Councillor Mary Clarkson was elected Chair for the Council year 2023-24.

Councillor Alex Hollingsworth was elected Vice-Chair for the Council year 2023-24.

General

Councillor Upton declared that as a member and trustee of the Oxford Preservation Trust she had taken no part in that organisation’s discussions regarding the applications before the Committee.  Councillor Upton said 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.

23/00326/FUL

Councillor Fouweather stated that he had been a signatory to the call-in but was approaching the application with an open mind, would listen to all the arguments and weigh up all the relevant facts before coming to a decision.

22/00962/FUL

Councillor Clarkson stated that she lived near the application site, in Dunstan Road.  However, not sufficiently close as to be affected by the application.

Councillors Nala-Hartley and Altaf-Khan stated that they were former students of Ruskin College.  However, each declared that they had not taken part in any discussions with the College regarding the application.

Councillor Kerr joined the meeting late, and during consideration of the item declared that she had objected to the application on the grounds of a lack of cycle storage.   However, she was approaching the application with an open mind, would listen to all the arguments and weigh up all the relevant facts before coming to a decision.

The Committee considered an application (22/02849/FUL) for the development of land at Winchester, Banbury and Bevington Road for the provision of student accommodation through the construction of accommodation buildings, a new villa on Bevington Road and the conversion of 43-45 Banbury Road together with a student pavilion building, and academic accommodation building, maintenance and repair works to the conservatory at 59 Banbury Road and associated landscaping works including walls and railings to roadside frontages, electrical substation, associated ancillary accommodation, access, cycle parking, accessible parking and refuse and recycling facilities.

The Planning Officer provided the following updates and clarifications:

·       The applicant was both the University of Oxford and Hertford College.

·       The CIL amount shown in the report was incorrect, due to the way it had been reported and calculated.  Following an amended CIL form and calculation the correct figure was £784,457.

·       The Section 106 highways contribution had also been re-negotiated with the County Council.  The contribution was now proposed to be £100,000.

·       Since publication of the report three additional letters of representation had been received.  The issues raised related to conditions; impact on water and sewerage infrastructure; intensification of the site; the location of access points; traffic construction times and general noise.  All of the planning issues raised had been addressed in the officer’s report.  With regard to the use of conditions, planning policy guidance was clear that conditions could enhance the quality of development and enable development to proceed where it would otherwise have been necessary to refuse planning permission, by mitigating the adverse effects.  Therefore the use of planning conditions was a recognised way of dealing with planning issues.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·       The application sought planning permission for the redevelopment of land to the rear of Winchester Road, Banbury Road and Bevington Road in the north of Oxford. It sought to provide a new academic community, with the introduction of student accommodation and a new departmental building -Southeast Asian Studies Centre (SASC) - bringing together Hertford College, Kellogg College, Reuben College and Oxford School of Global and Area Studies (OSGA).

·       The proposed development would provide 130 new graduate student rooms for Hertford College, Kellogg College and Reuben College across 6 new buildings, together with the conversion and upgrade of the existing detached twin villa building at 43 - 45 Banbury Road.

·       Additional ancillary student facilities would also be provided, including a pavilion which would accommodate a reading room, recreation room and common room. The ground floor of 11 Winchester Road would be partially refurbished to provide a Porter’s Lodge, an accessible bedroom and staff facilities, replacing an existing bedroom and communal kitchen.

·       The site would provide 7 car parking spaces and 346 cycle spaces across the site.

·       The site was located within the North Oxford Conservation Area.  In addition, 59 Banbury Road and Gees Restaurant were Listed Buildings which were located within the setting of the proposed development.  Great weight had been given to preserving these heritage assets when determining the application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Committee considered an application (23/00326/FUL) for partial demolition of the existing building; erection of a three storey building to create 6 x 1 bed flats (Use Class C3); alterations to fenestration of the west elevation; provision of bin and bicycle stores; and alterations to landscaping and ancillary works at 39 South Parade, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·        There was a minor error in the officer’s report in that paragraphs 10.68 – 10.70 suggested that only part of the roof would be used for photovoltaic solar panels.  In fact, solar panels would be maximised over most of the roof.  The figures given in the report were correct, and the scheme was policy compliant with regard to energy efficiency measures.

