A G E N D a Please Address Any General Enquiries on This Agenda to Graham Warrington on Oxford 815321

Planning, 26/02/01, Agenda

Meeting PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE

Date Monday 26 February 2001 Time 2.00 pm

Place County Hall, Oxford

A G E N D A Please address any general enquiries on this agenda to Graham Warrington on Oxford 815321. Media enquiries should be directed to the Press Office on Oxford 815266. This agenda can also be viewed on the Council's web site, oxfordshireonline (www.oxfordshire.gov.uk).

1. Election to Chair (Conservative Group)

2. Apologies for Absence and Temporary Appointments

3. Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

4. Minutes

Minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2001 (PL4).

5. Matters arising from the Minutes

6. Petitions and Public Address

OPERATIONAL ITEMS

7. PLANNING AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

Report by the Assistant Chief Executive & Solicitor to the Council and Director of Environmental Services (PL7).

The Human Rights Act 1998, which came into force on 2 October 2000, incorporates into domestic law the provision of the European Convention of Human Rights. Of the three rights that are of particular significance in the planning arena Article 6 is likely to present the greatest challenge for national and local government. It seems advisable for planning authorities to take all reasonable steps to ensure that objectors are given a reasonable opportunity to comment on points raised by the authority and developers, and also to give full reasons for granting planning consents to establish that the consideration represented a fair hearing.

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to agree the procedures as set out in paragraphs 10 – 12 of the report. 8. County Council Planning Applications

Report by the Director of Environmental Services (PL8).

The following 4 current applications for County Council development, made under Regulation 3 of

Page 1 the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992, are detailed in the schedule appended to the report:

Application No: OS.01/99 (Reserved Matters). Demolition of Sandhills School and the construction of a new school, community facilities, playing fields, public open space and a new access to Merewood Avenue, including alterations to the existing highway at the junction of Merewood Avenue and the A40 London Road. Application for approval of Reserved Matters (design, external appearance and landscaping), Sandhills School, Delbush Avenue, Headington, Oxford and adjacent agricultural land. Application No: O.22/00 (detailed). Erection of extension to provide two new classrooms, ICT Room, GPA Room and associated WC and store facilities and extension of hard play area, Windale First School, Windale Avenue, Blackbird Leys, Oxford OX4 5JD. Application No: S.01/01 (detailed/conservation area). Erection of new school hall and gym with changing rooms, kitchen, storage room, associated landscaping and formation of temporary construction access, South Moreton School, High Street, South Moreton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 9BU. Application No: W.16/00 (detailed/Conservation Area). Replacement of a redundant two classroom temporary building with a two classroom extension and internal alterations, Wychwood CE School, Milton Road, Shipton-under-Wychwood, Chipping Norton, Oxon OX7 6BD.

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to consideration of any further representations received by the date of the meeting, the applications be determined as recommended in the schedules appended to the report, subject to the detailed wording of the recommended conditions being agreed by the Chief Planning Officer.

9. THE construction of a temporary access and haul road for 24 months for THE REMOVAL OF LIMESTONE, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANNING PERMISSION NO. 97/00455/CM WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH CONDITIONS 4 AND 7 TO ALLOW THE USE OF AN ALTERNATIVE TEMPORARY ACCESS TO THE SITE AND ALLOW BOTH THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN QUARRIES TO BE WORKED CONCURRENTLY AT ARDLEY QUARRY (APPLICATION NO. 002413/CM). DETAILS PURSUANT TO CONDITIONS 12, 21, 23 AND 25 OF PERMISSION NO. 97/00455/CM AT ARDLEY QUARRY

Report by the Director of Environmental Services (PL9).

Smiths of Bletchington have submitted the above applications at this time as they wish to be in a position to supply up to 450,000 tonnes of limestone from the northern quarry to be used in the A43 dualling work. The area to the north of the railway is already permitted for limestone extraction. However, under existing conditions it cannot be worked until the southern quarry has been completed. The applicants have applied to not comply with this condition so that the quarries can be worked concurrently and to create a temporary access onto the B430 (for a period of 24 months). The Director of Environmental Services is satisfied that this application can be approved without compromising highway safety, and in addition that details pursuant to Conditions 12 and 23 can be discharged.

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to:

(a) grant planning permission for a temporary access and haul road for 24 months for the removal of limestone, subject to the conditions listed in Annex 3 to the report; (b) grant planning permission for application no. 002413/CM not to comply with Conditions 4 and 7 of permission no. 97/00455/CM subject to the remaining conditions of 97/00455/CM: Condition 4 will now be: Vehicular access to and from the southern quarry shall be by means of the existing

Page 2 access onto the B430 at Ardley Fields Farm Cottages only. Vehicular access to and from the land north of the railway cutting to the B430 shall not be other than by means of the temporary haul road and access as shown on approved plan 8871/TA/1a. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

Condition 4a:

This permission is for a limited period ending 24 months from the date of this permission.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

Condition 4b:

Prior to the access being created a detailed survey must be undertaken in the vicinity of the access to establish how much hedgerow needs to be trimmed to establish adequate sight lines.

Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4c:

The hedgerow marked A-B on approved plan 8871/TA/1a shall be surveyed to establish the location of non-hawthorn species. The access will be located where damage to such species is minimised. Any coppicing or trimming of the hedge shall be undertaken by hand. The hedgerow shall be maintained in a coppiced/trimmed state for the period of this permission.

Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4d:

This approved temporary access shall not be used until adequate temporary signing has been erected on the B423.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4e:

Within 3 months of the permitted 24 month period ending the access and haul road will be removed and the area returned to agricultural use. The gap in the hedgerow will be planted with suitable native species, in accordance with a scheme to be agreed by the Minerals Planning Authority, in the first planting season following the approval of the scheme.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Condition 7 will now be: The working of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the following scheme:

- the material underlying the concrete plant and adjoining area in the vicinity of Ardley Fields Farm as shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 will be excavated by December 1999;

Page 3 - the area remaining to be quarried in the southern area shall take place as strips working in a southerly direction progressing to the southern boundary as indicated on approved plan No. 8871/2;

- workings in the north east area (north of the railway) will take place in two phases progressing in a generally northerly direction as indicated on approved plan No. 8871/2a. Working may occur concurrently in both the north east area and the southern area for a temporary period of 24 months from the date of this permission unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Mineral Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to provide limestone for the A43 from the permitted reserves in the north quarry. (c) approve the details required by conditions of planning permission 97/00455/CM related to a soil survey in the northern quarry pursuant to Condition 12, drainage details for northern quarry pursuant to Condition 23. Delegated authority be given to the Director of Environmental Services to determine details pursuant to Condition 21, a safe scheme of working for the northern quarry, and Condition 25, a detailed agricultural restoration scheme for the northern quarry. These details to be incorporated into conditions of permission 002413/CM.

10. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM)

Report by the Director of Environmental Services (PL10).

The operator and applicant Mr McDowell has applied to not comply with condition 1 of his temporary permission for a waste transfer station at Grove Technology Park. Condition 1 limits the permission to three years ending in April 2001. The application is, effectively, for permanent consent. 90% of waste imported is recycled.

The Vale of White Horse Local Plan allocates Grove Technology Park for B1 and B2 uses. Whilst the proposed use is one on its own it is akin to B2 (general industrial). Structure Plan policy encourages recycling and an industrial location is ideal. Visually, the site fits well at Grove.

The site's neighbour objects to permanent permission on the grounds of dust nuisance to his factory. A dust suppression scheme has been installed but it has yet to be tested in dry weather. Such a system is workable in practice. It would be wrong to limit the permission when a suppression system is in place and adequate conditions and enforcement are available to ensure dust is minimised.

It is RECOMMENDED that subject to a routeing agreement to include a ceiling of 34 movements on the number of HGV's accessing/egressing the site each day, planning permission be granted for application no. ECH/1432/21-CM subject to the conditions listed in Annex 4 to the report.

11. EXTRA MEETING OF PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE

The Assistant Chief Executive and Solicitor to the Council reports as follows:

A number of planning applications relating to the Oxford City Schools Review will not be submitted in time to make the May Planning Sub-Committee. In particular the schemes for Cheney and Cherwell/Frideswides are likely to be a couple of weeks late. However, if the review is to keep on

Page 4 programme, planning permission for these and other schemes will be needed before the July meeting. It is proposed to convene an extra meeting of the Sub-Committee for 14 June 2001 at 2pm.

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to agree that an extra meeting of the Planning Sub-Committee be convened on 14 June 2001.

C. J. GRAY Acting Chief Executive County Hall Oxford OX1 1ND

Page 5 Planning, 26/02/01, PL04

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE - 21 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL4

PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE - 22 JANUARY 2001 MINUTES of the meeting commencing at 2.00 pm and finishing at 3.45 pm

Present:

Voting Members:

Councillors Brenda Churchill, A.D. Crabbe, Dickie Dawes (in place of Councillor Don Seale), Mrs C. Fulljames, Terry Joslin, MacKenzie, Norman Matthews (in place of Councillor Steve Hayward), Anne Purse, G.A. Reynolds, Tom Snow, Sylvia Tompkins and David Turner.

Ex Officio:

Councillors Nils R. Bartleet (in place of Councillor Brian Hodgson), Tim Horton (in place of Councillor Margaret Godden) and Dave Green.

Officers:

Whole of meeting: G. Warrington (Chief Executive's Office); C. Cousins, K. Berry, S. Coyne and J. Hamilton (Environmental Services).

The Sub-Committee considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting together with a schedule of addenda tabled by the Chief Executive. Copies of the agenda, reports and schedule of addenda are attached to the signed Minutes, and in relation thereto the Sub-Committee determined as follows:-

1/01 ELECTION TO CHAIR

RESOLVED: that Councillor Mrs Fulljames (Conservative) be elected to chair the meeting.

2/01 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS

Apologies for absence, temporary appointments and Group Leader substitutions were reported as follows:-

Apology from Temporary Appointment/Substitute

Councillor Godden Councillor Horton Councillor Hayward Councillor Matthews Councillor Hodgson Councillor Bartleet Councillor Seale Councillor Dawes

Page 6 3/01 MINUTES

The Minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 27 November 2000 were approved and signed.

4/01 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

Minute 58/00 – Matters Arising from the Minutes (Minute 51/00)

In response to Councillor Snow, Mr Warrington confirmed that a report would be submitted to the next meeting considering the issue of how late representations received in respect of planning applications were dealt with under the new Human Rights Legislation.

5/01 PETITIONS AND PUBLIC ADDRESS

The following requests to address the meeting had been agreed:

Request from Agenda Item Norman Bowley ) 76 Gidley Way ) Horspath ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 10 - Sandy Lane Piggeries, Horspath ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) South Oxfordshire District Councillor Stella Edwards 3 Manor Farm Road Horspath David Horsley Horspath Parish Council Mr & Mrs Webb Three Acres Sandy Lane Horspath

Page 7 Mrs P. Simmonds Wheatley Parish Council

6/01 ORDER OF BUSINESS

RESOLVED: that Item 10 be taken immediately after Item 6.

7/01 DEPOSIT OF WASTE TO INFILL HOLE FOR RESTORATION TO AGRICULTURE AND CREATE BUNDS AROUND SLURRY LAGOON AND CREATION OF SLURRY LAGOON (PART RETROSPECTIVE) AT SANDY LANE PIGGERIES, HORSPATH – APPLICATION NUMBER: P99/NO781/CM (Agenda Item 10)

The Sub-Committee considered a report (PL10) which detailed an application submitted in part to regularise unauthorised development of a slurry lagoon and surrounding bunds using waste, but also seeking permission to improve internal access tracks and complete the lagoon construction as required by the Environment Agency.

