DOCSLIB.ORG

Oxford City Council Response to Second Set of Inspectors' Initial

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oxford City Council Response to Second Set of Inspectors' Initial Oxford City Council response to Questions Second Set of Inspectors’ initial 1 to 51 questions and comments (IC.2) Contents Q1. Policy H3: Employer-linked affordable housing ........................................................................... 4 Q2. Policy H8: Provision of new student accommodation .................................................................... 9 Q3. Policy H10: Accessible and adaptable homes ............................................................................... 23 Q4. Policy H15: Internal space standards ............................................................................................ 24 Q5. Policy RE3: Flood risk management .............................................................................................. 26 Q6. Policy RE4: Sustainable drainage, surface and groundwater flow ............................................... 27 Q7. Policy RE5: Health, Wellbeing and Health Impact Assessments ................................................... 28 Q8. Policy RE6: Air quality ................................................................................................................... 30 Q9. Policy RE7: Managing the impact of development ....................................................................... 31 Q10. Policy G2: Protection of biodiversity and geodiversity ................................................................. 33 Q11. Policy G3: Green Belt .................................................................................................................... 37 Q12. Policy G5: Outdoor sports ............................................................................................................. 38 Q13. Policy G7: Other green and open spaces ...................................................................................... 40 Q14. Paragraph 6.10 (Preamble to Policy DH1: High quality design and placemaking) and Appendix 6 42 Q15. Policy DH2: Views and building heights ........................................................................................ 44 Q16. Policy DH3: Designated heritage assets ........................................................................................ 49 Q17. Policy DH4: Archaeological remains ............................................................................................. 51 Q18. Policy DH5: Local Heritage Assets ................................................................................................. 53 Q19. Policy DH6: Shopfronts and signage ............................................................................................. 55 Q20. Policy M1: Prioritising walking, cycling and public transport ....................................................... 56 Q21. Policy M2: Assessing and managing development ....................................................................... 58 Q22. Policy M3: Motor vehicle parking ................................................................................................. 61 Q23. Policy M5: Cycle parking ............................................................................................................... 70 Q24. Policy V1: Ensuring the vitality of centres .................................................................................... 73 Q25. Policy V2: Shopping frontages in the city centre .......................................................................... 75 Q26. Policy V3: The Covered Market..................................................................................................... 80 Q27. Policy V4: District and Local Centre Shopping Frontages ............................................................. 81 Q28. Policy V5: Sustainable tourism ...................................................................................................... 85 Q29. Policy V6: Cultural and social activities ......................................................................................... 88 Q30. Policy V7: Infrastructure and cultural and community facilities .................................................. 89 Q31. Policy V8: Utilities ......................................................................................................................... 90 Q32. Policy SP1: Sites in the West End .................................................................................................. 95 2 Q33. Areas of Change: Cowley Centre District Centre, East Oxford-Cowley Road District Centre, Summertown District Centre, Headington District Centre, Cowley Branch Line, Marston Road, Old Road ....................................................................................................................................... 96 Q34. Policy SP17: Government Buildings and Harcourt House ............................................................. 99 Q35. Policy SP 19: Land surrounding St Clement’s Church ................................................................. 100 Q36. Sites Released from the Green Belt (Policies SP24 to SP31) ...................................................... 101 Q37. Policy SP34: Canalside Land ........................................................................................................ 111 Q38. Policy SP39: Former Iffley Mead Playing Fields .......................................................................... 112 Q39. Policy SP41: Jesus College Sports Ground .................................................................................. 113 Q40. Policy SP42: John Radcliffe Hospital Site .................................................................................... 