The Director of Planning and Regulation has submitted a report to approve the Proposed Submission Draft Oxford Local Plan 2045 for submission to the Secretary of State for formal examination.

 

Recommendation: That Council resolves to:

1.       Authorise submission of the Oxford Local Plan 2045 to the Secretary of State for examination, including the minor amendments made according to recommendation 3;

2.       Approve all the supporting statutory documentation including the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitats Regulation Assessment, Infrastructure Development Plan (IDP), Policies Map, Regulation 18 Consultation Statement, Regulation 19 Consultation Statement and Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendices 2-7 & 9);

3.       Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to make any necessary minor editorial corrections to the Submission Draft Oxford Local Plan 2045, IDP, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulation Assessment, Policies Map, and to agree the supporting evidence base prior to submission;

4.       Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to invite the examining inspector(s) to recommend any modifications considered to be necessary in accordance with section 20(7C) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

 

 

Council resolved to:

1.            Authorise submission of the Oxford Local Plan 2045 to the Secretary of State for examination, including the minor amendments made according to recommendation 3;

2.            Approve all the supporting statutory documentation including the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitats Regulation Assessment, Infrastructure Development Plan (IDP), Policies Map, Regulation 18 Consultation Statement, Regulation 19 Consultation Statement and Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendices 2-7 & 9);

3.            Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to make any necessary minor editorial corrections to the Submission Draft Oxford Local Plan 2045, IDP, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulation Assessment, Policies Map, and to agree the supporting evidence base prior to submission;

4.            Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to invite the examining inspector(s) to recommend any modifications considered to be necessary in accordance with section 20(7C) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The Director of Planning and Regulation had submitted a report to approve the Proposed Submission Draft Oxford Local Plan 2045 for submission to the Secretary of State for formal examination. 

 

Councillor Railton introduced the report, noting that Council is asked to agree the draft Oxford Local Plan 2025 such that it can be submitted for examination. It was emphasised that this request would only be made if the plan is deemed to be sound and legally compliant.  

 

Councillor Railton provided a summary of the plan’s development, including the reg 18 consultation in the summer of 2025, the following reg 19 consultation, Council’s previous approval of the plan in January 2026, and a judicial review process due to an injunction against submission of the plan. Members were informed that the hearing for the injunction will take place in October, and following this the plan must be submitted by 31 December 2026, otherwise the full process will have to be restarted. If this deadline is not met, Councillor Railton highlighted that the Council would be left with an out-of-date plan and several years of work unused.  

 

Council were also informed that the Planning Inspectorate had advised the Council not to make modifications to the plan at this stage ahead of submission as it is preferred that any main modifications are identified during the inspection process. Councillor Railton emphasised that it is for the Planning Inspectorate to determine the soundness of the plan.  

 

Councillor Brown seconded the report and reserved her right to speak until the end of the debate. 

 

The Lord Mayor informed Council of the submission of a proposed amendment to the Local Plan. 

 

Councillor Brown noted on behalf of herself and other cabinet members that due to representations received from the claimant’s solicitor on the day of this meeting in relation to the judicial review, Councillor Turner, Councillor Linda Smith, Councillor Munkonge, Councillor Upton, and Councillor Chapman would not be participating in the debate on the amendment due to current or historic roles as shareholder of the Council. Council heard that advice had been taken from the Monitoring Officer and despite feeling that they could approach the debate with an open mind, the progression of the local plan is crucial. Councillor Brown emphasised that they would leave, despite not considering themselves to be predetermined or conflicted. 

 

Councillor Henwood also noted that under the Monitoring Officer’s advice, he and Councillor Stares would also leave the chamber for the duration of the debate on the amendment.  

 

Before leaving, the Lord Mayor proposed that Councillor Rowley resume the role of the Chair for the duration of the debate on the amendment. On being seconded by Councillor Lygo, Councillor Rowley resumed the role of Chair.  

 

Councillor Brown, Councillor Turner, Councillor Linda Smith, Councillor Munkonge, Councillor Upton, Councillor Chapman, Councillor Henwood and Councillor Stares left the meeting. 

 

Councillor Dhall queried whether she would be required to leave the meeting given her previous concerns raised in relation to site access. The Monitoring Officer advised that without seeing the specific comments, she could not determine either way, and Councillor Dhall should leave if she felt unable to approach the debate with a fair an open mind.  

 

Councillor Rowley thanked officers and the legal team for their work on the Local Plan.  