Mr Bowley addressed the Sub-Committee. He was a member of Horspath Parish Council but emphasised that he was addressing the Sub-Committee on his own behalf. He considered that improvements to Sandy Lane should be to a much higher standard than as suggested in the report. The dust problem was particularly bad in dry weather. He endorsed the comments of the County Council's Rights of Way Officer and suggested they be incorporated into any recommendation.

District Councillor Stella Edwards addressed the Sub-Committee. The impact of this operation had given rise to a high level of concern amongst local residents, particularly those living in Sandy Lane and Gidley Way. South Oxfordshire District Council had expressed strong reservations over this proposal particularly because of its adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt. However, if the County Council were minded to approve the application then the conditions set out in the report should be strengthened to include greater detail regarding improvements to Sandy Lane and compression of the timescales for the end date of the development and completion of restoration. She also suggested three additional conditions relating to the removal of slurry waste by tanker to avoid a repetition of slurry running down Old Road, single one-way access to the site and removal of the lagoons and bunds if the pig operation were to cease in the future.

David Horsley, Horspath Parish Council addressed the Sub-Committee. He challenged the tenor of the report, which implied that there was little or no environmental impact resulting from this operation. The second lagoon would enable storage of slurry material throughout the summer months, this would exacerbate current problems of smell. This was not a small free-range operation but one which generated considerable lorry movements transporting food waste to the site. He asked the Sub-Committee to reject the application or to defer consideration pending an environmental impact assessment.

Mr & Mrs Webb addressed the Sub-Committee. As residents of Sandy Lane living very close to the site they would be affected more than most by this proposal. They doubted if the proposed improvements to Sandy Lane would stand the vehicle use proposed and reminded the Sub-Committee that as a bridleway no heavy lorry traffic should be allowed to use Sandy Lane at all. They urged that any decision taken should reflect the site's position in the Green Belt.

Mrs Simmonds, Wheatley Parish Council addressed the Sub-Committee. She pointed out that although the application site was on the edge of their parish it would have a considerable effect on Wheatley. The Parish Council supported South Oxfordshire District Council's objection on Green Belt grounds and considered that the development also compromised the provisions of PPG13. However, if the Sub-Committee were minded to approve the application then the recommended

Page 8 conditions were sensible and helpful but she stressed that the County Council should remain vigilant over the future use and operation of this site.

Mr Cousins considered that the additional conditions suggested concerning the compression of development and restoration dates and access to the site could be addressed. He suggested that officers be authorised to investigate the possibility of imposing a condition concerning the future of the site if the pig operation ceased to operate.

Councillor Purse referred to the high level of local concern over this proposal and the high degree of nuisance that had existed over a considerable period of time. Lorries would continue to visit the site after the bunds had been built and the County Council should endeavour to make the conditions attached to any permission as tight as possible. RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Mrs Fulljames, seconded by Councillor Reynolds, amended during the course of debate with their and the Sub-Committee's consent at the suggestion of Councillor Purse and carried nem con) that:

(a) subject to:

(i) advertising the application as a departure from the Development Plan and the Secretary of State not wishing to call it in for his own determination; and (ii) a legal agreement to cover routeing of vehicles; planning permission be granted for the development proposed in application number P99/N0781/CM subject to conditions to be determined by the Director of Environmental Services to include:

(1) improvement of Sandy Lane prior to any further development; (2) end date of development should be six months from the date of approval of bunding details and plans; (3) restoration to be completed within six months from the end date of development; (4) complete compliance with plans and particulars; (5) inert materials only and removal of any non-inert materials imported for this development; (6) standard hours of operations; (7) restriction of vehicle movements to 10 a day; (8) noise and dust prevention and mitigation measures; (9) restoration details; (10) maintenance of form and appearance of bunding; (11) details of fencing to lagoons; (12) sheeting of lorries; (13) wheel cleaning; (14) details of bunds and internal access track location and construction to be submitted and approved prior to any further development; (15) provision of warning and speed restriction signs; (16) details of surface water attenuation scheme; (17) restricting single access to one-way;

(b) authorise officers to consider whether or not a condition could be imposed on the future use of the site if the pig operation ceased and to impose such a condition if possible;

(c) ask officers to discuss with the Environment Agency ways of ensuring that lagoons were emptied and their contents disposed of in such a way as to prevent any risk of slurry flowing down Old Road.

8/01 County Council Planning Applications (Agenda Item 7)

The Sub-Committee considered a report (PL7) which dealt with the following 4 current

Page 9 applications for County Council development:

Application No: C.20/00 (detailed). Erection of a two storey extension to form eight class maths block, single storey four class art block and three storey three laboratory science block, extension of existing science block, demolition and removal of 3 prefabricated buildings and retention of 4 prefabricated buildings for the duration of works or December 2002 – whichever is sooner, Bicester Community College, Queens Avenue, Bicester OX6 9NS. Application No: C.21/00 (detailed). Erection of a two storey four classroom science block, a single storey dance studio, a single storey eight classroom technology block, re-arrangement of the coach park and demolition of existing aluminium buildings, Banbury School, Ruskin Road, Banbury, Oxon OX16 9HY. Application No: O.19/00 (detailed). Change of use from offices (Class A2) to offices for the Oxford Youth Offending Team (which supervises young offenders age 10-17 years), 193 Cowley Road (2nd floor), Cowley, Oxford. Application No: S.28/00 (renewal). Renewal of consent No. S.18/95 for the change of use from shop to library, 3 North Street, Thame, Oxon OX9 3PB.

RESOLVED: that the applications be determined as recommended in the schedule appended to the report PL8, subject to the detailed wording of the recommended conditions being agreed by the Chief Planning Officer.

9/01 APPLICATION NO. 00/02291/OUT: DEVELOPMENT OF A SETTLEMENT OF ABOUT 1000 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED JOBS, SERVICES AND FACILITIES, FORMER RAF UPPER HEYFORD (Agenda Item 8)

The County Council as Structure Plan authority had been consulted by Cherwell District Council on outline proposals for the development of a settlement of about 1,000 dwellings with associated jobs, services, facilities and highway improvements at former RAF Upper Heyford. The Sub-Committee considered a report (PL8) which assessed the proposal against recent Government advice; relevant Structure Plan policies (particularly policy H2) and the District Council's adopted Comprehensive Planning Brief.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Reynolds, seconded by Councillor Mrs Fulljames and carried by 10 votes to 0, Councillor Joslin abstaining) that the County Council as Structure Plan authority:

(a) informs Cherwell District Council that it objected to the development proposed in application no. 00/02291/OUT on the grounds that it was contrary to Structure Plan policies G1, G2, G3, EN1, EN2, E3, H2, R2 and the adopted Comprehensive Planning Brief in that:

(i) it allowed for significant further growth beyond the level provided by Structure Plan policy H2;

(ii) it did not contain proposals for the implementation of substantial landscaping and environmental improvements across the whole of the land covered by the base; and

(1) on the basis of current information, it was not clear that it would provide for appropriate supporting community and recreation services and facilities;

(b) requests the District Council to take into account the comments of other County officers in Annex 2 to PL8.

10/01 VARIATION OF CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 13 OF PLANNING PERMISSION REFERENCE P91/SO681/CM TO ALLOW PERMANENT USE OF RECYCLING WORKS AT PLAYHATCH QUARRY, READING – APPLICATION NUMBER POO/S0380/CM (Agenda Item 9)

Page 10 The Sub-Committee considered a report (PL9) which set out an application to operate the waste recycling facility permanently and consequently not implement the approved restoration scheme and aftercare requirement.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Mrs Fulljames, seconded by Councillor Dawes and carried by 11 votes to 0) that subject to a legal agreement being secured to cover the routeing of vehicles and cleaning the road drains, planning permission be granted for the proposed development in application number POO/SO380/CM but for a limited period and subject to the following conditions:

(1) the permission hereby granted should be for a limited period expiring on 31 December 2005 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority; (2) all buildings, structures, hardstandings, haul roads, plant, vehicles and machinery associated with the development hereby permitted should be removed and the site restored in accordance with the restoration details approved under planning permission reference P91/S0681/CM by 31 August 2006 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority; (3) no vehicle associated with the development hereby approved should enter or leave the site other than to or from the south; (4) no vehicle should leave the site unless its wheels were sufficiently clean to prevent mud, dust or debris being carried onto the public highway; (5) all internal site haul roads should be maintained in a condition free from pot holes while in use and should be removed when no longer required or during the course of site restoration whichever was the sooner; (6) with the exception of necessary works arising from emergency situations and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority, lorries should not enter or leave the site, plant and machinery should not be operated and operations should not take place: (i) other than between 0700 and 1800 hours Monday to Friday and 0700 and 1300 hours on Saturdays; and (ii) at any time on Sundays and Bank Holidays and Saturdays immediately following Bank Holidays; (7) notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order, no structure or building of any kind should be erected within the curtilage of the site without the prior written approval of the Mineral Planning Authority; (8) no floodlighting should be erected on site without the prior written approval of the Mineral Planning Authority; (9) in the event of the failure of any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with the provisions of planning permission P91/SO681/CM, such trees or shrubs should be replaced in the next planting season (November to February) for the life of the development hereby approved and aftercare period with others of similar size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority; (10) aftercare should be carried out in accordance with the aftercare scheme approved under permission reference P91/SO681/CM for a period of five years following restoration of the site unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority; (11) within one month of the date of this permission, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority, schemes should be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority for the minimisation of dust and noise generated by the development hereby approved. Any scheme approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority should be implemented within one month of the date of that approval for the duration of the development; (12) at no time should material stored on the site exceed 63.06 metres AOD

11/01 Updating Members on progress on enforcement (Agenda Item 11)

The Sub-Committee considered a report (PL11) which summarised progress on a number of enforcement cases. Mrs Coyne updated the Sub-Committee as follows:-

Land at Manor Farm, Frilford – No application had been received from the applicant. Although Enforcement Action had previously been authorised this had been done sometime ago and officers would be writing again to spokespersons on this matter.

Page 11 Barford Road Farm, South Newington – The appeal had now been withdrawn and there would be no public inquiry. However, waste still remained on the site and a planning application was expected.

New Manor Farm, Marston – No response received yet from either the Environment Agency or Michael Meacher MP.

Hinksey Heights Golf Course – The Enforcement Notice had been appealed and an inquiry date set for 9 May 2001. Officers would be asking the Secretary of State to hold this in abeyance until after the May meeting to enable the Planning Sub-Committee to consider the matter.

Land adjacent Chatterpie Lane, Combe – The Sub-Committee were informed that the snakes in question were believed to be adders and were a protected species.

RESOLVED: to receive the report.

in the Chair

Date of signing 2001

Page 12 Planning, 26/02/01, PL07

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL7

PLANNING AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT Report by the Assistant Chief Executive & Solicitor to the Council and the Director of Environmental Services

Introduction

1. The Human Rights Act 1998, which came into force on 2 October 2000, incorporates into domestic law the provision of the European Convention of Human Rights. Of the three rights that are of particular significance in the planning arena Article 6 is likely to present the greatest challenge for national and local government. It seems advisable for planning authorities to take all reasonable steps to ensure that objectors are given a reasonable opportunity to comment on points raised by the authority and developers, and also to give full reasons for granting planning consents to establish that the consideration represented a fair hearing.

