An Oxford bike shop under threat of closure has been spared the axe after controversial plans to redevelop the site were rejected.

Planning permission to knock down most of the building housing Beeline Bicycles, in Cowley Road, and replace it with a four-storey block of six one-bedroom flats and two ground-floor shops, was refused by Oxford City Council's east area committee on Wednesday.

Luis Tulip, the owner of Beeline Bicycles, said: "It would have disrupted my business hugely if it had gone ahead. We're very happy in this location.

"I inherited this shop four years ago, and every year it has grown. The shop has been here since 1991."

He said he had discussed the planning application with site owners RT Harris and understood that the bike shop would have been moved into one of the proposed new shops. But he said the business would no longer have been viable.

But he said: "My concern was that there would be reduced space in the shop, not to mention storage space, which is huge, because we need it to support the shop.

"While in the long term I'm concerned, there's a long way to go."

Planning officers, who recommended refusal of the scheme, said the plans for the site were not without merit.

Andrew Lewis said: "There's a lot to be positive about this scheme but we think some of the details let it down."

The scheme was put forward by Riach Architects, on behalf of the site owner.

Andrew Dawson, of Riach Architects, said: "This involves a redevelopment of a rundown complex of buildings which, as a result of the existing layout, is poorly used."

A number of residents living in Cowley Road, Alma Place and Tyndale Road had objected to the proposals.

Brenda Jarman, of Cowley Road, spoke against the planned development. She said: "Our main concerns are the loss of light to gardens and the disruption and noise pollution from the courtyard area.

"I have concerns about the visual presentation of the building, if you compare it to the row of Georgian houses it adjoins."

It was rejected on the grounds that the proposal did not provide a range of dwellings, would cause overlooking from a communal garden area, had an overbearing boundary wall and would add to car parking problems.