Minutes:
Shipton on Cherwell Quarry
As part of the planning permission granted earlier this year for application no. MW.0001/19 to extend of time for the completion of mineral extraction in the south-eastern part of Shipton on Cherwell Quarry to the end of September, an informative had been attached which advised that a monitoring report be provided in 6 months from the date of this permission to include progress on both extraction and restoration of the site and for that information to be reported to the next available Planning and Regulation Committee. A progress report had been received from the site operator which had been circulated to members. Officers had also carried out a further site monitoring visit on 29 October which identified that mineral working was continuing at the site contrary to the end date set out in the planning permission. Officers were also investigating whether mineral extraction and subsequent infilling had occurred beyond the area shown on the approved plan pursuant to this planning permission and also more generally beyond the depth permitted. The site operator was also contending that an old mineral permission, known as an interim development order permission, was still extant and could lawfully be implemented. Officers were currently looking at that but mineral extraction had clearly continued post the date permitted under the planning permission. The site operator had advised that they intend to make a further section 73 application seeking to extend the end date further and to make other changes to the planning permission.
Separately, an appeal had been lodged against the refusal of a separate planning permission (MW.0046/18) late last year for an extension to the south-east of the existing quarry. This appeal would be heard at a Public Hearing by a Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State on a date yet to be set by the Planning Inspectorate. However, officers had prepared and submitted a written statement on behalf of the County Council supporting the reasons for the refusal of planning permission which had been on Green Belt, amenity and locational grounds contrary to the Minerals and Waste Local Plan policies M3 and M5.
Controlled Reclamation Site
An appeal against service of an enforcement notice requiring the Controlled Reclamation Landfill site to be re-contoured and restoration, planting and grass-seeding carried out in accordance with the conditions of the relevant planning permission had been allowed by a planning inspector appointed by the Secretary of State. Essentially the land had been contoured to levels over two metres higher than those permitted in places. This appeal was allowed on the one ground, ground e) which had been that the council failed to serve the notice on all the landowners, specifically All Souls College, although All Souls College owned only a small part of the site and had no active responsibility for the breaches of planning control against which the enforcement action had been taken. The inspector has also awarded costs against the council. It had been disappointing that the inspector did not consider the other grounds for appeal and the council’s response to them. However, a section 73 planning application seeking to regularise the unauthorised development which had been carried out had been received and this would be reported to the committee for determination in due course. It was the officer view that it would not be appropriate to consider re-service of the enforcement notice or other enforcement action pending the determination of the application.
Elm Farm Quarry, Stratton Audley
Elm Farm quarry had been granted planning permission for restoration by landfilling in 1998 and that permission had been accompanied by a unilateral undertaking that the site would be available for public access for 300 days per annum post-restoration. Unfortunately, the original site operator having imported a large amount of waste material then abandoned the restoration works after which the site remained inactive and effectively abandoned. The land was sold on into other ownership until it was acquired by the current owners in 2018 who expressed a wish to liaise with the council with regard to the future of the site. However, although a planning application seeking to extend the time period for completion of restoration of the site was submitted in October 2018, this could not be determined before the end of 2018 and as the ten year date for taking enforcement action would otherwise have passed there was a need to take enforcement action in order to protect the council’s position. The enforcement notice was served in December 2018 and an appeal almost immediately lodged against it. As the site had been abandoned for many years and flora and fauna had colonised the site, initial ecological surveys carried out by the council identified that it was likely to contain important ecological habitats. Following completion of detailed ecological surveys by the applicant, it became apparent that the currently approved restoration scheme for the site could not now be complied with without having a detrimental impact on the ecology of the site, including protected species and this also meant that there would be a conflict with the terms of the unilateral undertaking in terms of public access. Officers have been liaising with the applicant to get a mutually acceptable solution. The chairman of the committee and local county councillor, Ian Corkin, are being kept apprised of the situation and support the negotiations currently being undertaken. The Head of Legal Services is liaising with the applicant’s legal advisor in order to progress this matter.