Partnerships Training

This session was set up for councillors by two officers from Strategic Policy and Partnerships.

I found it useful to have an overview of how the City Council works in partnership with other bodies both at the City and the County level and there was some useful information about changes to partnerships since the change of government in May 2010.  In particular we noted:

•Scrapping of the Local Area Agreement
•Scrapping of the National Indicators
•Removal of statutory duty to develop a Sustainable Community Strategy (and therefore the need for Local Strategic Partnerships)
•Scrapping of regional bodies (SEEDA, GOSE)
•Introduction of Local Enterprise Partnerships
•Changes to the Health and Well Being Board linked to the NHS reforms

The Oxford Strategic Partnership has some new priorities, structure and subgroups also:

Partnerships DiagramYou can click the image to get an even bigger version.

I had no idea there were so many bodies involved in the Oxford Strategic Partnership.  They include:  Oxford City Council; Oxfordshire County Council; NHS Oxfordshire; Oxfordshire Community and Voluntary Action; Oxford University; Oxford Brookes University; Oxford and Cherwell Valley College; Thames Valley Police; Oxford Inspires; Critchleys; and Oxford Preservation Trust.

The one suggestion I made was that meetings of all the partnerships, which are public and published should be added to the Council’s meetings newsfeed to get the importance of partnership working higher up on the agenda.

Licensing Hearing: The new Sainsbury’s in Summertown

I chaired this panel hearing today that was necessary because two Summertown residents had sent in a joint letter of objection to the premises licence application. I was joined by Cllrs Mary Clarkson and Mark Lygo.

The application was from Sainsbury’s as they are opening a new convenience store in Summertown in March.  They were applying for a license to sell alcohol on an off-sales basis only from 7am-11pm 7 days per week in line with the opening hours of the store itself.  It should be noted that we were simply deciding on the alcohol licence – all the other necessary permissions for the store to operate were already in place.

The objections centred around the risk that children might buy alcohol and the possible need for a security guard.  I put these to the applicants and got a very detailed description of Sainsbury’s ways of working, including their think 25 policy, and how in Leeds they have a similar store where problems have been avoided by close working with the Police and the local Community.  Sainsbury’s probably would employ a security guard at “sensitive” times but did not want to accept this as a condition.  I must say I was a bit perturbed that the objectors seemed rather to be objecting to a Sainsbury’s store rather than the sale of alcohol and indeed that’s what their petition said.

After the applicants and objectors had summed up they were dismissed while we made our decision.  We took the view that Sainsbury’s had addressed all the concerns so granted the hours as applied for but with a condition that a prominent sign reminding customers that Summertown was an alcohol-free zone must be displayed by all exits.  We also asked for contact details of the manager to be displayed for residents to use in case of problems and reminded Sainsbury’s that if there were problems it was open to the responsible authorities and the interested parties to call a licence review in the future.

I felt it was useful for Sainsbury’s to be able to hear to concerns of residents and I hope the hearing will be the start of an ongoing dialogue that will enable Sainsbury’s and the residents of Summertown to co-exist in common understanding and peace!

Please note this post does not form an official record of proceedings and should not be treated as such.  The decision notice from the City Council is the definitive document.

Full Council

The last full council of 2011 and a ridiculously full agenda! We met at 5pm and I didn’t stop until 10.37pm and even then, had not dealt with the motions on notices, statements and questions.

There were some very important items at this meeting.

The council also considered plans for Barton West and also the latest round of attacks on HMO tenants and landlords.  The use of a house as an HMO (that means 3 or more unrelated people living there) is a different planning use class and Labour has made it a requirement that all changes to use class C4 will require planning permission and that change of use from C3 (family home) to C4 will require planning permission.  Even more worrying is that planning permission will be refused if there are more than 20% of properties in that street already in use as HMOs.  I think that will be catastrophically disastrous for Oxford’s housing situation.  We’ll see.

I am utterly appalled at some of the judgemental and social-sorting based on tenure language that is being used by this Labour Council.  Try “However, in some areas of the city, high concentrations of HMOs are resulting in changes to the character of the local area, and may also contribute to local parking problems, large numbers of transient households, and the affordability of renting or buying homes in Oxford. This has led some people to believe that their communities are becoming unbalanced, because the number of short‐term tenants with less established community ties has grown too large.”

I think that’s outrageous and hope that lots of Oxford-dwellers will agree. I see it as nothing more than a direct attack on students, honest landlords and anyone elsewho can’t afford to live in Oxford in any other way than in an HMO.

Another thing discussed was the issue of adopting some legislation to allow the licensing of horse-drawn carriages in the City Centre. This was being recommended by the General Purposes Licensing Committee but I am pleased that the Full Council saw that any horse drawn carriages would be inappropriate in such a constrained City as Oxford for reasons both of horse welfare and pedestrian, cyclist safety. I was glad to be one of the 27 that voted against the Licensing Committee’s recommendation.  This shocking video from New York is one of the things that convinced me to vote against.

A long and tiring meeting and some really stupid planning decisions rushed through by our current megalomaniac Labour Administration if you ask me!

National Landlords Association Oxford Branch Meeting

This was an interesting meeting, attended by about 20 of Oxford’s decent and honest landlords as well as Ian Wright, the City Council Service Manager that covers HMOs and Ken Staunton, the NLA Head of Regions.

Ken first spoke about the NLA Landlord accreditation scheme which looks like is a really useful thing.  I am impressed at how much information it provides and how it has a requirement for Continual Professional Development for Landlords.  That’s very important in the continual changing regulatory landscape in which the business has to operate these days.

There was then a talk by Ian Wright from the City Council about the additional HMO registration scheme.  Ian did a good job of explaining what I think is a completely over-the top scheme that is crippling the HMO market.  It’s not Ian’s fault – he’s just doing what the Labour Administration of Oxford City Council tell him but there really are a lot of charges and I was appalled to hear that the council is demanding extra works on 97% of properties where licenses are being applied for.  In most cases tenants and landlords were entirely happy before the council interfered.  Ian did show some slides of some awful cases where council intervention is clearly needed and welcome but I suspect none of those applied to to the good and honest landlords present last night.  There was also a list given of successful prosecutions.  I was a bit surprised that the names of all those convicted were included and didn’t really understand why Ian included a case where someone had been imprisoned after performing an illegal eviction.  That case was nothing to do with HMO licensing even though that was the subject of Ian’s talk.

There was a lot of dicussion and confusion about the change to HMO registration requirements coming in January 2012 and the Article 4 direction on planning which removes the permitted development right to change a property from C3 (domestic household) to C4 (HMO with 3-6 unrelated sharers) coming in February 2012.  It’s fascinating to me that the council seems to act as if Landlords are nasty evildoers trying to extort money out of tenants while spending as little as possible whereas what I saw was a bunch of honest professionals trying to run their business in an honest a way as possible.  There is clearly a lot of confusion about the ridiculous amount over over-regulation the Labour council is trying to pile onto the HMO market in Oxford.  I find it really hard to understand as Oxford is depsperately short of housing and HMOs provide a vital part of the housing mix.  If Landlords are persecuted and saddled with ridiculous amounts of expense for work that nobody wants then that will just get passed on in increased rents and Oxford’s housing (and homelessness) problems will jut get worse.  I wish Labour would just accept that being a landlord is just an honest business in the same that running a taxi, a shop, or a bar is.

The meeting took about 2 hours and was extremely interesting.

Central South and West Area Forum

This forum met today in the Town Hall and focussed on student safety issues as well as homelessness.  It was really good to have Lesley Dewhurst from Oxford Homeless Pathways present to explain to us all the good work her charity does.  We also have the new manager from the Oxford Crisis Skylight Centre to tell us about all the good work just about to start in the Old Fire Station.   Lesley produced the best handout I have seen for ages that shows really well how the homelessness services work in Oxford.  How refreshing not to be blinded by high-tech graphics.  Click on the image here to see it in its full glory!

There was a presentation about student safety from the City Council community safety ream and some useful comments from the many students present .  Student input, particularly from the OUSU Vice-President for Charities and Communities , Daniel Stone, is always particularly welcome as it can be hard to build meaningful and sustainable channels of communication between the council and the University sometimes..  I was alarmed to hear a story about a sexual assault on a student in a bus but pleased that the City Council student safety team will take up the issue with the Police and the bus operator.

The Frideswide Civic Service

October is definitely a month of ceremony, being the start of the year for many parts of Oxford life.  The Frideswide service is an annual event that marks the founding of Oxford by St. Frideswide sometime around the 7th or 8th Century of the Common Era.  There is a good BBC article which tells you more about this.

The service is at Christ Church in the Cathedral and this year focussed on Care of Creation.  We heard three local folk interviewed by the Bishop of Dorchester.  Averil Stedeford has made her house in Headington very green and it is now quite famous.  Malcolm McCulloch, an Oxford academic talked about the green aspects of his research and Jenny Creese spoke about the Connecting Naturally project.

Part of the service involves a big procession to say prayers for St. Frideswide and also leave sprigs of rosemary on her tomb, as a mark of remembrance.

Redevelopment plans for Luther Court

I went to an interesting exhibition today about a2dominion‘s plans for redevelopment of Luther Court. This is an area of social housing in a difficult and constrained part of the City Centre and it would be fair to say it has been the victim, and site of, a lot of antisocial behaviour over the years. It comprises of lots of rather small and poky one-bedroomed flats that I’m sure are not ideal for the well-being both mental and physical of their tenants.  Currently the accommodation all faces, and has its access from, the North East side facing onto Luther Street Medical Centre and O’Hanlon House.  I think it would be fair to say that the interaction of some potential clients unable to be accepted by the Medical Centre or O’Hanlon House, and some of the more vulnerable tenants in the current Luther Court has not always produced optimal outcomes.  (click the image below to see a non-squashed version of it!)

The new plan is to demolish the current accommodation and to rebuild it on more levels and facing South West onto Thames Street with access only from that side.  The new accommodation would include more two- and possibly three-bedroomed units suitable for small families and would be to much higher standards of building, light provision and so on.  There is a plan to include lots of secure bike parking and  some student accommodation.  The development would be completely car-free and residents would be excluded from having City Centre residents’ parking permits.

I filled in a comment sheet and made the following points:

  • While I welcome purpose-built student accommodation, particularly in the City Centre, I do think it works better if there is a resident warden to nip any behaviour or noise issues in the bud.  It was indicated that this would probably be done by utilising more mature residents in return for a reduce rent.
  • I hope the development will utilise renewable energy including Solar Thermal and/or PV systems as these work incredibly well even in our climate and can make a real difference to social tenants struggling to pay ever-increasing fuel bills.  Anything that can keep people out a fuel poverty is a good thing in my book!
  • I welcome this consultation event and encourage a2dominion to have lots more making sure local residents are informed and invited widely and that communication with all local stakeholders is maintained
  • I asked also that a2dominion take into account the wishes of their current tenants in Luther Court carefully and sensitively.  I believe they will and offered to help in any way I can as ward councillor.

As these plans are worked up and come to the planning permission stage I will of course have to back away and keep an open mind about any plans that are actually submitted to the planning process in case I have to take part in a determination of the planning application at a committee.  At this stage though I think can honestly, and without prejudicing myself, say things look promising!

I am grateful to a2dominion for keeping me informed as a local councillor at this early stage of planning what could be a really effective and exciting new development.

Turning Gloucester Green into a food court?

I have received much correspondence this week from concerned residents of The Chilterns, the apartments that are along two sides of Gloucester Green.  The applications are 11/01135, 11/01140 and 11/01142. The first appears to be on the West side and the second two on the North side.  All applications are for a change of use from use class A1 (retail) to A3 (hot food restaurant and/or takeaway).

Concerns are around the much larger amount of rubbish A3 units tend to produce and its storage as these are quite constrained sites.  There is also concern that food waste not stored properly will cause bad smells and attract vermin.  I certainly share those concerns and also those about late night running of noisy ventilation fans and of course all the people-noise that more food outlets will inevitably bring.  Some objections are based on the impact more A3 will have on the viability of existing A3 premises but unfortunately this is not a planning reason that can be taken into account when determining a planning application.

What can be taken into account is the actual noise, smell, refuse problems that more A3 units will inevitably cause.  I think this would be a step too far in reducing amenity and increasing nuisance for residents of The Chilterns so I hope these applications are turned down.  There is already another hour added to the opening time (making it 4am) of a food outlet that backs onto the cinema (subject of an earlier blog post) and I really do think that enough is enough this time.

The applicants seem to make the argument that the retail units are not financially viable and that the only way to make these units viable is to let them be food outlets.  I think the applicants (who are the landlords) are rather forgetting that the financial equation also includes the rent payable to the landlord. These applications therefore do rather strike me as yet another landlord being greedy and trying to maximise profit without showing any regard for the amenity of the area, balance of uses of premises or the rights of quiet enjoyment of their properties that those living in the area have.

I am pleased that these applications have been called into the West Area Planning Committee by my Lib Dem colleagues Stephen Brown, Alan Armitage, David Rundle and Jim Campbell and I do hope that when it comes to determine the applications  the new West Area Planning Committee will turn them down.

In the event that the planning use changes are granted then I hope the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 can be used to prevent any new A3 units from operating late at night and into the small hours that further disturbing the residents of The Chilterns.

Central South and West Area Committee

We met today at West Oxford Community Centre. Our agenda was fairly short and included the normal items such as the open session, Police and Community Safety, Street Scene and Parks and Planning applications.

We also had a presentation from two Oxford Brookes Students showing their design for a poster for Mount Place in Jericho.  I liked the poster and suggested it have a QR code added for mobile camera phone users to get access to more information about it on the web.  There is an Oxford Mail article about this too.  You can click the picture to see a bigger version.

Brookes Students Design for Mount Place signage

The main planning application was the one for the new Jericho Health Centre on the Radcliffe Infirmary site and was just for comment as it will be determined by the Strategic Development Control Committee.  The application was by Oxford University and as that’s my employer I decided to declare a personal but not prejudicial interest.  The committee supported the officers’ view that planning permission should be granted although there was some disagreement about whether to put the health centre right on the street or to retain an historic stone wall and put it behind that.  As the application was for the latter, that’s what was recommended to the Strategic Development Control Committee.

We also had a planning application about a mobile phone mast near Walton Well Road at the entrance to Port Meadow.  It was to replace a mast that was already there and had only been allowed by a planning inspector on appeal in the first place.  The whole committee bar one member voted not to allow an even bigger and taller mast in this extremely beautiful and sensitive part of Oxford.

The meeting closed around 7pm.