Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3 June 2019 (PN3) and to receive information arising from them.

Worton Farm, Cassington

The Committee were informed that an appeal against the decision to refuse planning permission at Worton Farm, Cassington had been upheld

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

This is an application for extraction of 2.5 million tonnes of sand and gravel from an area north of the River Thames between Clifton Hampden and Culham, in South Oxfordshire. The land would be restored to a mixture of agriculture, lakes and mosaic wetland. No imported waste would be needed to achieve the proposed restoration. Clay would also be extracted for onsite engineering operations.  Permission is sought for a 12.5 year period. There would also be a new plant site and a new access onto the A415. The site is currently in agricultural use.

The application is being reported to this Committee because it is a resubmission of an application that was previously refused by the committee, contrary to officer advice (application MW.0039/16). Additionally, a large number of objections have been received, including from local Parish Councils, South Oxfordshire District Council and CPRE as well as over 300 letters of objection from local residents.

The report provides a factual update for members and invites the committee to consider whether the reasons for refusal of the previous application have been overcome.

That members consider whether the application overcomes their previous concerns and so reasons for refusal with regard to application No. MW.0039/16 and EITHER

  a)      if not, refuse for one or more of the following reasons:

i)       The additional vehicle movements arising from the development would lead to severe highways impacts contrary to paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework; would not maintain the safety of road users and the efficiency of the road network contrary to the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy policy C10 and would contribute to congestion, disruption and delays on the road network, contrary to Local Transport Plan policy 02.

ii)     The additional vehicle movements arising from the development would worsen queuing at local junctions leading to stationary vehicles with associated air emissions, causing unacceptable adverse impacts on environmental amenity, contrary to Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy policies C5 and C10.

iii)    The development would prejudice the future development of a new link road and Thames crossing along one of the routes safeguarded by policy TRANS3 of the emerging South Oxfordshire Plan 2033 and core policy 18 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1 contrary to these policies.

iv)       The development is inappropriate in the Green Belt contrary to Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy policy C12, South Oxfordshire Local Plan policy GB4 and National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 143, 144 and 146 and no very special circumstances exist to justify making an exception to these policies.

OR

b)      if so,

i)       subject to the consultation period closing without any new material considerations arising following consultation with the committee Chairman and deputy Chairman; and,

ii)     if members conclude the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt, the application first being referred to the Secretary of State to provide the opportunity for the application to be called in  ...  view the full agenda text for item 31/19

The Committee considered (PN6) an application for the extraction of sand, gravel and clay including the creation of new access, processing plant, offices with welfare accommodation, weighbridge and silt water lagoon system with site restoration to agriculture and nature conservation including lakes with recreational afteruses and the permanent diversion of footpath 171/15 and creation of new footpaths at Land at Fullamoor Plantation, Clifton Hampden, Abingdon.

Ms Catcheside presented the report along with an addenda setting out corrections to the report and points of clarification, further consultation responses and amended recommendations.

.

Suzi Coyne – SCP, speaking on behalf of Clifton Hampden & Burcot Parish Council spoke against the proposed application made the following key points of objection.

Landscape character. The proposals would have a detrimental effect on the North Wessex Downs.

Amenity value. Loss of the amenity value of the exiting footpaths and Thames Path route.

Harm to a scheduled monument.

There were no questions from the Committee.

Ian Mason – Bachport & Fullamoor Residents, opposed the application noting that the changes from the previous application did not address Parish Council concerns sufficiently. The reduction in bund size was marginal. The reduction in lorry movements and movement restrictions were not effective nor enforceable. Mr Mason argued that there was no need for a new quarry pointing out that production was 30% lower than forecast and the existing land bank figures ranged from 18 years to 22 years if a 10-year rolling average was used. There was clear harm to the landscape and heritage and very special circumstances are required to be demonstrated to overcome the harm to the green belt which he argued had not been shown.

Responding to a question Mr Mason explained that due to the topography of the site where the embankment looked down on the site the bunds had to be higher than normal.

Councillor Lindsay-Gale, local councillor for Berinsfield & Garsington spoke against the application on the grounds of the impact on roads and vehicular movements, damage to the green belt and the lack of need noting strong local opposition. Councillor Lindsay-Gale referred particularly to the danger posed by large vehicles causing an obstruction to children crossing at the A415 to access the school.

There were no questions from the Committee.

Councillor Lynda Atkins, local councillor for Wallingford, speaking against the application emphasised the following points: The application was for a processing plant, a huge concrete structure within the green belt. As such the regulations required that there be exceptional circumstances and she argued that there were none. There was a lack of need due to the land bank position. Councillor Atkins highlighted the traffic difficulties in the area that would be made worse by the application proposals with pollution and noise a constant problem. The mitigation referred to in the report was not satisfactory and the application was very little different to the earlier application that had been rejected.

Alan Pardoe, Chairman, Hills Quarry Products Limited speaking in support of the application highlighted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31/19

Report by the Director for Planning and Place (PN7).

This is an application for a western extension to an existing quarry near Shellingford in south west Oxfordshire. It is proposed to extract limestone and soft sand from a 30-hectare area over a 22-year period. The site would be progressively restored to agriculture using imported inert waste. Under the current consent the quarry would need to be restored by 2029. This proposal would extend the end date for restoration to 2044. The western extension area would bring the extraction closer to Shellingford village. The application is supported by an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

There have been no objections from any other consultees, including no objections from Vale of White Horse District Council or their Environmental Health Officer, the Environment Agency, OCC’s ecology, landscape, highways, or rights of way teams.

