One application was permitted by planning officers during week ending 26 June on a property in Windmill Road.

Click on Planning decisions in the central orange toolbar for details

 Oxford Brookes University has rethought its plans for the proposed student centre. If you would like to see the revised plans, please click here

If you would like to make comments on the plan directly to Brookes, or ask the University questions about the plan, you can email spacetothink@brookes.ac.uk

If you want to lodge any comment or concern with the City Council, you will need to contact Planning Officers (see Planning website for City Council on the central orange tool bar)

There are two new planning applications in our ward this week; one has been delegated to planning officers and the other is an application by the county council.  They are in Stapleton Road and Margaret Road.  If you would like to see them in full, please select “Planning applications” on the central orange menu bar

In the past few weeks, the wrapping has come off Headington’s newest buildings — the flats and offices at the top of Lime Walk. It’s the site where the Royal Mail sorting office used to be and I suspect that you, like us, would prefer that to have stayed. But, in their wisdom, Royal Mail closed it down and sold it off and now we have a new addition to Lime Walk’s street-scene.

The buildings are designed by Douglas Riach, who was also the architect for the elegant London Road building used by Scott Fraser, and for John Leon House, further up on the corner of the main road. When the plans were first presented, I must say I was worried by the design, particularly the arch of the metallic roof curving down half the height of the building. So, it was a surprise to me when I saw the building and thought it was actually an interesting arrival in the street…

…But I expressed my opinion the other day to one of the residents of Lime Walk whose reaction was ‘how can you? It’s the worst building I’ve ever seen.’ As another person present commented on our difference of opinion: tastes differ. But Ruth and I would both be interested to hear your views on the Lime Walk building — and on the architecture of Headington more generally. Do leave us a comment!

Permission has been given for a certificate of lawfulness to erect a telecomms mast on Rock Edge, and permission has been refused for an application to extend property in St Anne’s Road this week ending 27 February.  Please click on Planning decisions on the centre orange menu bar for details

Many residents in the Lime Walk area will remember the planning application for 91 Lime Walk, demolishing the house and replacing with a set of houses and flats. Many people understandably felt that this was cramming far too much onto the site. It was rejected by the planning committee and the developer took that decision to appeal.

I offered to represent the Council in this case. This morning saw the site visit of the Inspector. The applicant, his consultant, a Council officer, two residents and myself were present. It’s one of the curiosities of the system that you are not allowed to raise issues there, only to point out physical features ot the Inspector. But I made sure that he noted various aspects of the site, and the relationship of the site to Cecil Sharpe Place.

So, no significant news at this point. We should expect a result in a couple of months. We’ll keep you posted!

Planning Aid provides free, independent and professional town planning
advice and support to communities and individuals who cannot afford to
pay planning consultant fees. It complements the work of local
planning authorities, but is wholly independent of them. 

Planning Aid can help people to:

Understand and use the planning system
Participate in preparing plans
Prepare their own plans for the future of their community
Comment on planning applications
Apply for planning permission or appeal against refusal of permission
Represent themselves at public inquiries.
Planning Aid helps to meet one of the key aims of the government’s
planning reform agenda, which is to place community engagement at the
heart of the planning system.

The up and coming Planning Aid South information evening will offer an
opportunity for the public to come and meet staff and volunteers to
find out what planning help they can give members of the public and residents’ associations

It’s on Wed 11 February at 6 p.m.
Planning Aid South, 3 Woodins Way, Paradise Street, Oxford OX1 1HD

Click here to see their website

A start of a year and a chill has set in, both in the economy and in the weather. But there are some things to celebrate — and one small one comes with 2009 ushering in ‘The End’ of one of last year’s less happy sagas.

You may remember that the Labour City Council proposed to centralise planning decisions away from local communities, without even consulting those communities. It was hardly a surprise: Labour had been saying for some time that centralised is more ‘efficient’, and that local decision-making was poor decision-making that must not be allowed. I’ve picked apart their arguments before; the point is that, whatever the weaknesses of their claims, the way they presented them was, to be frank, woefully handled. The debate at the Town Hall  was no fine display of oratory and, as the Oxford Mail reported, nearly ended in farce — Labour lost a key vote, but a final resolution was not reached, leaving the question simply undecided.

