APPLICATION NO.	P21/V1376/FUL
SITE	Foxcombe Hall Boars Hill Oxford, OX1 5HR
PARISH	WOOTTON
PROPOSAL	Change of use from a non-residential educational institution (use class F1(a)) to a residential university campus (use class C2), the demolition of the Old Laboratory building and ancillary buildings. Internal and external alterations to listed building. Redevelopment and extension to include 60 student bedrooms, dining hall, campus cafe/shop, gym, extension to lecture theatre, teaching space and study space and associated external works. (as amended plans received 24 November 2021 and amplified by plans and information received 14 March 2022)
WARD MEMBERS	Debby Hallett Emily Smith Val Shaw
APPLICANT	PHBS UK
OFFICER	Penny Silverwood

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that authority to grant planning permission is delegated to the head of planning subject to:

1. Completion of a S106 agreement with the Vale of White Horse District Council and Oxfordshire County Council to secure:

a. Provision of a shuttlebus service between the site and Redbridge Park and Ride for students and the local community on a hail and ride basis with eight services a day on weekdays including one morning and afternoon service to serve Sunningwell, Bayworth and Boars Hill and six services a day on weekends and bank holidays.

b. Provision of a shuttlebus service between the site and the location of off-site student accommodation with eight services a day on weekdays.

c. Ensuring tenancy agreements with students legally bind occupants not to own or bring cars to the site or park within the vicinity of the site.

d. Provision of public art onsite or within the vicinity of the site.

2. Conditions as summarised below:

1. Time limit for commencement

2. Approved plans

Pre-commencement Conditions

3. Details of site levels

4. Submission of Community Employment Plan

5. Submission of photographic schedule of materials

6. Submission of internal and external photographic record of Old Dairy building

7. Submission of external lighting scheme designed to an E2: Rural Environmental Zone as defined by the Institute of Lighting Professional Guidance for the reduction of obtrusive light

8. Details of window design including glass that reduces the visible light transmission to reduce light spill from internal room illuminance

9. Submission of sustainable drainage details

10. Submission of foul drainage details

11. Submission of Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan

12. Submission of landscaping scheme

13. Landscape management plan

14. Submission of Tree pit design

15. Submission of Contaminated Land Remediation Method Statement and Verification Report

16. Details of vehicular access and visibility splays

17. Construction Method Statement

18. Details of sustainable design and construction including rainwater harvesting system.

19. Submission of archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation

20. Submission of piling method statement

Details to be submitted prior to occupation

21. Submission of Woodland Management Plan

22. Submission of Travel Plan Statement

23. Submission of Travel Information Pack

24. Details of cycle parking

25. Details of electric vehicle and electric cycle charging points

Later submissions and compliance

26. Submission of unsuspected contaminated land information

27. Implementation of landscaping scheme

28. Submission of archaeological report within two years of the completion of the archaeological fieldwork.

29. Compliance with sustainable construction and design details.

Informatives

1. Need for a European Protected Species licence

2. S278 agreement with Oxfordshire County Council will be required

3. Offence under S151 of the Highways Act for vehicles leaving the development site to carry mud onto the road

4. Offence under S137 of the Highways Act for vehicles associated with the building operations to park on the public highway so as to cause an obstruction

5. No private drainage is to discharge onto any area of existing or proposed adoptable highway

6. Foul and surface water manholes should not be placed in the middle of carriageway, at junctions, tyre tracks and where informal crossing points are located.

7. A Groundwater Risk Management Permit from Thames Water will be required fir discharging groundwater into a public sewer.

8. S106 informative

1.0	INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSAL
1.1	This application is presented to Planning Committee due to an objection from Wootton Parish Council. The application is also called in by Councillor Val Shaw.
1.2	This application relates to the buildings and grounds of Foxcombe Hall on Boars Hill, which is the campus of Peking University HSBC Business School (PHBS UK). The site lies to the south of Berkeley Road and to the south-east of Jarn Way. The main existing vehicular access to the site is via Jarn Way. There is also a secondary access from Berkeley Road which is predominantly used by pedestrians and cycles. The buildings and car parks are located on the northern part of the site close to adjacent roads. The southern area of the site is mainly extensive woodland with a large pond.
1.3	Beyond Berkeley Road to the north lies the Old Berkeley Golf Course, an area of open land owned by Oxford Preservation Trust. To the north, northwest, west and east are residential properties characterised in the main as dwellings set within large plots. To the south of the site lies further woodland which forms the Foxcombe Woods Nature Reserve owned by the Cecil Pilkington Charitable Trust.
1.4	Foxcombe Hall, the North Gateway and the Garden Terraces and Structures to the south are Grade II listed, first listed in 2017 for their architectural and historic interest. The following structures and features on site were explicitly excluded from curtilage listing by Historic England in their assessment of the site: - North wing of 1964 - The square apse and the east end of the hall - The 1977 extension of the north wing to the south and east (incorporating the modern entrance) and the link to the former billiard room - The interior of the service wing - The former garages and the Old Dairy to the NW of the hall. A site location plan is below:
1.5	The Proposal The application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the site from a non-residential educational institution (use class F1 (a)) to a residential university campus (Use class C2), with the demolition of the old laboratory building and ancillary buildings and internal and external alteration to the listed building. Redevelopment and extension is to include 60 student bedrooms, a dining hall, campus café/ shop, gym, an extension to provide a new lecture theatre, new teaching and study space and associated external works.
1.6	In summary, the proposed works are : - Building T – Redevelopment and extension of Building T to provide a new 200 seat lecture theatre, library and multi-purpose teaching space as well as improvements to the 1960’s façade fronting the Old Berkeley Golf Course - Laboratory Building/ Old Dairy – Demolition of the Laboratory/ Old Dairy to be replaced by proposed buildings A and L to provide 55 student bedrooms. - Building D – A proposed new building to the south side of the courtyard to contain the dining hall and café. Proposed buildings A, L and D will form a new courtyard - West Wing of George and Yeates house– conversion from modern offices to 5 single study bedrooms and a campus gym, as well as the removal of a metal external stair. - New tree planting within the boundary wall along Jarn Way and new landscaping and planting within the newly created courtyard - Widening of the existing vehicular access onto Jarn Way and improvements to the existing car park to the west of this access and removal of the existing car park to the east of this access Further detail is set out in the design and access statement available to view online.
1.7	The plan below shows the existing layout of buildings on site:
1.8	The plan below shows the proposed layout of buildings on site:
1.9	The proposal has been amended following technical officer comments relating to highways, landscape and trees. The amendments include provision of wider access splays to Jarn Way, reduction to the car parking area and an amendment to path to rear of Building D. Additional technical information relating to highways, drainage and ecology and trees was also submitted.  The latest plans and enlarged plans of those above are attached as Appendix 1.

