Contact: Graham Warrington Tel: 07393 001211; E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Link: video link https://oxon.cc/PRC29112021
Apologies for Absence and Temporary Appointments
Declarations of Interest - see guidance note opposite
There were no declarations of interest.
The minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2021 were approved and signed.
Minute 21/21 – Serving of the Prohibition Order for the Review of the Mineral Planning Permission (ROMP) at Thrupp Farm and Thrupp Lane, Radley
The Chairman referred to an email sent to all members of the Committee from Radley Parish Council requesting that “OCC officers enter into discussions with the Parish Council so as to give the Committee an early, and if possible agreed, understanding of the legal options open to them.”
Officers reiterated that at the 6 September meeting their advice had been as set out in the report submitted to the Committee at that time and based on counsel’s opinion, which had been appended to the report. The Committee had then heard from representatives of the parish council, Friends of Radley Lakes and the operator and his agent before resolving to defer a decision to the July meeting with the expectation that the operator would by that time have submitted a ROMP application accompanied by an Environmental Statement for the whole of the Radley ROMP permissions area.
The Chairman was asked to respond to the Radley Parish Councilsetting out that the Committee having listened to a variety of views and opinions and debated the matter thoroughly had reached its decision in the light of all the information provided and it was not considered appropriate for officers to now enter into further discussion with the Parish Council with regard to the legal options open to the Committee and if the Parish Council had any new information and wished to make further submissions for officers to consider then they were of course welcome to do that in writing which officers could then review.
Petitions and Public Address
Currently council meetings are taking place in-person (not virtually) with social distancing operating in the venues. However, members of the public who wish to speak at this meeting can also if they prefer attend the meeting ‘virtually’ through an online connection. Places at the meeting are very limited due to the requirements of social distancing. While you can ask to attend the meeting in person, you are strongly encouraged to attend ‘virtually’ to minimise the risk of Covid-19 infection.
Please also note that in line with current government guidance all attendees are strongly encouraged to take a lateral flow test in advance of the meeting.
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 23 November 2021. Requests to speak should be sent to email@example.com. You will be contacted by the officer regarding arrangements for speaking.
If you ask to attend in person, the officer will also advise you regarding Covid-19 safety at the meeting. 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 9 am 2 working days before the meeting i.e. Thursday 25 November 2021. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.
Officers advised that an application had been submitted to the Vale of White Horse District Council for permanent planning permission to use the Curtis site in Thrupp Lane as a contractor's yard.
Section 73 application for the continuation of the winning and working of sand and gravel with restoration using suitable imported materials to vary conditions 2, 3 and 6 of planning permission 19/02521/CM (MW.0111/19) in order to extend the period of extraction until 31st December 2022 and the time period for restoration until 31st December 2024 to allow for sufficient time for the working of mineral from beneath the plant site and the revised restoration of the plant site at Cassington Quarry, Worton, Witney, OX29 4EB - Application no: MW.0122/20
Report by the Assistant Director of Strategic Infrastructure and Planning (PN6).
The report sets out the proposed changes to the specified existing planning conditions which have been applied for under application no. MW.0122/20. Having considered the proposals against the development plan and other material considerations, including consultation responses and representations received, it is recommended that that the application be approved.
It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for MW.0122/20 be approved subject toconditions to be determined by the Director of Planning and Place, to include those set out in Annex 1 to the report PN6.
The Committee considered (PN6) a report setting out proposed changes to the specified existing planning conditions which had been applied for under application no. MW.0122/20.
Officers presented the report and confirmed that the intention had been to use spoil from the now delayed Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme but there was nothing to restrict the applicants from sourcing restoration material from elsewhere.
Phillip Duncan for the applicants explained that this was an application for an extension of one year due to delays in acquiring a licence to undertake work involving Great Crested Newts. Cassington Quarry had been worked and restored ant this application represented the last element. He confirmed that material would be available from sources other than the delayed Oxford flood alleviation scheme. Plant site restoration had originally been for one large water body but as the quarry already had a large amount of that type of habitat a variation had been sought to reduce the extent of the water body, increase the area of grassland and provide smaller and more varied waterbodies. The timeframes for that permission had been for extraction to cease by 31 December 2020 with restoration completed within 2 years of that date. However, it was then identified that the site was populated by great crested newts, which were subject to protection with strict limitations on what works could be undertaken. The newt project, which related to the animal’s life cycle, had been due to commence in April 2021 with an application made to extend the timeframes of the planning permission by 1 year. However, the process to get the GCN licence took longer than anticipated with the necessary certificate only issued on 23 July 2021. Therefore, a further extension of time for the planning application was needed to enable the GCN works to be undertaken and amend the 1 year extension by a further year. This application was simply the result of an interconnected licensing and planning process. The GCN licence was now in place and if this application was approved then the last sand and gravel could be extracted from Cassington and the site then restored.
Councillor Ian Middleton referred to the many extensions to this site. The original permission had included a completion date of 2010 but we were now 11 years on from that. Although the applicant had referred to a 1 year extension the report referred to two years. There was a lot of local frustration that there always seemed to be one extension after another and a need to draw a line. He supported the protection being afforded to the great crested newt population but felt that the issue was something of a smoke screen. There were also issues relating to the green belt and rights of way and Yarnton residents wanted to see an end to this saga.