So, it was expected that there would be a re-run of the debate at next Council on 19th January. The item is on the agenda but I heard this week that Labour have decided to accept common sense: the status quo will continue, and local planning decision-making is saved.

This is a victory both for common sense and for local people — for those who bothered to write or to phone their councillors, and especially those who took the effort to come to the Town Hall and express their concerns. To those who did: thank you.

But we should not be naive enough to think this is the definitive end, with no possible sequel. There is an engrained attitude in Labour that is suspicious of decision-making away from the Town Hall, where they fear they can not control it. It may well be that we’ll find that this particular vampire, through whose heart we thought we’d thrust a stake, might walk again. Perhaps, but at least for now local decision-making is safe.

Lib Dems believe that planning decisions should be made as close as possible to the people affected

An inadequately argued proposal from the Labour administration on Oxford City Council, to remove the right of area committees to make decisions on planning applications in their areas, and to return to centralised decision-making, was so fundamentally amended at the last full council meeting that the council is now in limbo.

Since 2002, when a Lib Dem-led administration set up six area committees to make decisions affecting their own communities - including deciding key planning applications - people in Oxford have found that they can get much more involved with matters which concern them, and can influence their councillors much more effectively. Attendance at area committee meetings is regularly many times higher than was the case with centralised planning committees.

But the current Labour administration has vowed to change this, and return to a system of decision-making in the Town Hall by councillors who often know very little about the likely effect of their decisions on the people living closest. Said Lib Dem group leader Cllr David Rundle: “We have protested loudly that there has been very little consultation about this change with the communities affected. Representatives of many groups in the city have come forward in recent days to object, but they have been ignored by the Labour group. This flies in the face of their own Government’s claims to want to increase the powers of communities to decide things which affect them.”

Added Cllr Rundle: “Labour claim that the change will save the council money, but their financial case is so full of holes that they dare not let the scrutiny committee, or area committees, check it out. We have heard a succession of contradictory and false statements by the portfolio holder, and it is clear that the whole idea is being pursued for reasons which have nothing to do with community empowerment or improving quality of decisions.”

As a result of amendments agreed in council, the council may now allow area committees to decide for themselves whether they want to retain planning powers. People in those areas of the city with Labour-dominated area committees would find their planning decisions being made centrally, with limited opportunities to hold their councillors to account.

STOP PRESS

Councillors voted tonight and amended the recommendation on ways to handle planning decisions as follows:

Area Committees to be given the choice of whether or not they continue
to determine planning applications

So this means the paper will be referred through to area committee meetings for further debate, and if councillors at Area Committees vote against continuing to determine planning applications, they will have to do so in front of their own residents and residents’ associations who will be able to petition them and challenge them

Basically this will mean that, if councillors vote according to party lines then NEAC is likely to meet only every two months and won’t determine its own planning decisions, as I understand it, unless a couple of Labour councillors are brave enough to defy the whip.

This may mean that there will be disparities between the way planning decisions are made in different areas of Oxford

David and I feel that this outcome is better than we expected. We are really pleased that residents will now have the opportunity to have their say and we thank all those Headington residents and the Highfield Residents’ Association for taking such a spirited stand on the need for public consultation and partnership

Full Council meets at 4 pm on Monday 15 December to discuss a proposal that has been driven through by the Labour administration without any consultation with the public. Nor has there been any consultation with Group leaders of opposition parties or the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of area committees. The proposal is to take away the powers of the area committee members (local City councillors) to make decisions on planning applications in wards they represent. The administration and officers have also refused to let this badly-argued paper be properly examined by the main scrutiny committee.

This proposal spurns local democracy

• You have emailed us and told us this proposal will not result in better decisions
• You have phoned us and told us this proposal will not save money
• You have written to us and told us this proposal will turn away local people from getting involved as active citizens
• You have organized written and verbal statements to full Council to tell all councillors that making changes like this without engaging with the community is fundamentally wrong

But will they listen? We will know Monday night.

Nowadays we are called ‘front-line’ councillors because much of our work is in on the doorstep. But there are times when what happens outside Headington, in the Town Hall, needs must take up the attention of councillors — and residents. It can be a frustrating distraction, but when the Council announces it intends to undermine radically the way things work and hinder the job of ward councillors, then it’s time to fight back.

