Back from Holiday to a tirade of anti-student vitriol

I'm just back from a week away and disgusted by some of the emails I have received about a planning application in East Oxford. Clearly there is a campaign going on and a standard email has been circulated. I quote some phrases repeated in many of them:

"from my many years of experience of the growing numbers of students in the East Oxford area they are incapable of talking quietly or without using offensive language in every sentence that leaves their mouths along with continuously playing loud music."

"The student population is increasing to unbearable amounts already in this area and they do not need any further encouragement or welcoming into our community because they bring nothing positive."

"Our community is being destroyed and controlled by the universities and their students."

Well I'm sorry but I completely disagree with all of that.  It is full of gross generalisations and is frankly offensive to the many people in Oxford who are students or staff at either of its world-class Universities.  To say students bring nothing positive is utter nonsense - how do people think local business remain viable and vibrant?  I don't just mean bars either - I mean buses, restaurants, supermarkets, local shops and much more.  How many people in Oxford would become unemployed if out two Universities disappeared? I would, as would the leader of the council and many thousands more local people.  The other thing to consider is that if purpose-built student accommodation is provided then this reduces pressure on more conventional housing that could then be used for families and other social groupings.  In principle I think purpose-built student accommodation is a vital part of the accommodation mix in Oxford and the more of it we can have (so long as it is appropriate in scale, site etc.) the more we will reduce the massive housing pressure Oxford suffers.

We have students in our street and they are mostly quiet, considerate and well-spoken.  Occasionally we hear them late at night and occasionally they hear us.  That's a consequence of living in a crowded City with densely built accommodation - for me it's a fair swap for all the wonderful things there are about Oxford.  At last night's Central South and West area forum there were many students present with positive contributions to make and showing genuine interest for local issues of concern.  I was extremely impressed that OUSU, the Oxford University Student Union, is organising an-on street collection for the new Crisis Skylight Centre in Oxford this weekend.  Students do many good things for our City and many volunteer for all sorts of community outreach.  You can read lots about this on the site of the Oxford Hub.

On this particular planning application I will retain an open mind  - there may be reasons to refuse it if it gets called in and there may not.  As chair of Planning Review Committee I'll have to study it more carefully.  But I can say this without any doubt:  I will not be making any decision in either direction just because this is accommodation intended for students.  To do so would show complete disregard for planning law and would be frankly stupid.

The language I have read in emails sounds horribly like the racism of the 60s, the homophobia of the 80s and the sexism of the 70s.  I wonder - would people oppose an afro-Caribbean resource and advice centre, or an LGBT resource and advice centre, on that site with such gross and frankly disgusting generalisations.  They might find themselves on the wrong side of the law if they did.

Central South and West Area Forum

This forum met today in the Town Hall and focussed on student safety issues as well as homelessness.  It was really good to have Lesley Dewhurst from Oxford Homeless Pathways present to explain to us all the good work her charity does.  We also have the new manager from the Oxford Crisis Skylight Centre to tell us about all the good work just about to start in the Old Fire Station.   Lesley produced the best handout I have seen for ages that shows really well how the homelessness services work in Oxford.  How refreshing not to be blinded by high-tech graphics.  Click on the image here to see it in its full glory!

There was a presentation about student safety from the City Council community safety ream and some useful comments from the many students present .  Student input, particularly from the OUSU Vice-President for Charities and Communities , Daniel Stone, is always particularly welcome as it can be hard to build meaningful and sustainable channels of communication between the council and the University sometimes..  I was alarmed to hear a story about a sexual assault on a student in a bus but pleased that the City Council student safety team will take up the issue with the Police and the bus operator.

A useful meeting about HMO licensing

I had a meeting today with Tim Sadler, Executive Director City Services, and Ian Wright, Health Development Service Manager in Environmental Development.  My colleagues Cllr Mark Mills and Cllr John Goddard also attended.  The subject of the meeting was to discuss the problems and unintended consequences that are occurring with the City-wide licensing of Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs).