Members expressed their sympathy with the obvious local frustration which seemed to be a common theme with many permissions not meeting original estimates for completion of operations.
Officers accepted that there ... view the full minutes text for item 29/21
(i) Importation of inert material for use in restoration of the site and ii) To continue the development of limestone quarry extension permitted by 18/02008/CM (MW.0027/18) without complying with condition 1, condition 2, condition 8 and condition 26 in order to amend the approved restoration scheme, extend the date for restoration and allow the importation of inert material at Castle Barn Quarry, Fairgreen Farm, Sarsden, Oxfordshire - Application nos: MW.0057/21 and MW.0058/21 PDF 1 MB
Report by the Assistant Director Strategic Infrastructure and Planning (PN7).
The report sets out the two proposed developments for which planning permission has been applied under application nos. MW.0057/21 and MW.0058/21. Having considered the report against the development plan and other material considerations including consultation responses and representations received it is recommended the two applications are refused.
It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for application MW.0057/21 be refused for the following reasons:
i) The development is Major Development in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty for which exceptional circumstances do not exist and for which it has not beendemonstrated that the development is in the public interest. Therefore, the development is contrary to paragraph 177 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policy C8 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy, policies EH1 & EH2 of the West Oxfordshire Local Plan and policies CE1, CE4, CE10, CE11, CE12 & CE13 of the Cotswolds AONB Management Plan 2018.
ii) The development is not necessary in order to achieve the satisfactory restoration and afteruse of the existing quarry in a timely manner contrary to Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy policies W6 and M10.
iii) The development would not minimise carbon emissions nor make effective use of natural resources contrary to policy C2 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy and policy OS3 of the West Oxfordshire Local Plan.
It is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for application MW.0058/21 be refused for the following reasons:
i) In combination with the importation of inert material proposed in application no. MW.0057/21 which the proposed variations to the existing planning permission18/02008/CM (MW.0027/18)would facilitate, the development is Major Development in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty for which exceptional circumstances do not exist and for which it has not beendemonstrated that the development is in the public interest. Therefore the development is contrary to paragraph 177 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policy C8 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy, policies EH1 & EH2 of the West Oxfordshire Local Plan and policies CE1, CE4, CE10, CE11, CE12 & CE13 of the Cotswolds AONB Management Plan 2018.
ii) In combination with the importation of inert material proposed in application no. MW.0057/21 which the proposed variations to the existing planning permission18/02008/CM (MW.0027/18) would facilitate, the development is not necessary in order to achieve the satisfactory restoration and afteruse of the existing quarry in a timely manner contrary to Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy policies W6 and M10.
iii) In combination with the importation of inert material proposed in application no. MW.0057/21 which the proposed variations to the existing planning permission18/02008/CM (MW.0027/18) would facilitate, the development would not minimise carbon emissions nor make effective use of natural resources contrary to policy C2 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Part 1 Core Strategy and policy OS3 of the ... view the full agenda text for item 30/21
The Committee considered (PN7) a report setting out two applications in relation to Castle Barn Quarry. One (MW.0057/21) sought permission for the importation of inert material for use in restoration of the site and the second (MW.0058/21) a Section 73 application to vary certain conditions attached to planning permission MW.0027/18 regarding importation of material and an extension to the restoration date to 31 December 2024.
Officers presented the report.
Responding to questions officers advised that the statement by the applicant’s counsel on page 44 of the report had unsurprisingly stated that this application did not constitute major development and was in the public interest because of benefits from the proposed scheme and improvements to safety on the site. However, under the NPPF a view had to be taken on any application in an AONB and it was for the Committee as decision takers to decide on whether advice given by officers in this case was correct or not. There had been a quarry there for many years and the original permission had been for restoration using on site material but, for whatever reason, more material had been removed from the site and as a result some imported material would now be required. However, the level of import being proposed was twice what was required to infill under the existing scheme.
While giving a higher bio-diversity net gain the new scheme would also result in more HGVs and carbon emissions so a balance was needed between the benefits to be derived from any net gains against the disbenefits from 27,00 additional vehicle movements when restoration could be achieved without that. There was a duty of regard for the management of AONBs.
The Highway Authority had initially raised some concerns but not now, subject to routeing agreements
Antony Cook for the applicant. Castle Barn Quarry had historically been worked for building stone but in 2015 that changed to allow surplus waste mineral to be crushed and exported as aggregate enabling the quarry to be worked in a more efficient and effective manner while creating a viable product from finite mineral resources. However, adequate safeguards had not been established by that permission or those that followed to ensure retention of sufficient waste material on site for restoration, which now meant that the approved restoration scheme could not now be delivered without importing inert material. While this was an issue that could have been prevented and was a problem inherited by the applicant (as landowner) who was now responsible for delivering the restoration of the quarry the scheme as now proposed presented an opportunity to deliver significant improvements through development, which sought only continuity of the nature and scale of the quarry operation that had existed on this site between 2015 and 2020 with a maximum three-year extension to complete restoration works. However, it was anticipated that the infill operation would be completed within eighteen months with the only discernible difference between the previous mineral operation and the proposed infilling of the remaining void ... view the full minutes text for item 30/21