115 Q41. Policy SP44: Lincoln College Sports Ground ............................................................................... 116 Q42. Policy SP48: Nielsen, London Road (Thornhill Park) ................................................................... 118 Q43. Policy SP49: Old Power Station ................................................................................................... 119 Q44. Policy SP51: Oxford Brookes University Marston Road Campus ................................................ 120 Q45. Policy SP52: Oxford Stadium ....................................................................................................... 121 Q46. Policy SP53: Oxford University Press Sports Ground .................................................................. 124 Q47. Policy SP55: Radcliffe Observatory Quarter; Policy SP66: Ruskin College Campus and Policy SP57: Ruskin Field ....................................................................................................................... 126 Q48. Policy SP62: Valentia Road site ................................................................................................... 130 Q49. Policy SP64: Wolvercote Paper Mill ............................................................................................ 133 Q50. Policy SP65: Bayards Hill Primary School Part Playing Fields ...................................................... 134 Q51. Policy SP66: William Morris Close Sports Ground ...................................................................... 136 Appendix 1: Background information for Policy SP52: Oxford Stadium ................................................ 138 3 Q1. Policy H3: Employer-linked affordable housing Is it necessary for the Council to exert the degree of control over employer- linked affordable housing set out in Policy H3? In particular, is it necessary for the policy to require Council approval for the list of items in subsection (a) (d) (e) (f) (g) and (h) bearing in mind that the organisations concerned will have their own on-site operational requirements, their own staffing requirements and their own appropriate tenancy arrangements tailored to their needs? What are the planning reasons that justify such an approach given that the sites are presumably suitable for housing in any event? 1.1 This policy provides an alternative approach to that of Policy H2 on affordable housing. By exempting these developments from the normal requirements for affordable homes under Policy H2, the City Council is offering a significant opportunity for those employers to provide for their own needs and address the sector of society between those able to access traditional affordable housing and those able to access market housing for sale or rent. Application of this alternative approach is dependent on a series of criteria that collectively ensure the policy is effective and that the accommodation provided is affordable in perpetuity given there will be no requirement for affordable housing included social rented housing in line with Policy H2 on these specified sites. It will be important in order to be effective that the rent levels are affordable for employees and that if it is no longer needed by the employer that 50% of the units remain affordable. If general market housing is to be provided on these sites then Policy H2 will apply to that element of the housing. 1.2 Recruitment and retention problems due to affordability and housing issues are some of the most consistently raised concerns of businesses in Oxford as evidenced by representations received from the first issues consultation and the preferred options consultations. The response from Oxford University Estates, First Options consultation July 2016 stated that the University has identified fixed-term, junior employees such as post-doctoral researchers and other staff as having particularly acute housing challenges. These employees need to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NR05 Oxford TWAO
    OFFICIAL Rule 10(2)(d) Transport and Works Act 1992 The Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 Network Rail (Oxford Station Phase 2 Improvements (Land Only)) Order 202X Report summarising consultations undertaken 1 Introduction 1.1 Network Rail Infrastructure Limited ('Network Rail') is making an application to the Secretary of State for Transport for an order under the Transport and Works Act 1992. The proposed order is termed the Network Rail (Oxford Station Phase 2 Improvements (Land Only)) Order ('the Order'). 1.2 The purpose of the Order is to facilitate improved capacity and capability on the “Oxford Corridor” (Didcot North Junction to Aynho Junction) to meet the Strategic Business Plan objections for capacity enhancement and journey time improvements. As well as enhancements to rail infrastructure, improvements to highways are being undertaken as part of the works. Together, these form part of Oxford Station Phase 2 Improvements ('the Project'). 1.3 The Project forms part of a package of rail enhancement schemes which deliver significant economic and strategic benefits to the wider Oxford area and the country. The enhanced infrastructure in the Oxford area will provide benefits for both freight and passenger services, as well as enable further schemes in this strategically important rail corridor including the introduction of East West Rail services in 2024. 1.4 The works comprised in the Project can be summarised as follows: • Creation of a new ‘through platform’ with improved passenger facilities. • A new station entrance on the western side of the railway. • Replacement of Botley Road Bridge with improvements to the highway, cycle and footways.
