air quality impacts

The report outlines the relevant planning policies along with the comments and recommendation of the Director for Planning and Place.

The development accords with the Development Plan as a whole and with individual policies within it, as well as with the NPPF. It is considered to be sustainable development in terms of environmental, social and economic terms. The proposed development would be beneficial in terms of safeguarding a rail depot site for the importation of aggregates into Oxfordshire. It is considered that potential impacts can be adequately addressed through planning conditions and legal agreements. 

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to a routeing agreement and a S.106 agreement to secure highway works first being entered into that planning permission for Application MW.0026/20 be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Director for Planning and Place including the matters set out in Annex 2 to the report PN7. 

Application MW.0026/20 had been withdrawn by the Applicant.