2.0

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS & REPRESENTATIONS

2.1

A summary of the responses received to the current proposal is below. A full copy of all comments received can be seen online at www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk.

Wootton Parish Council	Third consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) Further comments: - Planning authority should take views and objections of residents into consideration - Concerns about impact on traffic, green belt and heritage assets. - Expect the application to meet the policies of the Neighbourhood Plan First Consultation (May 2021) No objection, but concerns raised: - Local population will increase by 25% during the day and 15% overnight - Reference to refused application for B&B at Ripon Lodge for 9 residents which was considered to cause harm to the character of the area, there would be a great deal more harm caused by a café, shop and 100 residential students. - Wrong location to be expanding a business school - Scale of development represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt and there would be material harmful impact on the openness of the green belt because of the increase in volume and footprint of the proposed built environment. - The applicants state that the volume would increase by 35% however this is significantly understated as the baseline for determining the volume increase is as the site existed on 1 July 1948 (NPPF para 145). Compared with the original building the increase in volume is 82%. - The backdrop to the Oxford spires would be damaged by this proposal - There are no such very special circumstances to outweigh the evident harm. The economic benefit would accrue wherever the university is located and there is no compelling argument to local within Oxford’s Green Belt. Greater economic benefits would accrue if students reside in Oxford, Abingdon or Botley with better access to shops, restaurants, bars, social life and public transport. - Proposed rules for students and visitors to limit the impact on local amenity are not enforceable and cannot be policed including student use of cars, particularly for those on short courses and conferences - There will be an impact seven days a week all year round due to out of term residential conferences - Light pollution from the site will be significant especially fronting Jarn Way where student bedrooms and a kitchen present 10 large windows above the boundary wall and within a few metres of the road causing urbanisation to the Green Belt - Without any public transport options from Boars Hill there will be significant use of taxis and private cars which will intensify the use of surrounding roads, footpaths which will impact on residential amenity - The proposal requires significant excavation for basement accommodation, estimated that at least 780 32 tonne truck movements will be required during the excavation works plus additional construction traffic which will impact local amenity for about two years - The loss of a curtilage listed heritage asset is not acceptable given the lack of justification. Preservation of Lord Berkeley’s laboratory should be maintained unless there are very exceptional reasons for destroying the heritage asset and no such reasons have been proved.
Sunningwell Parish Council	Third consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) Objection - Nothing in the amendments to cause any less concern about the impacts of the proposal and it continues to fail to address the main issues - Change of use to a full-time residential university campus operating 24/7 days a week - The increase in population in a quiet rural area both day and night will have an adverse effect on the local community - Adverse impact on the green belt and wider environmental issues and contrary to the provisions set out in the NPPF - Serious traffic impact and implications and lack of on-site car parking First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - The development contravenes a number of local and national Green Belt policies; para 133 of the NPPF and policy CP13 of the local plan - Policy CP3 and CP4 protect Boars Hill from development as it is stated to be in the open countryside and paragraph 145 of the NPPF refers to new buildings in the green belt as inappropriate development - No very special circumstances have been demonstrated - The increase of staff and students will cause overspill on the local road network resulting in an adverse impact on the amenity of immediate residents - The local roads cannot take such an increase in traffic and Boars Hill is no longer served by a dedicated bus route. It is unrealistic to think that vehicles to/from the site can be controlled to the extent that would not cause there to be traffic overspill problems on and in the area of the site - The conferences to be held will exacerbate the traffic situation - The increase in volume will actually be over 82% when calculated from as the area existed in 1948 - The Old Dairy building is a listed heritage asset and there are no proven special circumstances to justify its removal - The increase in student and staff population in this quiet part of Boars Hill will cause additional noise and light pollution adversely impacting the lives of residents - Security and road safety issues need to be considered especially for cyclists
Residents	Comments from 4 residents in support of or raising no objection to the application have been received which are summarised as: - Will benefit students and create value for the area - The proposed development can be achieved in harmony with the nature of the area and its cultural and historical heritage - A great opportunity to improve the energy performance of existing buildings and create a highly sustainable, low energy campus - Good opportunity for the local community to work with PHBS to secure a commitment to no further development and future management of the campus - It will attract international visitors, tourism and local investment to Oxford - The construction process will bring new jobs to the area - A new coffee shop and public toilet will be significant Comments from 303 residents objecting to the application have been received which can be summarised as: Green belt - No very special circumstances exist - No overwhelming need in the green belt - No economic or social benefits to the local community - Volume calculations are incorrect, should be based on size of building in 1948 - No benefit from development that harms the green belt - The college does not need to be in Oxford and any of the perceived benefits could benefit the national economy irrespective of the facility’s location - Will have a material and harmful impact on the openness of the green belt and its purposes due to the increase in volume and footprint of the proposed built environment - Impact on the green belt is both visual and spatial - Inappropriate intensification because of the level of activity that will be generated - The green belt should not be impinged upon - The change of use itself is most harmful to this quiet, non-urban residential area - A minor cosmetic improvement to Berkeley Road frontage hardly does not make up for the massive and permanent construction in a green belt setting Design and Layout - The development will be totally