One of those times is now. Much of the casework both Ruth and myself pursue relates to planning issues, because residents know that we, like all councillors, sit on our local Area Committee where planning decisions are made. But the Labour administration wants to stop that and take planning away from local decision-making. Not only that, but they want to do it without even going through the must basic process of consultation. So, earlier this week I wrote to some of my local residents for whom I’ve worked on planning issues. Here is what I said:

Dear Headington resident,

 

I am writing to you as you are one of the many people I have attempted to help in the past over a planning issue that has concerned you. Unfortunately, in the future, it will be more much difficult for me to be of assistance – if Labour at the Town Hall get their way.

 

Here is the background. At the moment, a large or controversial application can be heard in the local community, with local residents having their voice heard and their local councillors making the decision in front of them, at the Area Committee. Labour’s proposal is to stop that happening. They argue that this is inefficient and that planning should be decided away from the local area. They also want to decrease the number of councillors who can vote on planning. That will mean that councillors like me who are interested in working for the best interests of their patch but would not want to stick their nose into areas of the city they know less well will be excluded from all planning decision-making. They argue that instead a councillor like me could be an ‘advocate.’ They don’t seem to realise that councillors who are not making planning decisions are soon going to be out of touch with the changing demands of planning law and end up being unreliable advocates.

 

So, if I have helped you with advice before a planning meeting, if I have asked questions prompted by your concerns at an Area Committee, if I have appeared on behalf of you at a Planning Appeal, I have been glad to do all that and believe that, working with you, we have achieved some successes. But Labour want this to stop.

 

If this is the first you’ve heard of all this, that’s a mark of what makes this even worse: Labour are trying to push through this significant change without even consulting Oxford’s residents. They have made no attempt to ask the local people who go to Area Committees or who write in about planning applications what they would prefer.

 

Is there anything that can be done to stop this mean-spirited, half-baked plan? I will certainly be working hard to force Labour actually to consult and to listen to what local people say. You can help by writing to any Labour councillors you know asking them not to vote with their party on this key issue. But this is urgent: Labour have set a date of 15th December for a decision to be made.

 

If all this sounds party-political, I’m afraid it’s unavoidable. It is a Labour administration who are attempting to force this through – and, from what I’ve seen, it’s all too  typical of their top-down attitude, telling people what is good for them, rather than letting people decide what they think will work for them.

 

And if I sound angry, that’s because I am. I have served Headington for more than six years, with planning being one of the ever-present issues in my post-bag. I don’t take kindly to being told part of my job is no longer any of my business.

 

I’ve been amazed by the level of reaction. One of the reasons that I want there to be proper consultation on this issue before a decision is made is because I really wouldn’t want to second-guess local opinion on this matter. But even I am surprised and relieved by the level of interest there is in planning and the desire to keep it local — coming from people of all persuasions and none.

At the moment, my own opinion is that there are three failings in what is proposed. First, it won’t do what it says on the packet: what’s proposed won’t achieve the savings or the ‘improved efficiency’ that is supposed to be its purpose. But that’s a problem for Labour who have come up with a plan which to my mind, and in the opinion of many local residents who have written to me, is wrong in principle: it flies in the face of the talk of community engagement which, it now appears, is empty rhetoric on their government’s part. But my own opinion is now — as it is whenever I discuss a particular planning application with objectors or the applicant — only tentative and provisional. Because my third point is that this is no way to make such an important decision. Consultation must come first. And I don’t mean consultation Tory-style where the County Council asks people a question and then ignores the answer. I want the Council on which I sit to be better than that: it should both give people the chance to comment and actually listen to the responses. Is it too much to ask for that? We will see on Monday.

There seems to be some movement in the County Council’s Transform Oxford proposals on buses. More details can be found on their website but I have copied and pasted an extract below. David and I attended a meeting at County Hall last week and asked some questions about bus services for East Oxford residents that seemed to provoke some irritated comments, and it seemed to me that the public transport proposals for East Oxford are causing considerable concern and re-consideration. I wonder if there is scope in this text for bus routes to operate into Oxford City Centre from East Oxford? See what you think!

