The Committee considered a reserved matters application (22/00675/RES) (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for the erection of 317 dwellinghouses (Use Class C3) on the Canalside parcel of the Oxford North site located to the south of the A40 and north-west of Wolvercote.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·        Section 10.90 of the report outlined that a total of 3.01 biodiversity units were expected to be delivered, based on the net gain metric in the submitted biodiversity assessment.  The applicant had subsequently re-run the metric in response to a request from the Council’s Ecology Officer, and had confirmed that the extent of the biodiversity units would be higher, at 4.63 units, once the net gain to be delivered via the brown roofs on the site had been accounted for.

·        Three further public comments had been received following publication of the officer report.  Each of the representations had raised concerns about the developer’s capacity to meet the 5% biodiversity net gain target.  Concern had also been expressed about the potential impact of noise and air quality on future occupiers, and also the adequacy of mitigation measures in terms of building design.

·        The Planning Officer clarified that the applicant was required to deliver 5% biodiversity net gain across the entirety of the Oxford North project. 5% was not required within each of the reserved matters applications.  Where there was a shortfall in the estimated net gain, as was the case with this application, this would need to be met elsewhere on the site in the later phases of the development, or delivered off-site if required.  The strategy for biodiversity enhancements as outlined by the applicant would therefore not conflict with either the legal agreement or local or national policy.

·        The Council’s Ecology Officer had recommended inclusion of a condition requiring specifications for the brown roofs to be provided.  This was in order to ensure that the brown roofs delivered the required number of biodiversity units as outlined in the biodiversity strategy.

·        The hybrid application had been subject to extensive viability testing in terms of the percentage of affordable homes to be provided.  It had established a requirement for 35% of all the homes to be delivered as affordable units; 80% of which would be delivered as socially-rented homes.  The Section 106 agreement also outlined the required mix of affordable homes, and aligned with Policy H4 of the Oxford Local Plan. The percentage of affordable homes which would be delivered on the site, and the mix of these houses, would be fully compliant with these requirements and was considered to be acceptable.

·        The buildings fronting the A40 would be of a larger scale and height, as reflected in the height parameter plan and the design and access statement accompanying the hybrid permission.  The height of the flats was considered to be commensurate with the site context and the adjacency of the buildings to the A40, as well as the sizeable scale of development on the opposite side of the road and the employment buildings to be delivered on the central area of the Oxford North site.

·        A number of the submitted representations had related to the potential impact of noise and air pollution on the amenity of the occupiers of the flats.  The Planning Officer responded that it had always been intended that residential dwellings would be sited in this location on the site: whilst some of the homes had balconies which would face on to the A40, none of the units were solely dependent on their external amenity space facing the A40. The façade and glazing specification would achieve what was classed as acceptable living standards for future occupiers, and had been assessed by the Council’s Environmental Health team.  It was considered that future occupiers would not be exposed to unacceptable levels of noise disturbance, and the proposal was considered compliant with Policy RE8 of the Oxford Local Plan.

·        All of the units were compliant with the government’s nationally described space standards in terms of the size of the internal accommodation, and with Policy H15 of the Oxford Local Plan.

·        The proposal was considered to be fully compliant with the Oxford Local Plan, the Wolvercote Neighbourhood Plan and the NPPF, and for the reasons set out in the report approval of the application was recommended.

Andrew Siantonas, local resident, and Councillor Andrew Gant spoke against the application. Councillor Jo Sandelson had also registered to speak against the application but had been unable to due to illness.

Glynn Mutton, applicant, spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions on the details of the application, which were responded to by officers.  Discussion included the following:

·        As a reserved matters application, the principle of residential development at the site had already been established, as well as the nature of the development, and the percentage of affordable housing. The reserved matters application before the committee was solely for approval of the design, layout and tenure mix.

·        The affordable housing would be contained in two blocks on the site, rather than the ‘small clusters’ which the officer report had suggested.  However, it was acknowledged that social housing landlords and housing associations often preferred their properties to be in close proximity to each other for management purposes, and the ability to secure a registered social landlord to purchase the properties was important. It was therefore not considered that this should constitute a reason for refusal. 

·        Issues of concern relating to the application (for example, relating to boundary treatments, noise attenuation and drainage issues) had been addressed by way of conditions.

Having been proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application, subject to the addition of a condition requiring the applicant to submit a specification for the brown roofs.

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 an additional condition requiring the applicant to submit a specification for the brown roofs and grant reserved matters approval; and

2.    delegate authority to the Development Management Service Manager to finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report including such refinements, amendments, additions and / or deletions as the Development Management Service Manager considers reasonably necessary and issue the reserved matters approval.