Site Address: Land At Jericho Canal Side Oxford

Proposal: Demolition of various structures on an application site including former garages and workshops. Erection of 23 residential units (consisting of 13 x 3 bed and 1 x 4 bed house, plus 5 x 1 bed and 4 x 2 bed flats), together with new community centre, restaurant, boatyard, public square, winding hole and public bridge across the Oxford Canal. Demolition of existing rear extension and erection of two storey extension to Vicarage at 15 St. Barnabas Street and ramped access to church entrance. (Amended plans)

Report:

Section 1 and Appendices A and B deal with:

1.    Amended plans submitted in relation to the Boatyard element of the proposal and impact on No.9 Coombe Road; and

2.    Update following a meeting with the Canal and River Trust and the St Barnabas Parochial Church, the JWT, the Applicant and Architect to discuss the Church’s concerns regarding the location of the bridge at the southern end and allay their concerns regarding use of the new public open space.

Section 2 and Appendices 1-7 deal with the S106 agreement.

Summary of Overall Recommendations:

1.    Officers recommend that West Area Planning Committee approve the amended plans submitted in relation to the Boatyard,

2.    It is recommended that Committee considers the potential impact to trees and heritage assets arising from a second bridge at the northern end of the site and on balance agree the principle of a second bridge to the north of the site, as shown on the submitted plans, secured via the S106 but subject to a separate planning application in due course; and

3.    It is recommended that Committee endorses the recommendations set out in Section 2 and instructs officers to issue a fresh draft S106 on that basis with the further instruction to report to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Committee within four weeks of the issue of that draft as to ongoing progress.

Councillor Hollingsworth, having declared a disclosable pecuniary interest, left the room for the duration of this item.

The Committee considered report detailing matters relating to application 14/01441/FUL. The matters for decision were:

1.    amended plans submitted in relation to the Boatyard element of the proposal and impact on No.9 Coombe Road;

2.    the principle of a second bridge to the north of the site as shown on submitted plans and secured via the s106 agreement; and

3.    details of the s106 agreement.

The legal officer advised of further representations after publication including:

·         the applicant’s noting that the SPD made no reference to building out the boatyard but he intended to do this to avoid impacting on the housing;

·         JWT and Jericho Community Association submissions on land ownership.

The committee were advised land ownership and interests were only of relevance if they frustrated a necessary part of the development while allowing other elements of the development to proceed. It was confirmed that this was not the case as the draft S106 issued by the Council precluded any part of the development until these were resolved.

Mark Davies, of the Jericho Living Heritage Trust, asked that the development include the names Great Bear Meadow, Henry Ward, and Twentiacre as these were names of historical importance associated with the site and Jericho.

Phyllis Starkey and David Feeney, representing Jericho Wharf Trust (JWT), set out why the JWT should be a party to the S106Agreement or at least to the development of this; why the freehold should be transferred; and their confidence that with this they could successfully develop and run the community facilities including the boatyard.

Stephen Green, representing Future Heritage Group on behalf of the applicant, explained the amended plans; the three landowners of the boatyard land; and the reasons for retaining the freehold and developing the boatyard as part of the canal works.

The Committee asked questions of the officers and were advised:

·         That there was no planning justification that would require a freehold over a 999 year lease, no need to have land transfer/lease and related documents agreed and appended to the s106 Agreement and could not hold back the grant of planning permission on this basis if there was no agreement.

·         Not to build out the boatyard would frustrate the building of the community centre above it and there was a positive obligation to complete this in the draft S106 Agreement.

Councillors noted that the SPD and previous decision of the Committee required the land to be transferred for the benefit of the community for nil consideration. They were of the view that it was reasonable to require freehold of the community centre/boatyard site to be transferred to the community. They appreciated the difficulties this posed for the applicant but considered this gave greater certainty, the separation of the community and commercial elements of the scheme, and brought an end to the developer’s responsibility for the community elements. Obligations to ensure the boatyard was built were required.

The Committee noted that that a further draft would come to it for agreement if the S106 could not be completed on the terms agreed below.

The Committee resolved to:

1.    approve the amended plans submitted in relation to the Boatyard,

2.    agree the principle of a second bridge to the north of the site, as shown on the submitted plans, secured via the S106 but subject to a separate planning application in due course; and

3.    endorses the recommendations in relation to the s106 Agreement with the following exceptions:

·         the boatyard is to be built out by the applicant;

·         the freehold of the land and the boatyard are to be handed to the community organisation to own and operate: the freehold to be transferred for a nominal consideration;

and it being specifically confirmed that

·         the requirement for the £150,000 unilateral contribution from the applicant to remain;

·         there shall be a requirement to provide a northern and southern bridge;

·         the requirements for social housing and the public square are to remain

4.    and instructs officers to issue a fresh draft S106 Agreement on that basis with the further instruction to report to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Committee within four weeks of the issue of that draft as to ongoing progress.