disproportionate, and the scale of development is inappropriate for the area - Out of keeping with other buildings and development in the area and will change the character - Development would be more suited to an urban area where the local infrastructure and services would support it and for the social interaction of students - The design is arguably marginally less visually repugnant than previous design - Creeping expansion and further attempts at erosion of the green belt can be anticipated and there is adequate capacity for further expansion within the proposed teaching facilities - It is unnatural to have an underground lecture theatre in a rural location - The proposed development will not enhance the character of the area, it will damage the character irreparably through the construction of the proposed development - Proposed development is on a large scale, distinctly urban looking development adversely affecting the landscape - There is an opportunity to build a building of exceptional architectural merit but the plans proposed are not fit for purpose - The new building is located on the highest, most prominent corner of the site that impacts neighbours the most - Heights proposed are higher than current buildings Heritage - Concern regarding the Old Dairy being demolished. - The proposals will not enhance or preserve the historic assets or their setting - The demolition of the Berkeley-Hartley Laboratory would be a dreadful act of vandalism. It could be refurbished and should have a blue plaque on it for the discoveries made within - The loss of a curtilage listed heritage asset is unacceptable and unjustifiable - The site will become a mish-mash of styles with the listed building suppressed and losing its heritage setting both in the buildings and the effect of 200 students massing on site - The Old Dairy is a historic landmark and should be open to the public as a local history museum Traffic and transport - Concern regarding congestion associated with large numbers of conference attendees and visitors - Concern regarding traffic to and from the site from students, daily supplies, tradesmen and conferences - Offers from the applicant for improvements to the rural road network should not be allowed to result in creeping urbanisation by the back door - Local amenity will be disrupted due to traffic and mess during construction given the large number of truck movements needed to remove earthworks for subterranean development - Anticipated there will be 780 eight wheeled 32 tonne truck movements for the excavation works - Rules or offers to limit traffic movements cannot be enforced - The traffic management plan for the Scout Camp at Youlbury is ignored - Conferences already held by the university have caused gridlock - Affluent students will not rely on the bus and so traffic movements and the resultant noise and pollution will increase throughout the day and night - The assessments for traffic generation will be grossly inaccurate - Assumptions that wealthy international business executives will use public transport is unrealistic - Out of character movements in the surrounding streets, paths and bridleways - The traffic from conferences will exacerbate existing problem of speeding along Foxcombe Road and parking in Berkeley Road and surroundings - There is no public transport in Boars Hill - The provision of the minibus is inadequate - Improvements to the rural roads will increase urbanisation - Increased hazards for walkers and horse riders - Old Boars Hill Lane is not suitable for a large amount of motor traffic - Provision of 69 cycle spaces is welcome but cycle route to Oxford is extremely dangerous - Access to residential properties will be disrupted during construction - Concerns regarding access for emergency services being blocked - During the Covid-19 lockdown traffic and parking has increased and caused problems from visitors to the countryside - The reduction of parking spaces from 80 to 40 will not provide enough parking for the number of people who will go to the university - The Council will not wish to impose a condition restricting the use of vehicles - The increased traffic will create significant noise pollution in the surrounding area - Danger to cyclists and pedestrians on surrounding roads as a result of increased traffic - The development is not within walking distance to public transport or facilities - Location is unsustainable on transport grounds. - The site is located too far away from facilities, shops and bus stops and there not safe and suitable access to the site for all users - Insufficient turning space for coaches within the site will cause interference with traffic flow on surrounding roads - Hail and ride shuttle bus service will have impact on traffic flows and is unsafe - Additional shuttlebus service as a result of the withdrawal of S8 service will not make the proposal sustainable - Offer of cycle standards at Hinksey Hill Top bus stop should not be withdrawn - Students will heavily rely on taxis which will Residential amenity - Unsatisfactory relations with neighbours - Light pollution into Jarn Way and into neighbouring residential properties will be significant and ruin the rural nature of Boars Hill - Noise pollution from students and conference guests will be neither enforceable nor policeable - There will be 10 large bedroom windows above the boundary wall onto Jarn Way causing light pollution - The proposal to have a curtain warden is laughable - Current students have caused considerable disturbance late into the evening - The disruption to the community (of largely retired people) during construction would be intolerable - Overlooking from the viewing Tower to neighbouring garden Landscape and environment - There is currently no maintenance of the grounds and some areas have been taken over by brambles - Concerns regarding the environmental impact of the changes on an important green space and its biodiversity - Detrimental effect on arboriculture and biodiversity from the use of parking areas - The proposed excavation will likely do damage to the Perched Lower Greensand aquifer which lies over a bed of Kimmeridge Clay - The proposed tree planting is unrealistic - The destruction of the ecology of the lake has dismayed many local expert residents - Would impact Foxcombe Woods and number of visitors cannot be controlled which is important for protecting the woodland - Would cause a loss of habitat for endangered species such as great crested newt - Increased rubbish and mess on the Old Berkeley Golf course - The proposed scheme will damage the protected views to and from Oxford - Oxford View Cones Assessment (2015) gives as much weight to the view back from the spires as to the view towards Oxford. The backdrop to the spires is part of the wider landscape and would be damaged by this proposal - Footpaths and verges are getting churned up and ruined - Concern regarding impact on local woodland and neighbouring SSSI - Impact on the tranquillity, beauty and unique nature of the site - The landscape at this site is a valued landscape and warrants protection - Not enough space for tree planting behind wall along Jarn Way and not an immediate solution due to the length of time it takes for trees to grow - Increased traffic and impact on the network of rights of way, mitigation for this could be