Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Cllr Batstone, Cllr Hannaby (substituted by Cllr Epps), Cllr McLean and Cllr Sargent.

The Chair noted that she intended to step down from the Chair for Item 5, Land at Thrupp Farm, Radley, Abingdon, Oxfordshire Grid (Ref: SU 51539 97065) and would not participate in the debate or vote on the application. Item 5 would be chaired by the Deputy Chair.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 19 January 2026 and to receive information arising from them.

The Planning Development Manager noted that correspondence had been received by members of the Committee after the 19 January meeting and that officers were working on responses.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 January were approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Cllr Diana Lugova stepped down from the Chair at this stage and viewed the Committee from the public gallery but did not participate in the debate or vote. Cllr Tony Worgan (Deputy Chair) assumed the role of Chair for the remainder of the meeting.

Members of the public who wish to speak on an item on the agenda at this meeting, or present a petition, can attend the meeting in person or ‘virtually’ through an online connection.

Requests to present a petition must be submitted no later than 9am ten working days before the meeting.

Requests to speak must be submitted no later than 9am three working days before the meeting.

Requests should be submitted to committeesdemocraticservices@oxfordshire.gov.uk

If you are speaking ‘virtually’, you may submit 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 9am on the day of the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

Nine requests to address the Committee on the following agenda items had been received from:

Land at Thrupp Farm, Radley, Abingdon, Oxfordshire Grid (Ref: SU 15139 97065)

- Andrew Coker

- Roger Thomas

- Craig Woolhouse

- Richard Dudding

- David Tannahill (Radley Parish Council)

- James Lodge (Applicant)

- Nick Dunn (Applicant’s Agent)

- Dr James Etienne

Report by Planning Development Manager

Application for determination of the conditions to which a planning permission is to be subject (Permission numbers DD1 and DD2).

It is RECOMMENDED:

a)    That in the absence of there being a position in law to refuse the application to determine the conditions to which planning permission numbers DD1 and DD2 are to be subject despite the significant effect identified through the loss of irreplaceable and priority habitats, refer the application to the Secretary of State for their consideration as to whether to call the application in for their own determination;

b)    Should the Secretary of State decline to call the application in for their own determination, authorise the Director of Economy and Place to determine the conditions to which planning permissions DD1 and DD2 are to be subject including those set out in Annex 4  and with any amendments as considered necessary including to provide greater clarity and precision as to the geographical areas which the conditions apply to, but without the condition restricting development in the areas of irreplaceable and priority habitats.

The Chair introduced the item to the meeting and invited the Planning Development Manager to introduce the application, which was an application for the determination of the conditions to which a planning permission is to be subject (Permission numbers DD1 and DD2).

The Chair noted that the Committee might need to take legal advice during the Committee, which would be legally privileged. In such circumstances, the Chair stated that he would propose for the Committee go into private session to allow legal advice to be sought.

The Planning Development Manager read out the further addendum in full for the benefit of the Committee and for members of the public attending the meeting.

The Planning Development Manager presented maps and photographs of the areas that would be affected by the application.

The Chair then invited speakers to address the Committee and noted that members may ask questions of clarification after they had finished.

Roger Thomas spoke about the legalities over whether the Thrupp Farm ROMP application was still valid, given that the re-application for permissions needed to happen before the first review date (in this case, 31^st October 2016) and if not, the permission ceased to exist the following day. It was noted that the ROMP legislation was designed to avoid situations such as this. He asked for the Committee to refer the application back to officers to deal with the detailed points raised in Taylor Wessing’s letter.

Andrew Coker spoke as a local resident adjacent to the ROMP area, highlighting that ROMP applications were an issue of national importance and that legislation was designed so permissions could not continually roll over. He spoke of the national importance with regards to the habitat and the issues the ROMP application could cause local residents if it was not decided until 2042.

Craig Woolhouse, representing Radley Lakes Trust, spoke about the Radley Lakes Masterplan, produced in 2021 as part of the Neighbourhood Plan, which therefore held weight in planning decisions. He spoke in favour of the Council’s acceptance of some of the conditions proposed by the Trust, but did note there would be significant adverse effects through loss of habitats. Mr Woolhouse argued that recommendation b) should have strengthened conditions to increase the level of mitigation for habitat loss.

Councillor Smith asked for clarification regarding the Section ‘C’ area totalling 50% of the gravel extraction for the entire site and asked the speaker if he knew that to be correct. Mr Woolhouse stated that the applicant would have their view but that it was his understanding that the 50% figure was correct.

Councillor Gawrysiak noted the speaker’s ask for further mitigations and asked what type of mitigations this could involve. Mr Woolhouse focused on shallower areas and potentially islands on the lakes to increase biodiversity, noting that some progress had been made but that there was more to do.

Richard Dudding noted that the conditions proposed by the applicant were almost entirely for the site they proposed to extract, but not the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30/26