DOCSLIB.ORG

Appeal Decisions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions Hearing held on 19 June 2014 Site visit made on 19 June 2014 by Anthony Lyman BSc(Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 28 July 2014 Appeal A: Ref: APP/G3110/A/14/2215380 St Cross College, Pusey House, St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LZ • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by St Cross College against the decision of Oxford City Council. • The application Ref 13/01800/FUL, dated 15 July 2013, was refused by notice dated 22 October 2013. • The development proposed is the erection of new college accommodation to include 53 study bedrooms, seminar/meeting rooms, lecture theatre, library and student facilities including a bar, café, common room and cycle storage, demolition and rebuilding of existing boundary walls. Appeal B: Ref: APP/G3110/E/14/2215384 St Cross College, Pusey House, St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LZ • The appeal is made under section 20 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 against a refusal to grant listed building consent. • The appeal is made by St Cross College against the decision of Oxford City Council. • The application Ref 13/01801/LBD, dated 15 July 2013, was refused by notice dated 22 October 2013. • The works proposed are the demolition and rebuilding of existing boundary walls. Preliminary Matters 1. The two applications use the same full description of the proposed development. Only the listed walls require listed building consent and, therefore, for Appeal B I have used the reduced description as it appears on the Council’s Decision Notice and on the appeal form – ‘Demolition and Rebuilding of Existing Boundary Walls’. 2. The application forms certified that the appeal site was owned by the applicant, St Cross College. In a letter to the Planning Inspectorate dated 14 May 2014 the University of Oxford confirmed that the University is the registered owner of the site and that the correct notices had subsequently been served. With reference to a court case 1 the University confirmed that the applicant had not acted in bad faith and that the University had not been prejudiced in any way by the error on the ownership certificate. The University stated that the application complied with the University’s approval procedures and internal governance requirements, and requested that the appeal proceed. 1 R (O’Brien) v West Lancashire Borough Council [2012] EWHC 2376 (Admin) www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate Appeal Decisions APP/G3110/A/14/2215380, APP/G3110/A/14/2215384 3. A completed Section 106 Undertaking committing the University to making certain financial contributions to Oxfordshire County Council, to mitigate the impact of the development, was submitted at the Hearing. I will refer to this later in my Decision. Decisions APPEAL A: 4. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of new college accommodation to include 53 study bedrooms, seminar/meeting rooms, lecture theatre, library and student facilities including a bar, café, common room and cycle storage, demolition and rebuilding of existing boundary walls at St Cross College, Pusey House, St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LZ, in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 13/01800/FUL, dated 15 July 2013, subject to the conditions set out in the attached Annex 1. APPEAL B: 5. The appeal is allowed and listed building consent is granted for the demolition and rebuilding of existing boundary walls at St Cross College, Pusey House, St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LZ in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 13/01801/LBD dated 15 July 2013, subject to the conditions set out in Annex 3 attached. Application for Costs 6. At the Hearing an application for costs was made by St Cross College against Oxford City Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision. Main Issue 7. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the significance of designated heritage assets. Reasons Background 8. The appeal site forms part of the grounds of St Cross College within Oxford’s Central Conservation Area. The site abuts Pusey Street to the north and Pusey Lane to the west and has historic stone walls along these boundaries, albeit with substantial unsightly gaps in them created in more recent times. There are a number of listed buildings within the vicinity of the appeal site. These include the early C20th Grade II* Pusey Chapel to the east, the adjacent Pusey House and the terraces of early C19th houses on St John Street, the rear elevations of which can be seen beyond an extensive row of C20th mews type properties and garages on the opposite side of Pusey Lane to the college. 