However, there have been objections from 21 local residents and from Shellingford Parish Meeting. Concerns raised include impacts on residents including from noise, dust and visual impacts arising from the proximity of the workings to the village.

Technical assessments submitted with the application demonstrate that impacts on amenity could be effectively mitigated and the proposal is considered to accord with relevant policies relating to amenity, minerals, waste, landscape, rights of way, flooding and water, the historic environment, biodiversity and soils and agriculture.

Subject to the applicant signing a Section 106 agreement for the matters outlined in Annex 2 to this report it is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for MW.0104/18 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 PN7.

The Committee considered (PN7) an application for a western extension to an existing quarry near Shellingford in south west Oxfordshire to extract limestone and soft sand from a 30-hectare area over a 22-year period with the site progressively restored to agriculture using imported inert waste and extending the current restoration date of 2029 to 2044.

Mrs Hudson presented the report along with 2 changes as set out in the addenda sheet.

Mike Wright a local resident spoke on behalf of the Shellingford Parish Quarry Sub-Committee. They considered the proposed application to extend Shellingford Quarry unsatisfactory in many respects and in support of that made the following key points:

Need - the Oxfordshire Local Aggregate Assessment, published in November 2018, had clearly stated that there was no requirement for more soft sand or crushed rock for the period to 2031 and stating that the landbank in Oxfordshire for Soft Sand was 16.4 years and for Crushed Rock 16.0 years. With local demand for this product already met by the existing landbank and even with some increased demand it was likely that this excess product would have to be transported out of County which as defined in the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Part 1, sections C1, C2, C5 and C10 would be environmentally unacceptable. The proposal was opportunistic and speculative and sought to circumvent the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Part 2 which was yet to be published and adopted.

Inadequate buffer zone - a 250 metre Buffer Zone between quarries and local residences was an Industry Standard, which had been relaxed in Oxfordshire in 2017.  This sensible principle had helped to ensure that the amenity and health of local residents and school children were protected.  Recent analysis clearly predicted that there would be increased dust experienced by residents and school children, should an extension be permitted.  Therefore, bringing the quarry closer than 250 metres was unacceptable and contrary to the distances of “approximately 250 metres” as quoted in the Council’s summary with distances to residences, school and Grade 1 listed church all substantially less than that.

Rigorous dust monitoring - At the insistence of Oxfordshire Public Health, gravimetric dust analysis had been undertaken at the Primary School during the wet month of April 2019.  Official consultees have commented that measurement for one month would not be sufficient to predict annual dust levels and would not be representative of levels of dust generated during dryer summer months. Additionally, there was no dust monitoring undertaken on the adjacent A417 road, which was well known to be covered in dust and dirt generated by the cumulative effect of quarry lorries from Shellingford and the other nearby quarries of which there were 3. This dust exacerbated respiratory problems, especially for vulnerable adults and children containing carcinogenic silica.

Noise - with the wind from the North East, noise generated by the quarry was unacceptable, particularly when the hydraulic breaker was being used. Both the Council and the Applicant had acknowledged  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32/19

Report by the Director for Planning and Place (PN8).

This application seeks permission for the construction of a new 1FE primary school to complement the new housing development, Hanwell View. It is anticipated that the new school will provide places for 270 pupils (60 nursery places and 210 places in reception - year 6) with 30 pupils per class.

The application is being reported to this Committee as an objection has been received from the local member and from Cherwell District Council. The report describes the planning proposal and outlines the consultation replies and objections to the application. Relevant planning policies are included along with the comments and recommendation of the Director for Planning and Place on the proposal.

Subject to the applicant first providing a Unilateral Undertaking for the payment of the Travel Plan monitoring fee of £1240, it is RECOMMENDED that planning permission for Application R3.0034/19 be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Director for Planning and Place but to include matters set out in Annex 3 to the report PN8. 

The Committee considered (PN8) an application to construct a new 1FE primary school to complement the new housing development, Hanwell View which, it was anticipated would provide places for 270 pupils (60 nursery places and 210 places in reception - year 6) with 30 pupils per class.

Ms Woodcock presented the report together with a number of amendments to the report as follows:

Paragraph 45 – the report referred to “additional planting is proposed to the west of Southam Road”. That should have read “east of Southam Road”

Amendments to the fenestration arrangements to be delegated to officers.

Additional planting to address air quality concerns.

Also tabled was a statement from Bob Robinson the Agent for the application who had hoped to attend but been unable to do so.  His statement also referred to changes to fenestration arrangements, confirmed further discussions would be held with Cherwell DC regarding concerns about external appearance and materials, additional planting to address air quality concerns and the terms of a community use agreement allowing the school access to additional areas for formal recreation.

Members discussed issues of air quality and design noting that changes had been proposed which would go some way to addressing issues of concern.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Reynolds, seconded by Councillor Johnston and carried by 11 votes to 0) that subject to the applicant first providing a Unilateral Undertaking for the payment of the Travel Plan monitoring fee of £1240 that planning permission for Application R3.0034/19 be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Director for Planning and Place but to include matters set out in Annex 3 to the report PN8 and an additional condition 15 for provision of secure cycle storage.