2. In particular, in response to members' concerns (minute 58/)), this report considers the issue of how to deal with late representations.

3. The Human Rights Act requires all public bodies to comply with the Human Rights Conventions. The relevant convention in relation to Planning is in relation to an individuals right to a fair hearing (Article 6):

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law."

4. The Planning Sub-Committee deals with planning applications and, therefore makes decisions affecting a person's civil rights and obligations and, therefore, potentially falling within Article 6. Nevertheless, administrative decisions that affect individuals civil rights and obligations may be made by bodies that do not provide all the guarantees of Article 6 provided there is ultimately a right of appeal sufficient to render the proceedings as a whole compatible with Article 6.

5. Where a matter is decided by Committee the individual must be able to challenge that decision before a judicial body with full jurisdiction providing the guarantees of Article 6.

6. The Planning Sub-Committee is not a tribunal or a Court and there is a right of appeal. However, the introduction of the Human Rights Act has prompted local authorities to look at their planning processes and at how applications are dealt with.

Decision Making Processes

7. The Courts in Judicial review have a long history of looking at the decision making process to ensure that all relevant information that was readily identifiable has been considered; that those making the decision have not considered any matter that is irrelevant and finally that the decision taken is one that a reasonable authority could have taken i.e. it is not irrational, perverse or unjust. This is known as the "Wednesbury Reasonableness" test. In addition the Human Rights Act also adds the concept of proportionality to that test.

Page 13 8. The issue of late representations is a difficult one. The Courts have recognised that it is entirely proper for a body to set reasonable time limits and to have procedures to ensure consistency and fairness to all. Nevertheless, if an applicant was responding to some new matters contained in an officer report it could well be argued that natural justice dictates that the applicant should be afforded an opportunity to respond to those points and for those representations to be considered before a final decision is taken.

9. With this in mind it is important for all applicants to be aware of what the necessary timescales are and the risk that late representations may not be considered by the Committee/Sub-Committee. It could be argued that it was their choice not to file matters on time and in certain cases it might be appropriate to refuse to consider further representations, particularly if that would mean possible deferment of the decision.

10. It is therefore essential for all applicants or individuals/organisations submitting representations to be aware of the need to file representations before the due date and the circumstances under which late submissions might be considered e.g.;

(a) additional points that come from having sight of the officer report;

(b) new information which was not obtainable before;

Current Practice

11. Late representations are dealt with on an ad hoc basis with no set procedure for dealing with such representations other than through the addenda sheet, reported orally or tabled at the meeting. This normally works well enough when dealing with late submissions resulting from the initial consultation period undertaken by the Director of Environmental Services but problems can arise following the publication of an officer report seven days before a meeting. The timescale between publication and the meeting often means that comments in response to the contents of a report can be received on the morning of the meeting which results in members either having to read long and complicated submissions or officers trying to summarise the submission accurately. In either case the party submitting the late representation may feel aggrieved that their submission has not been considered in a proper manner.

Late Representations

12. In order to overcome these problems and to comply with the Human Rights Legislation the following are suggested:

Initial Consultation Period (undertaken by Environmental Services)

13. When consulting on or advertising an application Environmental Services staff will make clear the deadline for submissions. They will also point out that comments received after the deadline may not be taken into account.

Following Publication of an Officer Report

14. When a copy of a published report is requested the Assistant Chief Executive & Solicitor to the Council, who normally issues the report will do so with a covering letter setting out deadlines for a response to points contained in the report. The letter will highlight the need for comments to be in writing, submitted by 9.00 one working day before the meeting (to allow one day for matters

Page 14 submitted to be considered) and emphasising that the Sub-Committee may not be able to fully consider the contents if those deadlines are not met.

15. The County Council's procedures need to be transparent and seen to be giving individuals every opportunity to put their case forward.

16. Environmental, Financial and Staff and Implications for People Living in Poverty

There are none arising from this report.

Recommendation

17. The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to agree the procedures as set out in paragraphs 12 – 14 above.

C J IMPEY Assistant Chief executive & Solicitor to the Council

DAVID YOUNG Director of Environmental Services

Background Papers: Nil

Contact Officer: Graham Warrington, Tel Oxford 815321 Chris Cousins, Tel Oxford 815459

12 February 2001

Page 15 Planning, 26/02/01, PL08

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL8

COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS Report by the Director of Environmental Services

1. The Schedule annexed to this report considers 4 current planning applications for County Council development, made under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 1992.

2. The applications and any letters of objection which may be received are available for inspection in the Land Use Planning Section of Environmental Services (refer to Contact Officer).

Environmental Implications

3. These are identified as appropriate in the application schedule.

Staff and Financial Implications

4. The Sub-Committee are asked to determine the applications. The finance for and staff implications of the scheme are a matter for the promoting Committee.

Implications for People Living in Poverty

5. There are none arising from this report.

RECOMMENDATION

Page 16 6. It is RECOMMENDED that subject to consideration of any further representations received by the date of the meeting, the applications be determined as recommended in the schedules appended to this report, subject to the detailed wording of the recommended conditions being agreed by the Chief Planning Officer.

DAVID YOUNG Director of Environmental Services

Background papers: Nil

Contact Officer: John Griffin, Tel. Oxford 815723

February 2001

Page 17 Planning, 26/02/01, PL08, Sandhills

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL8

COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS Application No: OS.01/99 (Reserved Matters).

Application No: OS.01/99 (Reserved Matters) Demolition of Sandhills School and the construction of a new school, community facilities, playing fields, public open space and a new access to Merewood Avenue, including alterations to the existing highway at the junction of Merewood Avenue and the A40 London Road. Application for approval of Reserved Matters (design, external appearance and landscaping), Sandhills School, Delbush Avenue, Headington, Oxford and adjacent agricultural land Development and Site (see plan):

This application is for approval of the design, external appearance and landscaping for this development which was approved in outline on 27 January 2000 (a copy of the approval is availble in the Members' Resource Centre). The siting and means of access were approved at that time. However, conditions were also imposed requiring further information to be approved in relation to a) details of the means of access, b) a scheme for parking restraints in the area of the junction of the school access road with Merewood Avenue and the A40, c) management of the community open space, d) treatment of the Green Belt boundary and e) the materials to be used. These matters are all to be determined by the Chief Planning Officer under delegated powers when the applications are made.

The application site is on the eastern boundary of the city and straddles both the Oxford City and South Oxfordshire administrative areas. The part of the site to be used for playing fields and community open space is currently agricultural land in South Oxfordshire and is in both the Oxford Green Belt and an Area of Great Landscape Value.

Relevant Planning Considerations

Central Government Guidance PPG2 - Green Belts PPG17 - Sport and Recreation

Structure Plan Policies G2 - Appropriate scale, type and design – be sustainable in travel terms. G3 - Necessary infrastructure to be provided. G4 - Development to be appropriate to Green Belt Designation. R1 - Leisure development to be well related to catchment area and accessible by sustainable means of transport.

Oxford Local Plan Policies EN1/EN2 - Green Belt EN68 - Provision of public open space. RE8 - Protection of open air sports facilities. RE9 - Ensure maximum use of Council owned sports facilities.

Page 18 RE24 - Provision of Children's play space. TR25 - Improvements to cycle safety and cycle routes.

Development and Site (see plan): contd

South Oxfordshire Local Plan Policies GB3 - Openness and purposes of Green Belt. GB4 - New development to have minimal impact on Green Belt. C3 - Protection of Areas of Great Landscape Value. Results of Consultations:

Highways Agency – no comment.

Environment Agency – no objections but have asked for a condition to be imposed for the approval of surface water drainage details and for planning informatives about culverting and pollution prevention.

MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food) – no comment.

Sport England – no objection.

TVPA (Thames Valley Police Authority) – happy with scheme.

Risinghurst and Sandhills Parish Council concerned that the community open space around the school site should be independently owned and properly managed so as to prevent further development into the Green Belt; subway under the A40 should be extended to serve pupils from Risinghurst; concerned about fate of mature trees; building unsatisfactory, does not fit surroundings, elevations incorrect and resembles an industrial building; parking for community and school inadequate; not enough detail on planting; slipway from A40 into Sandhills should be extended.

Forest Hill with Shotover Parish Council – no objections – the existing Green Belt must be fully protected from any encroachment of buildings.

Oxford Preservation Trust – 1. Pleased the building is of low design. 2. Concerned about the impact of the development on the edge of the Green Belt. 3. Concerned that landscape details are scant for an item fundamental to the development in the green belt. 4. Would like more details of the amphitheatre. 5. Would like confirmation that artificial pitches will not be used. 6. Floodlighting to pitches should not be provided. 7. Are there other examples of the patinated metal roof that can be seen?

Page 19 8. What is the roofing material to the hall? 9. The Trust is considering whether to take and manage the community space but no decision has yet been made.

Results of Consultations: (contd)

Cultural Services (Rights of Way Officer) – safety and access to the bridleway to be observed at all times.

Save our Sandhills – 1. The school is a cross between an aircraft hangar and a warehouse. 2. Poor design does not blend with its surroundings. 3. Have safety concerns about the access road junction which will have no pedestrian crossing. 4. Wish the 'ransom strip' to be implemented around the Green Belt edge of the development to prevent further incursion into the green belt.

Mrs Hessey, 65 Delbush Avenue – 1. Why use wood cladding which is a fire hazard. 2. Building not in keeping – roof should be pitched and tiled. 3. The 'ransom strip' should be provided. 4. The road junction is hazardous.

Mr Fyvie, 51 Bardell Avenue – objects 1. A pitched roof would be more in keeping. 2. New road junction will be dangerous – the subway should be extended or a footbridge provided. 3. Strict protection should be provided for mature trees. 4. 'Ransom strip' should be provided to protect the Green Belt.

Mrs Warland, 20 Bardell Avenue - 1. Buildings out of character, roofs should be pitched and tiled. 2. Wood cladding will present a fire hazard. 3. A 'ransom strip' should be provided. 4. The traffic lights should be altered to give Sandhills the priority over Thornhill traffic.

R T Kelly, 61 Delbush Avenue – 1. Buildings do not blend with their environment and local materials. 2. Materials are cheap – shape is hideous. 3. Access inadequate. 4. Annexation of green belt for school playing fields is an abuse of power.

Sean Heaver, 13 Merewood Avenue – 1. Concerned about the junction layout. 2. A 'ransom strip' should be introduced. 3. The building is hideous, the curved tin roof makes the building look like an aircraft hangar out of keeping with the tiled pitched roofs on adjacent housing.

Page 20 The consultation period has not yet expired. Any further representations will be reported at the meeting.

Director's Comments:

This application is only for approval of the design and external appearance of the scheme and its landscaping. Issues that have been raised by objectors, such as the means of access and highway works, have already been approved in principle and in the case of the road junction are the subject of conditions for which delegated approval still has to be sought.

Because this is an application for the approval of reserved matters, no further conditions can be applied to any approval other than those that were imposed on the outline planning consent. As a result the conditions suggested by the Environment Agency will have to be negotiated with the applicant.

The key concerns from the consultation process are as follows:-

1. Provision of a ransom strip to prevent further encroachment into the Green Belt. 2. The design of the building is not in keeping with its surroundings. The metal roof and its shape are inappropriate and the roof should be pitched and tiled. 3. The new access road junction will be dangerous and the subway should be extended. 4. Inadequate detail on landscaping scheme.

The proposed community open space provides a strip of land around the Green Belt side of the playing fields. The application states that 'the intention is to transfer the community open space to the Oxford Preservation Trust'. Such a transfer would appease the ransom strip concerns. Discussions have taken place with the Trust but they have not yet taken a decision on whether to accept the land or not and are likely to consider the offer on 27 February. If the Trust are not willing to accept the land it could be offered to the Parish Council, as an alternative responsible body. Although an important issue the management and maintenance of the community open space is not part of this application. However, it is subject to a condition on the outline planning consent that requires a scheme to secure the provision, management and future maintenance of this land and its subsequent implementation to be approved by the Chief Planning Officer before any development starts.

Such a condition should remove any doubts about provision of the 'ransom strip'.

The design of the building is a subjective matter and the building needs to blend into its surroundings because of its location on the edge of the Green Belt and open countryside of Great Landscape Value. I expected the building to be designed using the traditional local materials such as red brick and pitched red/brown tiled roofs.

The walls are of red brick but the roof is of low pitched curved grey metal sheets which it is said will patinate to a lead colour. This roof design and material has not found favour with several people and is not a traditional feature.

The school however is happy with the design and neither the planning officers at South Oxfordshire District Council nor Oxford City Council raised any adverse comments on the roof when they were pre-consulted on the application.

The architect's view is that a low pitched curved grey roof will have less impact than a steeper traditional pitched tiled roof. Director's Comments contd.

Page 21 In my view, traditional design and materials for the roof would have been preferable in this locality. However, the neutral colour and low pitch used make it on balance acceptable in planning terms.

The access road and junction were approved at outline application stage subject to conditions requiring details of the highway works and parking restraints in the area of the junction with Merewood Avenue and the A40. These details have not been submitted and will be dealt with by the Chief Planning Officer under delegated powers.

The landscaping scheme as submitted shows only the principle of the design and does not provide specific details of plants or trees to be used. Were there not conditions also requiring landscape details to be submitted I would have found the scheme to be inadequate. However, I am happy with the principle of the design and the details can be controlled when approval of the conditions is sought (the landscape architect will be producing a planting scheme which will be on display at the meeting.) There are also conditions on the outline consent to protect the existing trees on the site that will remain.

The school pitches will be grass not artificial turf and floodlighting is not to be provided.

The roof of the Hall will be of curved grey metal to match the classrooms. The school and community parking is to the Council's parking standards, and safety and access to the bridleway should not be affected by the development. Recommendation:

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED that subject to the consideration of any objections received before the date of the meeting to approve the reserved matters application.

Contact Officer: John Griffin Tel: Oxford 815723

AGENDA ITEM 8 – COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS FURTHER CONSULTATION RESPONSES AND REVISED RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. OS.01/99 (Reserved Matters) (Sandhills School)

Further Consultation Responses:

South Oxfordshire District Council – No objection subject to: a) the submission of a proper landscaping scheme that they are consulted on, b) the metal roof material being non reflective, c) the timber cladding being low maintenance and d) the hedge along the A40 being reinforced.

Oxford City Council – the City Council's consultation period expired on 12 February. The earliest date that their Planning Committee could consider the application would be 7 March.

Director's Comments: The District Councils will be consulted on the landscaping scheme, the metal roof will be zinc and non reflective, the timber cladding will be low maintenance and the hedge along the A40 can be reinforced as necessary.

Page 22 RECOMMENDATION It is RECOMMENDED that subject to first consulting the Sub-Committee Spokespersons if Oxford City Council object, the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to approve the application. Application No. O.22/00 (Windmill School)

Further Consultation Responses: Oxford City Council – No objection.

Director's Comments: As main report.

RECOMMENDATION As main report. Application No. S.01/01

Further Consultation Responses: South Oxfordshire District Council – to be considered by South Oxfordshire District Council's Planning Committee on 28 March 2001.

Page 23 Planning, 26/02/01, PL08, Windale

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL8

COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS Application No: O.22/00 (detailed)

Application No: O.22/00 (detailed) Erection of extension to provide two new classrooms, ICT Room, GPA Room and associated WC and store facilities and extension of hard play area, Windale First School, Windale Avenue, Blackbird Leys, Oxford OX4 5JD Development and Site (see plan)

This application has been submitted as part of the proposals for the Oxford Schools Review.

Windale First School is sited on the Greater Leys development in Oxford. The school opened in September 1995 as a 10 class school for 300 pupils and 26 nursery places. A further 2 classrooms were added in 2000. The Oxford Schools Review sees Windale becoming a Primary School in 2002 and therefore 2 further classrooms along with the ICT and GPA rooms are required. This will take the capacity of the school to 420 pupils.

The new accommodation will be added as a natural extension to the school completing the courtyard style of the existing design.

Vehicular and pedestrian access remains as existing.

Relevant Local Plan Policies:

Policy CS18 - Provision to be made of schools for younger pupils which minimises risk of accidents, travel and respects needs of various local communities. Policy CS22 - possible extension for Windale 1st School. Results of Consultations:

Oxford City Council – No reply as yet. Have asked for a traffic assessment to be provided in support of the planning application. Application to be considered by City Planning Committee on 14 February 2001. Their views will be reported at the meeting.

Blackbird Leys Parish Council – no objection.

Sport England – proposal does not impinge on the school's playing field provision. No objections.

Oxford Preservation Trust – no objections.

County Archaeologist – no further archaeological constraints required on this site. Director's Comments:

This scheme completes the school courtyard theme and will maintain what has proven to be a secure

Page 24 design.

The City Council have yet to formally respond as a consultee but they have requested that a traffic assessment be provided along with the planning application.

Director's Comments contd:

It is considered in this instance that as the increased capacity of the school as a result of this proposal (a further 60 places) is not significant when considered against the advice contained in "Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment" (published in 1994 by the Institution of Highways & Traffic), a traffic impact assessment is not required in order to determine the application. In addition, the Schools Review proposals in this locality should involve an improvement to school journey patterns within this school's catchment area with many children having shorter and less dangerous journeys.

There are no highway objections to the proposal. Recommendation:

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED that subject to the consideration of any objections received by the date of the meeting, to approve the application subject to the following conditions:

1. detailed compliance; 2. detailed duration – 5 years; 3. roof and wall materials to match existing; 4. landscaping.

Contact Officer: John Hamilton Tel: Oxford 815584

Page 25 Planning, 26/02/01, PL08, South Moreton PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL8

COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Application No: S.01/01 (detailed/conservation area)

Application No: S.01/01 (detailed/conservation area) Erection of new school hall and gym with changing rooms, kitchen, storage room, associated landscaping and formation of temporary construction access, South Moreton School, High Street, South Moreton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 9BU Development and Site (see plan):

This application is for the construction of a new school hall and gym for multi purpose use with changing rooms and storage area. The development is to be financed by the school itself.

The existing hall was built as part of the original school building back in 1896. The hall is small, sits centrally within the main school building and has other classrooms leading off it. At the time it was built, the number of pupils at the school was 45. The number of pupils at the school is now 120. The nature and size of the existing hall is such that indoor sporting activities are severely restricted as are school assemblies which have to be split.

The hall is to be sited to the rear of the school on what used to be the swimming pool. The proposal will also involve the removal of a dilapidated storage building.

Also as part of the project, the existing hard play area to the rear of the school is to be extended to cater for a school of 120 pupils. This extension will not significantly encroach on the playing fields.

Relevant Local Plan Policies

Policy G8 - All new development to display high standard of design and layout. Policy G9 - Landscaping and tree planting to be an integral part of development. Policy CON10 - Developments in Conservation Areas. Policy C6 - Developments on the edge of settlements. Results of Consultations:

South Oxfordshire District Council – Have yet to comment on the proposal.

Environment Agency – no objections.

County Archaeologist – proposal will not affect any archaeological deposits.

Mr & Mrs G Astley, The Old School House, South Moreton – no objections to the proposal but do have concerns about its use, particularly if it is to be used 'out of school' hours. Amount of traffic to the school has steadily increased over last 12 years along with the use of the school building for such activities as PTA meetings, Governor meetings, school plays, parents evenings etc. Do not want new hall to become a replacement village hall. Suggest a restriction on use of the hall to legitimate school use only perhaps with a limit on number of evenings per year that it could be used.

Page 26 Ms C Longbotham, Moatside, Crown Lane, South Moreton – support proposal in principle but object to some of details i.e. (i) extra traffic that would be generated by letting building to uses in addition to school use. Parking at school is inadequate and increased pressure on road through the village will make cycling and walking more dangerous;

Results of Consultations contd

(ii) potential noise nuisance from hall, particularly when used for functions. Soundproofing needed and east facing double door to be for emergency use only; (iii) proposed siting does not allow for tree planting between building and site boundary. Building also very large and high.

Mrs Lomax, Rose Cottage, South Moreton – Concerned about mass and height of new building. Could it not be sited elsewhere in the school grounds. Use of building so close to boundary at out of school hours could give rise to noise nuisance.

The consultation period has not yet expired. Any other representations will be reported to the meeting. Director's Comments:

The new building is to be built to the rear of the school on that part of the site currently occupied by the school's disused outdoor swimming pool together with various small storage sheds and dilapidated portacabin.

Although the school itself is within the South Moreton Conservation Area, the site of the new hall is not. Siting the building in this location will involve the removal of some unsightly buildings and will also avoid encroaching on the school playing field. In this corner of the school site a row of coniferous trees will screen the hall from the main school building and the properties on the High Street. Existing trees, also coniferous, in neighbours' gardens to the east will further add to the screening of the building. New trees are also proposed and these together with the existing trees will form a backdrop to the Hall when seen from open countryside.

Concern has been raised by neighbours over the closeness of the building to the eastern site boundary and that this will not allow any additional screen planting to be undertaken. At present the building is proposed to be one metre from the boundary. I would suggest that this be increased to a minimum of 2 metres to allow for additional tree planting to take place. This could be done by planning condition.

The use of the building outside school hours has raised some concerns with neighbours. It is both national and County Council policy to promote the community use of schools and this building capable of being used for school, badminton and social uses could provide for both school and community needs.

The school decided not to apply for a lottery grant for this self financed project because they did not want to have public use of the building for as long as the required 40 hours/week.

The school already holds functions out of school hours and would wish the hall to be used by the community for activities which would not cause neighbour problems.

The Headteacher and Governors are a responsible body and can be left (as in other schools) to control the suitability of the activities in the hall. I would not therefore suggest controlling the uses by condition but would include an informative as a reminder of local concerns about potential anti social uses.

Recommendation:

Page 27 The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED that subject to the consideration of any objections received before the date of the meeting to approve the application, subject to the following conditions:

1. detailed compliance; 2. detailed duration – 5 years; 3. landscaping scheme to be submitted; 4. implement landscaping scheme; 5. tree protection measures during construction work; 6. external materials to be agreed; 7. building to be re-sited a minimum distance of 2 metres from the eastern boundary of the site; 8. land subject of the contractor's access to be reinstated following completion of development.

Informative: Any use of the school hall should take into account the need to avoid causing nuisance to neighbours by reason of excessive noise, unneighbourly hours or inconsiderate parking.

Contact Officer: John Hamilton Tel: Oxford 815584

AGENDA ITEM 8 – COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS FURTHER CONSULTATION RESPONSES AND REVISED RECOMMENDATIONS

South Moreton Parish Council – A split response received from the Parish Council:

Two members of the Parish Council have no objection and have submitted a letter of support, on the grounds that: (i) prospect of having a large enough hall to assemble all children at one time should be greeted as long overdue; (ii) size of the hall should be such that it meets the needs of the children. Appearance is not unsympathetic with its surroundings; (iii) no need for further parking. The proposal will not increase number of cars visiting the school.