The discussion centred around the inflexibility of the Amenities and Facilities guide.  I made a statement in full council about one of these issues a while back and two more have since arisen:

In the first case we have a landlord who owns a few some modern executive houses (built in 2003/4) and has six tenants in each.  They have plenty of bathrooms and toilets and a huge kitchen/lounge communal area with which the tenants are all happy.  The problem is that for six tenants the dreaded document insists on an extra sink (or a sink and a dishwasher).  The tenants are happy with one sink and don't want either another sink or a dishwasher as this would reduce the cupboard space available to them for storage of their own personal food.  The council is however insisting this work be done against the wishes both of the tenants and the landlord.  This seems bonkers to me and only creates expense for the landlord that will inevitably be passed to the tenants in the next rent rise.  See the ground floor plan on the left.

The second case is even more bizarre.  This is another house with six tenants.  It has two bathrooms, each of which contain a toilet.  You'd think that would be fine as the guide says that for 1-4 tenants one bathroom that contains a toilet is sufficient.  But no - for six people if you have two bathrooms that both contain a toilet you also have to have a separate toilet.  I understand that toiled has now been fitted after the issue was forced by the council -  in a room that opens onto the kitchen, as one of the options the council suggested.  The tenants hate it and never use it because of the smell into the kitchen and obvious hygiene issue.   The work the council has imposed again strikes me as a waste of money and another inevitable rent rise.  I really don't see why the house can't be treated as two groups of three people with a toilet-containing bathroom for each group.

My real issue with all this - both these cases, and the one I talked about at full council - is that these are groups of consenting and non-vulnerable adults sharing a house in a responsible and neighbourly way, with good relationships with their landlords.  One of them even said to me: "As a landlord it is my policy to provide almost anything my tenants ask for.  They are, after all, my customers.  Thus, for example, if one tells me that their mattress is uncomfortable I don't even check it myself.  If they say it is uncomfortable...it is; so I change it.   A quick phone call to my supplier who delivers and takes away the old one is easy and not very expensive.  It makes good business sense to treat tenants well.  I even turned out to fix a leak on Christmas Day.  The tenants really do not want these things that Council officers are forcing us to do."

The council is not protecting tenants in these cases - it is making problems and rent rises when there were no problems and everyone was happy.  This is absolutely classic Labour behaviour:  We'll decide what's best for you and make sure you have it - even if you don't want it! This attempt to impose a one-size fits all policy on a complex situation where one set of guidelines clearly does not fit all situations is just causing unnecessary expense and waste for landlords and rent rises for tenants in a not exactly financially buoyant time of the economic cycle.  Tenancies come in many different forms - some are room by room, some are whole-house, some have individual locks on rooms, some don't.

I am of course all in favour of pursuing landlords who are negligent, don't keep their properties in good repair and treat their tenants badly.  These are not examples of that though - these tenants are financially capable working people who choose to live in high quality HMOs because they can't afford to live in other way in Oxford with housing being in such short supply and so expensive.  The landlords are providing essential accommodation for the people of Oxford and running decent, honest businesses doing it.  In many cases this is to fund retirement - which seems entirely reasonable to me.  If the landlords were not treating the tenants well they would move out!

There are two ends of the HMO spectrum in Oxford.  At one end you have cases like those I've mentioned and at the other end you have run-down, damp, cold, overcrowded properties with vulnerable tenants with few choices.  In my mind THESE are the places where council intervention is welcome and essential.  But it really is not welcome or needed when landlord and tenants were happy and everything was fine - it is not the job of the council to disrupt perfectly good and safe arrangements between good landlords and non-vulnerable tenants.  The Labour council should be arguing about numbers of cockroaches in some properties - not numbers of sinks or toilets in places where everyone is happy!

This was put rather well by one of the landlords at the last full council also:

"I would ask that the council focus on the highest risk properties and are not deflected by technical breaches of guidelines. That they use scarce resources and strong enforcement powers to protect vulnerable tenants and do not waste their energies on nitpicking .... Please avoid the temptation to consider being a landlord as a life choice of the more unsavoury end of the spectrum."

