The Committee considered an application (21/03582/FUL) for conversion and partial redevelopment of the Oxford Deaf and Hard of Hearing Centre to create a hotel (Use Class C1) with ancillary community facility venue.  The proposal included the retention, refurbishment and repair of the principal Grade II listed building (10 Littlegate Street); conversion, refurbishment and repair of the former Baptist Chapel building; demolition of side and rear extensions (10a and 10b Littlegate Street); erection of a four storey side extension and part 2/4 storey rear extension; provision of hard / soft landscaping; installation of green / blue roofs and green walls; and provision of 2 no. accessible car parking spaces (with EV charging points) and staff / guest cycle parking.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.  In addition to the information presented at the 19 July meeting this also included new information relating to consideration of paragraph 187 of the NPPF and policy V7 of the Oxford Local Plan 2036 in relation to noise breakout as had been requested by the Committee.

The following was highlighted:

·        A noise breakout assessment had been submitted, which included proposed insulation and secondary glazing to ensure adequate noise insulation for the hotel bedrooms.  This would not affect the fabric of the listed building.

·        A further 33 objection comments had been received since the July Committee meeting.  These broadly related to: concern that a live music venue would be lost; a reduction in the amount of parking; a lack of reference to live music in the application submission; lack of an operation and management plan for a live music venue, or a separate servicing plan; lack of benchmark analysis about how the live music venue had been run previously and whether this could continue in the same manner; concern that the capacity of the venue would be reduced from 150 to 100 people; concern that the opening hours of the hotel would not match those expected for a live music venue in the community hall; bar and licensing arrangements; concern that a Section 106 agreement could be modified or discharged after 5 years; concern that the whole of the site would no longer be designated for a community use; comment that noise from the music venue disturbing local residents was not a material planning consideration, live music had not disturbed local residents in the past; comment that new developments should protect themselves from external noise sources and restrictions should not be put on the venue; concern that the building could not be adequately insulated; concern that the committee would have made its decision before noise breakout testing was carried out; and concern that Planning Officers could not impose restrictions on licensing.

·        The Planning Officer reported that there had not previously been any community access agreement for the site, and the letting of the hall for community use had been at the choice of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing charity.  Officers were seeking to improve public access to the facility by securing a community access agreement via a Section 106 agreement.  Whilst it appeared that the objectors wanted more of the site, or the entire site, to be retained as a community facility officers felt that this would not be viable.  The unviability of the hall had contributed to the reason for the site not currently being in use and having been put up for sale, as letting out the hall did not generate sufficient income to maintain it thus an enabling development was required.  The proposed hotel use would ensure a viable income for the site which would mean that the hall could be brought back into use and let out at an affordable rate, comparable to Council-owned halls.

·        The Planning Officer advised that the update report referred to the heads of terms for the S106 agreement.  These could be found at paragraph 3.1 of the original committee report which was appended to the update report.

Councillor Smith arrived during the course of this item and so did not take part in the debate or vote on this application.

Gregory Owen and Glenda Huish spoke against the application.

Philip Atkins, acting on behalf of Z Hotels and Craig Crowley, CEO of Action Deafness, spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee’s discussions included, but were not limited to, the following:

·         There was a process whereby the owner of the land could, after five years, apply to modify or discharge a Section 106 agreement.  The decision would be taken by the Council, who could decline the request if it was felt that there was a need for the Section 106 to continue.  If this decision were then appealed, the Secretary of State could decide to hold a hearing or a public inquiry at which members of the public would be able to make representations.  However, it was important to note that if there were good reason for the Section 106 agreement not to be discharged then the Council would not agree to it, and the Secretary of State would be likely to take the same stance.

·         The proposal involved a reduction in car parking to two disabled parking spaces.  The removal of the current informal car park would allow for landscaping in front of the listed building so as to improve its setting and would allow the creation of 10 cycle spaces.  The reduction in the amount of parking was in line with Local Plan policies; additionally, the Highways Authority considered that the level of provision for deliveries and servicing could be met on street for the needs of the site.

·         Specifications relating to the management, advertisement and fee hire of the community facility could be included within the Section 106 agreement for a community use agreement. This would be based on arrangements for other community facilities within the city and would be subject to monitoring by the Council.   Z Hotels had indicated that it would be responsible for managing the bookings and promoting the availability of the facility, under the supervision of the hotel’s General Manager.  Z Hotels had also indicated that it did not wish to use the hall, and the Section 106 agreement was being drafted on the basis that it would be solely for community use.

·         Indicative details relating to public art and revealing the significance of the archaeology of the site had been submitted.  Submission and approval of further details had been included as a condition. 

·         The proposal would bring back into use a building which was under-used and in poor condition.

After debate and being proposed, seconded, and put to the vote the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application as set out in the report, subject to planning conditions and the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers.

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 5 of the report and grant planning permission subject to:

·     the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers to secure the planning obligations set out in the recommended heads of terms shown in the original committee report; and

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

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

·    finalise the recommended legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers as set out in the report including refining, adding to, amending and / or deleting the obligations defined in the heads of terms set out in the original committee report (including to dovetail with and where appropriate reinforce the final conditions and informatives to be attached to the planning permission) as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary; and

·    complete the Section 106 legal agreement referred to above and issue the planning permission.