Site address:                    16 East Street, Oxford, OX2 0AU

Proposal:                           Demolition of existing workshop (Use Class B1) to erect a two storey yoga workshop (Use Class D2). Provision of cycle spaces (amended description)

Reason at Committee:   The application has been called in to the Planning Review Committee by Councillors Pressel, Rowley, Chapman, Taylor, Kennedy, Fry, Simm, Iley-Williamson, Lygo, Henwood, Malik, Howlett, Djafari-Marbini, and Corais because of concerns about the impact of the proposed development on the Conservation Area.

Recommendation:

Planning Review Committee is recommended to:

1.    approve the application for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 6 of the report and grant planning permission; and

2.    agree to delegate authority to the Acting Head of Planning Services to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Acting Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary

The Committee considered an application (19/00249/FUL) for planning permission for the demolition of the existing workshop (Use Class B1) to erect a two storey yoga workshop (Use Class D2) and the provision of cycle spaces.

The application had been called in to the Planning Review Committee by Councillors Pressel, Rowley, Chapman, Taylor, Kennedy, Fry, Simm, Iley-Williamson, Lygo, Henwood, Malik, Howlett, Djafari-Marbini and Corais because of concerns about the impact of the proposed development on the Conservation Area.

The Planning Officer presented the report and drew attention to the following points.

The site is located within the Osney Town Conservation Area but it is not a protected employment site.  

The application had been considered at West Area Planning Committee on 9 April 2019 when members of that committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to conditions and delegated authority to the Acting Head of Planning Services to consider and deal with any new material planning considerations that may be raised through public consultation which expired on 11 April 2019 and deal with any representations that might be received as a result of the notice which had been served on the owner which expired on 29 April 2019 including deciding whether it was necessary to refer the application back to the committee prior to issuing the permission.

Some additional comments had been received in relation to the application; some of these comments were received after the consultation period. Since the agenda had been published an additional 7 comments had been received in support and 3 objecting. Additional comments had been received from some local residents who had already objected. One of the comments objecting was from the local MP.

The Oxford Preservation Trust’s comments had been circulated before the Committee meeting earlier in the day.

The Officers’ view was that no matters received in public consultation raised any material matters that had not already been considered and dealt with in the report with the exception of concerns relating to bats.

Officers had therefore sought the advice of the Council’s ecologist and the applicant’s agent had produced a bat survey. The survey concluded that the site had negligible ecological value and there was no evidence of bats. However, an additional condition was recommended to secure ecological enhancements.

The officer recommendation was to grant planning permission subject to the recommended conditions with an additional condition requiring ecological enhancement measures and to delegate authority to the Acting Head of Planning Services to finalise those conditions.

The Legal Adviser added a few points of clarification and confirmed that it was normal practice to take into account comments received after the expiry of the consultation period if the application had not been determined as to not do so would leave the decision at risk of challenge if such comments had raised new material planning considerations.

She confirmed that her verbal response at the last meeting to the Counsel’s opinion which had been submitted by one of the objectors about the application had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12

Site address:                   16 East St, Oxford, OX2 0AU

Proposal:                        Demolition of existing workshop (Use Class B1) to erect a two storey yoga workshop (Use Class D2). Provision of cycle spaces. (Amended description)

Reason at Committee:     The application has been called-in by Councillors Pressel, Fry, Tanner and Hollingsworth on the ground that there is a massive concern locally about the possible change of use to D2 in the middle of a residential area and the design of the proposed building.

Recommendation:

The West Area Planning Committee is recommended to:

1.     approve the application for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 12 of this report and grant planning permission; and

2.     agree to delegate authority to the Acting Head of Planning Services to:

a.   consider and deal with any new material planning considerations that may be raised through public consultation, which expires on the 11th April 2019 including deciding whether it is necessary to refer the application back to the committee prior to issuing the permission;

b.   finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Acting Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary; and

c.   issue the planning permission.

The Committee considered an application (19/00249/FUL) for planning permission for the demolition of the existing workshop (Use Class B1) to erect a two storey yoga workshop (Use Class D2) and provision of cycle spaces (amended description).

The application had been called-in by Councillors Pressel, Fry, Tanner and Hollingsworth on the ground that there is a massive concern locally about the possible change of use to D2 in the middle of a residential area and the design of the proposed building.

The Council’s Planning Lawyer addressed the Committee on the points raised in the Counsel’s Opinion which had been circulated by Mr Orr a local resident, to the Planning Officer and members the Committee prior to the meeting.

The Planning Lawyer informed the Committee that the arguments in the opinion were not, in her view, persuasive and she did not consider that they could form the basis of a successful legal challenge to any decision to grant permission based on the content of the Planning Officer’s report.

The Planning Officer presented the report and reported that:

• an additional 8comments had been submitted in relation to the application (7 objections and 1 supporter) since the publication of the agenda but all of the material planning considerations raised were addressed in the Planning Officer’s report;

• paragraph 10.5 of the report should refer to policy CS28 not CS18;
• the wrong certificate of ownership had been submitted with the application; a  revised certificate had been now been submitted but this would require a 21 day consultation period. To address this it was proposed that the first bullet point at paragraph 1.1.2 of the report should be revised as follows (additional text in italics):

“Consider and deal with any new material planning considerations that may be raised through public consultation, which expires on the 11th April 2019 and consider and deal with any representations that may be made as a result of the notice which has now been served on the ownerwhich expires on the 29th April 2019, including deciding whether it is necessary to refer the application back to the committee prior to issuing the permission”.

Vernon Orr and Bianca Elgar spoke against the application. 

In discussion the Committee noted the following points:

·       that the Article 4 Direction did not apply to the application site as it was not a residential dwelling

·       that the proposed restriction to D2 use only as a yoga studio (proposed Condition 10) would prevent the use of any permitted development rights to change the use of the site

·       the concerns raised by local residents about potential increase in footfall and/or traffic were not limited to the proposed change of use to D2; the existing B1 designation could also result, without the need for any further planning permission, in a use of the site within that Use Class which could involve increased footfall and/or traffic

·       advice from the Conservation Officer that the heritage significance of the application site related primarily to its use as a light industrial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84