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 any of the applications before the Committee.  Councillor Upton stated that 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.

23/02411/FUL

Councillors Henwood, Upton and Clarkson eachdeclared that they were a member of Cyclox, which had commented on the application.  These Councillors each declared that they had had no discussion with Cyclox relating to the application or the comments submitted.

The Committee considered an application (23/02411/FUL) for the erection of accommodation for boarding pupils to include access, landscaping, associated bin/recycling stage, cycle storage and associated development at land north of Charlbury Road, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·      A further representation had been received following the publication of the officer’s report which had been circulated to committee members.  This had covered matters relating to the statutory consultation period carried out on amended plans; the drainage strategy; flood risk assessment; and consultation with the Environment Agency. 

·      The Planning Officer clarified that amendment had been made to the red line site location plan and the site plan and this had been re-advertised for a period of 21 days starting on 10 June.  The consultation period had therefore now expired.  Amendments were made to other statutory reports on 28 June; however, these changes were only to correct the red line plan on technical reports such as the drainage strategy.  They were therefore considered to be immaterial when considering the merits of the application.  Officers were satisfied that no development was proposed outside of the red line area and that all parties had been given appropriate notice.

·      The drainage strategy did not rely on drainage into the western ditch, which was not within the red line area of the site.  Fencing could be provided within the application site to provide separation between the development site and the adjoining Cherwell School.  Officers were satisfied that the development would not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere, and this view was shared by the County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority.  The Environment Agency had also been consulted on the application but had chosen not to issue formal comments, referring instead to its standing guidance. 

·      The application proposed removal of the existing tennis courts and development of three buildings to provide pupil boarding accommodation for 120 pupils within 81 rooms for use by Wychwood School.  The accommodation would include a mix of shared and single rooms.  Three staff flats (one two-bedroomed flat in each building) were also proposed.  Parking would be provided for 7 vehicles, with access from Charlbury Road to the south.  The applicant had agreed to a financial contribution of £150,000, to be secured by a Section 106 agreement, to mitigate the loss of the tennis courts: this would be directed to existing publicly accessible tennis provision in north Oxford at either Cutteslowe Park or Alexandra Park.  This was considered to be an enhancement in terms of wider sports provision relative to the existing tennis courts at the site which were under the private ownership of the school and was therefore considered to be in accordance with Policy G5 of the Oxford Local Plan and Policy HCS3 of the Summertown and St Margaret’s Neighbourhood Plan.

·      A site management plan would be secured by legal agreement.  This would be a key document in managing the potential impact on residential amenity, including management of the use of outside spaces and use  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

The Committee considered an application (24/00732/FUL) for the development of up to 22,375sqm open storage (Use Class B8) together with associated highways works, site-wide hard and soft landscaping works, and boundary treatment at UYS Ltd, Garsington Road, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·       The application site was located in the north of the Unipart site, with access only through the Unipart site via Transport Way and Garsington Road.

·       The surrounding development consisted of large industrial warehousing and buildings associated with use by Unipart; the nearest residential dwellings were to the northeast at Horspath, over 200m from the site.  The surrounding land to the east consisted of open agricultural land.  The Northfields residential site allocation, within south Oxfordshire District, lay to the south of the Unipart buildings.  Visibility of the site from the surrounding landscape was limited.

·       The building had been unused since 2021 when UYS had vacated the premises.  Planning permission had previously been granted for a temporary Class B8 storage use: the existing building fell under a Class B2 light industrial use but marketing had indicated a level of interest in use of the building for storage purposes.  Permission had also been granted for urgent repair and refurbishment works to the building.  Despite this, firm interest in use of the building had not materialised.

·       The application before the committee sought temporary planning permission (7 years) for open air storage on the site, to be located on both the existing hardstanding below the former UYS building and on the car parking.  The application site fell within the former Unipart employment allocation in the Oxford Local Plan which allowed for Class B8 storage uses on the site, although as noted in the report there was a contradiction with Policy E1 of the Oxford Local Plan which was not permissive of storage and distribution uses on allocated employment sites, apart from where such use was necessary to support existing uses.

·       The applicant’s intention was to redevelop the site in the longer term, subject to delivering improvements to the existing access arrangements.  This application would therefore allow for a ‘meanwhile’ storage use whilst still retaining potential for long term, more permanent, redevelopment in order to generate employment opportunities.  Officers considered that this was preferable to the site remaining vacant for an extended period; the departure in technical terms from Policy E1 of the Oxford Local Plan was therefore considered to be justified, particularly as the proposal was compliant with the wider provisions of the Oxford Local Plan and the NPPF.

·       A total of six car parking and two cycle parking spaces were proposed on the site.  The proposal would involve a substantial reduction in forecast vehicle movements and so was considered to be acceptable in terms of access, highway safety and highway amenity terms.  It was also likely to have a reduced impact on adjoining properties in terms of noise than the former UYS building.

·       Provision had been made in the plans to secure biodiversity net gain of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Recommendation: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 25 June 2024 as a true and accurate record.

The Committee resolved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 25 June 2024 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 August 2024

17 September 2024

15 October 2024

19 November 2024

10 December2024

21 January 2025

The Committee noted the dates of future meetings.