Councillors Douglas and Corais left the room for this item and did not participate in determining the application.

The Committee considered an application (23/01198/FUL) for the demolition of existing Bingo Unit (Sui Generis, Classes E (b), (d), (e), (f), and (g) (i, ii or iii)); development of a new part-four/part-five storey (plus roof plant) building comprising laboratory and office space (Use Class E(g)) and a ground floor level commercial unit (Use Class E(a) or E(b)) with associated access road, public realm, hard and soft landscaping, cycle parking, EV charging, service yard, site infrastructure and associated works at Unit 1, Ozone Leisure Park, Grenoble Road, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·       Since publication of the report the Environment Agency had formally lifted their objection to the development, subject to three recommended conditions.  These were (i) that the development was carried out in accordance with the revised Flood Risk Assessment; (ii) there was no raising of the ground levels within the 1% annual exceedance probability flood extent and (iii) a requirement that no development took place within a 10m buffer zone of the Littlemore Brook.  Officers had agreed these and advised that these conditions should be attached to any permission in the event that Members were minded to approve the application.

·       A correction was required to the CIL payment figure in the report, to reflect that the building had not been in continuous occupation for at least 6 of the last 36 months.  The revised CIL liability would be £345,247.11.

·       The proposal involved the demolition of a unit previously occupied by a bingo hall attached to the Ozone leisure complex located at the Kassam Stadium site, and construction of a new five storey building housing 10,929 sqm of lab and office space.  The new building would be detached from the adjacent buildings in the Ozone leisure complex: the service road to the north would be removed and replaced by a new pedestrian and cycle access route between Minchery Lane and the Kassam Stadium, opening up a new route through the site and improving connectivity and permeability of movement.  Service access would be provided to the eastern side of the building where it adjoined the retained Ozone buildings.

·       Significant weight had been given to the fact that the existing building could be re-used for the proposed use under previously granted planning permission.  Therefore, the community use of the site as a bingo hall could not be afforded significant protection. Officers considered that this was a significant fallback position which represented a material justification to depart from Policy V7 of the Local Plan.

·       The site was not currently allocated for employment use in the Local Plan; however, it did adjoin the Oxford Science Park which was allocated, and the site lay within the Cowley Branch Line area of change.  Policy AOC7 promoted the development of high density employment uses within the Cowley Branch Line area of change.

·       The Ozone leisure complex had been allocated in the emerging Local Plan and the site policy allowed for commercial uses, albeit that that policy was afforded limited weight at the current time.

·       There was significant demand for additional life sciences use in the city, and the proposal would assist in meeting this demand by providing an expected 438 jobs as well as significant economic benefits.  The applicant had agreed to produce a community employment and procurement plan which would secure local employment and local services and supplies during the operational and construction phases of the development.  This would be secured via a S106 agreement.

·       The landscaping plan included new permeable paving to replace the service road; new areas of public realm; new planting; and biodiversity net gain which significantly exceeded the Council’s 5% policy (15.72% in terms of habitat units, 9.6% in terms of river units).

·       No increase in parking was proposed: a car park management would be needed in order to ensure that staff did not park within the existing wider parking associated with the Kassam Stadium.  A financial contribution was sought towards the Eastern Arc bus service and the Cowley Branch Line in order to promote sustainable travel to the site.

·       The proposed materials for the building were a mix of limestone with bronze-coloured aluminium cladding which were considered to be appropriate and of a high standard.  The building would exceed the 40% carbon reduction requirements outlined in the Local Plan.

·       It was considered that the proposals would involve a moderate level of less than substantial harm to the setting of the adjacent Grade II* listed Priory by virtue of the introduction of a building of a substantial scale which would further detract, alongside the existing buildings, from the setting of the Priory.  It had also been identified that there would be a low level of less than substantial harm to the setting of the Central Conservation Area by reason of the slight encroachment of the building and visual impact on views from St Mary’s Tower across the city.  However, in both instances whilst great weight had been given to the conservation of these designated heritage assets it was considered that the levels of harm caused would be outweighed by the very significant public benefits of the development as outlined in the report.

·       Officers recommended approval of the application for the reasons set out in the report, subject to the relevant conditions and the matters to be secured by legal agreement.

Raoul Veevers (agent) spoke in favour of the application.

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:

·       A Committee Member highlighted concern about the loss of the leisure facility, the potential effect on the leisure complex of the incremental loss of Class E facilities, and noted that the Kassam Stadium site was likely to involve re-development for housing in the future.  Whilst there was currently a shortage of lab and research space, other developments were coming forward to meet this need.

·       Another Committee Member commented that Oxford was one of few cities making a net positive contribution to the life sciences economy.  The location of the building near to the Science Park was appropriate.

·       The building was well-designed in terms of appearance, construction and efficiency.

On being proposed, seconded and put to the vote the Committee agreed with the officers’ recommendation to approve the planning application for the reasons set out in the report, subject to the conditions set out in the report and the three conditions required by the Environment Agency and a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the report.

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to:

1.             approve the application for the reasons given in the report subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 12 of the report and the three conditions required by the Environment Agency 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 which were set out in the report; and

2.             delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regulatory 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 and Regulatory Services considers reasonably necessary; and

·       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 detailed in the heads of terms set out in the 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 and Regulatory Services considers reasonably necessary; and

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