    [Show full text]
  • Cc Dec1316sob
    QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL ANNEX 2 Questions are listed in the order in which they were received. The time allowed for this agenda item will not exceed 30 minutes. Should any questioner not have received an answer in that time, a written answer will be provided. Answers 1. COUNCILLOR SAM COATES COUNCILLOR IAN HUDSPETH, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL On the assumption that the UK Government There are no assumptions to be made; the Government are simply following are intending to push ahead with Brexit, will the democratic wish of the electorate of the United Kingdom with over 17 the Leader write on behalf of the Council to million voters exercising their democratic right to vote to Leave the EU. I am the relevant ministers reminding them of the confident that the Prime Minister and her government will negotiate a good County‟s views on continued EU deal not just for Oxfordshire but the whole of the United Kingdom. membership and asking them to seek to negotiate a revised Treaty relationship with the EU which would preserve the undoubted benefits that Oxford and our local economy have gained from the single market, a common customs union, free movement of labour within Europe and from the common standards attaching to product certification and common environmental standards? 2. COUNCILLOR DAVID WILLIAMS COUNCILLOR IAN HUDSPETH, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL Would the Leader of the Council like to make Before discussing reforms to governance, it is important to be clear why they a statement as to what progress has been are on the table.
    [Show full text]
  • A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026
    A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 Adopted by Full Council - November 2009 A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 This Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 was adopted at the Council meeting on 2nd November 2009 and is available for downloading at http://www.oxford.gov.uk/policy Spatial & Economic Development City Regeneration Oxford City Council Ramsay House 10 St. Ebbes Street Tel: 01865 252166 OXFORD Fax: 01865 252144 OX1 1PT [email protected] If you have any questions or would like clarification on any aspect of the document, please contact the Spatial and Economic Development team. If you would like a copy of the document in larger print, Braille or audio tape, please contact the Spatial and Economic Development team. Key to front cover photos 1. Underhill Circus, Barton 2. Barton Pool 1 2 3 3. Frys Hill, Blackbird Leys 4. Balfour Road, Blackbird Leys 4 5 6 5. ‘Glow Tree’. Blackbird Leys 6. New Housing, Rose Hill 7 8 9 7. Oxford Castle, Central Oxford 8. Castle Mill Stream, Central Oxford 9. Bonn Square, Central Oxford 2 A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 Contents Page 1. Introduction 4 2. A Strategic Approach to Regeneration 10 3. Evidence and Analysis of the Issues for Oxford 13 4. Roles of Partners 30 5. Action Plan 33 Appendix Economic and Health Trends in Areas of Multiple Deprivation 57 3 A Regeneration Framework for Oxford to 2026 1. Introduction This document sets out the regeneration challenges facing Oxford. It provides a framework for Oxford City Council to work with local and regional partners to respond to these challenges, developing a world class city for everyone who lives and works here.