made by the university body agreeing to give all students instructions on how to treat the local area - Increased use of Foxcombe Hall land has resulted in damage to boundary fence with nature reserve and hugely impactful noise with significant effect on the nature reserve - The impact on the biodiversity and natural capital of the site and neighbouring nature reserve has not been suitable assessed - The existing problem with littering, campfires and inappropriate behaviour will increase - Light pollution will have a detrimental impact on biodiversity Economic - Concern as to whether it is in the British interest to lodge a Chinese state institution devoted to the study of Chinese and British business activities - Economic benefits could be obtained in any location and would be more easily attainable in a location with shops, cafes, student facilities and transport readily available - There are no significant economic benefits for local people - It will not offer much in way of local employment - The site could be used within its current usage for many other purposes during the day with financial spin offs for the wider economy similarly to those proposed and therefore the arguments for financial benefits are misleading - The economic benefit can only be afforded very limited weight in the planning balance - Employment initiatives should not influence the application and offer no significant benefit - Apart from scholarship places for local people other economic benefits such as networking, collaboration, business development, innovation, opportunities and entrepreneurship are not specific enough to show how the local community may benefit Other - Change of use from non-residential academic to residential academic requires planning permission - Confidence in PHBS has been eroded due to the erection of a student dormitory in the lodge without planning permission - The site in not located within a strategic employment location - Students are promised the Oxford experience, but Boars Hill is nothing but countryside and housing - Concern regarding value of properties in the area (this is not a material planning consideration) - The change of use and ambitious nature of the school will fundamentally change the nature of the community creating a commercial hub with 24/7 activity - The intensification of taxis and private cars on the roads will be significant and dangerous - The B&B application at Ripon Lodge was refused for causing harm to the character of the area and this development will cause far more harm - Utilities infrastructure cannot support this development in terms of water, foul and surface water drainage, phones, electricity, and gas. All will need upgrading causing further damage to the local area by way of urbanisation - The offer of facilities being available for community use is a matter of neighbourliness and has little or no relevance to the application - There are many student accommodation blocks in the Vale and within the Oxford ring road which could be used - The control expressed in the Memorandum of Understanding should be discounted - When PHBS bought the site they had a choice of locations, there were and are more suitable sites nearer to Oxford which are not in green belt nor require a change of use - The purchase was a short sighted and opportunistic purchase without due diligence (this is not a material planning consideration) - Residents have experienced unexplained blockages of sewage pipes since PHBS have been in occupation - The proposal represents an intensification of use by at least 10 if not 20 times that at present - Inadequate infrastructure in the area for the proposed increase in population - Peking University’s record of human rights and academic freedom has been shown to be deeply unethical (this is not a material planning consideration) - Proposal for a shop and café is totally out of character with the area - PHBS is under the control of the Chinese state and there is a national level question as to whether it is in the national interest to allow institutions such as PHBS to establish themselves here when their home countries values run counter to the most fundamental democratic standards (this is not a material planning consideration) - UK business schools are not located in green belt, they are located in towns and cities, it is the wrong location - Approval would then result in more applications coming forward (this is not a material planning consideration) - Boars Hill cannot become a vast science park - The elderly population will feel threatened by the student population - The old Templeton College site near Redbridge Park & Ride would have been a better location - The application should be considered as commercial development rather than education - The development is for students from oversees it is not to help educate or benefit residents, local people, employers or future generations - Concerns the development will affect the local water table and water pressure - National guidance and local plan policies do not relate to tertiary education - There is no way of compelling the applicant to use local staff - The site is not in a strategic employment location - Under the Open University the site was not used as a normal campus, it was an administrative centre - The statement of need is based purely on the course structure chosen by PHBS which makes the Oxford city student accommodation market more expensive to be an option to them - Other student accommodation available in Oxford, e.g. at Botley - If it was an application for a hotel it would be turned down - There is no properly evidenced need for a business school with no detailed documentation of forecasting methodology - The Covid-19 pandemic will continue to have an effect on international travel - There has been inadequate time for residents to assimilate and response to such a voluminous planning application - There is no need for another conference centre in Oxfordshire - There is a lack of facilities and infrastructure to support students
Conservation Officer	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection - Revised plans do not alter previous recommendation First Consultation (May 2021) – No objection - Site comprises the following Grade II listed designated heritage assets: o Foxcombe Hall o The North Gateway o The Garden Terraces and Structures to the south - The following structures and features are explicitly excluded from curtilage listing by Historic England in their assessment of the site: o North wing of 1964 o The square apse and the east end of the hall o The 1977 extension of the north wing to the south and east (incorporates the modern entrance) and the link to the former billiard room o The interior of the service wing (having been remodelled to form offices and modern facilities) o The former garages and the Old Dairy to the NW of the hall. Old Dairy Laboratory building - The Old Dairy Building is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset under the tests of paragraph 203 of the NPPF being of local historic interest - The Old Dairy building has specific local interest as the former laboratory of 8^th Earl Berkeley. This local interest is considered to be in part historic interest due to its specific connection to the 8^th Earl Berkeley’s tenure at Foxcombe Hall and in part architectural owing