She is absolutely right! I really want this council to accept that decent, honest landlords actually provide vital housing for many of Oxford's students and young professionals.  These good landlords want the bad landlords brought to account just as much as the council and we councillors do.  The problem is that it feels like the council is currently treating all landlords like the enemy - when the council writes to them for example wouldn't a few sentences in the letter acknowledging the important contribution they are making to the City's housing needs be quite useful?  It might achieve a much better relationship and much better outcomes.

Both of the landlords quoted above have told me they are seriously considering getting out of the business because it is too much hassle.  Neither is young and both are providing good quality accommodation that Oxford desperately needs.  I think it would be a real tragedy if the Labour council's actions pushed these and others out of what is actually an essential business in Oxford thereby removing even more housing stock for young professionals and students who are an absolutely vital part of the economy of our City.

LibDem Group Meeting

We had a meeting of the Lib Dem Group on the City Council today.  We talked about our manifesto for next year and some of the excellent candidates we have lined up.  The meeting was very positive and left me encouraged for the upcoming few months leading up to the elections in 2012.

Three licensing hearings

I was called up at the last minute to join a panel to hear three license applications/variations today.  It was rather annoying as I'd just got home but I cycled back to the Town Hall in about 8 minutes! The applications were:

1.  Kebab Kid on St. Clement's

This application was for a licence to service takeaway food well into the small hours (5am at the weekends) and act as a takeaway.  There were objections from residents and Police concerned with noise in a very residential area and about the tendency for food outlets to be flashpoints for late night gathering of people and disturbance.  Eventually the panel granted reduced hours and imposed a condition requiring door supervisors to aid with dispersal on some evenings of the week.

2.  The Six Bells in Headington Quarry

The was a short extension to hours as part of a revamp of the premises by the brewery.  The panel granted the application as requested and I made sure that none of the extensions came into force until Januray 2012  (thus removing the possibility of using the extra hours in the busy December period, prior to renovation) and also that although the venue could open until 1am on some evenings, it would not be possible to admit new customers after midnight - this is to avoid people leaving other local pubs at their closing time and making a noise walking along to the Six Bells.

3.  The Viking Sports and Social Club in Old Headington

This was really just a regularisation of of existing practice due to technicalities in licensing law and the 2003 Act.  There was some confusion among local residents and indeed the applicant about what their existing club licence covered and about the ability of the licensing panel to change the number of Temporary Event Notices (TENs) that can be used.  TENs are entirely outside the remit of the Council so discussing them was actually a red-herring that caused considerable confusion.  Eventually agreement was reached and I was pleased that we had asked that the club notify neighbours of their yearly plan for events and also notify if any events were added to the calendar later in the year, after it was published.

I left the Town Hall around 8.15pm.  There was one more hearing to do but I couldn't do that as it was for an application in Carfax Ward, the one I represent.

Please note this post does not form an official record of proceedings and should not be treated as such.  The decision notices from the City Council are the definitive documents.

Licensing and Gambling Acts Committee

This was quite a brief meeting.  It included the quarterly report of licensing activity which was presented ably and usefully as ever by Julian Alison, the City Council Licensing Manager.

Most of the meeting focussed on discussion of the government proposals to deregulate lots of forms of licensable entertainment.  While I welcome reduction of red tape I do feel the current regime does give the City Council some very useful and effective tools to make sure the right balance between people's right to quiet enjoyment of their homes and licence-holders' rights to run their businesses.  I don't feel the City Council over-uses or abuses this at the moment.

In principle while I support deregulating where it is safe to do so, I am clear that local authorities do need to have sufficient legislation behind them to be able to properly balance the needs of all people in this City be they those who want to party into the small hours or those that want to sleep in the small hours so they can study or work in the morning.

I do welcome any change that will allow schools, colleges, Universities, charities etc. to be less hindered by legislation when they want to run what are essentially low-risk problem-free events but I do worry about losing control over some bigger and more problematic venues and/or events.  You can read about the proposed changes on the Department for Culture Media and Sport's web site.

The Frideswide Civic Service

October is definitely a month of ceremony, being the start of the year for many parts of Oxford life.  The Frideswide service is an annual event that marks the founding of Oxford by St. Frideswide sometime around the 7th or 8th Century of the Common Era.  There is a good BBC article which tells you more about this.

The service is at Christ Church in the Cathedral and this year focussed on Care of Creation.  We heard three local folk interviewed by the Bishop of Dorchester.  Averil Stedeford has made her house in Headington very green and it is now quite famous.  Malcolm McCulloch, an Oxford academic talked about the green aspects of his research and Jenny Creese spoke about the Connecting Naturally project.

Part of the service involves a big procession to say prayers for St. Frideswide and also leave sprigs of rosemary on her tomb, as a mark of remembrance.

The glove ceremony and court sermon

The glove ceremony which takes place in the Dean's drawing room at Christ Church is a symbolic event of uncertain origin. It may be that white gloves were presented to the High Court judge if there were no crimes for him to try on his visit. These days a pair of white gloves are presented to him both by the Lord Mayor of Oxford and by Oxford University. It is a very grand affair with Heads of Houses, vice-chancellor, Registrar, Proctors and more all present.

This is a very traditional event that marks the start of the legal year in Oxford. It used to mark the
annual start of the "Assizes" - the title of a visit by the a High Court Judge to dispose of criminal and civil business in the county. The Assizes were abolished by the 1971 courts act. These days High Court Judges still visit Oxford but now sit in the Crown Court. The service is now known as the court sermon and the preacher is appointed by Oxford University's Summoner of preachers - usually a college chaplain.

These types of event don't really do much in terms of day to day politics but they are important traditions that I think keep Oxford the great and fascinating City it is today.  I was pleased to attend with around 5 other members of the City Council.

Full Council

This was another long meeting.  I'm afraid I didn't stay for all of it - I left around 8pm when a Labour Councillor started shouting at a Green Councillor.  We were in the final bit of the meeting where motions are debated and this never achieves anything as the council has a majority and the outcome of motions is very predictable.  You can see a recording of the whole meeting at http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decCD/FullCouncilMeetingVideo10October2011.htm and the Agenda and other details are also available.

I was pleased to see Mrs Judy Crompton at the meeting - she is a good local landlord who treats her tenants (one of whom she had with her) extremely well.  She gave a good speech about the HMO licensing scheme and I think it explained very well how although the scheme is a good thing in principle, it is being applied to the wrong landlords.  As she said, "Please avoid the temptation to consider being a landlord as a life choice of the more unsavoury end of the spectrum" and I think really importantly,

" It certainly does seem from the wording of motion 3 that the council sees landlords as wild beasts who must be captured, tamed and kept chained and under control. I, personally, and as a representative of my colleagues, find this unhelpful and, as a council tax payer who personally pays council tax on 6 properties, I also feel that this attitude and the “tarring of all with the same brush” an unhelpful attitude which wastes my money. I expect a more measured tone from my paid representatives.".

I entirely agree with Judy on this.  HMO licensing is being applied far too bluntly.  We have officers pursuing landlords to do work to properties that is not safety-related and that their tenants don't want while at the same time there are other properties that are damp, cockroach-infested and vastly overcrowded.    It staggers me to see that they are not getting prioritised over the many excellent properties that are now being ruined in appearance (being made to look more like hostels) by the ridiculous demands being made by the huge HMO team.  I consider it a public disgrace.

A sneak preview of the new Crisis Centre at the Old Fire Station

Oxford City Council and Crisis, the national charity for single homeless people, have been working together for some time to plan the redevelopment and refurbishment of the Old Fire Station building in central Oxford.

Along with Cllr Stephen Brown, my ward colleague, and Cllr Mark Mills (Holywell ward) I was taken on a tour of the building as it currently is.  It is looking very impressive - very clean and some ingenious use of space to create some very useful art rooms as well as accommodation and a café.   I am particularly impressed with the way the hose tower has been preserved and made visible again.

