Agenda, decisions and minutes

8. Hornton Grounds Quarry, Hornton.

Councillor George Reynolds, Non Statutory Interest, as the Clerk to Drayton Parish Council

Councillor James Macnamara, Non Statutory Interest, as a customer of the applicant Certas Energy Limited.

Councillor Phil Chapman, Non Statutory Interest, as a Local Authority Board Member of Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

9. E P Barrus Limited,  Launton Road, Bicester, OX26 4UR.

Councillor Les Sibley, Non Statutory Interest, as a member of Bicester Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

Councillor Lynn Pratt, Non Statutory Interest, as a member of Bicester Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

10. Land North and West of Bretch Hill Reservoir, Adj to Balmoral Avenue, Banbury.

Councillor Andrew Beere, Non Statutory Interest, As a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

Councillor Barry Richards, Non Statutory Interest, as a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

Councillor Colin Clarke, Non Statutory Interest, as a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

The Chairman advised that requests to address the meeting would be dealt with at each item.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5 November 2020.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 5 November 2020 were agreed as a correct record and would be signed by the Chairman in due course, subject to the following amendment to resolution (2) of Minute 99, Heyford Park, Camp Road, Upper Heyford:

Under the heading “Access and movement” insert the following:

•         Resurvey traffic flows and undertake reassessment using traffic models of whether the proposed mitigation scheme at Middleton Stoney remains the most appropriate solution

•         Form a working group to consider solutions to relieve congestion at Middleton Stoney and advise on additional mitigation measures for other villages that may arise as a result of any such solution

To receive communications from the Chairman.

The Chairman made the following announcements:

1.  There had been three supplements to the Planning Agenda;

·        Written Updates

·        Great Wolf late report

·        Update on Bretch Hill decision

2.  After consideration and approval of the Heyford Park Master Plan it had been before the Secretary of State. The Department of Communities and Local Government has decided not to call in application  18/00825/HYBRID so there would not be a Public Enquiry and the Committee’s decision stands.

There were no items of urgent business.

Approved contrary to Officer recommendations, conditions to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 20/02328/F for the erection of 2 acres of polytunnels and a circular coated steel water tank (50m3) at OS Parcel 8975 North of Middle Farm and West of Featherbed Lane, Mixbury for PC & IC Rymer Limited.

Ms Melissa Balk, Agent for the application addressed the meeting in support of the application and read a statement from Mr Peter Rymer the applicant in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Corkin and seconded by Councillor Wood  that application 20/02328/F be approved contrary to officer recommendations as it would cause no significant harm.  Suitable conditions delegated to officers.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the addresses of the public speakers and the written updates.

Resolved

(1)      That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Planning and Development to grant permission for application  20/02328/F contrary to officer recommendations.

(2)      That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Planning and Development to add suitable conditions to application  20/02328/F.    

Refused, reasons to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 20/02453/F for a fuel depot including ancillary offices, the installation of plant and hardstanding at Horton Grounds Quarry for Certas Energy Limited and FINSCO Property Company.

Councillor Douglas Webb, Local Ward Member addressed the meeting in objection to the application.

Sir David Gilmour, Chairman of (Campaign to Protect Rural England CPRE) Oxfordshire, addressed the meeting in objection to the application.

Parish Councillor Steven Tilling Hornton Parish Council addressed the meeting in objection to the application.

Mr Peter Frampton, Agent for the applicant addressed the meeting in support of the application.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officers report and presentation, the addresses of the local ward member and public speakers and the written updates.