So far, we believe that there are three options for achieving a reduction in bus flow in High Street and St Aldate’s:
1.
Re-route certain services that do not necessarily need to use the High Street and St Aldate’s to other routes – for example Abingdon Road or Marston Ferry Road and Banbury Road. Because of the detours involved, this approach may only be appropriate for a limited number of services but will still help us achieve a reduction in bus flows.

2.
Use larger vehicles to serve the routes that feed into the High Street, but reduce the service frequencies – i.e. carry the same number of passengers on fewer, larger vehicles. This could mean significantly fewer vehicles not only in the city centre but throughout the routes into the city from the east.

3.
Use “normal” size buses to serve the routes that feed into the High Street but terminate those buses to the east of the High Street. There are two points where routes converge – at The Plain and at London Place. There appears to be scope at both locations to create an appropriately landscaped terminus. Travel onwards into the city centre would then be by a very high capacity, high frequency (leaving at least every five minutes) transfer bus (some vehicles are available that take almost four full “normal” bus loads) or on foot or, possibly, by a hired bike.

Options 2 or 3, probably in conjunction with option 1, could result in at least a 50% reduction in bus flows in High Street and St Aldate’s.
From a passenger’s perspective, option 1 could mean longer journey times. Option 2 means lower service frequencies but no need to interchange; option 3 maintains high frequency services but means an interchange. Making the options work well for passengers is clearly vital and that will be the focus of our work.

We will consult stakeholders and the public on these options to try to find the right balance between convenience for bus passengers and local environmental improvements.
Because of the huge amount of work involved, we are not expecting to deliver major bus reductions in High Street and St Aldate’s before 2011.

There is now a Frequently Asked Questions page on the County website with an exceedingly long web address.  Please click on this link for a short cut!

Planning Aid is an organization which provides free, independent and professional town planning advice and support to communities and individuals who cannot afford to pay planning consultant fees. It complements the work of local planning authorities, but is wholly independent of them.

Planning Aid can help people to:

Understand and use the planning system

Participate in preparing plans

Prepare their own plans for the future of their community

Comment on planning applications

Apply for planning permission or appeal against refusal of permission

Represent themselves at public inquiries.

I shall put a sticky link on the left hand menu to this web page as it may be a useful contact point for residents’ associations and those making (or commenting on or objecting to) planning applications

Those who attended the planning meeting of the North East Area Committee last Thursday will remember that the planning application relating to 10/12 Stephen Road was discussed.  The decision of the area committee has now been called in by the Strategic Development Control Committee for further consideration.  There are two ways that decisions by area committees can be called in - either by the most senior officer in charge of planning at the Council (Michael Crofton-Briggs) or by four councillors.  This decision has been called in by the portfolio holder for planning, Cllr Colin Cook, and three other councillors. 

The membership of that committee is: Councillors Abbasi, Altaf Khan, Benjamin (Vice-Chair), Brundin, Christian (Chair), Cook, Goddard, Gotch, Khan, Keen, Timbs and Young. The Committee has a meeting scheduled for today but it is too late to include this item within the agenda.  The next date scheduled for the committee to meet is the 18 December and I have asked one of the officers to double check that date for us as it’s so near Christmas. A number of meeting dates have been changed at short notice recently so I will post this up when it has been confirmed.

One delegated planning decisions have been made by officers this week at the NOC.

Please click on Planning decisions on left hand menu bar for more details

There will be a Consultation Event on the re-development of Windmill House, 157a Windmill Road, Oxford at 6.30 pm on Tuesday 28^th October at the Seminar Room, Nuffield Orthopaedic Hospital, Windmill Road

Stonham is Home Group’s care and support business which operates the support service at the above property. Jointly, they are working with Oxford City Council to re-develop the above site. The proposal is to demolish the existing building and construct a new one to provide supported accommodation for young people and supported living units for individuals with learning difficulties.

Representatives from Home Group Development Team, Stonham and Oxford City Council will be in attendance to answer questions and listen to the views of invited local residents to ensure the development has minimal impact on the area. David and I will be there too.

Please click here to see the County Council’s plans to pedestrianise the centre of Oxford

I went to a briefing on this tonight. I get the impression that very few people have been consulted. This is

a vision, not a solid immutable blueprint (Keith Mitchell).