9. Planning permission was granted in 1989 for an architecturally modest three sided extension to the college accommodation/facilities involving the creation of a new quadrangle. Only the southern wing of that scheme has been completed in the early 1990s. Although permission is extant for the remaining two wings, the appeal proposal seeks permission for an alternative, larger scheme which would complete the quadrangle. The proposal is to erect an ‘L’ shaped building to provide 53 study bedrooms and increased communal and www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 2 Appeal Decisions APP/G3110/A/14/2215380, APP/G3110/A/14/2215384 educational facilities. In order to facilitate the development, the boundary walls to Pusey Street and Pusey Lane would be taken down and rebuilt. 10. The proposal would be a clearly contemporary building. It would have the appearance of being set immediately behind the reinstated historic walls, although in reality the rebuilt walls, complete with coping stones, would be incorporated into the facades of the building, with the inner stone faces exposed in some of the ground floor rooms such as the lecture theatre and the library. On the Pusey Street elevation, projecting windows would overhanging the walls. The building would have four storeys with the upper floor described by the architect as a regular row of dormer bay windows alternating with significant deep setbacks. 11. The smooth ashlar walls of the facades between projecting masonry window frames would rise to about level with the top of the third floor windows and would create a distinct shoulder below the deep recesses of the upper floor. This shoulder has been designed to be roughly level with the top of the vertical section of the pronounced buttresses which dominate the northern elevation of the adjacent chapel along Pusey Street. The flat roof of the new building would be significantly below the ridge height of the chapel and would be similar in height to the 1990’s wing on the southern side of the quadrangle. Policy approach to development and work 12. Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, (the Act) requires the decision maker, in considering whether to grant listed building consent, to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest. Section 66(1) of the Act takes a similar approach to development which affects a listed building or its setting. Section 72(1) of the Act sets out that, with regard to conservation areas, special attention shall be paid to preserving or enhancing their character or appearance. 13. The Council’s single reason for refusal of the planning application cites conflict with Policies CP8, CP9, HE3, and HE7 of the Oxford Local Plan 2001-2016 (the Local Plan), Policy CS18 of the Oxford Core Strategy 2026 (the Core Strategy) and Policy HP9 of the Sites and Housing Plan (SHP). Policy CP8 requires, amongst other things, new buildings to relate to their setting, enhance and protect local character, and for the siting, massing and design of the proposed development to create an appropriate visual relationship with the form, grain, scale, materials and details of the surrounding area. Policy CP9 relates to creating successful living and working environments and achieving high quality public places. 14. Policy HE3 relates to listed buildings and their setting and amongst other things states that proposals involving demolition of a listed building will not be granted and that development must be appropriate in terms of its scale and location and have due regard to the setting of any listed building. Policy HE7 seeks to preserve or enhance the special character and appearance of conservation areas. Core Strategy Policy CS18 promotes high quality urban design that, amongst other things, responds appropriately to the site and its surroundings, is of high quality architecture and respects Oxford’s historic environment. Policy HP9 sets out a number of criteria relating to the design, character and context of residential development, including the requirement to www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 3 Appeal Decisions APP/G3110/A/14/2215380, APP/G3110/A/14/2215384 sustain and enhance the significance of heritage assets and to make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. 15. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) advises that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Paragraph 132 of the Framework states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. Substantial harm to or loss of a Grade II listed building should be exceptional and should be wholly exceptional in the case of a Grade II* listed building.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 58 St John Street, Oxford, OX1 2LQ (Site Plan: Appendix 1);