to his intention to house a laboratory. - It is one of the earliest buildings on site, original plans were for a large, thatched building in the prevailing character of the outbuildings at the hall at the time. At some point the thatched roof was replaced with a tiled roof. There is no evidence the building was ever intended as a dairy being much larger in footprint than would have been required for such a use. - There is evidence the building was separated from the main house and lodge by a retaining wall and gates, one end of the gate piers survives. - Building was externally designed to respond to the Arts and Crafts style popular at the time and consistent with the later proposals for other elements of the site and extensions to the main house that came in the early C20, although the detailing is not as refined as that on the West Wing or the Lodge. - Internally the layout is a series of rooms off a central spine corridor with no specific internal features that indicate it has a former academic research use. Adaptations have been made for its use as a hostel, officers and training space over the year. Timber paraquet floors are on the ground and basement floor and the principal structure at roof level appears to date from late C19 and early C20. - There have been extensive interventions to introduce and alter services throughout the building and the planning history indicates that much of the internal layout and partitioning has changed from the original layout - There are areas where the deterioration of the fabric has occurred, specifically to the lower ground/ basement level where damp levels have severely compromised the floor structure and to the west end where similar damp issues are causing harm to the integrity of the floor. - The detailed heritage assessment submitted provides a historic record of the site and the development of the lab for Berkeley. This assessment provides a more detailed understanding of the site’s former owner and the proposals for the lab building than can be understood specifically from the building as existing. It also provides an adequate record of the fabric of the building. It is stylistically consistent with the Arts and Crafts phases of the wider site. It provides a very useful record of the building’s historic and architectural interest. - The building is rightly not of high enough Architectural or Historic Interest to have been worthy of statutory listing when the main Hall was listed. - The building proposed to replace it is of a scale intended to make best use of the space available including increasing the basement level to reduce the overall massing. - It would not be possible to accommodate the same amount of proposed accommodation in the existing building without significant extension and alteration to it. - If the principle of new development is acceptable here in planning terms, then no objection to the removal of the former lab building to facilitate it. The supporting documents provide a valuable record of the building’s history, association with a person of local historic interest and the remaining fabric of the structure. - Overall, the extant Old Dairy building fabric is not of such high historic or architectural interest that it should be retained and converted.  - The documentary research compiled and submitted provides a greater level of detail about the history of the building and wider site than can be understood from the building itself. The condition of the interior is such that much of the primary fabric and legibility of primary plan form would be lost in order to bring the building up to a habitable standard. - Loss of the building would alter the existing setting of the listed building but would not harm the significance of the designated heritage asset - The proposed new accommodation block Building A is designed to sit behind the existing site wall along the junction between Berkeley Road and Jarn Way. Although of greater massing that the existing building it has no greater relationship with the exterior of the site than the current built form and would not obscure views towards the Lodge or Tower and the glimpses of the main house that can be experienced from the roads. The building is designed so that the elevations that are visible in the street scene share traditional pitched roofs and proportions as the other buildings on the site but would be finished in a contemporary style and materials. New development - Proposed buildings A and D are located in the historic service areas of the site and are designed to be architecturally subservient to the main listed building. - The massing is greater than existing outbuildings but the topography of the site has been used to increase the floor space without far exceeding the ridge height of the west wing of the house or the retained lodge. - Building D continues the building line of the existing West Wing in a discreet area of the site. - Building A has a larger massing that the existing Old Dairy but shares a similar relationship to the main house and the site as experienced from Jarn Way and Berkeley Road. - Satisfied that the listed building remains the dominant building on the site and the use of a C21 style for new buildings ensures that the characteristic Arts and Crafts designs of the listed building are not eroded by pastiche or diminished by statement architectural forms that detract from their historic characteristics. - The proposed alterations to Building T are considered a visual improvement on the existing 1990s first floor extensions to the 1964 range that overlook the Berkeley Road above the estate wall. The existing building has a significant visual impact on views of the site from Berkeley Road and shares none of the material detailing or proportions of the other buildings on site - The proposed alterations serve to improve the overall appearance of this area of the site by introducing a more traditional pitched roof to the first-floor element of the 1960s and 1990s extensions that will soften the appearance of this part of the site when views from approaches along Berkeley Road. No objection to the proposed works to Building T. - The proposed works across the site preserve the prominence of the listed building and the features of its designed setting identified as making the greatest contribution to its significance and historic and architectural interest that make it worthy of statutory listing. - The loss of the former Berkeley Laboratory will change the existing setting of the building, but the fabric of the building is not considered to be of such high historic or architectural interest that there is more that can be learnt from retaining the fabric. - Satisfied that the assessment provided forms an adequate record of its interest as a building - Proposed building A introduces a greater massing into the historically service and ancillary area of the site but the building will remain subservient to the main listed building and is not considered to detract from the architectural or historic interest of the listed building or the contribution that this part of the site makes as part of its setting - From within the site when viewed from the lower ground in the courtyard area surrounding the tower the proposed new landscaping and new building will create a greater sense of enclosure at the north-western end