Agenda and minutes

To record the attendance of Substitute Members, if any, who have been authorised to attend in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 17(1), with notification having been given to the proper Officer before the start of the meeting and to receive apologies for absence.

The attendance of a Substitute Member who had been authorised to attend in accordance with Standing Order 17(1) was recorded as referred to above with an apology for absence having been received from Councillor Matthew Barber.

Apologies for absence were also recorded from Councillor Melinda Tilley who had intended to be present at the meeting in her Ex-Officio capacity as Leader of the Opposition.

To receive any declarations of Personal or Personal and Prejudicial Interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

Any Member with a personal interest or a personal and prejudicial interest in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct, in any matter to be considered at a meeting, must declare the existence and nature of that interest as soon as the interest becomes apparent in accordance with the provisions of the Code.

When a Member declares a personal and prejudicial interest he shall also state if he has a dispensation from the Standards Committee entitling him/her to speak, or speak and vote on the matter concerned.

Where any Member has declared a personal and prejudicial interest he shall withdraw from the room while the matter is under consideration unless

(a)    His/her disability to speak, or speak and vote on the matter has been removed by a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee, or

(b)    members of the public are allowed to make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter by statutory right or otherwise.  If that is the case, the Member can also attend the meeting for that purpose.  However, the Member must immediately leave the room once he/she has finished; or when the meeting decides he/she has finished whichever is the earlier and in any event the Member must leave the room for the duration of the debate on the item in which he/she has a personal and prejudicial interest.

Councillor Margaret Turner declared a personal interest in the Local Development Framework: Core Strategy Preferred Options in so far as a number of the speakers were know to her.

Councillor Jerry Patterson declared a personal interest in the Local Development Framework: Core Strategy Preferred Options in so far as he was a Member of on the Executive Regional Planning Committee of the South East England Regional Assembly and also a member of the Central Oxfordshire Steering Group.

Councillor Roger Cox declared a personal interest in theLocal Development Framework: Core Strategy Preferred Options in so far as he was a Member of the Faringdon Town Council and had voted in support of the Faringdon Plan which had included development at Wicklesham Quarry.

To receive notification of any matters which the Chair determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the Chair.

The Chair introduced himself and welcomed everyone present to the meeting.

He explained that the purpose of the meeting was to consider a report on the Local Development Framework: Core Preferred Options.

For the benefit of members of the public the Chair pointed out the Officers who were present to give advice and to minute the proceedings and he explained that only elected Members of the Committee could vote on the items on the agenda. He commented that as the process was that this Committee made a recommendation to the Executive, those Members of the Executive who were not on the Development Control Committee had been invited to the meeting to hear the presentation of the report by the Officers, ask any questions but not to take part in the debate on the matter.

In the unlikely event of having to leave the meeting room, the Chair pointed out the emergency exits.

The Chair asked everyone present to ensure that their mobile telephones were switched off during the meeting.  He also asked everyone to listen to the debate in silence and allow anyone speaking to make their comments without interruption.   

Any statements and/or petitions from the public under Standing Order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.

Five members of the public made statements as follows: -

1.         Stewart Lilly – Harwell Parish Council

Mr Lilly commented that Harwell Parish Council was coming to grips with the Great WesternPark which was imminent, noting that lots of the development was coming into the Parish.  He noted that the extension of the Didcot area had been divided across two districts.  He stated that the Parish Council’s objections were directed at the South East Plan as well as at the Vale and in particular at the lack of involvement with the village in this important expansion.  He commented that the acceptance by the Vale of 50-50 around Didcot was taken after a meeting in January 2007 where the Parish Council had asked for liaison.  He explained that the parish had heard nothing of the proposals until the Vale’s Officer had visited a few weeks ago. He stated that there had been little consultation or discussion. He reported that the Core Strategy stated in the Plan that separate identities of villages must be maintained with well landscaped areas between towns. He asked that these gaps should not be closed to avoid coalescence and that these proposals could result in this.