Their view of the City Centre is that there are too many buses, dirty
cluttered streets, and poor quality pavement materials

The exemplar of good practice they want to aspire to is the Castle redevelopment

They are aiming for:

• more pedestrianisation
• low-emission buses (trams are too expensive)
• optical registration of bus routes
• significantly reduced no. buses but the same no. passenger journeys
• smartcard bus ticketing
• cleaner streets
• better pavement materials

The buses from East Oxford via Cowley Road/Iffley Road/St
Clements/Marston Road will turn round at the Plain - that’s the
current thinking. But they will think about extending the route for
through buses from further out if this is not possible. From St
Clements? From Gipsy Lane? From London Road roundabout? From Park
and Ride? That’s all up for debate and the bus companies will have a
big role in sorting this out. But at present they are assuming the
buses from our end of Oxford will turn round at the Plain and will not
diminish in frequency. People will then change onto buses that run through the City Centre

Buses from North Oxford will turn round at a strange new turning place by
the Ashmolean short of the Martyrs’ Memorial, councillors are concerned
this will upset St John’s College

Mr Hugh-Jones (Env/Econ) mentioned talks starting about running a bus service
between Thornhill, the hospitals, and Peartree.

A bendy bus had been superimposed on the presentation slides, it resembled an airport bus for people to stand in, with very few seats. “What about the elderly? What about
people with luggage?” we exclaimed! But the type of bus has not been decided upon yet

Ian Hudspeth and Keith Mitchell seem to think the scheme frees up the options for London buses to depart from other areas of the City. I pointed out that 25%
Tube passengers get on the coach between the Plain and London Road
roundabout, that many Headington residents have bought houses here in
order to access the London buses, and that proprietors of bed and
breakfast accommodation and hotels in Headington had acquired premises
precisely because they were on the main route to London.
I pointed out that the bus companies would be hard to persuade that
their established routes should be changed as they stood to lose a lot
of money, at least initially.

They want to pedestrianise Broad Street and pave it with high quality
materials funded from developer money! (from where? Where can they
develop Broad St.?)

They have no budget for this at present. They are interested in
getting money from the Transport Innovations Fund and they think
they’d be successful, although this would not be enough

Bus stops would move from Queen St to Castle St. and New Road

They will do an audit of cycle racks, then decide where to site new
ones. Lots of concern about the need for cycle routes - The Plain may
become a death trap for cyclists? They would like a rent-a bike scheme as in Barcelona

Phase 1 is putting a non-stopping bus lane down the middle of Queen St
with pedestrian walkways either side.

The plans for consultation are not yet firmed up, but residents will be able to give their views via the County Council. There’s a lot to sort out before plans get as far as that!

We know there is a lot of concern from residents about cycling in Headington.  Pedestrians tell us that they experience near misses or are bumped into by cyclists on pavements. Cyclists say they experience near misses or are forced off road by buses. Car drivers tell us that cyclists swerve in front of them without using arm signals. 

The neighbourhood police have been stopping cyclists who ride on the pavements and ask them why they are doing it, and the answer is frequently “because I don’t feel safe cycling on the road”.  Many of these cyclists are adults, not children.  We need to come up with some good ideas about how to improve all this, before there are any more accidents.  At a recent Neighbourhood Action Group meeting some suggestions included:

• impose on the spot fines for people who cycle on pavements

• stop those cycling on pavements and give them a warning first time round, if they are stopped again, send them on a compulsory cycling proficiency training course

• enforce the law that cycle lanes should be used only by cyclists and not by cars - this would make cyclists feel safer

• devise cycle routes that take cyclists off the main roads and give a map of these routes and a warning to those who cycle on pavements

• put up signs instructing cyclists to dismount where traffic junctions are particularly dangerous

We have asked for this topic to be raised at a forthcoming North East Area Committee meeting.  There are two questions that must be asked of the County:

1. Why isn’t there a Cycling Officer for Oxfordshire?

2. Why isn’t there an up to date County strategy on cycling?

If you have any ideas or suggestions, we would welcome them!