of the site than the existing dairy building. It is not considered that this will detract from the character of this part of the site or the experience of the listed buildings that remain. - Satisfied that the listed building and any features of special architectural or historic interest within it will be preserved by way of this application - There will be an alteration to the setting of the listed building. The proposed removal of the Old Dairy and development of new ancillary structures must be considered with regard to the impact it will have on the contribution this part of the building’s setting has on its significance - The use of the area for ancillary functions will preserve the historic associated use of the area as part of the setting to the main Hall however the scale of new development will alter the appearance of this area and result in an intensification of the use of this area - Satisfied under the tests of Chapter 16 of the NPPF that the significance of the heritage assets on the site including non-designated heritage assets are appropriately understood and have been taken into account in assessing these proposals as per paragraphs 194 and 195 of the NPPF. - The scheme will result in the loss of a non-designated heritage asset and the intensification of new ancillary development in the setting of the Grade II listed Foxcombe Hall. - Consider the harm to the significance of the listed building would be less-than-substantial as per paragraph 202 of the NPPF resulting from the loss of an ancillary structure of subservient scale and character contemporary to the original listed building that provides some understanding of the development of the listed building and wider site. The harm is not considered to be greater than less-than-substantial as the building is not considered curtilage listed to the main building and its associative value has been adequately record by heritage appraisal. - A low level of harm is also considered to arise from the intensification of built form in this ancillary area which is considered low level because the proposed massing has sought to preserve the dominance of the listed building on the site by remaining physically and materially subservient. - In determining the application, the council should be satisfied that there are demonstrable public benefits that would outweigh the harm identified. - Paragraph 203 of the NPPF requires a balanced judgement to eb taken having regard to the scale of harm or loss to a non-designated heritage asset and its overall significance. Whilst the proposal results in total loss of the asset the application has demonstrated that the remaining building has been considerably altered from its original design as planned by 8^th Earl Berkeley from whom it gains much of its local historic interest. The submitted heritage statement provides a very valuable record of the building’s history and development in the absence of surviving features within the building itself. - While the scale of loss is high the significance of the remaining building is considered to be low. Overall, the demolition of the former laboratory building results in a moderate level of loss which should be weighted in the balance when decision taking. - Under paragraph 204 of the NPPF the Old Dairy should not granted permission for demolition unless there is a reasonable expectation that the proposed development will be implemented. - The application will preserve the listed fabric of Foxcombe Hall and improve the external appearance of a number of areas of the stie that form part of its setting whilst continuing to provide a viable use for the listed building. Some harm has been identified to the heritage assets which must be weighed in the overall planning balance.
Countryside Officer	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection - In response to previous comments the applicant undertook eDNA surveys of the nearby pond which returned a negative result for GCN - Satisfied that the proposed development is unlikely to have any impacts on GCN - Satisfied that subject to woodland enhancement taking place, the proposed development can achieve a net gain for biodiversity. A woodland management plan will be secured by condition - Recommended condition for details of external lighting. First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - The woodland to the west and south of the existing building complex is identified as being priority habitat woodland and woodland/ trees in the west of the site benefit from a tree preservation order. - There are records of badgers and slow worms in the woodland to the south and records of bats in some buildings within the site. - The supporting Preliminary Ecological Appraisal concludes that the habitats on site to be impacted by development are not considered to be a constraint comprising of mainly amenity grassland, bare ground, ornamental shrubs, hardstanding and buildings. All surrounding woodland is proposed to be retained and protected - Bat emergence surveys have concluded that the Old Dairy and Lecture Theatre building support roosting bats including a maternity roost in the Lecture Theatre. Works to these buildings will require a derogation licence from Natural England to be lawful due to the demolition of roosts. Satisfied that having regard to bat mitigation guidelines that there is adequate scope to provide compensatory bat roosts to preserve the favourable conservation status of species on site and satisfied that a derogation licence would likely be granted. - Concern that the potential for impacts on Great Crested Newts has been underestimated. If present in the large woodland pond to the south, development could impact this species. There are well established populations on Boars Hill and a network of ponds within the area - The evidence within the Preliminary Ecological assessment which concludes that the pond is of below average suitability and has not been subject to additional survey effort is concerning as the methodology used is not robust to conclude presence or absence of GCN and too greater reliance without evidence has been placed on the presence of fish within the pond. Recommend that further survey work should take place or that the development is entered into the GCN district licence scheme. The drainage proposals to divert water to the south and likely to the woodland pond may also have impacts on GCN. - A woodland management plan to deliver the enhancements accounted for in the biodiversity net gain report could be secured with a planning condition however the metric for this assessment needs to be submitted and reviewed.
Drainage Engineer	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection, subject to condition - No additional comments to make First consultation (May 2021) No objection, subject to conditions - Surface water drainage strategy proposes an attenuated discharge via an existing sewer to the watercourse. This is acceptable subject to a condition providing further details. - Foul water is proposed to be drained to an existing sewer running under Berkeley Road with the on-site network remaining private. Thames Water should assess whether there is sufficient capacity within their network to accept the increase in flow proposed. Further details of the on-site foul network should be provided by condition.