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTING OXFORD Improving Connectivity / Reducing Congestion / Tackling Pollution CONNECTING OXFORD
    CONNECTING OXFORD Improving connectivity / Reducing congestion / Tackling pollution CONNECTING OXFORD CONTENTS FOREWORD / A GREAT TRANSPORT VISION Oxfordshire needs a modern, efficient, reliable, affordable and sustainable transport system. This means transforming transport connectivity and how people move around, while ensuring everyone has access to employment, education, health, retail, and leisure. 4 THE CASE FOR CHANGE Vitally, it also means moving Oxfordshire’s transport system to one that is largely zero- emission, and as close to zero-carbon as possible, within 20 years. This will improve 6 ASSUMPTIONS & OBJECTIVES people’s health and wellbeing and reduce transport’s contribution to climate change. 8 CHALLENGES To make this vision a reality, Oxfordshire’s transport system needs to encourage more DETAILS 12 walking, cycling and use of public transport, and reduce the number of motor vehicles on 16 BENEFITS the roads, particularly in and around Oxford. 19 NEXT STEPS Sustainably planned housing and employment growth in Oxfordshire will help deliver this vision. Cllr Yvonne Constance OBE Councillor Alex Hollingsworth Cabinet Member for Cabinet Member for Planning Environment, and Sustainable Transport, Oxfordshire County Council Oxford City Council 2 CONNECTING OXFORD INTRODUCTION Oxfordshire County Council is responsible Some good progress is being made including major for most aspects of transport in Oxfordshire. improvements in Headington, the Zero Emission Zone and design work on improvement schemes for In 2015, the county council and its the main routes into the city. partners began Connecting Oxfordshire, a Having laid this important groundwork, Oxfordshire transformation of how people travel to and County Council and Oxford City Council are now within Oxford, as part of our plan to create a embarking on the next leg of the journey.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Vegetation Dynamics on Port Meadow 4.1 History of Port Meadow
    4 Vegetation dynamics on Port Meadow 4.1 History of Port Meadow Port Meadow (132 ha) and Wolvercote Common (39 ha) (the Meadow) are adjacent commons lying on the River Thames flood-plain within Oxford City boundary (Map 2.5). They have been grazed since at least the Bronze Age and have never been ploughed. Shiplake Ditch forms the boundary between Port Meadow and Wolvercote Common. The common land and Hook Meadow form part of a larger Site of Special Scientific Interest first notified in 1952 and re-notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The Nature Conservancy Council’s citation (1983) states that the history of ecological interest in the Meadow was taken into account so the SSSI should be extended to the whole of Port Meadow with Wolvercote Common, with the exception of the Wolvercote allotment gardens. The Meadow is also important as a gene bank of species, particularly well adapted to heavy grazing, which have already been fundamental in the development of agricultural leys (McDonald forthcoming). In 2004, Port Meadow was confirmed as a Special Area of Conservation under European Union legislation because of the presence of Apium repens. The whole was registered as a Scheduled Ancient Monument in 1993 because there are the remains of six Bronze Age burials and three Iron Age settlement sites and field systems on the commons (Map 4.1). Both commons are owned or held in Trust by Oxford City Council and Oxfordshire County Council under Section 9 of the Commons Registration Act 1965. Under the same Act, the Freemen of Oxford and the Wolvercote Commoners registered grazing rights for 1,365 horses, 1,890 cattle, 6 donkeys, 48 ducks and 1,192 geese.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford City Council Local Plan 2036
    Oxford City Council Local Sites Audit Plan 2036 BACKGROUND PAPER INTRODUCTION 1. This background paper forms part of the evidence base for the Oxford Local Plan 2036 and supplements the relevant background papers on Site Assessments that were published at the Issues stage of consultation in 2016 and the Preferred Options stage of consultation in 2017. For clarity, the 2016 and 2017 papers have not been reproduced here but this paper should be read alongside the previous papers. 2. The first part of the paper provides background information on the sites identified at Preferred Options Stage and provides information on how these were identified and the assessment process used to determine which sites would be taken forward for further investigation. 3. The second part sets out the differences between the list of sites accepted at Preferred Options stage and those taken forward into the Proposed Submission Plan. Within this section there is commentary on further reasons considered to help determine which sites should go forward and why sites were rejected at this stage. The section also includes commentary on additional sites that were added at this stage and the reasons for this. 4. The paper is supported by two Appendices. Appendix 1 is a list of Preferred Options rejected sites. This list has been updated with an additional column added to identify sites that were previously rejected but are now being accepted. The additional column contains commentary on why these sites are now being accepted and included within the Proposed Submission Plan. Appendix 2 is a list of the Preferred Options accepted sites.