Resolved

(1)      That application 20/02453/F be refused for the following reasons:

1.     The proposed development represents an unjustified and unsustainable form of development in a rural location, which lack opportunities for sustainable travel to and from the site and would in significant adverse impacts on the character of the surrounding environment, for which it has not been demonstrated that exceptional circumstances exist for such development in this unsustainable location. The proposals are therefore contrary to the provisions and aims of Policies SLE1, SLE4 and ESD1 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.     By virtue of its siting, scale and form and associated lighting and significant HGV vehicle movements the proposed development would appear as an alien feature within the rural landscape, intruding into the open countryside. The proposals would have a detrimental visual impact on the rural character and appearance of the locality, causing significant and demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the area and open rural landscape. The proposals are therefore contrary to Policies ESD13 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, saved Policy C28 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.     The proposals have failed to demonstrate that safe and suitable access with appropriate vison splays can be achieved at the site, to accommodate the proposed significant intensification of the use of the site and associated vehicular movements. The proposals are therefore contrary to Policy ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.     The proposals would generate frequent heavy-goods vehicle movements through residential areas, including the villages of Drayton and Wroxton and Hardwick and Ruscote on the periphery of Banbury. It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the levels of such movements would not adversely affect the amenity of these residential areas and villages, to the detriment of the living environment in these locations. The proposals are therefore contrary to saved Policies TR10 and C31 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1.

5.     The applicant has failed to demonstrate that an appropriate surface water drainage strategy, and mitigation measures necessary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

Approved, conditions to be set out in the minutes

The Committee considered application 20/02139/F for the demolition of existing VOSA buildings and the erection of two new  commercial buildings  at Launton Road, Bicester, OX26 4UR for Morleys Stores Limited.

Paul Troop, Bicester Bike Users Group addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the address of the public speaker and the written updates.

Resolved

(1)      That authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Planning and Development to grant permission for application 20/02139/F subject to the following conditions (and any amendments to those conditions considered necessary):

   CONDITIONS

Time Limit

1.     The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason - To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Compliance with Plans

2.     Except where otherwise stipulated by conditions attached to this permission, the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the following plans and documents: Site Location Plan (210,34-40 rev A); Proposals for Block 1 – plans (210,34 – 41 rev A); Proposals for Block 2 – plans (210,34 – 43 rev A); Site Utilities with proposed new buildings (210,34 – 50 rev A); Site Layout plan as proposed (210,34 – 51 rev B); Proposals for Block 1 – elevations (210,34 – 42 rev B); Proposals for Block 2 – elevations (210,34 – 44 rev B); Preliminary planting layout plan (BD 0216.3 SD 003 R02); Proposed Access Arrangements and Swept Path Analysis (2020-F-018-004); Proposed Access Arrangements and Swept Path Analysis (2020-F-018-005); Proposed Access Arrangements and Swept Path Analysis (2020-F-018-006); Proposed Access Arrangements and Swept Path Analysis (2020-F-018-007); Proposed Access Arrangements (Ghost RTL) (2020-F-018-008I REV B) and Proposed Access Arrangements (Ghost RTL) (2020-F-018-008II REV B).

Reason – For the avoidance of doubt, to ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority and comply with Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.     The premises shall be used only for purposes falling within Classes B1, B2 and B8 as specified in Schedule 1 to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) and for no other purpose(s) whatsoever, including any other purpose(s) within Class E of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

Reason - In order to safeguard the character of the area and safeguard the amenities of the occupants of the adjoining premises and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011 – 2031 Part 1, Saved Policies C28 and C31 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.     No development shall commence unless and until full details of the means of access between the land and the highway, including,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 105.

That the original decision on application 20/01643/OUT be disolved and be reconsidered at the meeting of the Planning Committee in January.

The Committee considered application 20/01643/OUT, an outline application for the erection of up to 49 homes, public open space and other infrastructure, with all matters reserved except access at Land North and West of Bretch Hill Reservoir  Adj to Balmoral Avenue Banbury  for  Lone Star Land Limited.

This application had been considered by Planning Committee on 8 October 2020 and was refused contrary to the officer’s recommendations.