 

Councillor Yeatman introduced the amendment, noting it as simple and sensible for addressing issues with the purchase of land at Meadow Lane by Oxford City Housing Limited. At the time of purchase, the site was expected to deliver 29 new homes however the Local Plan as now set out, notes that zero will be constructed. Councillor Yeatman queried why, on this basis, is the site still allocating for housing in the Local Plan. Council heard that the amendment did not oppose the Local Plan or seek to delay it, however it requests that the Council writes to the Planning Inspector at the appropriate stage to seek the removal of the site allocation from the plan. Councillor Yeatman emphasised that this would provide certainty for the local community and opportunity for local initiatives, such as The Meadow School project which seeks to use Oxford's last untouched meadow as an educational resource to help improve school attendance, raise educational attainment, and provide outdoor learning opportunities for young people. Council heard that in summary, the amendment would remove a redundant housing allocation and permit a valuable community project. Councillor Yeatman asserted that procedure guide provision 1.5 under reg 19 expressly notes changes that have not been consulted on can be submitted for examination.  

 

Councillor Harley seconded the amendment and reserved her right to speak until the end of the debate.  

 

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that there is a process for submitting amendments to the Local Plan, however the view of the planning officers on this particular issue is that the removal of the site would undermine the plan and render it unsound. At this point, in their professional opinion, the plan would not meet legislative requirements in terms of being ready to submit. Council heard this is largely because removal of the site from the plan would affect the housing numbers on which the plan is based.  

 

Councillor Rowley invited debate on the amendment.  

  

Councillor Smowton noted that he would be opposing the amendment as he believed the site plan, as stated, could facilitate sufficient social benefits and retain the opportunity for housing to be developed in the future. Councillor Smowton noted the need for housing in Oxford, specifically social housing with walkable and cycle suitable options, and did acknowledge that other sites in Oxford could also provide this, however he asserted his view that all the housing sites allocated in the plan would be required to ensure a chance of meeting the housing need. As a result, Council heard that he would not be content to begin removing housing sites from the Local Plan at this time. Councillor Smowton reminded Council that it is for the Planning Inspector to determine whether the Plan is sound.  

 

Councillor Miles emphasised that Oxford needs housing of all types but noted that development at Meadow Lane would not meet the demand as it stands; instead, focus should be paid to development of brownfield sites rather than greenfield and biodiversity rich locations in the context of the climate emergency. Councillor Miles also cautioned against building homes on flood risk areas and urged for more focus on housing construction in place of commercial spaces and offices which push up commuting demands. Councillor Miles, on behalf of the Lib Dem group, noted that officer advice was acknowledged and, on that basis, she would not be supporting removal of a site from the plan and urged Council to leave this consideration for the inspection process. It was suggested that this amendment should have been put forward earlier.  

 

Councillor Muddiman also recognised the local need for housing and welcomed increased development on brownfield sites with better connections to amenities and public transport, rather than employment spaces and labs. Councillor Muddiman urged Council to support more mixed developments in order to enable protection of green spaces in support of residents’ health and well-being and local biodiversity. Councillor Muddiman noted her belief that the amendment would not make the plan unsound or require further consultation so noted she would be voting in support.  

 

Councillor Ottino, recognising inequality in Oxford as stemming from housing issues, noted that the Local Plan identifies sites for more housing as a remedy to matters such as homelessness. Councillor Ottino also noted that this would still require planning applications to be brought before the relevant committee for consideration and appropriate scrutiny would be applied. Council heard his view that the site should not be removed from the plan as it opens the chance to build even one block of social housing which could be life-changing for one vulnerable individual or family. Councillor Ottino recognised officers’ advice and noted his trust in the planning application process.  

 

Councillor Jarvis noted agreement with Councillor Miles’ comments, specifically in relation to process, and suggested that the inspector is best placed to determine whether the Local Plan is sound or not. Councillor Jarvis also acknowledged the advice of officers and on this basis, and noted his opposition to the amendment. It was suggested that the amendment should have been suggested through earlier processes in which the political groups discussed the development of the Local Plan.

 

Councillor Malik agreed with Councillor Ottino’s recognition of inequality within the city and noted dissatisfaction with current planning decisions, such as Botley Road. Councillor Malik also called for better use of brownfield sites and emphasised that planning must be considerate of all social and environmental requirements, specifically to support youth development and wellbeing. As such, Councillor Malik noted the value of green spaces for supporting younger people and therefore asserted his support for the amendment.  

 

Councillor Arshad noted her opposition to the amendment and asserted that the Council has prioritised delivery of homes to meet the housing demand and support for a thriving economy. Council heard her recognition of the housing crisis and the work being done to bring forward more affordable and social housing, but also the need to ensure each site is properly tested through the independent examination process to ensure ecology, heritage, and sustainability are appropriately considered.  

 

Councillor Railton noted that it is easy to support house building in principle, however the details of implementation are more challenging and divide opinion. Whilst recognising housing inequality in the city, Councillor Railton referred to Councillor Jarvis’ concerns regarding process and urged Council to consider officer advice to ensure the submission of the plan is not blocked. It was emphasised that the amendment could render the plan unsound, and thus the Council would be left with an outdated Local Plan and the resulting consequences. Council was urged to reject the amendment.  