    Agenda Item 7 West Area Planning Committee 25th May 2016 Application Numbers: 15/01674/FUL and 15/01675/LBC Application Number: 15/01674/FUL; Decision Due by: 28.07.2015; Proposal: Erection of single storey rear extension and two-storey first floor extension. Alterations to front and rear dormer windows and insertion of 1.No. rear rooflight. Formation of patio with associated landscaping (amended plans); Site Address: 58 St John Street, Oxford, OX1 2LQ (site plan: Appendix 1); Ward: Carfax Ward; Agent: Mr. Simon Beattie Applicant: Mr. Mark Blackwell Application Called in – By Councillor Hollingsworth, supported by Councillors van Nooijen, Brown and Lygo for the following reasons – potential overdevelopment and impact on neighbouring properties, in a conservation area. Recommendation: The West Area Planning Committee is recommended to resolve to grant planning permission subject to conditions for the following reasons: 1. Reasons for Approval: 1.1. The proposed development is acceptable in design terms and would not cause unacceptable levels of harm to the listed building, Central Conservation Area or amenities of the neighbouring properties. The proposal therefore accords with policies CP1, CP6, CP8, CP10, HE3 and HE7 of Oxford City Councils ‘Local Plan’2001-2016, and policy CS18 of the ‘Core Strategy’ and policies HP9 and HP14 of the ‘Sites and Housing Plan’ 2026. 1.2. The Council considers that the proposal accords with the policies of the development plan as summarised below. It has taken into consideration all other material matters, including matters raised in response to consultation and publicity. Any material harm that the development would otherwise give rise to can be offset by the conditions imposed.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2015 Plan Document 01/01/2015
    Forward Plan January - April 2015 Ian Hudspeth Leader of the Council County Hall, Oxford OX1 1ND Date Issued: 5 December 2014 The Cabinet’s Forward Plan: Introduction This Forward Plan outlines the decisions which are expected to be made over the coming four-month period by or on behalf of the County Council’s Cabinet. NB Also included, for ease of reference, are items for the current month. The Plan is arranged according to the responsibility areas of the various members of the Cabinet. (The members and their portfolios are listed in the table on the next page.) Each entry briefly describes the subject and scope of the decision; indicates the “target date” on which the decision is expected to be taken and by whom (eg whether the full Cabinet or an individual Cabinet Member); what documents (normally a report by an officer) are expected to be considered; and contact details for the officer(s) dealing with the matter. Where consultation is being carried out prior to the decision being taken, the principal consultees are specified. The method of consultation will normally be by letter or – where the views of the wider public are to be sought – by press coverage, supplemented by local notices if the decision affects a particular area. Other methods, such as exhibitions, opinion surveys, community forums etc, may be used to supplement these. The lists include any “key decisions” - those which are “significant” under the terms of government regulations. In general, a key decision may not be taken unless notice of it has been included in the Forward Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Comments and Council Response
    OXFORD CITY COUNCIL CONSULTATION STATEMENT Oxford Local Plan 2036 March 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 Proposed Submission Consultation Process ............................................................................... 2 Sustainability Appraisal Consultation Statement ...................................................................... 4 Preferred Options Consultation ................................................................................................. 6 Appendix 1: Statutory Consultees (specific consultation bodies and Duty to Cooperate bodies) ................................................................................................................................................ 132 Appendix 2: Additional Local Groups and Organisations Contacted Directly ........................ 134 Appendix 3: Consultation Report from First Steps Consultation 2016 ................................... 138 Appendix 4: Summary of Press and Social Media Coverage During Each Consultation Stage ................................................................................................................................................ 216 Appendix 5: Summary of Responses Relating to the Proposed Submisison Draft Local Plan and Officer Responses……………………………………………………………………..…………....Filed separately Page 1 of 221 INTRODUCTION 1. Oxford City Council is required (Regulation 22)1 to produce a Statement
    [Show full text]
  • Manchester Unitary Development Plan: Expired Policies Direction Under Paragraph 1(3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning And
    MANCHESTER UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN: EXPIRED POLICIES DIRECTION UNDER PARAGRAPH 1(3) OF SCHEDULE 8 TO THE PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, which came into force in September 2004, introduced a new planning system, which means that the Unitary Development Plan will be replaced with a Local Development Framework. The Local Development Framework Core Strategy will not be adopted until 2010 therefore the policies in the Unitary Development Plan have to be ‘saved’ so that they can continue to be used in the meantime. The City Council was required to apply to the Secretary of State to continue saving the policies past the 27th September 2007. A number of policies were no longer relevant so the Secretary of State directed that these policies not be saved. The