at the Kingβs Centre, Osney Mead yesterday (Tue 3 Dec) and will continue until
Thu 19 Dec. Members of the public are welcome to attend and observe the
discussions at the Kings Centre without prior notification, but it is not
possible to participate in the discussions themselves at this late stage.
There is more information here:
https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20286/local_plan_examination/1312/oxford_local_plan_2016-2036_examination
The decisions taken in the last Local Plan (2001β2016) are often criticized on
this forum, particularly the one attempting to preserve retail shops in
Headington centre. Similarly, the decisions being made now will affect
Headington for at least the next fifteen years (and for ever in respect of
possible developments).
The full agenda for the 16-day hearing can be downloaded here
https://www.oxford.gov.uk/downloads/file/6872/agenda_and_programme_25_november_2019
The following matters particularly affect Headington and Marston:
Matter 5: Housing for particular groups, especially:
5.1. Are the ceilings for student numbers living in non-university
accommodation realistic and achievable?
5.2. Are the restrictions on university development that would arise from going
above those ceilings reasonable and proportionate?
5.3. Is it appropriate to seek affordable housing contributions from
purpose-built student housing schemes on existing university sites and those
not suitable for general purpose housing, and also 50% affordable homes on the
non-student residential component of university sites with mixed student and
residential developments? Will this inhibit the delivery of student housing and
affect housing land supply?
Matter 6I β Policy SP42: John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington
6.5. Would the policy limit the flexibility of the Trust to develop and adapt
the site including for its operational needs and for housing and employment
uses? If it would, how could it best be altered to achieve the delivery of
positive development outcomes?
6.6. Taking into account the Trustβs Framework Transport Strategy, how can the
policy incorporate the development of suitable transport management measures to
ensure a modal shift away from car trips so that development on the site can go
ahead is a sustainable way?
Matter 6L β Policy SP57: Ruskin Fields, Old Headington
6.7. Has the correct balance between the priority to deliver new housing in the
city and the protection of the character and appearance of the conservation
area been achieved?
6.8. Is it not possible to indicate the residential capacity of the site in the
policy?
Matter 6F β Policy SP65: Bayards Hill Primary School, Barton
6.22. If the site is surplus to playing field requirements, is there a need to
re-provide playing fields elsewhere (given the exception to this requirement in
NPPF paragraph 97a)?
Matter 6K β Policy SP17: Government Buildings and Harcourt House, Marston Road
6.27 Would the policy limit the flexibility of the Oxford Centre for Islamic
Studies to bring forward the development of its site in accordance with its
needs? In particular, is there any reason to preclude B1 development?
6.28. Is the requirement for the site to deliver public open space reasonable
given its location near to Headington Hill Park and would this limit the
delivery of development on the site?
Also Matter 3: Green Belt could affect the land to the north of Bayswater
Brook.