The Committee considered an application (22/01712/FUL) for temporary change of use from general industrial use (Use Class B2) to storage and distribution (Use Class B8) for a period of 5 years at UYS Limited, Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2BW.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·         Section 1.1.2 of the report required amendment to clarify that authority to finalise conditions and issue the decision was to be delegated to the Acting Head of Planning Services (Development Management);

·         The building was currently vacant, and had been since UYS had left the site last year.  It had been marketed since September 2020, and no occupier had yet been found.  However, the marketing summary suggested that the majority of interest was from potential Class B8 occupiers;

·         Access to the site was only via the adjacent Unipart site, via a controlled security access point;

·         The building was a large industrial structure, housing 12,173 sqm of Class B2 floor space;

·         The building remains of a high standard and was capable of use for Class B2, or other Class B uses.  Parking for 135 cars was provided on the site, and this would be unaltered by the planning application;

·         The application site was located in the overall site allocation policy for Unipart, which was covered under policy SP7 of the Oxford Local Plan.  The site allocation was permissive in principle of Class B8 uses on the Unipart site;

·         Policy E1 of the Oxford Local Plan included a caveat that B8 uses would in general only be supported on employment sites where those uses supported existing employment operations on the site or Category 1 employment sites.  It was not intended that the temporary B8 use within this proposal would be in connection with Unipart or another Category 1 employment use, and on that basis the proposal did depart from Policy E1 of the Local Plan.  However, the site allocation for Unipart did not specifically require Class B8 uses on the site to be connected with Unipart or any other Category 1 employment use;

·         The change of use would enable use by a greater range of occupiers, increasing the likelihood that the building would be brought back into operation in the near future;

·         It was estimated that Class B8 use on the site would deliver 166 jobs.  This was slightly lower than the 313 employees who had worked for UYS on the site; however, the building was currently providing no employment at all whilst it remained vacant;

·         The application was for an intervening use, as the applicant had proposals to potentially develop the rear section of the Unipart site in the future, including the UYS building.  The building would revert to its existing B2 use after the recommended 5 years temporary planning permission, and therefore the site would not be permanently lost as high generating Class B2 space;

·         There would be no significant environmental issues resulting from the change of use in terms of noise or air quality.  Whilst there was likely to be a higher number of HGV vehicles associated with Class B8 use, the overall number of vehicle movements was likely to significantly decline, particularly during the peak hours, as a result of fewer staff commuting to the site.  There were no proposals to increase parking provision on the site;

·         Officers considered that there were significant economic benefits arising from improving the chance that the building could be re-used and brought back into use as an employment site, and for the reasons set out in the report approval of the application was recommended, subject to the condition shown in the report.

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 following:

·       Land which had been allocated within Policy STRAT 12 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan for residential development for the provision of 1800 homes lay to the south of the application site and not the east as set out in the report;

·       The range of use for the building was limited due to its location within the wider Unipart site.

On being proposed, seconded and put to the vote the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning 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 Acting Head of Planning Services (Development Management) to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Acting Head of Planning Services (Development Management) considers reasonably necessary and issue the decision.