Three members of the Parish Council made the following comments: 1) Roofing should match classrooms. 2) Better parking required, if more children attend the school. 3) Could the Sports Hall be soundproofed? To protect properties close by. 4) Could the building be moved nearer to the school to contain some of the height? (lower ground). 5) it will be very near the pool and changing area at Rose Cottage.

Sport England – no objections.

Mrs J Lomax, Rose Cottage, South Moreton – expands on comments contained in report. In addition,

Page 28 concerned about effect of constructing the new gym on roots of adjoining trees, possibility of siting away from boundary to allow room for additional planting, setting the building into the ground to lower its height and providing extra parking.

Director's Comments: As main report.

RECOMMENDATION Because the consultation period will not expire until after the date of the meeting it is RECOMMENDED that subject to first consulting the Sub-Committee Spokespersons if the South Oxfordshire District Council object, the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to approve the application subject to the conditions outlined in the main report.

Page 29 Planning, 26/02/01, PL08, Wychw ood

PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL8

COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING APPLICATIONS Application No: W.16/00 (detailed/Conservation Area)

Application No: W.16/00 (detailed/Conservation Area) Replacement of a redundant two classroom temporary building with a two classroom extension and internal alterations, Wychwood CE School, Milton Road, Shipton-under-Wychwood, Chipping Norton, Oxon OX7 6BD Development and Site (see plan):

This application is for the construction of a two classroom extension which will replace an existing dilapidated prefabricated classroom building. The extension will be linked to the rear of the existing school buildings and will be constructed in matching materials.

The school is in the Shipton-under-Wychwood Conservation Area.

Relevant Local Plan Policies:

BE3 - Standards of design. BE10 - Conservation areas. T1 - Traffic management measures. Results of Consultations:

West Oxfordshire District Council – no objection.

Shipton-under-Wychwood Parish Council – no objection.

Environment Agency – no comments.

County Archaeologist – would like archaeological informative added.

Peter Gilbert Paper Resources Ltd, Shipton-u-Wychwood – owns units 2 and 3a on Wychwood Business Centre and at dropping-off and picking up times parents park on the Centre's access road (often blocking it) and car park both of which are private property. The mixture of delivery vehicles and parents parking is potentially dangerous. Suggests providing extra car parking on the school for parents to drop off or collect children. Director's Comments:

The application replaces an existing prefabricated building with a permanent extension, will not add to the numbers on roll and therefore the existing traffic problems will not be exacerbated by the proposal.

However, having met Mr Gilbert with the headteacher at the end of the school day, I do have some sympathy with the concerns he raises about parent parking. The headteacher has and is happy to continue reminding parents about where they should park. The head does allow parents to park in the school car park to help ease the problems on the road outside the school. He is also investigating the use of both Shipton and Milton parish hall car parks for parents to drop off and collect their children and

Page 30 generally encouraging children to travel to school other than by car, through such things as the provision of cycle racks. Otherwise obstruction of private property is a matter for the police.

Recommendation:

The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to approve the application, subject to the following conditions:

1. detailed compliance; 2. detailed duration – 5 years; 3. materials to match existing.

Contact Officer: Mike Robinson Tel: Oxford 810431

Page 31 Planning, 26/02/01, PL09

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL9

THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TEMPORARY ACCESS AND HAUL ROAD FOR 24 MONTHS FOR THE REMOVAL OF LIMESTONE, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANNING PERMISSION NO. 97/00455/CM WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH CONDITIONS 4 AND 7 TO ALLOW THE USE OF AN ALTERNATIVE TEMPORARY ACCESS TO THE SITE AND ALLOW BOTH THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN QUARRIES TO BE WORKED CONCURRENTLY AT ARDLEY QUARRY (APPLICATION NO. 002413/CM). DETAILS PURSUANT TO CONDITIONS 12, 21, 23 AND 25 OF PERMISSION NO. 97/00455/CM AT ARDLEY QUARRY Report by the Director of Environmental Services

Introduction 1 Smith and Sons of Bletchington have submitted two applications at Ardley Quarry: a temporary access to the B430 and the implementation of planning permission no. 97/00455/CM without complying with conditions 4 and 7. These conditions are as follows: Condition 4 – Vehicular access to and from the site shall be by means of the existing access onto the B430 at Ardley Fields Farm Cottages, and no other means of access whatsoever shall be formed or used. Condition 7 (part): No limestone shall be removed from the north east area until all limestone has been extracted from the southern area unless otherwise agreed in writing by the mineral planning authority.

2. Details pursuant to Conditions 12, 21, 23 and 25 of the planning permission relate to a soil survey of the northern quarry, a safe scheme of working, drainage details and detailed agricultural restoration scheme for the northern quarry respectively. 3. This application has come forward at this time because Smiths wish to be in a position to supply up to 450,000 tonnes of limestone to be used in the A43 dualling work. The Site (see also plan attached)

4. Ardley Quarry lies approximately 2 km to the south of Ardley village. The quarry is owned by Viridor Limited who are landfilling the area once the limestone has been extracted. Once restored the area will be returned to agriculture. 5. Limestone is currently extracted in the southern quarry (south of the railway line). The area to the north of the railway, whilst being permitted for limestone extraction, does not have permission for infilling. Access to the northern quarry is via the existing railway bridge within the site which has width restrictions to ensure it is used by one vehicle at a time. Some material has already been quarried from the northern area. It was used for the construction of the M40 and delivered directly to the construction site. The bridge was used only for plant and equipment rather than regularly by quarry traffic. 6. This northern area has been restored to pasture and nature conservation with some exposed limestone faces which have been designated as SSSIs. The Proposed Development 7. The applicant and Viridor Limited consider that if limestone were extracted for the A43 from the northern quarry and exported using the current quarry access it would cause unacceptable levels of congestion. At peak times of demand for aggregate for the A43 there will be up to 150 additional lorry movements per day although they are expected to average 112 movements per day. Hence the applicant wishes to create a temporary haul road and access (for 24 months) which would run along the northern side of the railway onto the B430. The haul road will be hard surfaced for 50 metres from the road towards the quarry, beyond which the haul road will be made up of crushed limestone laid on a Terram geofabric base. A wheel cleaner will be installed before the section of

Page 32 hard surface. In order to create the access, up to 20m of hedgerow will have to be removed and additional hedgerows will have to be trimmed either side of the access to create and maintain the sight lines. 8. The temporary access will be designed to ensure that all HGV traffic enters from the north and exits to the north. Private cars and vans will be able to turn right into the site. 9. A new set of conditions for Ardley Quarry have been agreed with the County Council under the Review of Old Mineral Permissions (ROMPs) procedure in 1999 but Conditions 4 and 7 will need to be varied if the new access is to be permitted and the quarries worked concurrently. The applicants have applied for the access for 24 months but have stated they would seek an extension of time in the event of all the material not having been extracted to avoid sterilisation of the reserve. 10. The northern quarry will be worked in the same way as for the main quarry. Soils will be stripped and the limestone excavated using hydraulic backactors loading to mobile crushers and screening equipment located on the quarry floor. The working face will be approximately 6m in depth. Working will terminate 1.0 metre above the water level in accordance with Condition 8 of the existing permission. The working face will progress in a north easterly direction in two phases in order to benefit from the natural landform which will help to reduce views of the quarry from the M40. A strip of unworked land will be left between the currently restored area and the quarry. A 3m high bund will be created around three sides of the quarry. Once working has been completed the area will be restored to agricultural use. A mini gorge will be cut into the quarry area to the restored area to the south-east to ensure adequate drainage. 11. The current permission allows blasting in the quarry; as for the main quarry this will be controlled by condition. No blasting will occur within 40 metres of the railway embankment. An undisturbed margin of 10.0 metres will be maintained to the railway boundary and the face will be cut vertically. Consultations 12. These are set out in Annex 1.

Comments of the Director of Environmental Services

13. As with any planning application, this application should be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless other material considerations require it to be determined otherwise. The relevant policies are set out in Annex 2. In this case the main considerations are the impact of additional traffic movements along the B430 and the impact that the creation of the temporary access and haul road will have on the existing hedgerow. 14. I have received two objections to this proposal for a new access onto the B430 from Ardley with Fewcott Parish Council who are concerned about road safety and Cherwell District Council who are concerned about hedgerow removal (refer to Annex 1 for full details). However, I consider that we may be able to overcome these concerns by conditions. I am concerned about the impact the new access would have on the existing hedgerow but I do not think the proposals are such that permission should be refused. The impact can in the short term be minimised and the hedgerows restored. In order to minimise the impact on the hedgerow the applicant will be required to create the access where only hawthorn has to be removed. The hedgerow should be coppiced or trimmed rather than removed, thus reducing the loss of hedgerow required to create the sight lines. Any trimming or coppicing must be undertaken by hand not machine. As the hedgerow will be able to grow to maturity again policy EN7 has not been breached. Prior to the creation of the access a detailed survey must be undertaken in the vicinity of the access to establish how much hedgerow needs to be trimmed to establish adequate sight lines. In the event of planning permission being granted conditions would be attached to secure the above procedures. 15. I am satisfied that the creation of the access and the additional, concentrated traffic movements will not compromise road safety on the B423 and therefore policy T18 (f) is satisfied. The applicant will be required to erect temporary signs and ensure that all HGVs turn right out of the quarry and left into it. Again, this will be secured by condition. 16. I am concerned that owing to the large volume of traffic leaving the site that the wheel cleaning facility (a lorry bath) may not be adequate. It will be located at the start of the 50m of hard surface to ensure that wheels are free from mud prior to turning onto the highway. The use of the wheel cleaning facility could be secured by condition. However, Condition 5 (refer to Annex 3) seeks to ensure that no mud is carried onto the highway. Again, policy T18 (f) would be satisfied. In the event of this happening, enforcement action could be taken. 17. I consider that subject to conditions the objections raised by the Parish Council and the District Council can be overcome. This quarry is permitted for limestone extraction. If the applicants were to win the contract to supply stone to the A43 it would provide the opportunity to extract the stone over a two year

Page 33 period without affecting the use of the main quarry access or the already restored area. The applicant would have to submit a further application should they wish to remove stone beyond the 24 month period. 18. The safety of walkers using footpath BR26, which runs along the south-eastern side of the restored area of the northern quarry, will not be affected as the working will be over 115m from the working area at its nearest point. The development must be undertaken in accordance with the Minerals & Waste Local Plan Code of Practice to accord with policy PE18 and Annex 1 of the Minerals & Waste Local Plan. 19. The applicant has submitted satisfactory details relating to Conditions 12 and 23 of planning permission No. 97/00455/CM and these details can be discharged. However, details related to Condition 21 (safe system of working) have yet to be agreed. I will report orally on progress on this matter at the meeting. The applicant has submitted details of how the quarry is to be restored; however, I am not satisfied with them and have requested additional details. 20. In the event of the north quarry being excavated the applicant has been requested to contact the County Archaeologist if any archaeological finds occur during extraction who wishes to keep a watching brief of the site but has not requested that a condition be attached concerning archaeology. 21. I have yet to receive a written response from the applicants to English Nature's request for new sections in the White Limestone. Again I will report orally on this matter at the meeting. 22. In conclusion, I consider that subject to the conditions set out in Annex 3 that planning permission should be granted. These conditions are basically the same as those for the ROMP permission 97/00455/CM except that Conditions 4 and 7 have been altered. I have also updated conditions related to the submission of details pursuant to conditions 12 and 23 of permission no. 97/00455/CM. Environmental Implications 23. These have been outlined in the report.

