General

Councillor Cook stated that as a Council appointed trustee for the Oxford Preservation Trust and as a member of the Oxford Civic Society, he had taken no part in those organisations’ discussions or decision making regarding the applications before the Committee. He said that he was approaching all of the applications with an open mind, would listen to all the arguments and weigh up all the relevant facts before coming to a decision.

Councillor Upton stated that as a Council appointed trustee for the Oxford Preservation Trust and a member of the Oxford Civic Society, she had taken no part in those organisations’ discussions or decision making regarding the applications before the Committee and that she was approaching the applications with an open mind, would listen to all the arguments and weigh up all the relevant facts before coming to a decision.

Councillor Smowton stated that he was a member of the campaigning group Oxford YIMBY, but was not aware that the group had taken any stances on these applications and he was approaching the applications with an open mind.

21/01255/FUL

Councillor Upton stated that she had called the application in to committee but she had expressed no view on the application and had not made her mind up on the matter and approached it with an open mind.

Councillor Smowton stated that he intended to submit a personal planning application for the installation of photovoltaic plates at his own property and for that reason he would not take part in the consideration of the application before the committee and would leave the meeting.

Proposal:                        Conversion of No.78 Banbury Road to office and teaching (Use Class E/ F1) in association with No.76 Banbury Road headquarters building. Demolition of existing swimming pool and studio and erection of a new office building and hall to the rear of Nos.76 and 78 Banbury Road. Demolition of existing to garage No.78 and erection of a 1 x 3-bed dwelling (Use Class C3). Demolition of the existing extensions between Nos.76 and 78 Banbury Road and erection of new link extension to form new entrance and reception. Alterations to existing car park to create an enclosed courtyard and alterations to landscaping.           

Reason at Committee:     Called in by Called in by Councillors Wade, Goddard, Landell Mills, R Smith and ex-councillors Garden and Harris.

Recommendation:

The Oxford City 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 the report and grant planning permission;

2.     agree to delegate authority to the 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 Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary; and

·       issue the planning permission.

The Committee considered an application (20/02417/FUL) for planning permission for demolitions, conversion and re-development at Nos.76 and 78 Banbury Road to provide offices, meeting rooms, multi-purpose hall and general facilities in conjunction with No.76 Banbury Road that is currently occupied by the Ravi Zacharias International Ministries Trust (RZIM) as their office headquarters. Also provision of a new replacement 3 bed residential dwelling in lieu of the converted No.78 Banbury Road.

The application was before the Committee as it had been called in by Councillors Wade, Goddard, Landell Mills, R Smith and ex-councillors Garden and Harris.

The Planning Officer presented the report. She advised the Committee that she proposed to revise the wording of Condition 5 to address concerns raised about parking controls (proposed changes shown in italics):

Condition 5: The development shall not be brought into use until the car parking area has been be constructed and laid out in accordance with the revised site plan drawing no.6.3.0a showing car parking for the development.  Thereafter the areas shall be retained solely for the purpose of the parking of vehicles in relation to the occupiers of Nos.76 and 78 Banbury Road only.  and There shall be no parking spaces for the residential dwelling at any time and for the avoidance of doubt this shall include any occupier associated with and/or employed by and/or under a leasehold or any other form of rental agreement with the main occupier of No.76 and 78 Banbury Road or as freeholder of the new dwelling hereby approved.

Mr Philip Green, representing the Linton Road Neighbourhood Association spoke against the application. 

Mr Ian Smith and Mr Arthur Smith, representing the applicant, spoke in favour of the application.

In discussion the Committee explored the implications of the development on the local area in terms of traffic levels, parking and road safety, noting the concerns raised by local residents and by the public speaker but acknowledging that these matters would be addressed by conditions and that the Highways Authority, as the statutory consultee, had raised no objections to the proposed development.

The Committee also considered the detailed design features of some elements of the proposed development; the impact of the development on the conservation area; and sought clarity on the proposals to use the “multifunctional hall” for community events and weddings.

In reaching its decision, the Committee considered all the information put before it.

After debate and on being proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application subject to the amendment to the wording of Condition 5 as detailed above and the inclusion of a further condition to secure details of measures to close the unused existing accesses on to the Banbury Road to ensure the proposed one way system through the site between Banbury Road and Bardwell Road. Such mitigation measures would also reduce confusion of which access to use and should ensure that there was ready access to the site to avoid the Banbury Road becoming a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Proposal:                        Insertion of photovoltaic plates to roof.

Reason at Committee:    This application was called in by Councillors Clarkson, Pressel, Fry, Munkonge, Rowley, Upton and Bely-Summers, for reasons of balancing the harm to a designated heritage asset against the benefits of renewable energy.

Recommendation:

The Oxford City Planning Committee is recommended to:

1.     Refuse the application for the reasons given in paragraph 1.1.2 of the report and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning Service to:

·       finalise the reasons for refusal including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary.

The Committee considered an application (21/01255/FUL) for planning permission for the installation of 18no. photovoltaic plates to the roof slopes of the application site.

The application was before the Committee as it had been called in by Councillors Clarkson, Pressel, Fry, Munkonge, Rowley, Upton and Bely-Summers.

The Planning Officer presented the report.

In reaching its decision, the Committee considered all the information put before it and noted the reasons for refusal as detailed in the officer report and appendices.

In discussion the Committee reflected on the challenge of determining individual planning applications for this type of development whilst balancing the requirements of local and national planning policies particularly in respect of the protection of conservation areas and designated heritage assets and the great weight to be afforded to that against the Council’s ambition to create a Zero Carbon Oxford by 2040 and the personal desire of local residents to address the climate emergency and the different ways that could be achieved.

After debate and on being proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to:

1.    Refuse the application for the reasons given in paragraph 1.1.2 of the report and stated below and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning Service to:

·         finalise the reasons for refusal including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary.

The reason for refusal was as follows:

The photovoltaic panels proposed to the eastern and southern roof slopes facing Boults Lane, by reason of their design, number, mass and siting, would result in the cluttering of the roofscape and appearance of the building. The proposal would be out of keeping with the surrounding area and detrimental to the character and appearance of the Old Marston Conservation Area, resulting in less than substantial harm that would not be outweighed by any public benefits. The application would be contrary to Policies DH1 and DH3 of the Oxford Local Plan, the NPPF, and Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Recommendation: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 15 June 2021 as a true and accurate record.

The Committee resolved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 15 June 2021 as a true and accurate record.

Items currently expected to be considered by the committee at future meetings are listed for information. This is not a definitive list and applications may be added or removed at any point. These are not for discussion at this meeting.

The Committee noted the list of forthcoming applications.

Future meetings of the Committee are scheduled at 6.00pm on:

The Committee noted the dates of the future meetings.