 

Councillor Robinson recognised the complexity of this decision however stated her belief that it centred on the need to make compromises. Council was urged to see that the Meadow Lane site should be saved from housing development, and that biodiversity and green spaces should be prioritised; the environmental values of the site were summarised.  Councillor Robinson noted her belief that, even with the incorporation of this amendment, the Local Plan would remain sound. Whilst not wishing to undermine the Local Plan,  she would be voting in support of the amendment. 

 

Councillor Harley thanked Councillor Robinson for her comments and, whilst recognising the great housing shortage in Oxford, also emphasised that housing should not be developed at any cost. Council was urged to protect green spaces, especially those which are not planned for housing, such as Meadow Lane. Councillor Harley asserted that then Local Plan would remain sound even with the incorporation of the amendment and no delay would be caused. Councillor Harley also noted that the amendment would not affect the overarching strategy of the plan, it would save time, expense and stress. Council heard that the motion requested no more than for the inspector to be written to in order to invite the removal of the site allocation from the plan.  

 

Councillor Yeatman, in summarising the debate, urged Council Members, as elected representatives, to take the opportunity to shape the development of the city and protect green spaces. The unique value of Meadow Lane was also emphasised and Councillor Yeatman suggested as an unsound site, it should be removed from the Local Plan to avoid threatening the soundness of the entire Local Plan. Councillor Yeatman also asserted that incorporation of the amendment would not delay submission, it would only make a request of the inspector.  

 

On being proposed by Councillor Yeatman, and seconded by Councillor Harley, the amendment was put a vote.  

 

9 voted in favour, 29 voted against, and 1 abstained.

 

The amendment fell. 

 

Councillor Brown, Councillor Turner, Councillor Linda Smith, Councillor Munkonge, Councillor Upton, Councillor Chapman, Councillor Henwood and Councillor Stares rejoined the meeting following the debate of the amendment.  

 

The Lord Mayor resumed his role as Chair for the remainder of the meeting.   

 

Councillor Diggins left and rejoined the meeting during discussion of this item.   

 

The Lord Mayor invited questions or comments from Members on the Local Plan as submitted to Council. 

 

Councillor Miles thanked officers for their hard work to get the Local Plan to this stage and ready for submission. Councillor Miles noted that the recommendations, as set out in the report, do not open previous policy debates and focus on submission of the plan and scope for minor editorial corrections as required. Councillor Miles noted the positive aspects of the plan and recognised its greater recognition of some local centres. Council heard that she did not wish to undermine the work that has gone on in the plan, noting the significant cost to the taxpayer and risks of disrupting submission to the inspector within tight timelines. On this basis, Council Miles urged Council to support the Plan with recognition that input could be contributed to any revised local planning processes after Local Government Reorganisation and it is better not to leave the city in a position where no Local Plan is in place at all. On this basis, Councillor Miles noted that the Liberal Democrat group would be abstaining from the vote.  

 
Councillor Dhall left and rejoined the meeting during discussion of this item.   

 

Councillor Turner commented on the balance between employment and housing which had featured in the debate repeatedly. Council heard that employment sites could be used for housing under the conditions of this Local Plan and a summary of matters relating to flood plains was outlined.  

 

Councillor Roz Smith acknowledged Councillor Turner’s comments but noted that Council can urge commercial property occupiers to change their property use into residential, if owned by the Council. Councillor Roz Smith noted that she would like the Council to act on this ability more.  

 

Councillor Brown, as seconder, supported many of the comments from Councillor Turner. In respect of use of properties for housing and employment, she explained that every site in the city has the ability for the landowner to put housing on it, as noted under the Local Plan. However, this does not award the Council an ability to force people to develop houses. Councillor Brown emphasised that all members should be aware of this technicality via planning committee training. Members were reminded that the Council, as the Planning Authority, does not have the ability to make employers put housing on their sites. Councillor Brown also provided a summary of the values and strengths of the Local Plan as proposed, including positive housing policies and environmental considerations.   

 

On being put to a vote, 30 voted in favour, and 17 abstained. The recommendations carried.  

 

Council resolved to:

1.            Authorise submission of the Oxford Local Plan 2045 to the Secretary of State for examination, including the minor amendments made according to recommendation 3;

2.            Approve all the supporting statutory documentation including the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitats Regulation Assessment, Infrastructure Development Plan (IDP), Policies Map, Regulation 18 Consultation Statement, Regulation 19 Consultation Statement and Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendices 2-7 & 9);

3.            Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to make any necessary minor editorial corrections to the Submission Draft Oxford Local Plan 2045, IDP, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulation Assessment, Policies Map, and to agree the supporting evidence base prior to submission;

4.            Authorise the Director of Planning and Regulation, after consultation with the Lead Cabinet Member, to invite the examining inspector(s) to recommend any modifications considered to be necessary in accordance with section 20(7C) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.