Some of you will remember that there is a long history of planning applications for the area around and including 10 and 12 Stephen Road. It seems only a few weeks’ ago that a planning inspector dismissed appeals on two previous applications at this site. Now there is a new application for the same address. It is similar to the previous applications but the developers hope that they have found a way to overcome the concerns of the planning inspector. As there is history on this site, it is only right that this application is heard at a future Area Committee — if, that is, Labour have not abolished the right to have such cases heard locally by then — and I will be interested to hear both sides of the argument at that stage. That’s the point when I’ll make up my own mind. But if you want to form your own view now, do go to the Council’s planning portal and look under the reference number, which is:  08?01961/FUL.

Following our street surgery in St Anne’s Road, we have reported residents’ concerns about near misses due from the traffic light sequencing to the County’s Safety Officer. Here is his reply:

As you will be aware, the changes to the traffic light phasing here were introduced in late 2007 to help improve traffic flows. We have been monitoring safety here very closely, and although there have been two reported accidents (one resulting in serious injury to an elderly pedestrian, and one resulting in slight injury to a pedal cyclist) neither appear to have been in any way related to the changes. It is nevertheless worrying to hear about the recent incidents; we are now working on the next phase of the London Road project covering the length between Osler Road and Wharton Road, and one objective will be to make the shopping area as friendly a place as possible for pedestrians, and an important part of this will be trying to achieve consistently low speeds on the approach to , and through the junction. We hope to consult on the proposals in the spring 2009, which will be an opportunity for all users to express their views and help shape the scheme.

Planning, particularly strategic planning, can be mind-numbing at times. I’m not sure the little attempt to make the City Council’s Core Strategy interesting will entice many to read it, but it is an important document, defining aims for Oxford in terms of house-building and the facilities to support them.

It is not yet adopted as policy, but it’s nearly there. It’s been through several stages of drafting and consulting and is now out to final consultation for a 6-week consultation period, running from Friday 5th September - Friday 17th October.  This is the final stage of consultation before it is submitted to the Secretary of State towards the end of November.  An examination is likely to take place in March 2009.

In case you’re still reading: at this stage, it starts to have weight in relation to decisions on particular planning applications, but it is limited until it’s actually been formally submitted it to the Secretary of State.

This document does matter, so do go onto the City Council’s website by clicking on the link above and look at it.

Bad news everyone, this is the latest news relayed to me by the County re crossing signals at London Road/Latimer Road junction

The signal equipment has been repaired but to carry out the repair the
electrical supply had to be isolated (cut off). It is my understanding
that we are awaiting the electrical company to come out and reconnect
the supply. They had indicated that they would be out on Wednesday but
failed to show up.

Your City Councillors and County Councillors are pressing for urgent action to ensure the crossing lights are up and running without further delay

Public consultation on Oxford’s CORE STRATEGY (2026)

A series of public meetings will take place in Oxford for people to attend and register their point of view with the county council. Please see the County Council’s website for details of public meetings on this issue, and how to send in your views and comments electronically.

Local organisations will be contacted for their comments by the County. If you wish to air your views on this issue, then please come to the next North east Area Committee meeting on Tuesday 16 September at St. Andrew’s Primary School at 6 p.m.

There is one current licensing application in the Headington Ward being processed by the Licensing Authority week ending 29 August 2008

08/00734/PREM White Hart Public House, 12 St Andrew’s Rd.

Please click on Licensing applications on the left hand tool bar for details

David and I have received quite a few enquiries lately about licensing applications concerning premises in the Headington area.  If you want to find out more, please click on the Council’s licensing application search link

I shall make a link to this search site from the left hand toolbar so that you can reach it quickly at any time 

This is the title of an interesting article in this week’s “Total politics” magazine about the importance of the Green Belt. Some figures are quoted by the Chief Economist at Policy Exchange that are quite surprising.

Which of these would you agree with?

75% of England is developed

50% of England is developed

25% of England is developed

15% of England is developed

or less than the above?

The answer is that, although 54% of survey respondents thought half of England was developed, the real answer (including garden space in cities) is 9.8%.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Parks account for 55.2% of England’s land.

More than 1.6m hectares in England (12.9% of land) is classed as Green Belt.

It’s important that we discuss the issues around the Green Belt in a measured, non-emotive and rational way. Local residents are best placed to consider housing and other economic needs in our communities, not national government. We need to keep up pressure on central government to give us greater powers of decision-making in any future review of the County’s Green Belt.