·        The application was a resubmission of two previously refused applications (22/01994/FUL and (22/00393/FUL).  Application 22/00393/FUL had been the subject of an appeal decision, details of which were provided in the report.

Rosalind Philps (local resident) spoke against the application.

Nik Lyzba (agent) and Bruce Coburn (architect) spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions about the details of the application which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included, but were not limited to:

·      The new application sought to overcome the existing basis for the development being found to be unacceptable, as determined by the Planning Inspector.  The proposal before the Committee only significantly differed from the previous application with respect to the proposed rear staircase which would be enclosed, with light provided by high level windows only.

·      With the exception of the outstanding issue of privacy (which had now been addressed), the judgement of the Planning Inspector overrode all previous reasons for refusal.

·      There had been no material change to national or local planning policy since the Planning Inspector’s judgement, nor had anything factually changed on ground.  This application only significantly differed from the previous in respect of the proposed rear enclosed staircase, to deal with the privacy issue.  Refusal of this application risked the decision being appealed and under the circumstances discussed it was suggested that a refusal relating to the design and amenity impacts of the development would be unlikely to be upheld by a Planning Inspector with a further risk of costs being awarded against the Council.

On being proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application for the reasons set out in the report and subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved 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; and

2.      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.

The Committee considered an application (22/00962/FUL) for demolition of existing 24-bed student accommodation building (Bowen Building) and erection of 65 bed student accommodation building and erection of 30 bed student accommodation building with associated landscaping at Ruskin Hall, Dunstan Road, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·        The scheme would provide 95 rooms, representing a net gain of 71 student rooms, on a site which was allocated for student accommodation.  The new accommodation would also be of a higher standard than that currently provided within the Bowen building.

·        The proposal followed a series of identical applications for the proposed new student blocks.  The principle of the development had therefore been previously established and accepted in principle.

·        A representation had been received subsequent to the publication of the report which had referred to part of the land to the north of the site being designated as peat.  The Planning Officer clarified that whilst this had been the case in the past, updated British Geological Survey mapping had changed this designation.  However, the applicant had nonetheless worked with officers and the Lead Local Flood Authority to move the attenuation tank out of that zone.  Officers were therefore satisfied that there would be no harm, and that the applicant had done as much as was necessary, with regard to sustainable drainage.

·        Correction was required to the percentage figures provided at paragraph 10.100 of the report in relation to carbon reduction, due to errors in the modelling.  However, the development was still policy compliant.  Block A would achieve carbon reduction of 41.3% against a 2021 Part L compliant baseline.  The figure for Block B was 54.4%.

·        There was considered to be a level of less than substantial harm in terms of reducing the glimpsed views of the crinkle crankle wall and the parkland setting to the listed building (The Rookery), and also to the character and appearance of the Old Headington Conservation Area by reducing the sense of a house within a parkland setting.  However, the public benefits of the scheme, including the provision of housing for students and meeting the College’s needs for their full-time students; increasing biodiversity; provision of sustainable buildings; and increasing tree canopy were considered to outweigh the harm that would be caused to the significance of heritage assets in this case.  Conditions had been included to prevent harm to the Sequoia tree, and further to original objections there was now policy compliant cycle parking.  Officers were also satisfied that there would be no harm caused by overlooking of the Rookery Villa.

David Ramsey (agent) spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions about the details of the application, which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included, but were not limited to:

·        Parking of cars on the campus driveway and in Stoke Place was currently an issue for local residents.  Officers were requested to include wording within the conditions to the effect that parking should only be permitted within designated parking spaces.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Recommendation: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 18 April 2023 as a true and accurate record.

The Committee resolved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 18 April 2023 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:

20 June 2023

18 July 2023

15 August 2023

19 September 2023

17 October 2023

21 November 2023

The Committee noted the dates of future meetings.