- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@oxfordmail
Oxford Mail on Twitter
@oxmailjsmith
Follow our Features Editor on Twitter
@oxmailtimhughes
Music Editor Tim Hughes
@oxfordmailOUFC
Oxford United from Oxford Mail
@oxmailmacky
Food & feature writer Katherine MacAlister
- Find us on Facebook
Oxford Mail
Like and follow us on Facebook
@theoxfordmail
Follow us on Twitter
Inspector criticises student home plans (From Oxford Mail)
Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting OXFORD NEWS to 80360 or email us
Inspector criticises student home plans
10:00am Thursday 20th September 2012 in News
Michael Crofton-Briggs
A PLANNING inspector has delivered a major blow to city council plans to control the spread of shared and student housing in Oxford.
Oxford University and Oxford Brookes University have both bitterly opposed “a housing tax” introduced by the council, to make them contribute to social housing as the price of being allowed to build new student accommodation.
The council policy adds significantly to the cost of student homes, with a “social housing charge” of £140 per square metre, plus a five per cent administration charge.
But now planning inspector Shelagh Bussey has expressed concerns, warning the council that she found the policy “ineffective” and “unsound”.
In her note to the inquiry, she was equally critical of the policy to control the spread and locations of houses of multi-occupation (HMOs).
The city council will today be given an opportunity to change her mind when the issue goes before an inquiry into the city’s sites and housing plans and policies at the Town Hall.
But the inspector issued the statement after hearing evidence about the city’s affordable homes policies last week.
Lawyers acting for university colleges had warned that the “housing” tax was legally flawed and would deter development of purpose-built student homes.
The council claimed that the charge was necessary to deter developers from building student accommodation instead of family homes. But the inspector said in her statement: “I consider that the policy is ineffective and therefore unsound because its implementation strategy is not robust.
“It has not been demonstrated how the required contribution to affordable housing would in all cases be clearly related to the development proposed, especially in respect of sites specifically allocated in the plan for student accommodation.”
Turning to the council’s policy of only allowing homes to be turned into multi-occupied houses in stretches of streets where the number of HMOs do not exceed 20 per cent, the inspector said: “Insufficient evidence has been presented to indicate that the policy is likely to have the intended positive outcome.”
Her statement was published on the city council’s website on Monday. But the council’s head of city development, Michael Crofton-Briggs, remained confident the inspector’s concerns would be answered today.
He said: “The council has been requested to carry out further work. She has put these points to us and we shall respond to them. We will be seeking to persuade the inspector that these policies are sound.”
The two-week inquiry will end tomorrow.
FAILURE OF POLICY
TEMPLE Cowley Pools’ allocation for housing development represents a “failure” of Oxford City Council’s planning policy.
That’s what a hearing into the city council’s plans to earmark more than 60 sites across Oxford for development heard yesterday.
As part of the sites and housing plan, the pools are set aside for residential development and they will be replaced by a new £9.2m facility in Blackbird Leys.
But some people have objected to the plans to close Temple Cowley Pools.
At the hearing, Judith Chipchase, of Oxfordshire
Green Party, told the planning inspector the pools should not have been earmarked for development.
She said: “This proposal is a failure of planning policy because the community has opposed it.
“They were very concerned because this is a community facility and they will not have one in the area [if it is developed].”
Mark Jaggard, of Oxford City Council, said: “Temple Cowley Pools is not fit for purpose.
Oxford is very lucky in having a lot of swimming pool provision.”
Sport England did not object to the proposal because the pools would be replaced with a facility in Blackbird Leys.
Comments are closed on this article.
Comments (20)
10:13am Thu 20 Sep 12
bart-on simpson says...
By the way, Judith Chipchase ran for our local council, came last, and now represents the local community. Democracy.
10:38am Thu 20 Sep 12
EMBOX1 says...
As for democracy....pah. Hasn't existed for a long time in the UK. Two-and-a-half parties who always win doesn't equal democracy. Might as well not vote at all.
1:41pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Andrew:Oxford says...
Ousting Labour from Oxford was a fundamental component of the SaveTCP campaign and was an outright failure. The first attempt at blocking it in the courts was also failure, as was Parish Green status for a small corner of BBL park.
By the time the second court case comes round in December, it will be around 6-7 years since members of the SaveTCP group succesfully campaigned to prevent a mid-life refurbishment of TCP and at least 6 months beyond the expected life-expiry of the pool.
I'd hope the council have the sense to close and drain the pools by mid November.
1:42pm Thu 20 Sep 12
PopGoesTheWeazel says...
1:59pm Thu 20 Sep 12
jamiek says...
!!!!!! At least Dick Turpan wore a mask!!!
3:08pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Christine Hovis says...
The place is beyond its use by date.
4:03pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Andrew:Oxford says...
4:04pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Andrew:Oxford says...
4:38pm Thu 20 Sep 12
bart-on simpson says...
6:44pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Myron Blatz says...
8:22pm Thu 20 Sep 12
Andrew:Oxford says...
The full story was published in the Oxford Mail in May 2006.
9:24pm Thu 20 Sep 12
ger elttil OX2 0EJ says...
1:33am Fri 21 Sep 12
Myron Blatz says...
7:15am Fri 21 Sep 12
Andrew:Oxford says...
I'm not convinced that residential accommodation is best suited for that site, a redevelopment of it, the corner buildings and Cowley Centre with a move of County hall to Cowley would probably be better.
On the current County Hall site, why not build new student halls?
1:42pm Sun 23 Sep 12
SaveTCP says...
5:17pm Wed 26 Sep 12
ger elttil OX2 0EJ says...
4:03am Fri 28 Sep 12
Yoosef says...
Almost all the disrepairs of TCP are super-structural and superficial and mainly result from several years of neglect and lack of proper service and maintenance.
The existing BBL Gym does not even have a Steam Room or any windows! It is dark dim and gloomy and underused. The few times I have used it I couldn't wait to finish and leave.
Spending £13M of taxpayers money to build a new pool next to this red herring looser of a Gym is a most foolish idea I have ever heard. It will result in under-use (except by 2-3 nights a week by the likes of Swimming Club) hence further waste of tax payers' money.
5:42pm Fri 28 Sep 12
gavin2012 says...
An example is their year long refusal to repair the Gym AC Coil which only costs a few hundred pounds. Instead for several months the Council and Fusion have put dirty heavy duty fans on the Gym floor recycling dusty, sweaty and dirty Gym air back into the lungs of the users while they work out.
In this way the Council have also failed in their obligation to the tax paying local community members who have been short changed by not getting the standard healthy services that all other centres provide.
Also in this way the local community have felt they are being pressured to give up their TCP Gym and travel further and use the dim and dull BBL Gym which does not even have any windows or a Steam Room. It was designed more like a converted warehouse or garage rather than a Gym.
10:51pm Fri 28 Sep 12
gavin2012 says...
10:29pm Fri 12 Oct 12
AmandaJP says...