Agenda item

Agenda item

21/02776/RES: Land At Barton, Northern By-pass Road, Oxford, OX3 9SD

Site Address:

Land at Barton, Northern By-pass Road, Oxford, Oxfordshire

Proposal:

Details of Reserved matters (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping) for Phase 2 and 4 of Barton Park pursuant to Condition 3 of outline planning permission 13/01383/OUT. These works comprise of residential units (Use Class C3) and commercial units (Use Class E) with associated public realm and highway works including landscaping, cycle and car parking.

Reason at Committee:

The proposal is a major development.

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 this report and grant approval to the reserved matters; and

2.             agree to delegate authority to the Head of Planning Services to:

·       Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary, and

·       Finalise the landscaping proposals, plans and planting schedule prior to the issue of the decision notice, and

·       Authorise the Head of Planning Services to agree the change in the affordable housing mix set out in the S106 agreement associated with application 13/01383/OUT in writing, to be issued with the decision notice, and issue the decision notice.

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered an application (21/02776/RES) for the approval of reserved matters in relation to layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for 434 residential units and a commercial centre following the grant of outline planning permission for Barton Park in 2013.

The Planning Officer presented the report and visualisations of the development, and provided the following updates:

·      Many matters had been agreed at outline stage in 2013, including parking and energy standards; the energy standards set in 2013 had been exceeded;

 

·      The size of the commercial centre had been reduced in scale since the approval of the indicative proposal;

 

·      The distribution of the affordable units had been split in order that they would be distributed more evenly throughout the development;

 

·      Since publication of the agenda, an objection had been received from Headington Heritage.  This had raised concerns that the officer’s report referred only to the official parking spaces which were proposed.  There was a concern that parking may take place in areas which were not designated for parking, thereby exceeding the maximum standards.  The officer’s response was that a condition could be added to require that no additional hardstanding was to be put down, and to remove permitted development rights to that effect in order to prevent additional parking spaces being created.

 

·      A request had been made that a legal agreement should be put in place to require that all sporting facilities should be available at all times.  The Planning Officer responded that the development referred to had been subject to a separate reserved matters application.  It would therefore not be appropriate to impose new restrictions on matters which were the subject of the application before the Committee.

 

·      A request had also been made that artificial sports pitches should be replaced with grass in order to increase run-off.  The Planning Officer reported that that had also been subject to a separate reserved matters application which was not before the Committee.  Having checked the drainage report, the Planning Officer advised that the synthetic pitch was of a porous construction, with attenuation tanks underneath serving the whole of Barton Park.

 

·      In relation to paragraph 10.53 of the report, the Planning Officer clarified that the Construction Environmental Management Plan for the whole of Barton Park had already been approved by condition.

 

·      In relation to paragraph 10.59 of the report, the Planning Officer clarified that a tree protection plan had been submitted and approved under the outline application.  No condition requiring a tree protection plan had therefore been included in the reserved matters application.

 

·      The original officer recommendation in the report had been to grant approval subject to the finalisation of landscape proposals, plans, and a planting schedule and to give officers delegated powers to finalise these prior to issuing the decision notice.  The Planning Officer clarified that revised landscaping plans had now been received and reviewed by officers.  Officers were of the view that they went a significant way towards addressing the lack of native species’ identified outside the greenways and pocket parks, and the further native species which had been included would provide additional biodiversity benefit.  Therefore, officers now recommended that the application should be approved in accordance with those plans, with no further requirement for delegated powers in that respect.

 

Mark Patt, representing Headington Heritage, spoke against the proposal.

 

Andy Barron, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in favour of the proposal.

 

The Committee asked questions of the officers about the details of the application.

 

In discussion the Committee considered various issues, which included the following:

 

·       The site was exempt from the ‘First Homes’ requirements due to the outline permission having been granted in 2013;

 

·       A footpath diversion may be required in order to allow the construction of some of the dwellings, subject to checking the exact route of the right of way.  Any diversion would need to be subject to a separate Footpath Diversion Order which would require public consultation;

 

·       The outline permission had included a larger retail area and the proposal no longer included a large supermarket.  As no minimum size threshold had been set at the time of approval of the outline application it was not possible to insist that the commercial centre should be of the larger size previously indicated.  The reduction in size of the commercial area did offer the potential for a larger number of homes to be delivered within the overall scheme.

 

·       The 40% affordable housing within the scheme would all be at social rent, with nomination rights to be given to the Council.

 

·       The parking standard had been reduced through pre-application discussions from 1.9 spaces per unit at the outline stage to 1.44 spaces per unit.  There was also a condition requiring details of the implementation of a controlled parking zone.  There was no scope to completely remove provision for car parking from the proposal due to the outline permission which had been granted in 2013.

 

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

 

After debate and being proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application subject to (i) the addition of a condition to remove permitted development rights for additional hardstanding; and (ii) approval of the application to be in accordance with the submitted revised landscaping plans.

 

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to:

 

1.    approve the application with the submitted revised landscaping plans for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 12 of the report and the addition of a condition to remove permitted development rights for additional hardstanding and grant approval to the reserved matters; 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; and

 

·        Authorise the Head of Planning Services to agree the change in the affordable housing mix set out in the S106 agreement associated with application 13/01383/OUT in writing, to be issued with the decision notice, and issue the decision notice.

Supporting documents: