Planning Review Committee: Mill Street Student Block

And so we get to the Planning Review Commitee meeting that will reconsider the planning decision made at the last West Area Committee.  This is the first Planning Review Committee meeting I’ve chaired as the first meeting happened while I was in Bonn on the twinning trip.  I was very keen to get things right so ran the meeting as carefully and inclusively as I could.

I should point out that “review” is a slightly confusing name for this committee as its job is not to review the previous decision and the process followed to reach it, but rather to take a fresh look at the planning application and make a new decision based on all the evidence presented.

All objectors had time to speak as did the applicant’s agent.  The planning officer (Murray Hancock) gave a very informative and useful report and though he was recommending approval, that is just one of the opinions we as a committee were to consider.  We had some debate among councillors and then a motion was put  seconded to refuse the application and this received almost unanimous assent.  The application was thus refused.

.

Mill Street Site Visit

One of the planning applications that was approved on 13 July at West Area Planning Committee was for some accommodation for students of a local college to fit in a strip of land between the back of houses on Mill Street and the railway, just south of Oxford Station.  At West Area Planning Committee councillors and officers had largely spoken highly of it and it was given planning permission (although not unanimously).

The council has a procedure after such decisions where if 12 councillors request it the decision is “called in” and get re-determined at Planning Review Committee.  That happened in this case.  I am chair of the Planning Review Committee so decided that we should actually visit the site to see how things would look from the neighbouring properties and well as from other angles.  Quite a few members of the committee attended the visit and we were accompanied by Murray Hancock, one of the City Council’s senior planners, as well as some local residents and the agent for the applicant so he could let us onto the site.

I found the visit extremely informative and instructive and I think councillors much better equipped to made informed decisions in the actual committee meeting.

There was some controversy over the accuracy of pictures submitted and I was slightly amused at this one (although the whole issue is of course a serious one) as I think it looks like the mockup of the propsed building is floating in the air!

West Area Planning Committee

I attended this meeting today as I wanted to see the outcome of the planning application to change the use of three shop units in Gloucester Green to A3 food use.  The meeting was ably chaired by Oscar Van Nooijen and there was some good discussion on all the applications considered.  The biggest item on the agenda was the St. Clements’ Car park application but that was deferred.

Much discussion ensued on the Gloucester Green application and the voting was a dead heat.  I am pleased that Oscar used his casting vote as chair to decline the permission as I think three extra late-night food outlets in that area would have caused intolerable problems for the residents of the flats on Gloucester Green (the Chilterns).

The meeting papers are available online.

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.

Special Full Council: Core Strategy

We had a short full council meeting today to vote on the finalised Core Strategy document that puts a strategic framework around development of our City for the next fifteen years.

The meeting started with a few words from the Lord Mayor about the terrible disaster unfolding in Japan. We had a minutes’ silence to reflect on all the suffering and loss of life.

The core strategy was then presented by the deputy leader of the Council. Two speeches of five minutes were allowed by each of the Labour (administration), LibDem, and Green Groups. We had decided to abstain on the vote – not because we didn’t approve of the core strategy as presented but because we didn’t think it went far enough on things like the need to build housing and being more energy-efficient. The Green voted against and for some reason demanded a named vote whereby every councillor present has their name read out and has to declare their vote for the record.

There were lots of people in the public gallery who seemed in the most part opposed to the Northern Gateway proposals for housing.

I must say arguing over housing in Oxford, while a serious matter, did feel rather insignificant compared to the troubles some Japanese Cities will be facing for years to come after this weekend’s earthquake.

Labour killing democratic accountability?

I received a consultation questionnaire in my council mail today about the proposed changes to the Council’s decision-making process. I’m afraid I think this is one of those consultations that is basically there to tell people what has already been decided. I don’t think public comments will make any difference to what is going to happen.

The changes are essentially:

  • Abolish monthly formal Area Committees, and their revenue budgets, and replace them with quarterly informal, largely powerless, Area Forums.
  • Remove powers to make planning decisions from the local level and set up two large planning committees that won’t really have any neighbourhood link or context understanding.  There will be a “west” and and “east” committee.  Bizarrely the west committee will include east Oxford!  The committees will be politically balanced meaning each will have 4 Labour members, 3 LibDems and 1 Green.  I think this is shocking as it means the administration effectively takes over control of all planning decisions.  In the current scheme North area has a LibDem majority and East has a Green majority.
  • Remove planning decisions call-in to full council and replace this with a “planning appeals committee”.  This will also be politically balanced, so Labour-controlled.
  • Drastically cut the number of Executive Board meetings and let executive councillors make most decisions that were previously Executive Board decisions on their own with no requirement for a public meeting.
  • Give each councillor a paltry £1500 to spend as they wish on their ward.

You can read about this in detail and I urge you to fill in the consultation as I think this is an extremely important matter of local democracy and accountability.  You need to register first to do the survey but please do – this is really important!  It’s clear Labour doesn’t want to hear much from you as the boxes only allow 500 characters and that includes spaces! You can see my response on my website.