policies listed overleaf expired on the 27th September 2007 and no longer form part of the development plan for Manchester. All other policies remain saved. Policies that expired on the 27th September 2007 AREA 11 Rusholme and Fallowfield PART ONE H1.1 PART TWO AREA SPECIFIC POLICIES RF2 AREA 1: Blackley, Charlestown and Moston RF9 BM10 RF13 AREA 2: Cheetham and Crumpsall AREA 13: Chorlton and Barlow Moor CC11 CB4 CC12 CB5 CC13 CB6 AREA 5: City Centre CB7 RC11 CB8 RC16 CB9 RC19 CB12 AREA 6: Hulme CB14 HU4 AREA 14: Withington and Burnage HU5 WB5 HU6 WB7 HU7 WB8 HU8 AREA 15: Didsbury HU11 DB4 HU13 DB5 HU14 DB6 HU15 DB11 HU16 AREA 16 – West Wythenshawe HU17 WW4 HU19 WW5 HU21 WW6 AREA 7 Moss Side AREA 17 East Wythenshawe MS2 EW2 MS3 EW4 MS4 EW5 MS5 EW6 MS6 EW7 MS7 EW10 AREA 9 North and South Gorton EW16 GO7 EW18 AREA 10 Whalley Range EW19 WR2 EW22 WR4 PREFACE The Manchester Plan was adopted on 21st July 1995 following an extensive period of public consultation and a major public inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Application : 13/01075/LBD Former Ruskin College Site. Walton Street
    Planning Application : 13/01075/LBD Former Ruskin College site. Walton Street I am writing on behalf of the St John Street Area Residents’ Association to express our concerns about the proposals for the design, increased height and materials of the roof in this application. The current roof of the former Ruskin College building is substantially higher than the roofs of houses in Walton Street. As a result, this building’s roof is clearly visible from the backs of the houses in Beaumont Buildings and from many, if not all of those in St John Street (Beaumont Buildings and St John Street are in the City Centre conservation area). I would guess that the roof is also visible from a wider area such as Beaumont Street as well as from a good deal of Walton Street and Jericho. The present slate pitched roof with white painted dormer windows is similar to that of the surrounding houses and therefore is not very obtrusive in spite of its height. The proposed roof would stick out much more than that on the building at present for several important reasons:- 1. Its increased height compared with that at present. 2. The proposed shape of both the roof and the dormer windows, some of which would be high in the roof. 3. The proposed materials of stainless steel for the roof and aluminium cladding round the large dormer windows both of which are quite out of character with those used on the surrounding buildings or, indeed, in central Oxford. The result of all these factors is that the proposed building will obtrude on views from the conservation area in an unacceptable way and one which seems quite unnecessary.
    [Show full text]
  • May 2015 Plan Document 02/02/2015
    Forward Plan February - May 2015 Ian Hudspeth Leader of the Council County Hall, Oxford OX1 1ND Date Issued: 2 January 2015 The Cabinet’s Forward Plan: Introduction This Forward Plan outlines the decisions which are expected to be made over the coming four-month period by or on behalf of the County Council’s Cabinet. NB Also included, for ease of reference, are items for the current month. The Plan is arranged according to the responsibility areas of the various members of the Cabinet. (The members and their portfolios are listed in the table on the next page.) Each entry briefly describes the subject and scope of the decision; indicates the “target date” on which the decision is expected to be taken and by whom (eg whether the full Cabinet or an individual Cabinet Member); what documents (normally a report by an officer) are expected to be considered; and contact details for the officer(s) dealing with the matter. Where consultation is being carried out prior to the decision being taken, the principal consultees are specified. The method of consultation will normally be by letter or – where the views of the wider public are to be sought – by press coverage, supplemented by local notices if the decision affects a particular area. Other methods, such as exhibitions, opinion surveys, community forums etc, may be used to supplement these. The lists include any “key decisions” - those which are “significant” under the terms of government regulations. In general, a key decision may not be taken unless notice of it has been included in the Forward Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda West Area Planning Committee
