EXAMINATION STATEMENT Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan - Proposed Core Strategy Part 1

Matter 1

Legal Requirement and Duty to Co-operate

OXAGE (Oxfordshire Against Gravel Extraction) (017)

Project reference GP 009 Date 24 August 2016

Gardner Planning Ltd Down Ampney Bendlowes Road Great Bardfield Essex CM7 4RR

07887 662166 [email protected] COPYRIGHT The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of Gardner Planning Ltd.

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

INTRODUCTION

This Statement is the response to the Inspector’s Issues on Matter 1 by Gardner Planning Ltd (GPL) on behalf of Oxfordshire Against Gravel Extraction (OXAGE) - a county-wide alliance of community action groups against gravel extraction. OXAGE was formed in 2013 in order to formulate a joint response to the OCC’s draft minerals strategy, and has fully participated in the OCC Minerals and Waste Local Plan (MWLP) through the various stages. The groups which make up OXAGE are as follows:

BACHPORT (Burcot and Clifton Hampden Protection of River Thames) Parishes: Burcot and Clifton Hampden Long Wittenham Appleford Total population c. 2,500.

CAGE (Communities Against Gravel Extraction) Parishes: Aston Tirrold Aston Upthorpe Brightwell-cum-Sotwell Cholsey Moulsford North Moreton Wallingford Total population 14,000 (Census 2011) now estimated to be approximately 15,000 as a result of new housing since then.

Eynsham Population approximately 4,860.

PAGE (Parishes Against Gravel Extraction) Parishes: Benson Berinsfield Berrick Salome Dorchester-on-Thames Drayton St Leonard Newington Stadhampton Warborough Total population of around 5,500.

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

SEAG (Sonning Eye Against Gravel) Sonning Eye

Population around 100.

CPRE (Council for the Protection of Rural England) supports this alliance

1. ISSUE 1 LEGAL TESTS

1.1 This Statement has no comments on this issue and will comment on the SCI and SEA/SA below.

2. ISSUES 2 and 3: SCI

2.1 The Local Aggregate Assessment (LAA) was introduced in the Guidance on the Managed Aggregate Supply System (MASS) 2012. The first OCC LAA (Atkins) was published in 2011 (overtaken by demise of Regional Planning and the new NPPF/MASS publication). The second LAA (Atkins) was published in draft for consultation in June 2013, with a complicated deviation from the Government’s ‘10- year average method’ (10YAM) that produced higher production figures, and was the subject of consultation. OXAGE responded on 3 October 2013, objecting to anything other than the 10YAM. An Officer report to OCC Cabinet on 26 November 2013 rejected the LAA report and recommended that the 10YAM be adopted for several reasons (many advanced by OXAGE), and this was agreed by the Cabinet.

2.2 The third LAA (LUC) is dated November 2014. It re-opened the choice of assessment and recommended another (but different) complicated methodology rather than follow Government guidance and policy in MASS for a 10YAM. This will be the subject of Matter 3.

2.3 The first OCC SCI was adopted in November 2006 and was the extant SCI when the LAA (LUC) November 2014 was produced. It described (emphasis added):

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

 “‘Front-loading’ of involvement; there should be opportunities for early community involvement and a sense of ownership of local policy decisions” (para 3.1)

 “Ensure all relevant parties are consulted, that they are as representative as possible and are well informed of the parameters surrounding the consultation” (para 3.3)

 “community groups and the wider public should have the opportunity to put forward their own ideas and feel confident that there is a process for considering and responding to their concerns” (para 3.5) quoting from Creating Local Development Frameworks, ODPM, 2004 etc.

 “We will go beyond just meeting the requirements of the Regulations. We will seek to involve all individuals, groups, organisations and bodies that we think have an interest in the minerals and waste development documents being prepared or who have expressed an interest in being involved or consulted.” (para 4.3)

 The box at para 4.3 is headed “Key Target Groups to be Involved and Consulted” and included “Specific interest groups (national, regional and local); Environmental groups (national, regional and local); Local community, residents and civic groups; Local action groups; Parish and town councils and parish meetings within Oxfordshire;” (para 4.7)

 “We will involve people in the production of the minerals and waste development documents within the Minerals and Waste Development Framework at three levels: … (ii) Consulting – we will ask individuals and organisations what they think about particular approaches, options and proposals being considered and put forward in producing minerals and waste development documents; this will usually be done through a formal period of consultation when we will invite representations from all interested and affected parties on a draft version of a document; …(para 4.4)

2.4 The box at para 4.10 states that for the stage of “Initial evidence gathering to identify issues and options” the consultation will be with “Technical consultation with statutory bodies” and “Consultation with key stakeholders”.

2.5 Both the 2006 SCI and Revised SCI (December 2014) included the following text (emphasis added):

 “The production of local development documents will involve the following stages: A. Evidence Gathering – to form the evidence base for the plan – this could include assessment of need for minerals …”; (4.2 A)

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

 “Who we will Involve in Preparing Plan Documents - The ‘community’ includes all individuals, groups, organisations and statutory bodies living, working or operating in Oxfordshire, or close to the county boundary, or having a particular interest in minerals and/or waste development in the county. We will consult communities on the development of plan documents at the earliest possible stage to allow meaningful engagement in the process. If difficulties and conflicts are addressed at an early stage, both time and money can be saved in the final stages of plan production.”(para 4.3)

2.6 There can be no doubt that producing material, including ‘assessment of the need for minerals’ for the ‘development of plan documents’ (not development plan documents per se) is required by the SCI (all versions) to be the subject of consultation with bodies ‘having a particular interest in minerals and/or waste development in the county’ (‘stakeholders’). This definition includes OXAGE.