Those brave enough to stay till the end of the North East Area Committee meeting on Tuesday will have noted that David and I pushed hard for action on the Manor Ground development scheme.  Beech Road residents have made it clear to us that they are disappointed that the promised affordable housing units have not yet been built and made available for use.

We have secured the Area Committee’s backing to call for a progress report from the Head of City Development.  Our Area Co-ordinator Angela Cristofoli is arranging a meeting between officers in Planning and City Housing/Development and David and myself to agree an action plan.  We will post up more news when we have it..watch this space!

I have been asked why the planning applications made by Starbuck’s are no longer on the Council’s planning website. This is the information I have been given by planning officers.

The original Starbuck’s planning applications have been made invalid.

The original applications were served on the owners of the building but
incorrect details were quoted.  When this was realised, Starbucks
withdrew the applications, and submitted new ones with the correct
details.  These are currently being processed by planning officers and will be added to this week’s list

This means that the applications get logged all over again  and won’t come up before North East Area Committee till November.  

Important notice for residents who have sent in comments about the original applications

You will need to send in new letters quoting the new applications. 

Letters quoting the old applications will not be considered with the new applications.
 

The Planning Inspector has allowed Headington School’s appeal against refusal for floodlighting for their new sports pitch bordering London Road. This will be a disappointment to the residents nearby who have been concerned about the possibility of light pollution as well as the ugliness of the lights. The North East Area Committee rejected the application when it was discussed and Cllr Chris Scanlan (LibDem, Barton and Sandhills Ward) represented the Council at the appeal.

Many thanks to those who attended our street surgery this evening, we enjoyed meeting you and are taking up the issues you raised. Over 25 people attended and the event was very worth while. We shall be repeating our street surgeries in areas across the ward. Please watch out for details of our next surgery by clicking the box in the left hand margin

Some of the issues you raised included:  the future of the Dorset House site, uneven footpaths, the site of the old tree stump, the drains in Latimer Road, the delivery lorry at 4 am to St Luke’s Hospital, parking problems, rubbish problems at a site in Beech Road, RPZs for disabled constituents and their carers, green waste, replacement tree planting, cycling on pavements, affordable housing, and health and safety incidents involving buses in Osler Road

We are on the case!

One of the City planners has alerted me to a useful Government website which contains information on how to make planning applications, and gives guidance on regulations.  I have put up a link to it from the left hand toolbar.  It is called Planning Portal.

There will be a meeting of Full Council next Tuesday 5 August to discuss “Oxford 2026: the Oxford core strategy”. This is a very important document as it outlines the planning vision for Oxford over the next 18 years, and discusses, among other things, the proposed development of Headington and its infrastructure. If you would like to see this document, please click on the website link and select the section you want to view under item 4.1.

The document will be formally published on 5 September 2008 and there is still time to contact either Cllr David Rundle or myself if you want us to raise any associated issue at full Council. Any planning policy changes in the future are likely to refer back to this document, so we need to make sure it reflects the views of our Group and our residents. Please let us know if you have concerns about anything in this document.

I have been contacted by residents to ask about the degree to which public consultation has taken place with regard to the prospective application to install a mast at Rock Edge. Please click on the planning application website to view this application and quote planning reference 08/01162/CPU. This is the reply from Planning Officers.

There are three types of proposal for telecommunications:

1. Permitted development notifications
2. 56 day proposals ( up to 15 metres)
3. Full applications.

For all three we notify neighbours within 100 m and schools within 200m,
although blocks of flats will get just a notice put up in the foyer.

In addition for those:
For category 1 above the letter advises that this is permitted
development and neighbours should write to the company not us.

For category 2 we also put up 4-5 site notices on community notice
boards and other strategic sites in the area

For category 3 as well as the site notices we also put a formal notice
in the local press.

This application falls under permitted development. It
appears from the system that the 100m ruling was applied in this
instance.

**********************************************************************I

If you are a resident living close by this development (i.e. within 100 metres) and you feel you should have been consulted about the application but this has not happened, please get in touch with me via phone or email or via this website and I will investigate this further.

The planning officers have been working on a consultation guide outlining the extent to
which they should consult on all types of applications received by Oxford City Council’s Planning Dept. A copy will be posted on the Council’s website as soon as it has been signed off, and I will post a link to it from this website as soon as this has been actioned

The Site Agent for Oxfordshire Highways has contacted residents living near the London Road to let them know the schedule for roadworks. I thought it would be useful to reproduce this information below.