    [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]
  • Rallying Speech May 2013
    Campaign to save Port Meadow: Presentation to CPRE June 2013 My name is Sushila Dhall, community campaigner and a founder member of the Campaign to Save Port Meadow, which CPRE is supporting. I joined CPRE recently on the basis of your care to protect this and other public green spaces in Oxfordshire. The Campaign to Save Port Meadow has become a high profile one, with a legal challenge from yourselves awaiting an outcome, and other legal action being discussed should a Judicial Review not be called for in response. The issues are many and seem to increase as time goes on, with numerous dubious issues in the planning process having come to light. I am here to give you a sense of the background to this campaign, how it started and where it came from. This time last year the view across Port Meadow was as it had been for centuries, with peaceful views all round of greenery and spires, with a few rooftops showing through as allowed by stringent planning rules. People were shocked to see that view suddenly change, when last September eight ugly blocks covered with scaffolding started rising from behind the mature leafy willows at the southern end of Port Meadow, and were already in those early weeks damaging the beautiful view of the Grade I listed St Barnabas tower. Last September the character of Port Meadow was fundamentally altered by the ugly intrusion of blocks which are too large and tall, too close together, too uniform, too visible. The precious sense of a place of relaxation and refuge that Port Meadow provided residents and students of this pressured town was being wiped away.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford City Council Our Strategy 2020-24
    Oxford City Council Our Strategy 2020-24 The following content will be added to the draft document following the public consultation Foreword by Council Leader key statistics and trends from the Corporate Profile that provide a current context in respect of Oxford’s economy, housing, communities and environment 1 7 Our vision Oxford City Council: Building a world-class city for everyone By creating successful places in which to live and work, supporting our communities and addressing the climate emergency, we will build a fairer, greener city in which everyone can thrive Our aims 1. Foster an inclusive economy 2. Deliver more affordable housing 3. Support flourishing communities 4. Pursue a zero carbon Oxford Foster an Deliver inclusive more economy affordable housing Support Pursue a zero flourishing carbon Oxford communities How we work – a customer first approach 1. We work innovatively and efficiently – we are a flexible and customer-focused team offering high quality services that meet people’s needs 2. We prioritise tackling inequality – our services, investments and policy-making are all designed to address the social and financial inequalities across Oxford. We value diversity and seek to build community cohesion. We want to ensure all Oxford’s citizens have fair opportunities and a real share in the city’s future. 3. We work in partnership – we work with other councils, business, communities, voluntary sector, universities, Government and other public sector bodies to ensure the way we shape our services and direct our investments is joined-up with others. 4. We use our commercial assets for the benefit of local people – our wholly owned companies and properties create jobs, support the local economy and provide additional funds that support the delivery of public services 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Mr Gordon Mitchell Oxford City Council Town Hall St Aldate's Oxford OX1 1BX
    Mr Gordon Mitchell Oxford City Council Town Hall St Aldate's Oxford OX1 1BX 6 November 2018 Dear Mr Mitchell, ELECTORAL REVIEW OF OXFORD: FURTHER LIMITED CONSULTATION FOR SOUTH EAST OXFORD Following our consultation on the draft recommendations for Oxford, I am writing to inform you of the Commission’s decision to hold a period of further limited consultation prior to publication of its final recommendations. This will involve our proposals for wards in the southern part of east Oxford. The Commission believes it has received sufficient evidence in relation to the rest of the city. Therefore, this period of further limited consultation focuses on south east Oxford. During consultation, we received more than 150 representations, which included alternative proposals for this part of the city. None of the submissions supported our draft recommendations. Many respondents provided a great deal of evidence describing their community to substantiate their opposition to our proposals. Below is a summary of our revised proposals. Cowley, Donnington & Iffley, Littlemore, Rose Hill, St Clement’s, St Mary’s and Temple Cowley We received 63 submissions that referred to one of these wards. These included alternative proposals for the whole area from Oxford East Green Party (‘the Greens’) and Oxford Conservative Association and Oxford West & Abingdon Conservative Association (‘the Conservatives’). The Greens’ proposal was supported by Oxford City Council Liberal Democrat Group and the Oxford City Branch of Oxford West & Abingdon Liberal Democrats (‘the Liberal Democrats’). However, the Conservatives’ proposal was supported by relatively little evidence and, when we analysed it, contained two wards with poor electoral equality.