Forestry Officer	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection, subject to condition - The amended plans have addressed the elements of the development that would previously require works within the RPAs of protected trees - In addition, confirmation has been provided on the proposed drainage discharge route - Primary concerns have been addressed - To address outstanding tree protection and landscaping issues condition required First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - Trees within the site form a very significant feature of the landscape and the large majority are of sufficient value to be considered a constraint to development. - Many trees surrounding the western side of the site are protected by a tree preservation order - Although tight in places, the majority of the proposed new accommodation block and dining hall (including basements) have been designed to avoid the root protection areas (RPAs) of the surrounding protected trees. With suitable tree protection measures in place adjacent trees can be retained without lasting implications. An improved Arboricultural method statement is required to address all demolition and construction phases of the proposal - A path is shown leading from the car park along the southwestern side of the proposed dining hall. This encroaches into the RPA of TPO trees to the south and no information has been provided to demonstrate working in the RPA is appropriate. The path is not needed; the proposed pedestrian access on the northern side of the dining hall can be used to allow access down to the gardens between the eastern end of the hall and the George and Yeates west wing. The path should be omitted from the proposal and the area left as soft landscaping. - The car park resurfacing footprint should not encroach wider than the existing footprint and should be constructed using a cellular confinement system. No details have been provided on the No Dig methodology for the parking area in terms of finished surfacing or ground levels. More detail and clarification is required as to what is happening to the existing gravel surfacing, and plans for the existing concrete around the TPO lime trees in the car park by the access driveway. - Proposal to plant Pine and evergreen Oak between the northern elevation of the accommodation block and the site boundary wall fronting Jarn Way is questionable. The boundary wall is likely to require additional support as the ground behind is shown to be lowered and a second internal retaining wall constructed leaving a very narrow section of ground for the proposed trees to be planting. - Due to the extent of construction works required the amount of usable soil volume will be very limited. Questionable that these trees could be accommodated as illustrated, it has not been demonstrated that the trees would have sufficient soil volume in a form available to ensure the long-term establishment of the trees - The proposed location for feature trees will be too close to buildings. Tree planting needs to reflect the scale of the buildings to have lasting visual impact. Acers would suit elements of the site but provide limited landscape impact. Feature trees needs to be located further away from the buildings and be larger canopied long-lived species such as Tulip tree, Ginko, Copper Beech, Ornamental Plane etc. - The proposed feature tree in front of the north-eastern elevation of the dining hall would have very limited soil to become established as the proposed basement is situated directly beneath. It should be relocated to a central planting location in the courtyard in a structure tree pit designed in unison with the drainage storage tank. The proposed sculptural features should be located at the west of the dining hall instead. - The rainwater drainage strategy is reliant upon an existing pipe leading from the SW corner of the George and Yeates west wing, but the pipe is not shown on the existing services drawing or the inspection chambers shown in the topographical drawings - Existing chambers 1 or 2 were not found on site, a large tank was found directly under the corner of George and Yeates west wing but nothing else to indicate a pipe leading down through the woodland as suggested. Evidence is need to demonstrate this pipe is located as shown on the plan and further details are needed setting out how the pipe would be repaired without causing extensive tree root damage of protected trees.
Contaminated Land	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection - No signs of potential contamination were noted. Historical records revealed no potential previous contaminative sites and the site has mostly been open/agricultural land - The Phase 2 site investigation carried out and concludes that areas identified made ground should be removed from site and a detailed Remediation Method Statement submitted for approval. Condition recommended for submission of a remediation method statement and verification report. First Consultation (May 2021) No objection - The preliminary risk assessment report should be revisited to ensure that land contaminated risks for the larger application site are identified. Risks from the already identified land contaminated risk will need to be mitigated. These aspects can be covered by condition.
Environmental Protection	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection First Consultation (May 2021) No objection
Landscape Architect	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection - Addition information with regards to the car park layout and a more detailed drawing with regards to the tree planting adjacent to blocks A and L have been provided. - Comments from July 2021 regards impact of the proposed development and lighting are still relevant - Conditions required regarding hard and soft landscaping implementation and management and lighting including glazing. First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - No in principle landscape objection but concerns with some details, some elements that would be difficult to implement especially tree planting at the north western section of the site. - Overall satisfied with the Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) submitted and satisfied that the development would not result in landscape and visual effects significant enough to warrant refusal. - The proposed development will slightly alter the mass and appearance of built form on the site, the proposed changes are not significant in terms of landscape character or visual impact to warrant refusal on landscape grounds. - The site is not located within a view cone of the Oxford View Cones Study but partially forms the backdrop along with the wider area of Boars Hill in the views from the east looking west across Oxford City. The vegetation to the north of the site including Abraham wood restricts long distance views to the western site area. Due to the distance and limited proposed changes to the eastern section of the site adjacent to Berkeley Road there would not be a perceivable change in the views. - Details of the proposed landscape scheme have not been provided at this time and can be covered by condition - Concerned regarding the use of evergreen trees to screen the proposed residential blocks A and L at the north western corner of the site adjacent to Jarn Way. There