The Committee considered an outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for up to 121 dwellings and a care home, including open space and green infrastructure at Land at Bayswater Farm, Bayswater Farm Road, Oxford.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·        The application site was a 7.16 hectare area of land located to the north of Sandhills, consisting primarily of undeveloped fields with a rural character.  A public right of way ran through the site from east to west.  The application site crossed the boundaries of both the Oxford City and South Oxfordshire district administrative areas, with the vast majority of the site lying within the South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) area.

·        Approval was sought for all matters reserved except for the proposed means of access into the site from Delbush Avenue and Burdell Avenue.  The Planning Officer highlighted that it was only in the Council’s remit to determine the acceptability of those parts of the development which fell within the city council’s administrative area; this included cumulative impacts such as the impact of traffic generation.

·        A separate application had been submitted to SODC, which had been refused on 10 grounds.  A copy of the delegated decision report from SODC, including the reasons for refusal, was included in the agenda pack.

·        The development site was included in the SODC Local Plan under site allocation STRAT13.  The parcel of land which formed the subject of this application was part of the larger Bayswater Brook allocation.  This was the subject of joint planning applications submitted to OCC and SODC for 1450 homes, 20 assisted living units and commercial and community uses.  The site policy did not specify the number of homes which should be provided within the parcel of land which comprised the development site.

·        SODC had confirmed within its delegated decision report that the application complied with the adopted South Oxfordshire Local Plan in terms of the principle of development and the acceptability of the site for housing.  However, South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse District Councils were in the process of developing a joint Local Plan (JLP) which was currently under consultation.  This recommended that the site be de-allocated, primarily on the basis of the suitability of obtaining access into the site.  However, the Planning Officer advised that the South and Vale JLP was not at a sufficiently advanced stage to afford it weight when assessing the merits of this planning application at the current time.

·        The proposal would require the removal of a single large, mature Norway Maple tree in order to facilitate access into the wider site beyond the City Council’s boundary.  Owing to the loss of the tree and the lack of suitable mitigation it was considered that the development would be contrary to policy G7 of the Oxford Local Plan.

·        The County Council had advised, in respect of both accesses and the impact on surrounding roads leading to the site, that there was no provision for on-street cycling infrastructure.  As such, the development would also be contrary to policies M1 and M2 of the Oxford Local Plan and the relevant paragraphs on the NPPF.

·        The report outlined several issues which had been raised by County highways officers in respect of the methodology which had been applied in the transport assessment in terms of: how the trip generations were assessed; assessment methodology; and highways impact assessment.  For the reasons which were covered in detail in the report, it was considered that the transport assessment could not be relied upon and therefore it had not been demonstrated that the proposal would not have a severe impact on the surrounding road network.  Therefore it was considered to be contrary to policies M1 and M2 of the Oxford Local Plan and relevant provisions of the NPPF on that basis also.

·        Whilst the public benefits of the scheme – in particular the provision of housing – were acknowledged, officers did not consider that this would outweigh the overriding harm in respect of the impact on highways safety, lack of suitable access and the removal of the mature tree.  The application was therefore recommended for refusal for the reasons outlined in the report.

Reuben Bellamy (for the applicant) spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions about the details of the application which were responded to by officers.

On being proposed, seconded and put to the vote the Committee agreed with the officers’ recommendation to refuse the application for the reasons given in the report.

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to:

1.      Refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1.       The applicant has not provided sufficient detail for the proposed accesses off Delbush Avenue and Burdell Avenue to demonstrate the proposed accesses provide safe and suitable access into the site for all users and modes of transport. As such the proposed development is not in accordance with policies M1, M2 and DH1 of the Oxford Local Plan 2016-2036 and paragraph 114 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.       The highways impact assessment has not been undertaken in accordance with the Highway Authority's adopted 'Implementing 'Decide & Provide': Requirements for Transport Assessments (September 2022), whereby highway impacts resulting from this development cannot be fully assessed. As such, any proposed highway mitigation may fail to deliver appropriate off-site infrastructure that mitigates the highway impacts of the proposal. The proposed development therefore is not in accordance with policies M1 and M2 of the Oxford Local Plan 2016-2036, paragraphs 108 and 114 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy 36 of the Oxfordshire Local Transport and Connectivity Plan 2022-2050.

3.       The proposals fail to fully provide for safe and suitable off-site walking and cycling provision in accordance with LTN 1/20. Without these modes of transport suitably facilitated, the occupants of the site will be encouraged to rely on the private car for access to services and facilities. The proposed development therefore does not represent sustainable development and is contrary to policies M1 and M2 of the Oxford Local Plan 2016-2036 paragraphs 114 and 116 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies 1, 2,18 of the Oxfordshire Local Transport and Connectivity Plan 2022-2050.

4.       In the absence of agreed heads of terms for and the subsequent completion of a Section 106 legal agreement, the proposed development fails to secure infrastructure necessary to meet the needs of the development. As such the proposal is contrary to Policies S2, M1 and M2 of the Oxford Local Plan 2016-2036.

5.       The proposals would result in the loss of a prominent, mature tree which provides an important contribution to the character and visual amenity of the streetscape, public rights of way and the local landscape setting. The proposals would be contrary to Policy G7 of the Oxford Local Plan 2016-2036 and Paragraphs 136 and 180 of the NPPF.

2.      Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regulatory Services to:

·       finalise the recommended reasons for refusing the application 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.