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)
One of the most important topics in our area are the plans to change London Road. The County Council has now produced their response to the consultation, and what I’ll say first of all is that the consultation has been much better than previous ones. The proposal is to continue with the scheme with some small changes — for instance, it has been suggested that the Old High Street pavement does not need to be extended. But, other features, like getting rid of the subway, remain. As we have continually said, instead of replacing the underpass with a crossing, as the County proposes and which would please some pedestrians but infuriate others, what would be best is to have both a crossing and a subway in this major shopping area.
As reported in The Oxford Times, we are also calling for the County to step back and review what went wrong with Phase I of the scheme before giving the green light to another long period of disruption. I hope to be allowed to address the Committee to speak up for residents’ concerns.
The County’s report is available at on-line. Annex 5, in particular, is the response to the consultation. If you have any comments, do drop us a line.
As many of you in the Headley Way area know, the White Horse recently applied for an extension to its opening hours, to stay open into the early hours and also to open in the morning from 9am. They also asked for an extension for the time that under-18s could be in the dining area. Ruth and I have heard several complaints recently about the pub and the behaviour in the local area that flows from it. Local residents have been especially concerns about this application, with serious worries about the impact of later night opening and the danger that the pub would become more like a night club. Residents organised a petition, submitted representations, held a meeting at which I discussed their concerns and where several families and elderly couples asked me to represent them at the hearing.
The hearing occurred yesterday evening and here’s the result of it. Greene King attended and, at the beginning, announced a very significant change to their application — they removed any extension of night-time hours completely. The application, then, was only for morning opening from 9am, and for the extension of times for under-18s attending. They explained this was because they wanted to emphasis the pub as a food establishment rather than a ‘liquor-driven’ location. As a result, the police withdrew their request for a condition to have door staff but retained several other conditions. I spoke, reflecting residents’ concerns and trying to make sure that there were no loopholes. The committee accepted the revised application, with the police’s conditions attached.
So, in short, while the pub can now open earlier in the morning, it can not stay open any later than it presently does. This is a very significant climbdown on their part and I sense that this is largely due to the hard work of residents, led by Peter Combey, who organised the petition. He deserves a round of applause!
What also came out of this event was that Greene King have agreed to have an evening when they will host residents and allow you to talk with the licensee about your concerns and what can be done to overcome them. I have offered to help arrange that meeting and will do so in the near future — please drop me a line if you want to attend.
Of course, there may still be issues with how the White Horse works. Personally, I am pleased that a condition to have bouncers was not imposed because that would have institutionalised the night-club-like aspect: much better to keep them to their word that they want to turn the venue into a ‘family-friendly’ pub. We do need to monitor this and I ask you, please, to contact me or Ruth Wilkinson if you are affected by any incidents involving the pub in the coming months. Needless to say, we’re ready to work with you and the brewery to make sure we get the improvements that are said to be on their way.
We regret that the copper beech tree at the rear of the Dorset House site opposite Latimer Grange has been inspected and has been found to be dangerous. Here is the Tree Officer’s report in full (and please see the postscript about a further tree)
Background
The Tree Preservation Order (TPO) was made on the 19th of Octoberin 2004 as part of the Council’s continuing programme of TPO review; the Order replaced an older ‘Area Order TPO dating back to 1961, which was significantly out of date and effectively unenforceable. Around the same time the Dorset House School site became vacant and available for redevelopment. The TPO included 11 individual trees and 2 tree groups incorporating a further 10 trees. Due to an assessment made of tree conditions and quality a number of trees on the site were excluded from the Order.
An application under the TPO to fell T11, a mature copper beech tree, was registered on the 8th of June 2009. The reason given in the application is that the tree is infected with a root-decay fungus, Meripilus giganteus, and that an arboriculturalist advises that the tree is thus dangerous being liable to windthrow. The application is accompanied by a Tree Survey Report, which includes photographic evidence of the presence of the ephemeral fruiting body of the fungus concerned.
Officers Assessment
The photographs included in the application show a large fungus at the base of the tree, which is unmistakably the fruiting body of Meripilus giganteus. The photograph was taken in October 2008 and at the time of my inspection in June these had largely disintegrated; nevertheless I am in no doubt that a correct identification has been made. The inspection comments of the 2008 survey indicate that there was some incipient die-back of shoot tips in the crown of the tree, which may be symptomatic of disease or dysfunction in the root system. These crown symptoms have since become very much more pronounced, with as much as a 25% reduction in the density of the tree’s foliage being evident.