By autumn 2011 the Old Fire Station will open and be home to a Crisis Skylight Centre and Café and Arts at the Old Fire Station, a brand new arts company. The two organisations are independent but will work alongside each other to achieve the mutual goal of encouraging integration and collaboration between the cultural and homeless communities in Oxford.

Arts at the Old Fire Station will develop partnership projects with Crisis clients, as well as offering professional development for artists, and creative activities for the general public. This “two organisations, one building” model has been developed to offer exciting opportunities for artistic collaborations between the homeless and cultural communities of the city.

The newly developed Old Fire Station will also accommodate a brand new Skylight Café, which will operate as a social enterprise, providing a route into employment for homeless and vulnerably housed adults.

I think the project is a really exciting one and think it will be a real asset to the Gloucester Green area of Oxford, hopefully encouraging some regeneration and re-use of some of the currently vacant retail units in the area.

Some of the text and one picture in this post are taken from a very useful Crisis newsletter.

Oxford Homeless Pathways (OxHOP) 25 years celebration

This was a joyous and extremely well-attended lunchtime event at the Town Hall.  It was celebrating 25 years of amazing work by all those involved in OxHOP.  There was a great speech by Lesley Dewhurst, the Chief Executive, who has been with OxHOP almost all of its life and some really inspiring and moving stories from previous and current users of all that OxHOP provides.

What I like about OxHOP is that it is a holistic service that helps people right from providing emergency shelter at O'Hanlon House (called the Oxford Nigh Shelter before it was rebuilt) to second stage homeless housing via Julian Housing.  The support, encouragement and dignity that OxHOP offers to some of the most vulnerable people in our great city is truly amazing and very humbling.  It was a pleasure to attend the event.

Planning Review Committee: Grove Street Housing

We met today to discuss this one planning application that had been called in.  I was glad the St. Clements car park planning application had not been called in as I considered that the decision had been made properly and thoroughly at the West Area Planning Committee.

The application was to demolish an already half-derelict club, the Grove Street Club, and replace it with four terraced houses (one with four bedrooms and three with three).  The West Area Planning Committee had voted approve the application but I was willing to agree with my North Oxford colleagues that a reconsideration was warranted as there were some serious concerns around sizes of gardens and lack of parking.

There was a presentation from the Planning Officer, two speeches against the application and one in favour from the applicant's agent.  After some discussion the committee voted 4 in favour of the application and 3 against.  I realised that as chair I could either abstain or vote against and use my casting vote to cause a refusal.  I didn't consider that the grounds for refusal were strong enough not to be quashed at appeal so I reluctantly abstained thus allowing the application to be approved.  Losing an appeal against an unreasonable refusal can result in costs being awarded to the applicant against the council and that does nobody any favours.

I had held the meeting in the council chamber as I believe it is better for smaller matters and makes the public feel more included.  Apart from the sound system being not put out at all for the planning officers and then set too loud I thought things proceeded well.  I was sorry the planning officers didn't enjoy presenting in the council chamber.  Personally I think it makes for better democracy for small planning applications.

Redevelopment plans for Luther Court

I went to an interesting exhibition today about a2dominion's plans for redevelopment of Luther Court. This is an area of social housing in a difficult and constrained part of the City Centre and it would be fair to say it has been the victim, and site of, a lot of antisocial behaviour over the years. It comprises of lots of rather small and poky one-bedroomed flats that I'm sure are not ideal for the well-being both mental and physical of their tenants.  Currently the accommodation all faces, and has its access from, the North East side facing onto Luther Street Medical Centre and O'Hanlon House.  I think it would be fair to say that the interaction of some potential clients unable to be accepted by the Medical Centre or O'Hanlon House, and some of the more vulnerable tenants in the current Luther Court has not always produced optimal outcomes.  (click the image below to see a non-squashed version of it!)