    [Show full text]
  • The Binsey Boat: a Post-Medieval Story of the Thames at Port Meadow, Oxford
    The Binsey Boat: a post-medieval story of the Thames at Port Meadow, Oxford By BRIAN DLRIIA\I, REBECCA BRISCO~ and COLIN McKEWA.\i SUMMARY ThiJ report de~cnbe.~ a small scale rescue of part oj a boat .mb}I'Ct to ,nltr erOSIOn, with quite unexpecttd tmplicatlOtlS for three areas of enquiry: lhe evolution of the OXfOl·d Thames from commercial waterlllay to l-twlrl! activitles; the challenge of H!constnulmg a po.mbly unique riller craft from sUUllI lIreas of ;l~ mneT htlll; ami rrf/ecllOn.. on Iht gtomorplwlogy oj ant oj t/" 1110,1 clase'-, siudied flood pllllns in Englami. 71" ,lory Jwrt,d m 2003 when cablmg workJ on tht east bank o[ thl' Thamt,~ at Medley exposed a boat eroding from the bank, flotrjLed to Oxford City Cou11cils archaeologist. The boat WlU oJ clench boll (onslnulion am1 .,./\ expo.sed rt"mam.s presmted a risk to bathers, ,~IOt'k and TWl/igatiou. In the context of Port MeadO'w's protuil'd stallu mul till w/.urtain age of the veSJel It U'(u cifar lIwl any ;,westigatLOn would have to be a carefulf.), dt-Hgned ,\0 as not to compromi.se the tJeSJel or its slIrrolllldmg.\. Wilh Iht aul oj Ihe EnglISh Hmtagt Manlwlt Team mu1 .• IIUUllts of II" OUDCE MSr m Lmui.;rap, Archat'ology COUNt', the boat was invt'Jtigated Irt earlyJwU! 200-1 along with a topographical, geophysual "nd t1wironmmtal illITII!) of lhe .surrounding arta. Tht boat was Itnl(lLit'ely titablishtd as a punt-likL tle.utl, approxl1Iwlely 20,6 m.
    [Show full text]
  • Acquisition of Land Act 1981 – Section 32 Highways Act 1980
    REVISED NOTICE OF ORDER ACQUISITION OF LAND ACT 1981 – SECTION 32 HIGHWAYS ACT 1980 Environment Agency (Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme) (Footpath 320/18 South East of Weirs Mill Lane) Acquisition Extinguishment Order 2018 & (Footpath 352/2 South Hinksey to A34) Acquisition Extinguishment Order 2018 & (Footpath 352/3 South Hinksey to Abingdon Road) Acquisition Extinguishment Order 2018 Notice is hereby given that the above referenced Orders have been submitted to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for determination. An Inspector will be appointed by the Secretary of State to determine the Orders. The start date for the above Orders is 15 October 2019. As all the objections have been withdrawn the orders will be determined on the papers submitted. The effect of the first Order, if confirmed without modifications, will be to extinguish the public right of way running over land situated at Weirs Mill Lane. The effect of the second Order, if confirmed without modifications, will be to extinguish the public right of way running over land situated south of Barleycott Lane, South Hinksey. The effect of the third Order, if confirmed without modifications, will be to extinguish the public right of way running over land situated at South Hinksey and land situated at Old Abingdon Road. Any queries relating to these Orders should be referred to Helen Sparks at The Planning Inspectorate, Rights of Way Section, Room 3/A Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6PN. Telephone: 0303 444 5646. Email: [email protected] Please quote reference numbers ROW/3226942, ROW/3226944 & ROW/3226945 on all correspondence.
    [Show full text]