The host/pathogen combination of Meripilus on beech is one of the most significant disease associations in terms of tree hazard evaluation. The fungus causes a pervasive and aggressive rot in the anchorage roots of the trees’ root-plate, which the tree is not able to counter effectively. In addition to causing the internal decay of woody structural roots the fungus is a moderate pathogen capable of killing roots. The definitive reference in the literature is provided by Dr David Lonsdale, in the Government published text, Principles of Tree Hazard Assessment and Management, (HMSO 1999). Dr Lonsdale’s summary of the significance of the fungus to tree stability is unequivocal,
‘By the time that large fruit bodies of M. giganteus appear, especially on F. sylvatica [beech], it is likely that a high chance of windthrow exists. Crown symptoms may be present by this stage, but by no means always. Indeed, the upper roots may be largely sound, even though the deeper ones are extensively decayed. Due to this pattern of symptom development, and to the severe weakening of the partially decayed wood, M. giganteus is one of the most dangerous decay fungi to be found on F. sylvatica.’
Under section 198(6)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Local Planning Authority (LPA) consent is not required for the cutting down of a TPO tree if it is dead, dying or dangerous. Given the widespread and progressive crown die-back symptoms evident it is reasonable to consider that the tree may be dying although this is not certain. However the confirmed presence of Meripilus considered in combination with the crown symptoms indicate that the tree is definitely potentially dangerous and in my opinion the exemption at section 198(6)(a) does apply.
Government advice given to LPAs at paragraph 6.44 of Tree Preservation Orders- A Guide to the Law and Good Practice, is clear in that LPAs should not purport to ‘decide’ works applied for which are in fact exempt; instead the applicant should be written to without delay and advised that the TPO does not apply.
Under section 206(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 a duty exists for the replacement of a tree removed under section 198(6)(a). The duty is to plant another tree; of an appropriate size and species; at the same place [as defined by the schedule and map of the TPO]; as soon as this can reasonably be done, i.e. before the end of the next planting season. The duty transfers to a new owner if the land changes hands.
Conclusions
Evidence has been presented to the Council, which reasonably demonstrates that the copper beech tree is dangerous; the tree is therefore exempt from the protection of the TPO. The Council must not therefore attempt to determine the application under the TPO; instead it should write to the agents of the tree owner without delay informing them of this position and of their statutory duty to replace the tree (further advice over species selection can be provided in due course).
Post Script
The condition of one of the horse chestnut trees within G1, along the London Road frontage was also identified as a cause of concern in the 2008 tree survey; this is related to a severe infection with chestnut bleeding canker (Pseudomonas syringae pv aesculi); I am anticipating an application related to this tree in the future following a further more detailed assessment of the tree.
Our latest information from Southern Gas is that there may be a gas leak where the main in Osler Road joins the main in St Andrew’s Road i.e. in the middle of the road junction
It would appear that traffic lights will not be appropriate in this location, and there are moves to obtain a road closure order, we will keep you posted.
Some of you may remember that we started a Water Watch site when there were so many problems involving Thames Water, and our inbox was ‘overflowing’ with emails from unhappy customers.
We are pleased to announce that we have just helped obtain compensation for another resident whose garden suffered from sewage overflow on four separate occasions, and our caseload has now reduced to one outstanding claim.
It was great weather for the Friends of Old Headington’s Open Gardens Day yet again this year, and the event was very well attended today. The event is not only legendary for its wonderful variety of attractive gardens, but also for its excellent refreshments, especially the home made cake by the WI.
Please click here if you would like to see the Friends of Old Headington website, it is hot off the press, and a valuable community resource.
It’s a bit confusing but there are two different police teams in Headington, and residents either come under the Headington North team or the Wood Farm, Headington South and Quarry neighbourhood team.
If you live North of the London Road, in the Headley Way/Sandfield Road and Old Headington areas, then your local police team is Headington North. Their drop in surgeries will be held in the Baptist Church in Old High Street at the following times:
Wed 1 July 12.00-14.00
Wed 29 July 18.00-20.00
Wed 26 August 12.00-14.00
If you live South of the London Road in the Brookside/Latimer Road/ Lime Walk/ Windmill Road/ New Headington areas back to Rock Edge and the Churchill Hospital, then your local police team is the Wood Farm, Headington South and Quarry team. Their drop in surgeries are as follows:
NOC main reception on 16 June from 11.00-13.00
Headington Community Centre drop-in cafe, Gladstone Road, on 17 June 10.00-12.00
Co-op, Atkyns Road on 26 June from 16.00-17.00
Do drop in if you have any question for the teams or want to raise any issue of concern, you’ll be made very welcome
Thanks to everyone who attended yesterday evening’s surgery, Altaf and Ruth enjoyed meeting you and discussing your concerns
These included issues around road signage, parking, ways to improve traffic junctions, hazardous traffic light sequencing at the Windmill Road/London Road junction, a county council legal matter, damage to pavements by refuse collection lorries, proposed Ruskin developments, sewage and drainage problems, and the lack of cycle track along London Road
It’s good to hear that so many residents enjoy living in Laurel Farm Close
We shall update residents as we make progress with their issues
Our next street surgery will take place at 6.30 pm on Tuesday 9 June outside St Andrew’s Church in St Andrew’s Lane. If it rains, Altaf and Ruth will retreat to the White Hart pub opposite! We’d love to hear your views on any local issues, and all are welcome. We look forward to seeing you!