2.7 Whether the 2006 or December 2014 versions are the right context, the position is unaltered in that there is both spirit and wording which means that OXAGE and others should have been consulted on the November 2014 LAA. It would also be plain commonsense for a controversial LAA (which is the starting point for the Plan) to be the subject of consultation at the earliest point in the plan-making programme - not leaving the issue until the Pre-Submission consultation nearly a year later.

2.8 Issue 3 asks whether there has been a failure to comply with the SCI, and this Statement submits that the answer is clearly ‘yes’. There has latterly been consultation (April 2016) on a November 2015 LAA update, but that is after the MWLP was submitted, so whatever the response is it cannot change the submitted plan. Why the 2014 LAA was not consulted on is unknown - perhaps consultation would have exposed its flaws such that the Plan would have been delayed, again.

2.9 The 2012 Regulations state as follows (emphasis added):

Preparation of a local plan 18. (1) A local planning authority must— (a) notify each of the bodies or persons specified in paragraph (2) of the subject of a local plan which the local planning authority propose to prepare, and

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

(b) invite each of them to make representations to the local planning authority about what a local plan with that subject ought to contain. (2) The bodies or persons referred to in paragraph (1) are— (a) such of the specific consultation bodies as the local planning authority consider may have an interest in the subject of the proposed local plan; (b) such of the general consultation bodies as the local planning authority consider appropriate; and (c) such residents or other persons carrying on business in the local planning authority’s area from which the local planning authority consider it appropriate to invite representations

2.10 This has clearly not been complied with. The OCC document ‘Legal Assessment of Oxfordshire County Council's Minerals and Waste Local Plan April 2016’1 does not deal with the point, despite it being raised by OXAGE in September 2015. The impression is given that only the versions of the Plan itself need to be consulted on, not preparatory documents such as the LAA. The OCC letter to the Inspector of 4 February 2016 para 6 confuses ‘production of minerals and waste development documents’ with ‘the development of plan documents’ which is the wording in the SCI.

2.11 It is a matter for the Inspector whether the ‘plan has been prepared in accordance with … legal and procedural requirements’ (NPPF para 182). If he decides not, then the Plan should be withdrawn. This may give the opportunity for OCC to reflect upon some fundamental concerns about the Plan generally raised by the Inspector and others, and to prepare a better Plan. Alternatively, the Inspector may decide that although the process is obviously flawed, the case against the LAA will be debated at the Examination. If that is the case, and it is a fundamental platform for the Plan, then his judgement on the veracity of the LAA may be coloured by the fact that it was not properly consulted on.

3. Issue 4: SEA/SA

3.1 The SEA/SA did not properly identify or consider reasonable alternatives.

1 11.2.11

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

3.2 The NPPF was published in March 2012 and contained new requirements to produce a single plan showing where development would take place (paras 143, 154, 157). The SA did not evaluate the need to produce a single plan with sites against a two stage process with the sustainability advantages/disadvantages of each approach.

3.3 The NPPF brought in a new system for identifying annual need, to replace the Regional Apportionment, based on a simple use of past average production, but allows local (and by implication unusual) circumstances to adjust that figure. OCC in fact embarked on a strategy of identifying need on a complicated and unjustified process of identifying future need based on arguable linkages and a narrative which is based more on assertion than robust evidence.

3.4 The SA did not react to the significant changes brought about by the March 2012 Framework and assess the sustainability advantages/disadvantages of two basic alternatives (simple v complicated process) in terms of robustness and clarity for plan making process, nor with implication for the spatial strategy or environmental consequences of planning for potential over-supply.

3.5 The SA at 5.6/Table 5.1 suggests various levels of supply but not spatial strategies. There is no obvious evaluation of the dramatically different LAA 14 figures which are over 50% higher than the 10-year average figures, and what impact that difference would have on the environment.

3.6 It is recognised in the CS at para 4.30 that West Oxford has a high level of unworked resources but that there are economic needs (unspecified) which requires a more balanced pattern of extraction. The SA effectively concludes that an environmental balance needs to be struck to reduce long-term pressures on West Oxfordshire. This appears to be a subjective or anecdotal conclusion rather than based on objective evidence and analysis.

4. ISSUE 5: DUTY TO COOPERATE

Examination Matter 1 Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan Gardner Planning on behalf of OXAGE (017)

4.1 OXAGE has now been provided with material on DtC with other organisations, and has already indicated that it is now able to withdraw its objection on DtC. However, the Core Strategy massively over-provides for future sand and gravel production and the DtC has operated through the Regional Aggregate Working Party which is composed of adjoining Mineral Planning Authorities in the South-East and mineral companies which operate there. None of these participants would be likely to object to Oxfordshire over-providing, for obvious reasons. High production in Oxfordshire could result in exports to adjoining counties (saving their countryside and political resistance to new sites); the mineral companies would benefit from having access to more sites driving down acquisition costs, and taking off the pressure for seeking alternatives to land-won supply of aggregates.