Agenda and draft minutes

Development Control Committee - Monday, 20th October, 2025 11.00 am

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Woodgreen, Witney, Oxfordshire OX28 1NB. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services

Media

Items
No.	Item
11.	Apologies for Absence To receive any apologies for absence from members of the Committee. The quorum for the Committee is 6 members. Additional documents: Webcast for 11. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from: Councillors Elizabeth Poskitt, Mark Walker, Andrew Lyon, Mike Baggaley, Adrian Walsh, Adam Clements, Steve Cosier and Andrew Beaney. Councillor Tim Sumner substituted for Councillor Poskitt Councillor Stuart McCarroll substituted for Councillor Lyon. Councillor Hugo Ashton substituted for Councillor Baggaley.
12.	Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations from Members of the Committee on any items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Webcast for 12. Minutes: Declarations of Interest were received as follows: Councillor Andrew Prosser advised that as he was the Ward Member for Item 6 - West End House, Witney, he would not vote on that item.
13.	Minutes of Previous Meeting PDF 71 KB To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 2 June 2025. Additional documents: Webcast for 13. Minutes: Councillor Julian Cooper requested an amendment to the minutes to include Councillors Alaric Smith and Rosie Pearson, who were included as substitute members for the meeting but had been omitted from the list of attendees. Democratic Services confirmed that this would be amended. Subject to the above amendments, Councillor Cooper proposed that the minutes of the previous meeting held on Monday 2 June 2025 be agreed by the Development Control Committee as a true and accurate record. This was seconded by Councillor Alistair Wray, was put to the vote and was agreed by the Development Control Committee. The Development Control Committee Resolved to: 1. Agree the minutes of the previous meeting held on Monday 2 June 2025 as a true and accurate record.
14.	24/03278/FUL Land (e) 431186 (n) 208772 Witney Road. PDF 389 KB Purpose: To consider the application for development, details of which are set out in the attached schedule. Recommendation: That the application be determined in accordance with the recommendations of the Head of Planning. Additional documents: Late Reps Report DCC Oct 25 , item 14. PDF 227 KB Webcast for 14. Minutes: James Nelson, Principal Planner, introduced the item. In his presentation the Principal Planner made the following points: The proposal was for construction and operation of a ground mounted solar farm, Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), associated infrastructure, ancillary works and landscaping. The proposed site included six undeveloped agricultural fields on land south of the A40. The site had a public right of way through it. It was near designated ancient woodland and listed buildings at Caswell House. Site access and the BESS facility, including the impermeable attenuation tank, a key measure to contain run off water, were sited at the southern edge of the site. Proposed landscape and visual mitigation included woodland planting to the southern edge of the site which would contain views of the development from the southwest. Drainage layout drawings showed the sloping of the site down from the highest point in the north to the southwest corner. An overview of the appearance and heights of infrastructure was provided and included racks, panels storage containers and the substation. The BESS, substation and panels would be three metres in height. A control building would be in the southern corner of the site and be five metres in height. Details of fencing, gates and CCTV were shown. Photographs of the site from various viewpoints were presented. The Chair then invited public speakers to address the Development Control Committee. Richard and Amanda Matthews spoke in objection to the application which raised the following points: Caswell House was a Grade 2 star listed manor. The site of Caswell House included a moat. The moat was a heritage asset and was fed by a spring reservoir 500 metres away and was in direct proximity to the site of the proposed BESS. Underground aquifers fed the spring. Sinking steel supports into the ground was potentially damaging to the aquifers and risked the water supply and subsequently the moat. There was a colony of fresh-water mussels on the outlet of the moat that would be threatened by the potential water contamination. The spring was the sole water supply for Caswell House and was incorrectly omitted from the Officer report. The main risk was from flood and fire water which posed a threat to Caswell House as a business and had environmental and public health risks. Policy OS2 was relevant to the application decision due to the importance of minimising impact on neighbouring properties. Careful consideration was needed to the location of BESS units. Various consultees had been compromised with their findings based on an inaccurate briefing that omitted key information. Risks of water pollution could not be mitigated. Josh Rigby, Michael Breslaw and Aiden Van de Weyer, agents for the application spoke in support of the application which raised the following points: The site would help the move to clean low carbon power. The inclusion of battery storage enhanced the application as it released power when demand was highest. Since the initial application further work had been undertaken to work on the contamination risks. ... view the full minutes text for item 14.
15.	Matter Exempt From Publication. If Development Control wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any of the items on the exempt from publication part of the agenda, it will be necessary for Development Control to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraphs 1 and 6 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Development Control may maintain the exemption if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Minutes: The Chair advised that if the Development Control Committee wished to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of exempt item six on the agenda, it was necessary for the Development Control Committee to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraphs 1 and 6 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 Councillor Andrew Prosser proposed that the press and public were excluded from the meeting. This was seconded by Councillor Michael Brooker. Voting Record – For 13, Against 0, Abstained 0. The Development Control Committee Resolved to: Exclude the press and the public from the meeting in accordance with the provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in paragraphs 1 and 6 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972,with the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighing the public interest in disclosing the exempt information.
16.	West End House Witney View the reasons why item 16. is restricted Purpose: To recommend next steps in respect of 26a West End (West End House), Witney. Recommendation: To consider the recommendation set out in the exempt report. Minutes: The purpose of the report was to recommend next steps in respect of 26a West End (West End House), Witney. Voting Record – For 14, Against 0, Abstained 1. Resolved: 1. Agree the recommendation set out in the exempt report.

Related Pages