The Head of City Development has submitted a report which details a planning application for a change of use from a Leisure Centre (use class D2) to a Community Free School (use class D1), works to the external appearance of the existing building, boundary treatments, provision of play areas including Multi Use Games Area, access and parking along with associated landscaping.

Officer recommendation: Committee is recommended to SUPPORT the proposals in principle but defer the application in order to draw up an accompanying legal agreement securing a community access package to the school’s facilities, and to delegate to officers the issuing of the Notice of Planning Permission on its completion.

To support subject to the following conditions,

1          Development begun within time limit         

2          Develop in accordance with approved plans        

3          Materials - matching            

4          Landscape plan required    

5          Landscape - carry out after completion     

6          Boundary details before commencement first occupation,

7          SUDS for car parking area

8          Parking and vehicle manoeuvring areas   

9          Cycle parking details required       

10        Provision of bin stores         

11        Travel Plan and detailed SRTS      

12        School Rolls - Travel Plan   

13        School Rolls - traffic impact            

14        Traffic Management Plans  

15        Amenity no additional windows: west, south or east elevations

16        Noise

17        Cooking odours       

18        Biodiversity enhancements  

19        Archaeology - Implementation of programme       medieval and post-medieval remains

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated now appended) which detailed a planning application for a change of use from a Leisure Centre (use class D2) to a Community Free School (use class D1), works to the external appearance of the existing building, boundary treatments, provision of play areas including Multi Use Games Area, access and parking along with associated landscaping.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, the Committee noted that Cllr David Williams, Gus Bianchini and Judith Harley spoke against the application and Grace Manning-Marsh, Steven Jones and Michael Magri spoke in favour of it.

Cllr Lloyd-Shogbesan arrived but did not take part in the debate or determination.

After taking all written and oral submissions into account, the Committee resolved (by 6 votes to 1) to REFUSE the planning application for the following reasons:

1.      That having regard to the traffic generation arising from the development, and the design of the proposed school access and pupil drop-off facility, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact upon the free-flow of traffic and general safety of other road users such as pedestrians and cyclists in Barracks Lane, William Morris Close and at the busy junction of Barracks Lane/Hollow Way/Horspath Driftway.  This would be contrary to guidance in the NPPF, and to Policies CP1, CP10 and TR1 of the adopted Oxford Local Plan 2001-2016.

2.      The application site has been in use for formal and informal sport and recreation until recently. Although the site is now fenced it has not been clearly shown that the site is surplus to requirements for sport or recreation. The site retains the potential to provide for types of open air sport and recreation for which there is a need in the City. The replacement sports facilities in the form of community access to the proposed school’s external areas and facilities are not equal to or better than retaining the potential of the site to provide for open air sport and recreation. For these reasons the proposal does not accord with the NPPF, Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy, or Policy SR2 of the Oxford Local Plan.

3.      The external areas proposed for school use are insufficient to serve the needs of the proposed number of pupils. This would be contrary to Policy CP10 of the adopted Oxford Local Plan 2001-2016

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which details a planning application for a change of use from a Leisure Centre (use class D2) to a Community Free School (use class D1), works to the external appearance of the existing building, boundary treatments, provision of play areas, access and parking along with associated landscaping. (Amended plans)

Officer recommendation: That the Committee SUPPORT the proposals in principle but defer the planning application in order to draw up an accompanying legal agreement and to delegate to officers the issuing of the notice of planning permission on its completion, subject to the following conditions.

1 Development begun within time limit

2 Develop in accordance with approved plans

3 Materials - matching

4 Landscape plan required

5 Landscape carry out after completion

6 Boundary details before commencement first occupation,

7 SUDS for car parking area

8 Parking and vehicle manoeuvring areas

9 Cycle parking details required

10 Provision of bin stores

11 Travel Plan and detailed SRTS

12 School Rolls - Travel Plan

13 School Rolls - traffic impact

14 Traffic Management Plans

15 Amenity no additional windows west, south or east,

16 Noise

17 Cooking odours

18 Biodiversity enhancements

19 Archaeology - Implementation of programme

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated now appended) which detailed a planning application for a change of use from a Leisure Centre (use class D2) to a Community Free School (use class D1), works to the external appearance of the existing building, boundary treatments, provision of play areas, access and parking along with associated landscaping.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, the Committee noted that Gus Bianchini, Judith Hartley, Robert Timbs, Councillor David Williams and Councillor Sajjad Malik spoke against the application and Patrick Duffy, Steve Jones and Nigel Weeks spoke in favour of it.

The Planning Officer notified members that a second application for an adjacent site under the same ownership had been submitted and is likely to be determined by the Committee in the next few months.

After taking all written and oral submissions into account, the Committee resolved (by 9 votes to 0) to DEFER the planning application so that both applications could be determined together.

The Committee felt there was a need for a site visit and requested that a special meeting be held to determine solely these two applications.

The Committee asked that officers provide further information on the:

• travel plans – access and arrangements for car borne children
• robustness of overall proposals for protecting open space
• robustness of overall proposals in protecting  opportunities for recreational activities
• demand for school places in the locality.