In light of advice from the council’s legal team, the application had been resubmitted to clarify and/or inform the Committee regarding the site’s Development Plan status and the Banbury Vision & Masterplan SPD, and to seek confirmation of the wording of the three reasons for refusal:

It was proposed by Councillor Colin Clarke and seconded by Councillor Chris Heath that the original decision on application 20/01643/OUT made at 5 November 2020 Planning Committee be dissolved and the application be reconsidered at the 14 January 2021 meeting of Planning Committee when a new report with information received after the October meeting  be  included.

The Chairman advised the Committee that as the application would be including additional significant information for Members’ consideration, to ensure fairness, public speakers would be permitted to address the meeting.

Resolved.

(1)      That the original decision on application 20/01643/OUT be dissolved and the application be reconsidered at the 14 January 2021 meeting of the Planning Committee.

Please note this report will follow as it is being reviewed and finalised.

Resolved

(1)      That notwithstanding the information submitted on behalf of the Appellant regarding potential alternative golf course re-provision at Bicester Hotel, Golf & Spa (paragraph 5.5 of the Appellant’s Rule 6 Statement) and the further submissions (made in paragraphs 5.9, 5.14 and 5.35 of the Appellant’s Rule 6 Statement), which suggested the District Council had failed to appropriately consider or interpret relevant evidence and planning guidance, the Council still wishes to maintain its first, second, third and fifth reasons for refusal at the forthcoming Inquiry on 9th-17th February 2021.

The Assistant Director Planning and Development submitted a report on the Great Wolf Public Inquiry.

In introducing the report, the Team Leader – Major Developments explained that the report was being presented to Members to address suggestions made by the Appellant (Great Lakes UK Limited) that the Council’s decision to refuse planning permission and its reasons for doing so were arrived at, in some respects, without regard to information which had been provided at the end of the application process, by the then Applicant.

The Team Leader – Major Developments explained that the application  (reference 19/02550/F) had been refused for the following reasons:

1.       The proposed development by reason of its location would result in the loss of an 18-hole golf course when the Local Planning Authority’s evidence indicates the course is not surplus to requirements and there is a need for more provision for golf courses in the Bicester sub-area over the plan period. The evidence and proposals for alternative sports and recreation provision included with the application is not considered sufficient to make the loss of the golf course acceptable. The development is contrary to Policy BSC10 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1 which seeks to protect existing sport and recreation provision and enhance the existing provision. It is also contrary to Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.       The proposed development would result in the creation of a substantial leisure and hospitality destination in a geographically unsustainable location on a site largely devoid of built structures and beyond the built limits of the nearest settlement. It has no access via public transport and would not reduce the need to travel or offer a genuine choice of alternative travel modes over the private motor vehicle. Given the predominant guest dynamic (families with children) the majority of trips are likely to be made via private motor vehicle, utilising minor rural roads. Furthermore, the proposal is for retail and leisure development in an out-of-centre location and no impact assessment has been provided as required by Policy SLE2.  The Council do not consider that exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated to justify the development in this location, and as such the proposal is contrary to Policies SLE1, SLE2, SLE3, SLE4 and ESD1 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, Saved Policies T5, TR7 and C8 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.       The proposed development fails to demonstrate that traffic impacts of the development are, or can be made acceptable, particularly in relation to additional congestion at the Middleton Stoney signalised junction of the B4030 and B430.  As such the proposal is contrary to Policy SLE4 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, Saved Policy TR7 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, Policy 17 of the Oxfordshire Local Transport Plan 4 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.       The development proposed, by virtue of its considerable size,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 107.

Report of Assistant Director Planning and Development

Purpose of report

This report aims to keep members informed upon applications which have been determined by the Council, where new appeals have been lodged, public inquiries/hearings scheduled, or appeal results achieved.

Recommendations

The meeting is recommended:

1.1          To accept the position statement.

Resolved

(1)            That the position statement be accepted.

The Assistant Director Planning and Development submitted a report which informed Members on applications which had been determined by the Council, where new appeals have been lodged, public inquiries/hearings scheduled or appeal results achieved.

Resolved

(1)           That the position statement be accepted.