Mr Lilly referred to Planning Policy NE10 which identified the gap near Harwell as important open land.  He emphasized that there were other areas which were not designated this way.  He commented that the Parish Council was saddened that the landscape gap had been swept away. 

He commented that infrastructure in all respects had come into consideration, especially sustainaibility issues.  He stated that the Parish Council felt that too much emphasis had been placed on the Didcot railway as a solution to this area.  He commented that he was aware that the railway companies would not consider another station at Grove because of capacity problems and he questioned how were those capacity problems to be resolved when Didcot station was already nearly at capacity.  Finally, he asked the Council undertake positive close and proper dialogue with Harwell and other parishes affected by the proposals.

2.         Norman Staples – Keep Harwell Rural Campaign.

Mr Staples commented that he appreciated the opportunity to comment, but realised that the LDF report was unlikely to be altered before approval tonight. He hoped that the consultation process would result in significant modifications. He reported observations at this stage as follows: -

1.         Harwell Bypass.  – He was concerned that both the report and the Halcrow SCOTS report made the assumption that traffic through Harwell would be relieved by just the A4130 to A417 link without a continuation south to the A34 at Chilton.  He commented that this ignored the fact that the A417 went through Harwell, and thus the single link north of the A417 simply re-routed traffic from Harwell High Street to Harwell A417. It was an incomplete, unsatisfactory and unacceptable solution to growing traffic through Harwell.  He therefore did not accept the Halcrow preference for the Rowstock bypass (estimated cost £6m) to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 175.

Any questions from members of the public under Standing Order 32 will be asked at the meeting.

None.

To receive and consider report 122/08 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy). 

Councillors Margaret Turner, Jerry Patterson and Roger Cox had each declared a personal interest in this item.

The Committee received and considered report 122/08 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) which reminded Members that the Council had to produce a Local Development Framework which was a new style of development plan that would replace the Local Plan. The first document to be prepared was the Core Strategy and an important part of the process was engaging with the public. To this end under the guidance of the Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group a draft Preferred Options report had been prepared, which Members had before them

It was noted that the Committee was asked to consider the report and make recommendations thereon to the Executive with a view to the document being published for consultation in January.

The Officers introduced the report making the following comments: -

Background

·              Under the new planning system the Local Plan would be replaced by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy and the Managing Development document. 

·              Officers were progressing work on the Core Strategy, which would establish the broad framework to guide development to 2026 and identify major sites for development.

·              It had to comply with the policies and requirements in the South East Plan and government guidance and help deliver the priorities in the Community Strategy.

·              The Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group had been guiding the work preparing the Core Strategy Preferred Options report. If Members agreed, this will be published for consultation in January.

Summary of the main points in the report

The structure of the preferred options report was set out in paragraph 5.1.

The reasons why a strategy of urban concentration was being recommended were set out in paragraphs 4.27 and 4.28 of the report. Urban concentration would locate people in places with the best range of services, facilities and infrastructure and where there was the best chance of securing new infrastructure and services.

·                    It would locate people where there were more opportunities for cycling, walking and using public transport which would reduce the need to travel by car and hence carbon emissions.

·                    It supported the vitality of the market towns.

·                    It was consistent with the policy of urban focus set out in the South East Plan.

·                    The urban areas had the most pressure for affordable housing.

·                    Development here was supported by the Primary Care Trust, the County Council as highway authority and the emergency services.

Key Elements

Paragraph 5.2 of the covering report set out the key elements of the preferred options report.

(a)       Housing

·        The draft South East Plan required that at least 11,560 new homes must be built in the Vale between 2006 and 2026.

·        Government guidance indicated that the Council should have a 15 year supply of land when the plan is adopted. To make sure the Council has this, Officers are looking to provide sufficient land to 2027.

·        Many sites already had planning permission or were identified in the Local Plan and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 177.

None.