North side from Pullens Lane to Headley Way 21 July - 20 October 2008

• diversion of underground services
• carriageway widening
• drainage works
• reconstruction and re-paving of the footways
• installation of new traffic signs

North side from Headley Way to Osler Road 21 July - 13 October 2008

• diversion of underground services

North side from Headley Way to Osler Road 18 August - 17 November 2008

• carriageway widening
• drainage works
• resonstruction and re-paving of the footways
• installation of new traffic signs
• preparation work for changes to traffic signals

South side from Brookside to opposite Pullens Lane 20 October - 11 December 2008

• diversion of underground services
• carriageway widening
• drainage works
• reconstruction and re-paving of the footways
• installation of new traffic signs
• preparation work for changes to traffic signals

South side from New High Street to Brookside 17 November - 19 Jan 2009

• diversion of underground services
• carriageway widening
• drainage works
• reconstruction and re-paving of the footways
• installation of new traffic signs
• preparation work for changes to traffic signals

Oxford Brookes University public space area 18 December - 13 January 2009

• installation of new kerbing
• drainage works
• installation of high quality paving materials on the footways
• re-positioning and upgrading of the Pelican crossing outside the Gipsy Lane Campus
• installation of new traffic signs

Headley Way to Osler Road 19 January - 9 February 2009

• installation of traffic lights and pedestrian islands
• re-surfacing of the road
• installation of new road markings

Pullens Lane to Headley Way 26 January - 23 February 2009

• installation of traffic lights and pedestrian islands
• re-surfacing of the road
• installation of new road markings

Regular scheme updates will be posted on the County Council’s website

The Oxfordshire Highways Enquiry Line is 0845 310 1111

The County Council says it will carry out regular reviews of residents’ parking zones. One has just been completed in West Oxford.

Isn’t it time that our RPZs were reviewed in Headington? That’s what residents in New Headington are telling David and me.

We shall be working with residents’ associations to push for action on this.

Why should residents have to pay to park their cars outside their own homes?

Why are some zones 24/7? Is this unfair for residents living in busy areas?

Why should residents in 24/7 areas have to pay for passes for every visitor to their homes?

Tell us what you think!

The Inspector has dismissed two appeals for refusal of planning
permission for:
At 10 ~Stephen Road: Demolition of existing building comprising of 2
flats, garages and lock up storage. Erection of 4×3 bed houses, 1×2 bed
flats and 3×1 bed flats. Retention of existing single storey unit at
rear for commercial use. Provision of on-site car parking. (Amended
plans and description).

And at 10 and 12 Stephen road:
Demolition of existing property divided into 2 flats, garages/lock up.
Erection of 5 x 3 bed terraced houses and 2 x 1

The original decisions by City Council were by North East Area Committee overturning
the planning officer recommendation to accept.

So both appeals have been dismissed, meaning neither has been given planning permission.
This decision is final and can not be appealed. The developers can put in another planning application; if they do so, they will have to overcome the reasons for refusal as expressed in this decision.

At a meeting of stakeholders this morning at Cheney School, many people expressed frustration that developer money still had not been spent to improve cycling routes in this area.

There was widespread support for a 20 mph speed limit on Old Road, possibly enforced by a time over distance speed camera.

Another suggestion was made to remove the central white line from the middle of the road which reduces the sense of certainty that encourages drivers to speed.

Everyone wanted to support Cheney School’s cycling to school policy.

The suggestion to put in speed cushions or raised tables was not so popular.

Another suggestion was to enable cyclists to bypass the queue at Windmill Road junction by using a cycle track painted on the footway which would drop away to the advanced stop line marked on the road.

County officers were asked to look into ways of obtaining extra funding for improvements along this busy stretch of road which serves the Churchill Hospital, Cheney School, the University of Oxford, and Oxford Brookes University.

Three planning applications have been lodged in our ward during the week 30 December - 5 January, they are in St. Anne’s Road, Windmill Road and Dunstan Road (Ruskin College). If you want to see these in full, please click on Planning applications in the centre tool bar.  All three have been delegated to planning officers. Last date for comments/objections is 30 January