The new plan is to demolish the current accommodation and to rebuild it on more levels and facing South West onto Thames Street with access only from that side.  The new accommodation would include more two- and possibly three-bedroomed units suitable for small families and would be to much higher standards of building, light provision and so on.  There is a plan to include lots of secure bike parking and  some student accommodation.  The development would be completely car-free and residents would be excluded from having City Centre residents' parking permits.

I filled in a comment sheet and made the following points:

• While I welcome purpose-built student accommodation, particularly in the City Centre, I do think it works better if there is a resident warden to nip any behaviour or noise issues in the bud.  It was indicated that this would probably be done by utilising more mature residents in return for a reduce rent.


• I hope the development will utilise renewable energy including Solar Thermal and/or PV systems as these work incredibly well even in our climate and can make a real difference to social tenants struggling to pay ever-increasing fuel bills.  Anything that can keep people out a fuel poverty is a good thing in my book!


• I welcome this consultation event and encourage a2dominion to have lots more making sure local residents are informed and invited widely and that communication with all local stakeholders is maintained


• I asked also that a2dominion take into account the wishes of their current tenants in Luther Court carefully and sensitively.  I believe they will and offered to help in any way I can as ward councillor.

As these plans are worked up and come to the planning permission stage I will of course have to back away and keep an open mind about any plans that are actually submitted to the planning process in case I have to take part in a determination of the planning application at a committee.  At this stage though I think can honestly, and without prejudicing myself, say things look promising!

I am grateful to a2dominion for keeping me informed as a local councillor at this early stage of planning what could be a really effective and exciting new development.

St Clements Car Park: Call in FAILS

Well the 5pm deadline has passed and only 8 councillors requested a call-in. It needs 12 for a call-in so it fails. This means the council can go ahead and issue the refusal of planning permission but it does of course remain open to the applicant to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

I think not calling this in was the right decision as I believe West Area Planning committee last week was run openly and fairly and got to its decision in a correct and proper way.

Battle of Britain day service

I was asked to attend this service today to represent the City Council as The Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor were unavailable.  It was a real honour to be asked and as well as commemorating all that the military of the time had given in the Battle of Britain in 1940 I was also asked to "inspect" the dozen or so young people present from the 150 (City of Oxford) Squadron of the Royal Air Force Cadets.  I also gave one of the gospel readings

It was great to chat to young people with a real sense of duty and direction and I was impressed at how impeccably turned out they were.  Seeing one of them process with the flag in the service reminded me of my childhood as a cub scout and then a scout as we used to do that in church at parade Sundays.  I think it's a shame so much of that tradition is fading away - it's great to remember our heritage and commemorate all our forces have done for us to make us the free country we are today.  I don't buy arguments about being disrespectful to other cultures.  We have a great country and I think we should celebrate that, welcome all to join in as they wish!

Well done Oxford ATC and well done St. Michael at the Northgate for hosting an excellent service which had just the right balance of reverence and accessibility!

The saga of St Clements - tweets and many emails

Some readers will know that I like to tweet (Twitter -  @tonybrett) about things going on in the council as I believe it makes for more open and accountable democracy.  As I was just an audience member at West Area Planning  I tweeted about it in some detail.  BBC Radio Oxford picked up on this and rang me at home at 0640 on Thursday morning for comments and an interview about the process.  I was happy to oblige although I must say getting a phone call at 0640 did make me think for a fleeting moment that someone must have died!  Thankfully that was not the case and I was able to explain how call-in works.

Since then there have been a lot of emails to all councillors asking us not to call in the planning application.  I am sending a standard response which I hope is explaining how things progress from here.  The decision was published on Friday morning which means there must be call in requests from 12 City Councillors if the application is to be re-determined at a meeting of the Planning Review Committee, which I chair.  At the moment I have seen five call in requests but there may be more that have not been shared with other councillors. Here's what I've sent (not the picture!) :

Dear <name>,

The application has not been called in.

Some councillors have requested a call in but as far as I am aware only five have done that so far.  The application will only be called in if twelve councillors have requested that by 5pm on Monday 19th September.