    Agenda West Area Planning Committee Date: Tuesday 10 September 2013 Time: 6.30 pm Place: The Old Library, Town Hall For any further information please contact: Sarah Claridge, Democratic Services Officer Telephone: 01865 252402 Email: [email protected] West Area Planning Committee Membership Chair Councillor Oscar Van Nooijen Hinksey Park; Vice -Chair Councillor Michael Gotch Wolvercote; Councillor Elise Benjamin Iffley Fields; Councillor Anne -Marie Canning Carfax; Councillor Bev Clack St. Clement's; Councillor Colin Cook Jericho and Osney; Councillor Graham Jones St. Clement's; Counci llor Bob Price Hinksey Park; Councillor John Tanner Littlemore; The quorum for this meeting is five members. Substitutes are permitted HOW TO OBTAIN AGENDA In order to reduce the use of resources, our carbon footprint and our costs we will no longer produce paper copies of agenda over and above our minimum internal and Council member requirement. Paper copies may be looked at the Town Hall Reception and at Customer Services, St Aldate’s and at the Westgate Library A copy of the agenda may be:- - Viewed on our website – mycouncil.oxford.gov.uk - Downloaded from our website - Subscribed to electronically by registering online at mycouncil.oxford.gov.uk - Sent to you in hard copy form upon payment of an annual subscription. AGENDA Pages 1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENC E AND SUBSTITUTIONS 2 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests they may have in any of the following agenda items. Guidance on this is set out at the end of these agenda pages. 3 WITHDRAWN_CASTLE MILL, ROGER DUDMAN WAY 11/02881/FUL The Council has taken external legal advice in relation to the discharge of conditions for the University development at Roger Dudman Way.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda West Area Planning Committee
    Agenda West Area Planning Committee Date: Wednesday 13 July 2011 Time: 6.00 pm Place: The Old Library, Town Hall For any further information please contact: Alec Dubberley, Democratic Services Officer Telephone: 01865 252402 Email: [email protected] If you would like help to understand this document please call Alec Dubberley, Democratic Services Officer on or email [email protected] in advance of the meeting. West Area Planning Committee Membership Chair Councillor Oscar Van Nooijen Hinksey Park; Vice -Chair Councillor John Goddard Wolvercote; Councillor Elise Benjamin Iffley Fields; Councillor Colin Cook Jericho and Osney; Councillor Michael Gotch Wolvercote; Councillor Graham Jones St Clement's; Councillor Shah Khan Cowley; Councillor Bob Pri ce Hinksey Park; Councillor John Tanner Littlemore; HOW TO OBTAIN AGENDA In order to reduce the use of resources, our carbon footprint and our costs we will no longer produce paper copies of agenda over and above our minimum internal and Council member requirement. Paper copies may be looked at in our Town Hall and Ramsay House (St. Ebbe's Street) reception areas and at public libraries. A copy of the agenda may be:- - Viewed on our website - www.oxford.gov.uk/councilmeetings - Downloaded from our website - Subscribed to electronically by registering online at www.oxford.gov.uk/ebulletins - Sent to you in hard copy form upon payment of an annual subscription. Subscription charges can be found online at www.oxford.gov.uk/agendacharges AGENDA Pages 1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENC E AND SUBSTITUTIONS 2 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillors serving on the Committee are asked to declare any personal or personal prejudicial interests they may have in any of the following agenda items.
    [Show full text]
  • Questions from County Councillors PDF 198 KB
    CABINET – 25 FEBRUARY 2020 QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL Questions Answers 1. COUNCILLOR NICHOLAS FIELD-JOHNSON COUNCILLOR YVONNE CONSTANCE, CABINET MEMBER FOR ENVIRONMENT I have been asked by the St. Johns Street Connecting Oxford could deliver many benefits for residents and businesses Resident Association to put forward their case re: including reduced congestion and improved public transport connectivity, the exclusion zone. better air quality and reduced carbon emissions, and more people participating in active and healthy travel. These residents are among the worst and most directly affected by the congestion and poor air It is however fully acknowledged that the proposals, including a further “bus quality in Oxford city centre. As such, they gate” in the city centre and Oxford’s Eastern Arc, will need to be carefully welcome serious efforts by the City and County designed and assessed to ensure any adverse impacts are mitigated and Councils to tackle both problems. those directly affected, whether residents, employers or businesses, also benefit. They are however concerned that the following aspects of the current proposals will have a Proposals are still at a relatively early stage with more detailed feasibility work disproportionately disadvantageous effect on and consultation required before any decisions to implement them can be their members: made. 1. The Worcester Street “bus gate” would The feasibility work will however consider when the “bus gates” should mean that St John Street Area residents needing operate (days of the week and times of day) and whether there should be to travel west or south by car would have no exemptions and how these would be administered in practice, with the option but to drive a long way north to join the supporting transport improvements required to maintain accessibility and southbound A34 at the Pear Tree interchange.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford Wine Cafe at the Corner of Little Clarendon Street and Walton Street