Financial and Staff Implications 24. There are none unless the applicants appeal against a refusal.

Implications for People Living in Poverty 25. There are none arising from this report.

Recommendation 26. The Sub-Committee are RECOMMENDED to: (a) grant planning permission for a temporary access and haul road for 24 months for the removal of limestone, subject to the conditions listed in Annex 3 to this report; (b) to grant planning permission for application no. 002413/CM not to comply with Conditions 4 and 7 of permission no. 97/00455/CM subject to the remaining conditions of 97/00455/CM: Condition 4 will now be: Vehicular access to and from the southern quarry shall be by means of the existing access onto the B430 at Ardley Fields Farm Cottages only. Vehicular access to and from the land north of the railway cutting to the B430 shall not be other than by means of the temporary haul road and access as shown on approved plan 8871/TA/1a. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

Condition 4a:

This permission is for a limited period ending 24 months from the date of this permission.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

Condition 4b:

Prior to the access being created a detailed survey must be undertaken in the

Page 34 vicinity of the access to establish how much hedgerow needs to be trimmed to establish adequate sight lines.

Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4c:

The hedgerow marked A-B on approved plan 8871/TA/1a shall be surveyed to establish the location of non hawthorn species. The access will be located where damage to such species is minimised. Any coppicing or trimming of the hedge shall be undertaken by hand. The hedgerow shall be maintained in a coppiced/trimmed state for the period of this permission.

Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4d:

This approved temporary access shall not be used until adequate temporary signing has been erected on the B423.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Condition 4e:

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Condition 7 will now be: The working of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the following scheme:

- the material underlying the concrete plant and adjoining area in the vicinity of Ardley Fields Farm as shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 will be excavated by December 1999;

- the area remaining to be quarried in the southern area shall take place as strips working in a southerly direction progressing to the southern boundary as indicated on approved plan No. 8871/2;

Page 35 pursuant to Condition 23. Delegated authority be given to the Director of Environmental Services to determine details pursuant to Condition 21, a safe scheme of working for the northern quarry, and Condition 25, a detailed agricultural restoration scheme for the northern quarry. These details to be incorporated into conditions of permission 002413/CM.

DAVID YOUNG Director of Environmental Services

Background paper: File No. 8.1/5426/1.3 Construction of a temporary access and haul road for a temporary period of 24 months for the removal of limestone and conditions.

Contact Officer: Amanda Ford, Tel : Oxford 815884

February 2001

Page 36 Planning, 26/02/01, PL09, Annex 1

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL9

Annex 1

CONSULTATION RESPONSES AND REPRESENTATIONS

Cherwell District Council – Planning

Objects to the proposal: The proposed access track will result in an unacceptable intrusion into the landscape and in order to facilitate visibility at its junction with the B430 will result in the severe cutting back or potential loss of a mature and well established hedgerow.

Ardley with Fewcott Parish Council

Objects to the proposal: The temporary access would be dangerous, sight lines are inadequate and 60 mph speed limit would make slow moving lorries a real danger. 150 daily movements would result in more mud on the road.

Railtrack

No objection as long as haul road is constructed as indicated in the planning application.

English Nature

No objection but would welcome the provision of additional new sections in the White Limestone. SSSI faces must be retained and safeguarded during the period of extraction.

Health and Safety Executive

No objections.

Cultural Services – Archaeology

In the event of archaeological finds occurring during development the applicant should notify the

Page 37 County Archaeologist.

Cultural Services – Rights of Way

No comment except the applicant must ensure the public's safety when using footpath BR26.

Environment Agency

No objection.

Page 38 Planning, 26/02/01, PL09, Annex 2

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL9

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Oxfordshire Structure Plan 2011

Relevant policies include:

Policy EN7 Development which would damage woodlands and hedgerows which are important for landscape, ecological, amenity or forestry reasons will not be permitted. The local planning authorities will encourage the planting of appropriate new woodlands and trees.

Policy T18 Proposals for development should be permitted only if they are acceptable in the light of the following criteria:

(a) the existing transport situation, the aims of the local transport strategy and existing local car parking and traffic management measures;

(b) access for pedestrians, cyclists and those whose mobility is impaired;

(d) the impact of generated traffic including servicing traffic on existing settlements and roads;

(e) highway access and servicing arrangements;

(f) the safety of all highway users;

(g) the likely resource implications for the highway authority.

Oxfordshire Minerals & Waste Local Plan Policies

Policy PE18 In determining applications covered by this Plan the County Council will:

Page 39 (a) have regard to the appropriate provisions of the Code of Practice in Annex 1, which is part of this Plan, and

(b) regulate and control development by the imposition of conditions on the grant of permission. Where this cannot satisfactorily be done, appropriate planning obligations will be sought.

Cherwell Local Plan

Policy C14 (refer to plan)

In exercising its development control functions the Council will normally accept opportunities for countryside management projects where:

(i) all important trees, woodland and hedgerows are retained; (ii) the ecological value of the site will not be reduced; and (iii) new tree and hedgerow planting using species native to the area is provided.

Page 40 Planning, 26/02/01, PL09, Annex 3

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL9

PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS – APPLICATION NO. 002413/CM

1. The development comprising the winning and working of limestone from the north east area and southern area shown on approved plan 8871/1 shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the following conditions. There shall be no further development in the north west area as identified on plan 8871/1.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as the north west area is to be excluded from this permission.

TIME LIMITS

2. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the date of this consent.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

This condition is to be deleted.

3. The development shall cease no later than the 31 December 2027 and restoration shall be completed by the 30 June 2028, and all buildings, plant and equipment to which this permission relates shall be removed by the 30 June 2028 unless otherwise approved by the mineral planning authority.

Reason: To minimise the duration of disturbance from the mineral extraction operation.

ACCESS

4. Vehicular access to and from the southern quarry shall be by means of the existing access onto the B430 at Ardley Fields Farm Cottages only. Vehicular access to and from the land north of the railway cutting to the B430 shall not be other than by means of the temporary haul road and access as shown on approved plan 8871/TA/1a. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

4a. This permission is for a limited period ending 24 months from the date of this permission.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to allow development of the northern quarry without using the existing quarry access.

Page 41 4b. Prior to the access being created a detailed survey must be undertaken in the vicinity of the access to establish how much hedgerow needs to be trimmed to establish adequate sight lines. Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety.

4c. The hedgerow marked A-B on approved plan 8871/TA/1a shall be surveyed to establish the location of non hawthorn species. The access will be located where damage to such species is minimised. Any coppicing or trimming of the hedge shall be undertaken by hand. The hedgerow shall be maintained in a coppiced/trimmed state for the period of this permission.

Reason: To minimise the damage to the hedgerow and in the interests of highway safety. 4d. This approved temporary access shall not be used until adequate temporary signing has been erected on the B423. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

4e. Within 3 months of the permitted 24 month period ending the access and haul road will be removed and the area returned to agricultural use. The gap in the hedgerow will be planted with suitable native species, in accordance with a scheme to be agreed by the Minerals Planning Authority, in the first planting season following the approval. Reason: In the interests of highway safety. 5. The existing facilities for washing wheels of vehicles using the site in the position as shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 shall be retained and properly maintained. Details of the facilities in place shall be submitted within 3 months of the date of this permission. No heavy goods vehicles shall leave the site unless all its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

6. All internal site roads shall be maintained in a condition free from potholes while in use and shall be removed when no longer required or during the course of site restoration, whichever is the sooner.

Reason: To ensure the site is satisfactorily restored and to minimise noise disturbance.

WORKING PROGRAMME

7. The working of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the following scheme:

- the material underlying the concrete plant and adjoining area in the vicinity of Ardley Fields Farm as shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 will be excavated by December 1999;

- the area remaining to be quarried in the southern area shall take place as strips working in a southerly direction progressing to the southern boundary as indicated on approved plan No. 8871/2;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to provide limestone for the A43 from the permitted reserves in the north quarry.

8. The depth of mineral extraction shall terminate at least 1 metre above the maximum piezometric surface of the Upper Flaggy Limestone or Middle Flaggy Limestone, whichever is the higher, unless otherwise agreed in

Page 42 writing by the mineral planning authority.

Reason: To prevent pollution of groundwater.

9. No working will be permitted within 12.0 metres from the eastern kerb of the B430, and no working shall take place within the 10 metre strip shown on approved plan No. 8871/2 alongside the boundary of the adjacent railway. No soils or overburden shall be tipped or buildings erected within 10 metres of the railway or 12 metres of the B430.

Reason: To ensure the continued stability of highway and railway land.

SOIL HANDLING

10. Soil handling, cultivation and trafficking over the topsoil and subsoil material shall not take place other than in suitable weather conditions between 1 May and 30 September when soils are dry and friable unless otherwise agreed with the Mineral Planning Authority. All soil handling will be by backactor and dump truck unless otherwise agreed with the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise damage to existing and restored soil reserves.

11. Where present topsoil to a minimum thickness of 300 mm, and subsoil to a minimum thickness of 200 mm shall be stripped and stored separately within the areas shown on plan 8871/2. No indigenous soils shall be removed from site. All stored topsoil and subsoil will be seeded with grass and maintained in a tidy and weed free condition.

Reason: To preserve the existing soil resource and prevent weed spread.

12. Deleted

13. Prior to replacing soils as part of the site restoration a detailed soil handling scheme will be submitted to and approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise damage to existing and restored soil reserves.

HOURS OF OPERATION

14. No development or operations permitted or required by this permission to be carried out except between the following times:

0700 hours to 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays 0700 hours to 1300 hours Saturdays

and no such operations take place on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed with the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Page 43 PLANT

15. Notwithstanding the provisions of Parts 19 and 21 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, replacing or re-enacting that Order), no buildings, plant or machinery shall be erected, installed or replaced at the site except the existing plant and machinery outlined in Schedule 1 attached to this permission without the prior agreement in writing of the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

16. Cranes and jibbed machines, used in connection with site operations, must be positioned so that the jib or any suspended load does not swing out over railway property. All cranes, machinery and construction plant must be so positioned and used in the event of failure to prevent accidental entry onto railway property of such plant, or loads attached thereto.

Reason: In the interests of railway safety.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Dust

17. Regular water spraying of the access and operational haul roads will be carried out in periods of prolonged dry weather to suppress dust and all suppression equipment shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions for the duration of the permission unless otherwise agreed with the Mineral Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: To safeguard the local environment and to protect the amenities of adjoining properties.

Noise

18. All vehicles, plant and machinery operated within the site shall be fitted with and use effective silencers, and no operations will be carried out that do not ensure that noise levels at nearby properties do not exceed 55 Dbl Aeq.

Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring residents from unreasonable noise intrusion.

Blasting and Vibration

19. No blasting shall be carried out on the site except between the following times:

0900 hours to 1600 hours Mondays to Fridays 1000 hours to 1200 hours Saturdays.

There shall be no blasting or drilling operations on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring residents from unreasonable noise intrusion.

20. Ground vibration as a result of blasting operations shall not exceed a peak particle velocity of 10 mm per second in 95% of all blasts measured over a period of 6 months and no individual blast shall exceed a peak particle velocity of 12 mm per second as measured at vibration sensitive buildings and the railway boundary. The measurement to be the maximum of three mutually perpendicular directions taken at the ground surface.

Reason: To maintain the integrity of the railway infrastructure.

