Councillors Chapman and Hollingsworth left the meeting room. 

The Committee considered an application (24/00318/FUL) for the erection of 24 dwellings on Land North of Goose Green Close, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and provided the following updates and clarifications:

·        An additional obligation would be included within the section 106 agreement to secure the public open space.

·        Paragraphs 2.6 and 10.26 mentioned paragraph 136 of the NPPF, although these should refer to paragraph 152.

·        The application was for a residential development consisting of 24 dwellings, vehicle and pedestrian access, and the provision of public open space.  The site location comprised undeveloped greenfield land, in the south west corner of the Oxford North site as defined in the Northern Gateway Area Action Plan.

·        The development site and adjoining land at Oxford North was not allocated within the Local Plan but fell within the parameters of the Oxford Northern Gateway Area Action Plan (AAP).  The quantum of homes proposed would be four dwellings higher than the quantum permitted under Policy NG2 of the AAP.  The departure from policy was considered acceptable in this instance as the additional four dwellings would not have a harmful impact in terms of wider environmental effects or any other negative effects such as heritage or amenity impacts.

·        50% of the proposed dwellings would be affordable, split into 9 social rented and 3 First Homes, which was considered acceptable.  The overall housing mix was also considered acceptable.

·        To negotiate the difference in land levels between the northern and southern section of the site, a combination of stepped and ramped accesses was proposed which would provide a level access and a DDA compliant pedestrian and cycle connection between the site and Wolvercote.

·        The proposals included an extension of the Canalside park, with c 53% of the total site area given over to public space.

·        Officers considered that the landscape design for the space would be an attractive asset for existing and future residents and that the proposals would comply with Local Plan policies in this regard.

·        Officers considered that the proposed layouts of the house types would be compliant with national minimum space standards and would be acceptable in terms of the overall designs and layouts.  The design, scale and setting of the layout would have no detrimental impact on the amenity of existing occupiers nor on future occupiers within the Canalside development.

·        A total of 18 allocated car parking spaces and 2 visitor spaces would be provided.  In plots 1-12 the parking would be provided within integral garages and for the remaining houses parking would be provided in bays adjoining the street through the site.  160 cycle parking spaces were also proposed.

·        The development would lead to a very low level of less than substantial harm to the heritage asset of the setting of the Conservation Area.  The public benefits of the proposal would be the provision of 24 new homes and 12 affordable homes, the provision of high quality public space, enhancements to pedestrian and cycle connectivity, and delivery of a 5% biodiversity net gain.  Officers considered that the public benefits of the development would outweigh the very low level of less than substantial harm.

·        The proposal was recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in the report and the completion of a legal agreement as set out in the report and with an additional obligation to secure the public open space.

Vicky Trietline and Laurence Kendrick (joint applicants) spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions about the detail of the report which were responded to by the applicants and the agent.  The Committee’s discussions included, but were not limited to:

·        It would have been desirable to have less segregation between the housing tenure types and the distribution of parking spaces between the affordable and open market housing.

·        The benefits of the affordable housing to be provided were significant.

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 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 are set out in this report and an additional obligation to secure the public open space; 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.