    Agenda Item 1 To: Licensing & Gambling Acts Casework Sub-Committee Date: 16 February 2015 Item No: 1 Report of: Head of Environmental Development Title of Report: Oxford Wine Café (Jericho) Ltd – Application for a New Premises Licence: Oxford Wine Café, 32 Little Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX1 2HU. Application Ref: 14/04165/PREM Summary and Recommendations Purpose of report: To inform the determination of Oxford Wine Café (Jericho) Ltd’s application for a New Premises Licence for Oxford Wine Café, 32 Little Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX1 2HU. Report Approved by: Legal: Daniel Smith Policy Framework: Statement of Licensing Policy Recommendation(s): Committee is requested to determine Oxford Wine Café (Jericho) Ltd’s application taking into account the details in this report and any representations made at this Sub-Committee meeting. Additional Papers: Appendix One: Application for a New Premises Licence Appendix Two: Representations from Interested Parties Appendix Three: Location Map Introduction 1. This report is made to the Licensing & Gambling Acts Casework Sub- Committee so it may determine in accordance with its powers and the Licensing Act 2003 whether to grant a New Premises Licence to Oxford Wine Café (Jericho) Ltd. 1 Application Summary 2. An application for a New Premises Licence has been submitted by Oxford Wine Café (Jericho) Ltd. A summary of the licensable activities applied for and the times proposed for these activities can be found detailed below. Supply of Alcohol (on sales only): Sunday - Thursday 11:00 Until 23:00 Friday - Saturday 11:00 Until 01:00 St Patrick’s Night 11:00 Until 02:00 New Year’s Eve 11:00 Until 02:00 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Council Letter Template
    North Area Committee 4th February 2010 Application 09/02484/FUL & 09/02485/CAC Numbers: Decision Due by: 3rd March 2010 Proposal: 09/02484/FUL -Retention and refurbishment of facade to 123-125 Walton Street along with erection of 3-storey rear extension plus basement. Erection of 3-storey building including basement and part roof storey to replace 126-127 Walton Street and 32-32a Little Clarendon Street. Provision of 36 Student rooms and shared facilities across the upper floors. Provision of 3 new shop fronts to 123-125 Walton Street and provision of replacement retail units on ground floor to 126-127 Walton Street and 32-32a Little Clarendon Street. 09/02485/CAC-Demolition of 126-127 Walton Street and 32- 32a Little Clarendon Street. Part Demolition to the rear of 123-125 Walton Street. Site Address: 123 To 127 Walton Street And 32 And 32A Little Clarendon Street. (Appendix 1) Ward: North Ward Agent: Kemp And Kemp Property Applicant: Shirehall Properties Ltd Consultants Recommendation: i) North Area Committee are recommended to refuse both the applications for Planning Permission and Conservation Area Consent, for the following reasons: 09/02485/CAC. 1. 123 -125 and 127 Walton Street ,on a prominent corner site, serve as a reminder of the development of this suburb and through their qualities of age, form, style, materials and detailing individually and as a part of a group make a positive contribution to the special interest of the conservation area. Their loss would adversely affect the character and appearance of the conservation area contrary to national advice, and guidance in PPG15 .
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Changes to Parking Places – St John Street Area, Oxford
    CMDE4 Division: Jericho and Osney CABINET MEMBER FOR ENVIRONMENT– 15 JANUARY 2015 PROPOSED CHANGES TO PARKING PLACES – ST JOHN STREET AREA, OXFORD Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Commercial) Introduction 1. This report considers objections to a formal consultation on proposals to introduce some changes to parking restrictions in the St John Street areas in Oxford City Centre. Background 2. As a result of long-term construction work at St Cross College which requires the suspension of some residents parking places in Pusey Street, discussions have taken place with the St John Street Area Residents’ Association to find alternative temporary on-street parking places. The proposals which were finally agreed are shown on the plan at Annex 1. 3. Whilst the suspension of parking bays can be done through a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order, introducing new parking bays, even if only for a temporary period, requires a Permanent Traffic Regulation Order and associated consultation. Formal Consultation 4. In October 2014 formal consultation took place on the proposals, with copies of the draft Traffic Regulation Order, statement of reasons, and a copy of the public notice deposited for public inspection at County Hall, and Central Library. At the same time, the Council wrote to local residents and businesses affected by the proposed changes and public notices were displayed at each site and in the Oxford Times. 5. Four responses have been received from local residents objecting to or commenting on the proposals; the responses are summarised at Annex 2 along with officer comments. Copies of all the consultation responses are available for inspection in the Members’ Resource Centre.
    [Show full text]