The City Executive Board (CEB) on 16 October would be asked to approve the Annual Monitoring Report 2016/17 for publication. This item provided an opportunity for the Scrutiny Committee to make recommendations to the Board.

The Board Member for Planning and Regulatory Services, Councillor Hollingsworth, Rebekah Knight (Planner) and Mark Jaggard (Planning Policy and Design, Conservation and Trees Manager) joined the meeting for this item.

Councillor Hollingsworth spoke to the report which fulfilled a statutory requirement and encompassed a wide range of indicators, particularly prominent amongst which, in the context of the City, were the data in relation to student accommodation. In discussion the following points were made, among others, under the successive Corporate Priority headings.

A Vibrant and Sustainable Economy

The target for permissions given for new “B1” employment floor space had been exceeded. This was largely attributed to building in the Oxford Science Park (and so contributing to the City’s economic strength). Noted that the number of permissions given for commercial development were more volatile over time than those for housing. It would therefore be sensible to reconfigure targets for this as a rolling average over time rather that have absolute annual ones.

Meeting Housing Needs

While there was a shortfall in the number of houses built as against the target, in percentage terms it was very small. The progress against this measure was agreed, overall, to have been a very positive one, with the shortfall attributable, almost exclusively, to the after effects of the 2007/8 financial crisis.

The indicator for house building trajectory was rated as green, notwithstanding the shortfall in the target, in the confident anticipation of developments known to be in train.

Increases in the number of houses in an area did not improve the ratio of average income to average house prices (ie they did not become more affordable) as starkly evidenced by the data given in relation to Cambridge. A previous study did however show that increased housing supply did slow the rate of house price inflation.

In relation to the section on student accommodation agreed that the commentary should be expanded to reference the overall trajectory of  student numbers.

Strong and Active Communities

Indicator 21 describes progress against targets in relation to each priority regeneration area. While Littlemore is recognised on the basis of national indicators as being an area with particularly high levels of need, it is not identified as one of the five priority areas for regeneration identified in the Core Strategy and does not therefore feature in this section of the report.

A Clean and Green Oxford

Consideration should be given to removing Indicator 30 (Appeals allowed where conservation polices are cited as a reason for refusal) next year as the associated target of 80% is of limited value given very low numbers of appeals.

In relation to indicator 27, the Committee heard from the Board Member that “Green Belt” designation was never given in perpetuity, it was subject to regular review and could be both granted and taken away. The use of the word ‘permanently’ in relation to this indicator was therefore misleading.

Efficient and Effective

There were comments on this section

The Committee had no substantive recommendations  to make to the CEB, save the need to make the small textual amendment in relation to student numbers described above.

The Chair thanked the Board Member and officers for their contribution to the discussion.