21. Notwithstanding Condition 20 above prior to development commencing in the area north of the railway (the North East Area) a safe scheme of working will be submitted and agreed in writing with the Mineral Planning Authority and any that is agreed shall be implemented

Page 44 Reason: In the interests of railway safety.

Water Protection

22. No development whatsoever, including storage of soils or materials, shall take place within 5.0 metres of the Gagle Brook where it is adjacent to the southern 140 metres of the site (between Points A and B as shown on Plan 8871/2).

Reason: To provide undisturbed refuges for wildlife using the river corridor and to preserve water in the brook.

23. Drainage of the operational area north of the railway shall be undertaken in accordance with the supporting statement and approved plan 8871/TA/3 of planning permission 97/00455/CM.

Reason: To maintain the integrity of the existing surface water regime and prevent flooding of railway property.

24. Permanent storage of any oil, fuel and lubricants stored on the site will be in suitable tanks and containers which shall be housed in an area surrounded by bund walls of sufficient height and construction so as to contain 110% of the total contents of all containers and associated pipeworks. All fill or draw pipes will be within the bunded area.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

RESTORATION

25. The restoration of the site will be carried out as follows:

(a) a scheme for restoration of the area in the north eastern area (north of the railway) shall be submitted to the local planning authority within 1 month of the date of this permission. The scheme should incorporate a series of slopes from near vertical to 1:10, the latter, particularly to the north east and north west boundaries and shall include timings for restoration. Any scheme that is approved shall be implemented;

(b) the area outlined in green is the southern area (south of railway) shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 shall be restored in accordance with the restoration conditions of permission No. 95/01122 CM. However, should infilling of waste have ceased for a period in excess of 2 years a scheme for the restoration to agriculture (or such other use as may be agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority) of those areas which have been quarried but not infilled will be submitted for approval in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority, such scheme to include restoration by regrading the extraction faces, respreading overburden and quarry waste where available to create a new lower level surface and replacement of subsoil and topsoil unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority. Any scheme that is agreed shall be implemented.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory restoration of those parts of the site that have not already been restored.

26. In the event that restoration to a lower level takes place, a restored soil profile of 700 mm of subsoil and 300 mm of topsoil will be established and, following the respreading and ripping of the soils with appropriate machinery, the land shall be prepared to a state suitable for seeding by cultivation.

Reason: To facilitate an acceptable subsequent restoration of the site.

AFTERCARE

27. An Aftercare Scheme, requiring that such steps as may be necessary to bring the land to the required standard for afteruse shall be submitted for the approval of the Mineral Planning Authority not later than 3 months before completion of the restoration and thereafter be implemented as approved.

Reason: To ensure the restored land is correctly husbanded.

Page 45 BRIDLEWAY

28. A corridor of land, a minimum of 3.0 metres wide, shall be kept free from obstruction and shall be retained along the route of bridleway no. 26 as shown on approved plan No. 8871/1 which runs along the eastern boundary of the site.

Reason: To ensure the bridleway is kept free from obstruction.

Page 46 Planning, 26/02/01, PL10

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL10

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM) Report by the Director of Environmental Services

Introduction 1. Planning permission was issued for a waste transfer station and recycling centre at Grove Business Park on 9 April 1998 on a temporary basis. Condition 1 of that permission required the use to be discontinued on 30 April 2001 (see Annex 1 for the complete wording of condition 1). The use has been implemented and the applicant, David McDowell Ltd now wants to make it permanent by not complying with condition 1.

The Site 2. The site covers 0.4 hectares within the Grove Technology Park (referred to as Grove Business Park by the applicant). The Technology Park is a former wartime site of British Non Ferrous Metals Ltd, located on the perimeter of Grove Airfield. It lies approximately 800m to the west of Grove and 1 km to the north-west of Wantage. 3. The site of the recycling/waste facility is on the south-western edge of the Park. Approximately 30m to the north of the site are some small single-storey workshops and a large warehouse. The workshops are used by a range of businesses, for example engineers and carpenters. The warehouse has a temporary permission for go-karting. On the plot to the east of the site is the John Lewis factory manufacturing kitchen units. To the west of the site is an overgrown ditch beyond which are arable fields. To the south of the site is an area of trees/scrub. 4. The closest residential properties are at Woodhill Cottages, approximately 220m to the north west of the site. 5. Access to the Park is via Downsview Road. The internal road system has been recently improved. The Development 6. The site has an industrial building covering 1,860 m2 or nearly half the area of the site, on its north east corner. It is constructed of reinforced corrugated metal sheeting and is painted dark green with yellow vertical stripes on external walls and roof. It is 9m high at its highest point. Recycling activities take place within this building. There is a crusher and sorting area and storage bays together with a workshop, mess room facilities and weighbridge office within the building. The crusher delivers crushed material to an outside storage bay through a small hole in the wall. Lorries enter a door on the western side and exit via a door on the southern side. There are water spray points throughout the building and security lights on north, south and west elevations. 7. The yard to the south of the building is mostly concreted but part is gravelled. There are storage bays on the north and east boundaries of the site and bin storage on the south side. There is a 3m high wall on the eastern edge running the length of the yard from the building to the southern tip of the site. It is composed of metal sheeting painted green with yellow piping on the outside. It is in the process of being reinforced with concrete on its inside. There are water spray points located on the walls and a security camera and light at the southern point. The yard is used to store recycled materials but is not used to recycle waste. 8. The service yard is to the west of the building. It is concreted. There is a weighbridge, transfer storage, staff parking and storage bays here. The site entrance is on the northern boundary. The northern boundary is otherwise a 1.8m high corrugated metal fence painted green. 9. The south western boundary is a 1.8m high chain link fence with a solid metal section in the narrow

Page 47 section between Yard and Service Yard. Trees and bushes have been planted immediately outside the fence along its length. The Proposed Development 10. The current site layout differs in a number of ways from that permitted. However, the application now seeks permission for the current site layout as described above. The only additional features sought are an increase in height to 3.5 metres from 3.0 metres of the wall on the eastern edge adjacent to the John Lewis factory and the complete concreting of the yard. The applicant confirms that the trees that have failed will be replanted next planting season. 11. The application includes a supporting statement and information on noise and dust monitoring. The statement says that it is anticipated 90% of material brought to the site will be recycled and the rest taken to landfill sites. There are long term contracts with the MOD, Rutherford Laboratories and Culham etc. Tipping and sorting will take place in the building and recyled hardcore is stored there for re-sale. The outside yard is used for more long term storage of bricks, tiles and crushed materials which are unaffected by the weather. 12. The noise and dust monitoring were undertaken on two days in May 2000, on a Sunday and following Monday. The conclusions on noise were that the noise was around 66 dBA Laeq, 10-hour contrasting with a background of 41-51 dBA Laeq 10-hour and 48 dBA LA 90 contrasting with a background of 41 dBA LA90. These levels were recorded within the site. As there is a large metal wall at the boundary with John Lewis it states that it can be expected to be some 10 dB lower than measured in the yard. 13. Dust levels were very low. On the western boundary they were less than 1.2 mg/m3. There had been no complaints from neighbours and the recorded noise and dust levels indicate that no complaints are to be expected. Consultations and Representations 14. Consultations and representations are set out in Annex 2.

The Development Plan 15. The relevant policies of the Development Plan are set out in Annex 3.

Comments of the Director 16. In accordance with Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, applications must be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Development Plan unless there are other compelling material considerations. The main issues are whether a waste recycling and transfer station is an appropriate use within the Grove Technology Park, how dust nuisance can best be controlled and whether the potential contamination of wastes with radioactivity affects the application. 17. The Vale of White Horse Local Plan policy E6 allocates Grove Technology Park for new business development within Classes B1 and B2. The transfer station is in a class of its own (sui generis) not falling within B1 or B2. The policy also limits B8 use (Warehouse and Distribution) to a small part of the site to reflect the poor road system (A338). The proposed use does not accord with those set out in this policy, but whilst the Vale of White Horse District Council expresses concern, it does not object. The operation is within a modern building and screened by walls and offers an attractive face to the Park. It is well located to help develop the park by taking demolition materials and providing recycled aggregates. It is an employment generator and is much akin to a B2 (general industrial use). There are twenty four employees working at the site or driving skip lorries. Mr McDowell is considering employing six more on a waste picking line within the building. Whilst it generates or attracts an average of 30 loaded vehicles a day it is not a large distribution operation and cannot be compared with a typical B8 use. The site is in accordance with Structure Plan policy WD1 which encourages recycling. 18. There are never enough suitable sites for such potentially bad neighbour developments and Local Plans seldom make provision for them. It is rare for them to be located on Industrial sites although these offer advantages in terms of reduction in adverse environmental effects. This site is generally environmentally acceptable, will have advantages in the development of the Technology Park and on balance I think these factors outweigh the strict interpretation of policy E6. 19. Minerals and Waste Local Plan policy W3 states that recycling proposals will normally be permitted provided the site is close to the source of waste and market for recycled materials. The site has good links to the A338 and whilst that road is not ideal the facility provides local recycling and HGV generation is limited by a formal legal agreement. The site's location away from residential properties means that nuisance in terms of noise, dust, visual intrusion, smell or traffic is not an issue with one exception set out in the next

Page 48 paragraph. The Environment Agency has no objection. There is no risk to groundwater. The conflict with other policies is discussed in paragraph 17. 20. John Lewis of Hungerford have objected principally on the dust nuisance caused by the operation. Their other objections can be overcome by conditions. The yard is only used for storage of and loading of recycled materials not for waste but these materials are stored in open bays rather than stillages. Stillages are moveable storage containers. Conditions can prevent the processing of wastes in the yard and can require storage only in the bays provided. The hole in the wall is the exit for recycled materials from the crusher direct into a bay. The current proposal is to create a box around this exit with spray bars to lay any dust from the crushed materials. A condition can require the use of the spray bars whenever the crusher is in use. There are no curtains to the doors to the yard. It was planned to have transparent heavy duty plastic doors but these get scuffed by constant use, become opaque and are a safety hazard. They would act as a noise and dust barrier from the building. However, noise is not a problem and the internal sprinkler system can lay dust, and thus there is no need for such doors. 21. The creation of dust in dry, windy weather comes from the outside storage adjacent to the wall. The action of loading recycled aggregate from the bays creates dust. Mr McDowell installed sprinkler points on the wall last summer but the wet weather since has meant they have not been tested. John Lewis wants any planning permission to be limited to one year so that the effectiveness of the sprinkler system can be tested. Permanent permission could follow a successful test. I have some sympathy with this proposal as the dust has been created from bays which were not part of the original permission, although they are now part of this application. Although the site has been in operation for nearly three years Mr McDowell has not installed a dampening device until recently. A temporary permission would certainly encourage Mr McDowell to manage the site so that dust was not a problem. 22. However, John Lewis has not objected to me about dust before consultation on the application (they hoped that Mr McDowell's operation would improve), and Mr McDowell has installed a sprinkler system which, if used sensibly, would minimise dust. 23. Planning Authorities are encouraged by Government not to repeat temporary permissions unless there are good reasons to do so. I think that conditions requiring effective use of the sprinklers in the yard to keep the materials permanently dampened, making sure a secure source of water is available, limitations on the height of recycled materials in the bays, the cessation of use of these outside bays for storing dusty materials until and unless alternative systems for dust prevention had been agreed which would be effective conditions to minimise dust. There should also be monitoring of dust outside John Lewis to assess the effectiveness of dust minimisation techniques. Conditions covering these points would obviate the need for another temporary permission. The planning system provides local authorities with enforcement powers to encourage compliance with conditions. 24. The objections on the import of radioactive materials are not a planning matter but rather ones for the Environment Agency when updating the Waste Management Licence. I have consulted the Environment Agency on the objections but at the time of writing the report have not received a reply. I will report orally on any reply. In any event, there is plenty of waste available from sources where radioactivity is not an issue and these should be recycled if possible. Mr McDowell was not involved in the incident where contaminated materials were taken to a site in Didcot. Most of the questions posed are ones for the Environment Agency. However, the land adjacent to the Technology Park is not allocated for housing in the Vale of White Horse Local Plan and the District Council has not made any reference to housing, either existing or proposed, in its consultation. 25. The CPRE would like a temporary permission only to encourage compliance and because waste technologies will change. The arguments for and against temporary permissions have already been aired in this report. It is very likely that waste technologies will change. If permanent permission is given now, Mr McDowell can only carry out recycling within its framework. He will require further planning permission for material changes and applications for those can be tested in the future. 26. The existing permission has a routeing agreement associated with it and I consider that should be repeated to prevent skip lorries passing through local residential areas, and to limit the overall number of vehicles to 34 movements a day. The applicant is willing to sign such an agreement. 27. Mr McDowell has asked that the current hours of operation condition be amended. It prevents working on Saturdays immediately following bank holidays. He says that these Saturdays are a busy time for him. His neighbour, John Lewis, has no objection to this change. As the site is on an Industrial Estate I have no objections either. Financial and Staff Implications 28. There are no financial and staff implications unless the applicant appeals against a refusal or a further time limitation condition.

