The following apologies were given:-

Councillor Baxter – Councillor Tanner substituted;

Councillor Lygo – Councillor Cook substituted;

Councillor McManners – Councillor Coulter substituted.

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.

Councillor Cook declared that that he was a former member of Queen’s College who were objecting to the scheme for St Clement’s Car Park (minute 15 refers); and also that he is a member of Oxford University.

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which details applications for St. Clement’s Car Park as follows:

(1)       12/01370/CAC – Demolition of public toilets;

(2)       12/01369/FUL – Redevelopment of St. Clement’s car park to provide 140 student study rooms and ancillary accommodation in two blocks on 3, 4 and 5 floors.  Replacement car park with 80 spaces, public toilets, landscaping and ancillary works.

Officer recommendation: The Committee is asked to support the proposals in principle but defer the applications in order to secure an accompanying legal agreement, and delegate to officers the issuing of the notices of conservation area consent and planning permission on its completion.

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) detailing the following planning application at St Clement’s Car Park:-

(1)       12/01370/CAC – Demolition of public toilets;

(2)       12/01369/FUL – Redevelopment of St. Clement’s car park to provide 140 student study rooms and ancillary accommodation in two blocks on 3, 4 and 5 floors.  Replacement car park with 80 spaces, public toilets, landscaping and ancillary works.

The Chair, Councillor Bance, indicated that she was extending the time available for public speaking on this application from 5 minutes to 10 minutes per “side” (those speaking for the application and those speaking against).

Murray Hancock presented the report to the Committee and pointed out that two new points had arisen:-

(1)   The Council’s Sites and Housing Plan was currently being examined by a Planning Inspector – Michael Crofton Briggs (Head of City Development) would briefly update the Committee;

(2)   A letter had been received from Public Law Solicitors acting on behalf of residents of Anchor Court – Michael Morgan (Legal Advisor) would briefly update the Committee on this.

Michael Crofton Briggs explained that the Inspector had looked at the Council’s draft policy on St Clement’s car park and had asked if the Council was willing to amend the policy slightly. As a result some slight amendments had been made to include the words “safeguard the vitality of” and “not be significantly reduced but be retained”.  The Committee might find it helpful to asses the current application in the light of these amendments. It should be noted that this is a draft policy, which the Council, as a body, has not yet considered. The policy that went before Council in December 2011 was the un-amended one.

Michael Morgan then gave legal advice on the letter received from Public Law Solicitors. He advised that the claims made in the letter could be dismissed and that there was nothing within the letter that should alter the way in which the Committee should proceed.

Objectors to the Application

The following people then spoke against the application:-

Bev Clack

Craig Simmons

Clinton Pugh

Leatrice Beeson

Tony Joyce

The objectors collectively made the following points:-

• Current proposal does not make any significant improvement in car parking provision;
• Potential harm to local businesses outweighs any benefits;
• The original decision by West Area Planning Committee should be respected – the issues were examined thoroughly there;
• Design too large and overlooks neighbours;
• Unsure which students will occupy these premises (from Oxford University, Oxford Brookes, or elsewhere?);
• Development is unwelcome to residents, risks overdevelopment of the site and will affect businesses;
• This development is not wanted;
• Car parking was the reason for refusal before and nothing has changed since;
• Protection of the vitality of the local area is important;
• The suggestion for temporary car parking is ridiculous,
• Business will suffer and cannot bear the loss – if this continues, many will “go bust”;
• The proposed temporary car park is too far away, and the parking on site now proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Minutes of the meeting held on 25^th July 2012 attached.

Resolved to approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 25^th July 2012.

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which details applications as follows:

(1)       12/01340/FUL – Erection of reconstructed stone wall to create new access and construction of 2 detached houses (2x3 beds).  Erection of garage for 32 Quarry High Street.  Erection of 2 storey rear extension for 28 Quarry High Street.

(2)       12/01341/CAC – Demolition of outbuildings and part stone wall.

Officer recommendation: Approve subject to conditions.

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) concerning the following application:-

(1)       12/01340/FUL – Erection of reconstructed stone wall to create new access and construction of 2 detached houses (2x3 beds).  Erection of garage for 32 Quarry High Street.  Erection of 2 storey rear extension for 28 Quarry High Street.

(2)       12/01341/CAC – Demolition of outbuildings and part stone wall.

Nick Worlledge presented the report to the Committee.

Objectors

Laurence Kelly (on behalf of Friends of Quarry and local residents) spoke against the application and made the following points:-

• The houses are the last remaining pair of Victorian cottages in Quarry;
• The last application was rejected at appeal for reason of large scale loss of garden land – and this still applied here;
• Over 32m of stone wall will have to be demolished and rebuilt, but the exact position is unclear;
• The proposed houses are close to neighbourhood boundaries;
• There is local pressure on parking, access and highway safety;
• Would prefer to see these properties repaired, with thriving gardens.

In favour

Malcolm Griffiths (Applicant) spoke in favour of the application and made the following points:-

• This is brown field, previously developed land;
• There has been consultation with the planners and conservation officer;
• The old wall will be retained and form part of the garage wall;
• The site will be landscaped, with existing trees kept and more planted;
• The parking area has been moved and will be behind the garage;
• Each house will have its own bin store;
• County highways have approved the access;
• The design is for high quality sustainable family homes;
• It complies with the new National Panning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Questions

The following information was provided by planning officers and the applicant in answer to questions from Councillors:-

• There will be a visibility splay at the entrance to the site, but it won’t be a bell-shaped junction;
• The old existing concrete garage will be demolished;
• The bin store will be behind the garage or on the individual  sites – the bins will be the responsibility of the home owners;
• The property at number 34 is on higher land, so that although the boundary wall is 2.2m tall on the site, it is not as tall for the neighbour;

Following discussion by the Committee and taking into consideration all submissions made, both written and oral, the Committee resolved to APPROVE the application, subject to conditions laid out in the planning officers report, and that the Head of City Dvelopment be authorised to issue the notice of permission.

The following dates are scheduled for meetings of this Committee:-

Tuesday 25^th September (please note change of day)

Wednesday 31^st October

Wednesday 28^th November

Wednesday 19^th December

Wednesday 30^th January 2013

Wednesday 27^th February

Wednesday 27^th march

Wednesday 24^th April

Wednesday 29^th May

Resolved to note the following dates:-

Wednesday 31^st October

Wednesday 28^th November

Wednesday 19^th December

Wednesday 30^th January 2013

Wednesday 27^th February

Wednesday 27^th March

Wednesday 24^th April

Wednesday 29^th May