Apologies for absence were received by Cllr Van Coulter (substitute Cllr Colin Cook), Cllr Steve Curran (substitute Cllr Ed Turner) and Cllr David Rundle (substitute Cllr Mike Gotch).  Apologies for lateness were received from Cllr Ben Lloyd-Shogbesan.

Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests they may have in any of the following agenda items.  Guidance on this is set out at the end of these agenda pages.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which details a planning application for the construction of two all weather playing pitches, plus a new residential development consisting of 6 x 1 bed flats, 15 x 2 bed flats, 6 x 3 bed flats, 13 x 3 bed houses and 3 x 4 bed houses, together with access road, parking, landscaping etc accessed off Barracks Lane.

Officer recommendation: That the Committee REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

1.      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 all-weather mini-pitches with restricted community access are not equal to or better than retaining the potential of the site to provide for open air sport and recreation. Further it is not essential that the all-weather mini-pitches are provided on this particular site to satisfy local need. 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.

2.      The site meets the requirements of the NPPF as a local green space, valued local amenity which will be lost by developing housing on part of the site and diminished on the mini-pitches part of the site. The all-weather mini-pitches do not form an acceptable alternative to retention of this green space. This is contrary to guidance in the NPPF and Policies CS21 of the Core Strategy and SR2 of the Oxford Local Plan.

3        The development is contrary to Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy in that      the site is not allocated for development nor is it needed to meet the NPPF 5 or 10 year housing land availability requirements. There are no        other balancing reasons or mitigating circumstances why housing should be allowed on this site. It is not essential that the housing or all-weather mini-pitch developments are developed on this particular site       which it is preferable to retain as open space for the well-being of the community it serves.

4        The proposed number of dwellings constitutes an overdevelopment of the site in that it restricts the opportunity to create a high quality housing layout. The largely rectilinear disposition of buildings, the scale, bulk and massing of the block encompassing plots 26-43, and the absence of landmark buildings or features would fail to create a strong sense of place. The public realm would not be a visually attractive environment as it would be dominated by on-street parking with few front gardens, very little green space and no opportunities for landmark or focal-point planting/features. The gardens to plots 26, 27, 32, 33, 38 and 39 which include family units would be too restricted in size.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 138.

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated now appended) which detailed a planning application for the construction of two all weather playing pitches, plus a new residential development consisting of 6 x 1 bed flats, 15 x 2 bed flats, 6 x 3 bed flats, 13 x 3 bed houses and 3 x 4 bed houses, together with access road, parking, landscaping etc accessed off Barracks Lane.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, the Committee noted that Judith Harley and Gus Bianchini spoke against the application and Nik Lyzba spoke in favour of it.

After taking all written and oral submissions into account, the Committee resolved (by 7 votes to 0) to REFUSE the planning application for the following reasons:

1.      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 all-weather mini-pitches with restricted community access are not equal to or better than retaining the potential of the site to provide for open air sport and recreation. Further it is not essential that the all-weather mini-pitches are provided on this particular site to satisfy local need. 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.

2.      The site meets the requirements of the NPPF as a local green space, valued local amenity which will be lost by developing housing on part of the site and diminished on the mini-pitches part of the site. The all-weather mini-pitches do not form an acceptable alternative to retention of this green space. This is contrary to guidance in the NPPF and Policies CS21 of the Core Strategy and SR2 of the Oxford Local Plan.

3        The development is contrary to Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy in that the site is not allocated for development nor is it needed to meet the NPPF 5 or 10 year housing land availability requirements. There are no other balancing reasons or mitigating circumstances why housing should be allowed on this site. It is not essential that the housing or all-weather mini-pitch developments are developed on this particular site       which it is preferable to retain as open space for the well-being of the community it serves.

4        The proposed number of dwellings constitutes an overdevelopment of the site in that it restricts the opportunity to create a high quality housing layout. The largely rectilinear disposition of buildings, the scale, bulk and massing of the block encompassing plots 26-43, and the absence of landmark buildings or features would fail to create a strong sense of place. The public realm would not be a visually attractive environment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 138.

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 Committee NOTES the following future meeting dates:

Tuesday 16^th April 2013 (and Tuesday 23^rd April if necessary)

Tuesday 7th May 2013 (and Thursday 9th May if necessary)

The Committee resolved (by 8 votes to 0) to NOTE that the next meeting would be held on Tuesday 16^th April 2013.