Page 49 Environmental Implications 29. These are set out in this report.

Implications for People Living in Poverty 30. The development offers relatively low-skilled jobs.

Recommendation 31. It is RECOMMENDED that subject to a routeing agreement to include a ceiling of 34 movements on the number of HGV's accessing/egressing the site each day, planning permission be granted for application no. ECH/1432/21-CM subject to the conditions listed in Annex 4 to this report.

DAVID YOUNG Director of Environmental Services Background papers: File 8.4/3889/3 "Grove Business Park Waste Transfer Station" in Land Use Section of Environmental Services, County Hall Contact Officer: John Duncalfe, Tel : Oxford 815356 February 2001

Page 50 Planning, 26/02/01, PL10, Annex 1

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL10 NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM)

ANNEX 1

CONDITION 1

1. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority the permission hereby granted shall be for a limited period expiring on 30 April 2001, on or before which date the use of the land for waste transfer and waste recycling shall be discontinued and all waste materials, recycled materials, plant, buildings and structures shall be removed from the site and the site shall be left restored to its former condition.

Reason: A temporary permission is appropriate to enable monitoring of the effects of noise and dust on neighbouring properties to establish whether the uses permitted are suitable for permanent retention.

Page 51 Planning, 26/02/01, PL10, Annex 2

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL10

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM)

ANNEX 2

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Environment Agency, Vale of White Horse Environmental Health Officer, Grove Parish Council, Thames Water

No objections.

Vale of White Horse Planning

Reminds County Council of original concern that use does not relate well to intentions of Local Plan policy for this site and its future potential as a high quality Business Park.

CPRE

Permissions of this type should not be given on a permanent basis as (i) waste recycling technology moves on and what is satisfactory now may be obsolete in 5 years time and (ii) if applicants know they have to re-apply for permission later on they are more likely to comply with requirements. There is a potential for nuisance and conflict with interests of public health.

Blewbury Environmental Research Group

Main concerns are the long-term contracts with MoD, Rutherford Laboratories and UKAEA/AEA Technology Harwell, UKAEA/AEA Technology have embarked on long-term de-commissioning, de-contaminating and restoring sites at Aldermaston, Burghfield, Harwell, Culham and Sutton Courtenay. Waste materials from there are contaminated with chemicals and radioactive materials.

Exempt materials (ones whose radioactive content are reduced to agreed Government levels) are released for recycling and landfilling. Much of the non-recyclable waste from Grove goes for landfilling to Shellingford which is not licensed, and the recycled waste is sold to trade or industry. If it is contaminated it will leach into the groundwater at Shellingford.

There was an incident in 1997 in which contaminated soil and tarmac was taken to a housing development in Didcot from Harwell. It had to be removed and taken back to Harwell as it had only been licensed for landfill. As radioactivity in soil at Harwell and Culham are high any building material, soil and metal from these sites will be contaminated. Is a radiator detector used at Grove or at the originating sites. Was the building from Harwell? Is burning prohibited on site? Why was the Transfer Station allowed when the adjacent land is subject of ongoing private housing developments, including a health centre. Why isn't the Transfer Station at Harwell.

The site may not be legal as it does not comply with Waste Management Regulations.

Low Level Radiation Campaign, Llandrindod Wells, Powys

Page 52 If wastes come from MoD, Rutherford Laboratories and UKAEA/AEA Technology at Culham they may be contaminated with radioactivity. It may be legal to remove these wastes but they must not exceed 400 Becquerels per kilogramme. In the Oxford area it is interpreted as 400 Becquerels above background. The Head of the Radiation Protection Unit of the European Commission's Environment Directive says that is inappropriate. Therefore, the County Council may condone an unlawful activity if permission is granted. The Council must satisfy itself: (i) waste is monitored for radioactive content; (ii) monitoring should be capable of detecting alpha, beta and gamma radiation; and (iii) waste does not exceed 400 becequerels per kilogramme.

John Lewis of Hungerford (next door neighbours)

Page 53 Planning, 26/02/01, PL10, Annex 3

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL10

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM)

ANNEX 3

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Oxfordshire Structure Plan

WD1 (Encourage recycling) T18 (Proposals must be acceptable in traffic and transport terms)

Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan

W3 (normally permit recycling provided a) sources/markets are close; b) well located to road network; c) no environmental nuisance; d) no risk to groundwater; e) no conflict with other policies)

W4 (no recycling in open countryside)

W5 (screen activities)

PE18 (have regard to Code of Practice [proper control of sites] and regulate development by conditions)

Vale of White Horse Local Plan

E6 (permit B1 and B2 uses in Grove Technology Park. Limit B8 uses)

Page 54 Planning, 26/02/01, PL10, Annex 4

Environmental Committee PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE – 26 FEBRUARY 2001 AGENDA ITEM PL10

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 1 OF PLANNING PERMISSION ECH/1432/17-CM FOR A WASTE TRANSFER STATION AND RECYCLING FACILITY AT GROVE BUSINESS PARK, WANTAGE (APPLICATION NO. ECH/1432/21-CM) ANNEX 4

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

1. The development shall be carried out solely in accordance with the details submitted with the application as modified by conditions of this permission unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and details.

2. Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing and with the exception of necessary works arising from emergency situations, lorries shall not enter or leave the site, plant shall not be operated and operations shall not take place other than between 0700 and 1800 hours, Monday to Friday and 0700 to 1300 on Saturdays. No such operations or lorry movements shall take place at any time on Sundays or bank holidays.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the area.

3. No storage of recycled materials shall take place outside the building except within the storage bays or stillages shown on approved plan no. 1240/2D, and to a height not exceeding 2 metres.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and the proper functioning of the site.

4. No storage of skips shall take place outside the building except within the area indicated on approved plan no. 1240/2D and to a height not exceeding 2 metres.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and the proper functioning of the site.

5. The wall between points A and B as shown on approved plan 1240/2D shall not be other than 3.0 metres high, shall be composed of factory finished, box section steel sheets to match the site building, reinforced on the south side by concrete to a height of 2.0 metres. It shall be painted on the north side dark green with yellow vertical piping and shall be maintained in good condition.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

6. The wall and gates between points C and D as shown on approved plan 1240/2D shall not be other than 1.8 metres high, shall be composed of factory finished, box section sheets to match the site building. It shall be painted on the north side dark green with yellow vertical piping and shall be maintained in good condition.

Page 55 Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1998 (as amended or any order revoking or re-enacting that Order), the site building will not be composed of anything other than Standard British Steel factory finished metal profile sheeting walls coloured dark green with yellow vertical piping. The roof shall not be composed of anything other than fibre cement roofing panels coloured dark green. The building shall be maintained in good condition.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

8. There shall be a 1.8 metre high chain link fence from points B to D as shown on approved plan 1240/2D. The centre section shown as 'solid fencing' on approved plan shall not be other than composed of metal profile sheeting coloured dark green on the south-west side. The fence shall be maintained in good condition.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

9. Within 3 months of the date of this permission details of dust monitoring measures shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. These details shall include proposals for monitoring dust levels and shall set levels of dust that must not be exceeded. Any details that are approved shall be implemented within one month of approval of those details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring properties.

10. No floodlighting shall be erected on site except as shown on approved plan 1240/2D. The light at point B as shown on approved plan 1240/2D shall be cowled to prevent the light being shed outside the site.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity and character of the Technology Park.

11. Existing trees shall not be lopped, topped, felled or uprooted without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: To retain and protect the trees which enhance the appearance of the south-western boundary.

12. No uses shall take place on the site outside the building other than those that are shown on approved plan 1240/2D.

Reason: To allow proper functioning of the site.

13. The yard and service yard areas shall not be other than concreted and shall be maintained in a clean and tidy state.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and for the proper functioning of the site.

Page 56 14. The planting scheme on the boundary between points D and B shall be maintained. It comprises Grey Poplar (populus canescens) standards 2.0 metres high at 5.0 metre centres and hawthorn hedging whips 0.7 metres high at 0.5 metre centres. The planting shall be kept weed free and shall be protected from predators until 2004.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

15. In the event of the failure of any trees or shrubs planted or to be retained on the site, such trees shall be replaced with live specimens or species, at a time and in a manner as may be specified by the Local Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: To ensure, as far as possible, the maintenance of the planting on the site.

16. No retail sales shall be made from the site.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

17. No storage, sorting, recycling, crushing, chipping or grading of waste materials shall take place on site except within the building shown on approved plan 1240/2D.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring properties.

18. No loaded lorry or skip lorry shall enter or leave the site unsheeted.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring properties.

19. Within one month of the date of this permission or such other time as the Local Planning Authority may agree in writing, the crusher, as shown on approved plan 1240/3E shall not operate unless the opening in the wall has been boxed in in sheet metal coloured dark green and this box has been equipped with water sprinklers.

Reason: To suppress dust and to reduce visual intrusion to protect the amenities of neighbours.

20. The crusher, as shown on approved plan 1240/3E, shall not be operated unless the sprinklers located at its southern end are operated at the same time to wet the crushed material.

Reason: To suppress dust to protect the amenities of neighbours.

21. No aggregate or hardcore, or other recycled materials which, when dry, create dust when moved, shall be stored outside the building unless they are kept permanently dampened.

Reason: To suppress dust to protect the amenities of neighbours.

22. In the event that dust monitoring shows that agreed levels of dust are exceeded then no further outside storage of recycled materials shall take place and no movement of recycled materials already stored outside shall take place until an alternative scheme for dust suppression has been agreed in writing by the local planning authority and has been implemented.

Page 57 Reason: To suppress dust to protect the amenities of neighbours.

23. Noise levels as measured 3 metres in front of the façade of the John Lewis factory, shown as "new factory" on approved plan 1240/2D, shall not exceed 56 dBA Laeq 10 hour at any time during approved working hours.

Reason: To prevent noise intrusion in the interests of the amenities of the closest neighbours.

Page 58