My main concern is how the changes will effectively render the councillors of the North Area Committee (entirely LibDem) and those of the East Area Parliament (almost all Green) pretty much voice-less and powerless.  My own area, Central South and West will no longer see political balance of 4 Labour 4 LibDem but instead all its planning decisions will be made by committees with a Labour majority.  I have rarely seen such megalomania in a political party as Oxford Labour!

Central South and West Area Committee

We met at St Barnabas School on Hart Street today.  It was freezing cold and sitting on children’s chairs is not ideal.  There was not a huge amount on the agenda although we had a useful update on street scene issues and a City Centre Police report from Insp. Matt Bullivant.

barnabas.jpgThere were no planning applications although we did talk about the plans to make Jericho a conservation area and put an article 4 direction area in place (which basically removes permitted development rights from building owners).  Although some buildings in Jericho, notably St. Barnabas Church, are worth preserving I must say that a lot of the housing is very substandard with no cavity walls, poorly insulated windows and incredibly insubstantial foundations.  I’m not quite sure why we are preserving rows and rows of cheap houses that were originally built as mass housing for the poor.  I think the planning restrictions will severely limit people’s ability or inclination to make their properties more energy efficient and I think that’s a real shame.

There was a presentation from a County Council officer about the cuts to libraries and youth services.  I was very embarrassed at the hard time one member of the committee gave the officer, especially in public!  It’s not the officer that decided on the cuts – it was the Tory County Councillors!  Talk about shoot the messenger!

We finished just after 7.30pm all very cold and uncomfortable on the children’s chairs.

Central South and West Area Committee

We met this evening at West Oxford Community Centre.  The agenda was not huge.

cswac.jpgWe started with a good summary from Craig Rossington from the County Council about transport and roads plans for the next 20 years.  Clearly this is a long term strategy but it’s good to see the County Council thinking strategically even in these straightened times.  I think we all agreed that there has hitherto been over-regulation in the City Centre and that the cycling restrictions on Cornmarket and Queen Street are not ideal as considerate cyclists would be careful to work with, rather than against, pedestrians and careless inconsiderate ones probably ignore the restrictions anyway.  We also agreed that the traffic lights at the junction of Broad Street, Catte Street, Holywell Street and Parks Road are a waste of time as there is very low traffic flow at that junction, many cyclists ignore them and they don’t even have a pedestrian phase!

We had a good report from Dave Huddle who has done some excellent work on street scene issues and similarly from Matthew Bullivant of Thames Valley Police.

mhp.JPGWe had two planning applications to determine – one was a technical matter that had to come to committee and be done in public because it was an application by the council to the council.  We approved that without discussion.  The other was for the old Marlborough House pub in Grandpont that has been vacant and boarded up for some time.  It read “Demolition of rear outbuilding. Erection of ground floor extension. Change of use from public house to cafe on ground floor and 4 x 1 bedroom holiday apartments on the ground and 1st floor and 1 x 1 bed flat on 2nd floor. Provision of cycle parking and bin storage.”  It’s always a shame to lose a pub but it had gone anyway so the application was approved.  A very local resident also took the trouble to come along to give her supporting views of the application, for which I was grateful.

The other planning application was just for our comments and was for a for a big redevelopment on the corner of St. Aldates and Queen Street which has been festering for a long time.  As with all major projects, developers have to provide money sometimes called “section 106” money to the local authorities to mitigate the effects of the development on infrastructure things such as roads, schools, libraries etc.  This application had reached stalemate as the developers were offering about £200k and the planners were recommending about £1.9M.  Personally I thought some of the proposed buildings would have been a bit out of place too although I would have welcomed a new way through to Queen Street from St. Aldates that didn’t go via Carfax.

We meet again on 11th Jan if there are any planning applications to determine.  If not, then on  8th Feb.  We may not have many area committees left as the Labour administration of Oxford City Council is planning to abolish them early in the new year.  I think this is a terrible blow for local democracy but rather typical of Labour.

Central South and West Area Committee

Well that came around quickly! We met today in the town hall but I was rather late as I’d been to a work meeting in Nottingham and got stuck in a huge jam driving back through Oxford to go home and get my bike to cycle back to the Town Hall.  Oxford would jam up on the one rare evening I choose drive through it!

map_of_central_south_and_west_oxford_29783.gifWe looked again at the Westgate redevelopment planning permission renewal and I was concerned to hear from some residents who were seriously worried about noise and fume pollution to their properties.  I hope this can be sorted out before any development proceeds. We also determined some other fairly minor planning applications.

We had an item of urgent business that  was essentially asking to divert some developer contributions in the Botley Road area away from public art and towards improved flood mitigation measures.  Given the disastrous flooding we have seen three times in that area in the last decade this was a bit of a no-brainer and was approved once we’d asked a few questions about how the council would be ensuring best value for money for the citizens of Oxford.

There was one final item that was rather unfortunate as it was about a retrospective application for funds for an event held in September by the Oxford City Canal Partnership.  The application should not have been retrospective but it seems that nobody in the council remembered to ask the organisation to apply for the grant once it had been agreed in principle by the area committee back in February 2010.  We reluctantly decided to overturn the officer recommendation not to pay the money as we felt it had only not been paid because of an error that was in no part the fault of the Canal Partnership.