It is possible for the Head of City Development to call the application in also, within that same deadline, but there is no indication of that happening at this stage.

It is not my intention to support the call in as I believe West Area committee was run fairly and properly but we must accept that it is the democratic right of other councillors to do so if they feel that's what those they represent want them to do.

I am keeping an open mind about the acceptability or otherwise of the development as I am the chair of Planning Review Committee and will need to be able to chair a discussion openly and fairly if the call-in succeeds.

I hope this explains things at what I of course understand must be a stressful time.

Yours,

Tony Brett

West Area Planning Committee - St Clements

I attended this meeting tonight as I value seeing how others chair meetings and how discussion of planning applications proceeds.  Oscar is a good chair and it's good to learn techniques from him.

Among others, today's West Area Planning considered the controversial application to build student accommodation on the St. Clement's car park. There were some very impassioned speeches from many parties and it was clear that the opposers had really brought the cavalry with some very respected planning consultants, senior folk from local businesses and from the Queen's College.

There seemed to be several areas of discussion. These included access to Angel and Greyhound Meadow, proximity to Queens' College's listed Florey Building, the quality of the buildings proposed and the impact on local traders of the removal of the parking facility (in total during building and then reduced after completion).

Many councillors asked excellent questions and made very good and valid points both against and in favour of the application. Eventually there was motion to refuse planning permission, proposed by Oscar Van Nooijen (the chair) and seconded by Graham Jones (Lib Dem St. Clements' councillor). Five voted in favour of the motion (Cllrs Jones, Benjamin, Van Nooijen, Goddard, Gotch) with four against the motion (Cllrs Price, Cook, Khan and Tanner). The motion thus passed and planning permission was refused.

The council procedures mean that there is a 2 working day period during which the decision can be called in for a second (and fresh) consideration at Planning Review Committee.

Run down and abandoned buildings on George Street

I had a call from someone the other who had noticed some buildings on George Street in a terrible state.  They are all disused shop units and I agree with the caller that they really give a terrible impression of the City Centre so I am trying to find out who owns the building(s) and if there is a way to encourage or force them to do something about the awful eyesores that they have become.   All I have found out so far is that Oxford City Council does not own this building, but planning records indicate that the ownership lays with OXAM, OMCRG, 13-14 Broad St, Oxford OX1 3BP.

Internet searches seem to reveal:

Andre Stern, Karina Sonnenberg
OMCRG Broad Street Oxford,
OX1 3AY
GBR
tel: +44 1865 248 248
fax: +44 1865 249 249

I will continue to investigate...

Is Labour neglecting the Covered Market?

This is a piece of casework about which I won't say too much as I don't want to identify individuals.  Stephen Brown, my ward colleague has also been involved in it.  The story is that covered market traders can have a store room in the cellars below the market and that another trader has a leak in their floor which is causing damage to equipment and stock belonging to other traders as well as the obvious Health and Safety issues around slipping and mixing water and electricity.

I am very disappointed that the City Council administration appears to have been dragging its feet over forcing the offending trader to fix this problem for an extremely long time now.  This is despite large rises in Covered Market rents that traders are expected to pay.  If they paid their rents as slowly as the City Council is fixing this problem I think there would be trouble.

All I want is for Oxford Labour to play fair and make sure the traders get safe and dry storage in return for the huge rents they pay to the City Council, the owner of the Covered Market.

Blessing Service for St. Giles' Fair

I was invited to represent the City Council as Ward Councillor at the traditional service of blessing of St. Giles' Fair this year as the Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor and Sheriff were all unavailable.  It was an honour to do this, accompanying Bob Wilkes, the City Rector and Vicar of St. Michael at the Northgate; and Andrew Bunch, Vicar of St. Giles' Church on one of the rides in leading messages of welcome and a bible reading.  It was great fun to sing some hymns to the pipe organ that you can see in the picture, as well as singing some to the rather better-paced Salvation Army musicians!