Sports facilities upgrade at Hertford And Exeter College Sports Grounds, Oxford

What was proposed

The application proposed upgraded pitches, new padel and other sports facilities, refurbished pavilions, changed squash courts and associated access and landscaping.

“Proposal The upgrade of existing pitches and addition of new sports facilities including a light weight canopy and enclosure housing padel tennis courts, outdoor padel courts, cricket nets and the creation of a new basketball and netball hard surface court together with associated fencing. The refurbishment of Exeter Cricket Pavilion and Hertford Cricket Pavilion.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The grounds contained existing sports buildings and pitches within the Green Belt, flood zones, heritage settings and near New Marston Meadows.

“EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4.1. This report considers the proposed upgrade of existing pitches and addition of new sports facilities including a light weight enclosure housing padel tennis courts, outdoor padel courts, cricket nets and the creation of a new basketball and netball hard surface court together with associated fencing.”

“The site is located within the green belt, within the setting of the Central Conservation Area and the New Marston Meadows and is located within the Elsfield View Cone. The site is located within Flood Zones 1, 2, 3a and 3b, and lies adjacent to the New Marston Meadows Site of Special Scientific Interest. In addition the existing pavilions and squash court buildings are considered as Local Heritage Assets. 4.3.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the enclosure harmed Green Belt openness and the proposal raised flooding, drainage, heritage, archaeology, energy and noise concerns.

“RECOMMENDATION 1.1. Oxford City Planning Committee is recommended to: 1.1.1. refuse the application for the reasons given in paragraph 1.1.2 of this report and to delegate authority to the Director of Planning and Regulation to: • finalise the reasons for refusal including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Director of Planning and Regulation considers reasonably necessary. 1.1.2.”

“Due to the size, mass and height of the padel enclosure, and the height of the proposed lighting and fencing structures associated with the intensification of use, the proposed development would detract from the setting of the existing building group on the site and their significance as Local Heritage Assets, the remote and peaceful character of the sports fields, the surrounding green spine and neighbouring Local Heritage Asset known as New Marston Meadows.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A speaker spoke against the application, while four speakers spoke in favour; officers and the applicant answered committee questions.

The vote

The committee agreed with the officer recommendation to refuse, subject to changing the reason concerning riparian ownership.

“On being proposed, seconded, and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to refuse the application for the reasons listed on the report, subject to the modification in respect of the riparian ownership.”

“The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to: 1. Refuse the application for the reasons given in paragraph 2 of the report, subject to an amendment to reason for refusal 3, and to delegate authority to the Director of Planning and Regulation to:”

Minutes

The final decision

The application was refused for Green Belt, flood risk, drainage, heritage, archaeology, energy and noise reasons, with authority delegated to finalise the wording.

“Oxford City Council, Town Hall, St Aldate’s Oxford OX1 1BX • finalise the reasons for refusal including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Director of Planning and Regulation considers reasonably necessary. 2. The recommended reasons for refusal are as follows: • The proposed padel enclosure would fail to preserve the openness of the Green Belt and would conflict with the purpose of including land within it.”

“The proposed padel enclosure fails to comply with the sequential test, the Flood Risk Assessment fails to consider how people will be kept safe from the identified flood hazards, and it also fails to take the impacts of climate change into account. The proposals are contrary to Policy RE3 of the Oxford Local Plan 2036, Chapter 14 of the NPPF, and the Flood Risk and Coastal Change Planning Practice Guidance.”

Minutes