is limited space available for planting in this location. The illustrated section is not practical once the required support and retaining for the existing boundary all is added. If trees are to be proposed for this location a clear technical solution for the construction of this area is required at this stage to ensure that trees with sufficient rooting volumes can be planted in this location - An alternative solution may be the use of pleached trees reflecting the hedge further south along Jarn way and the formal boundary walls. This would allow for some screening of the residential blocks with a more instant effect but would be narrow enough to not cause a maintenance issue due to the proximity of the vegetation to the built form as the proposed evergreen trees would. - However, the proposed buildings do not need to be screened to the extent proposed and any building in this location needs to be acceptable without screening, replacing the roofscape and chimneys of the Old Dairy with a building which provides an alternative interest and articulation in this area. Proposed illustrations need to be provided either without the trees in this location or in year 1 so the buildings can be seen more clearly. - The feature trees south of building A and west of building D should be moved away from the built form to allow more space for any proposed tree to grow. These trees could be an idea location to provide additional seating for students by the use of circular tree seats. - The proposed parking area should be based on the existing area of surfacing and should not extend further into the woodland - Details of cycle parking should be provided - The proposed development will change the lighting of the site with changes to the use of buildings on site and additional residential development. The site however is in an area that currently contains numerous residential properties both to the east along Berkeley Road and Foxcombe Road and those more contained within woodland to the west. There are also streetlights present along Jarn Way. - Building T has been designed in a way to reduce the amount of potential light pollution onto Berkeley Road compared with the existing building. There are other residential properties along Berkeley Road that can be seen from the road including at night - Building A would increase the amount of windows and possible night time lighting onto Jarn way but this is an area which contains other houses and street lights - A condition could be used to control the proposed lighting of the site, with a lighting scheme to be designed to an E2 rural Environmental Zone as per the Institute of Lighting Professional Guidance for the reduction of obtrusive light. - If the additional light, especially onto Jarn Way, is thought to be an issue, then in addition to the proposed use of curtains to control light, light from windows can be reduced by the use of glass which reduces the Visible Light Transmission
Environment Agency	Third Consultation (March 2022) No comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No comments First Consultation (May 2021) No comments
Oxfordshire County Council - Transport	Third Consultation (March 2022) No objection, subject to conditions and S278 works - Since previous response, the Stagecoach S8 bus service has been removed. This public service provided an hourly service northbound to Oxford city centre and southbound to Abingdon and Wantage 7 days a week - The former service served the Hinksey Hill Top stop located at the junction of Hinksey Hill and Foxcombe Road approximately 2km (1.2 miles) from the campus and formed part of a sustainable transport strategy for the campus and the proposed expansion - The applicant has responded to the withdrawal with a Transport Statement Addendum - The sustainable transport strategy for the site also included the existing and proposed improvements to the existing university shuttle bus service - Following the withdrawal of the S8 bus service the County approach the University to consider the opportunity to further open the shuttle bus service to the public and to increase the frequency of the service at weekends - The University was already proposed to allow residents within the local community to use the shuttle bus service at the University’s discretion. The University is now proposing to extend the geographical area for the local community to include the Hinksey Hill Top area. - The applicant proposes that the shuttle bus service will operate on an informal hail and ride arrangement along its route and no physical stops provided. The applicant has proposed to extend the shuttle bus service to serve the villages of Sunningwell, Bayworth and Boars Hill for one weekday service in the morning and one in the afternoon. These villages were previously served by the Thames Travel 44 service which was withdrawn in 2016. This extension to the service and opening to the local community is welcomed. - The applicant proposes to increase the frequency of the shuttle bus service at weekends from three to six services per day and this is welcomed - Upon reviewing the indicative timetables for the service recommend that the return journey for the villages of Bayworth, Sunningwell and Whitecross is changed to 13:20 as the current return time of 16:25 would result in too long a time in Oxford or Abingdon for the majority of users - The previous Transport Statement proposed a second bus that will operate between Foxcombe Hall and the location of off-site student accommodation to provide 8 services per day during the weekdays - The applicant previously proposed to use the bus stop outside of ‘Go Outdoors’ on the Old Abingdon Road but now proposes to use the Redbridge Park and Ride. This improvement is welcomed as this location offers an improved waiting facility for the passenger and allows for an easier interchange between other public transport services - The applicant proposes to continue to operate the shuttle bus service under a Section 19 large bus permit. Consider the use of a S19 permit to operate this service is acceptable provided it is not open to the general public and that to satisfy permit requirements usage must be limited to those resident in the local area - Previously requested S278 works for cycle stands and a bus shelter at the Hinksey Hill Top bus stop, as this stop is no longer served by a bus service these measures are no longer required - Satisfied that the withdrawal of the S8 stagecoach bus service will not affect the sustainability of the site and that the proposed improvements to the shuttle bus service will improve the sustainable transport options available to the staff, students and visitors to/from the campus Second Consultation (November 2021) – revised comments No objection, subject to conditions and S278 works - Previous response requested minor amendments to car park to ensure a 15m coach is able to manoeuvre within the car park without encroaching onto the grassed area. - The applicant has advised that this would involve the loss of one or more trees. For this reason, the recommended condition is no longer required, a 15m coach would still be able to manoeuvre safely within the car park without this minor change. Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection, subject to conditions and S278 works -  Satisfied with dimensions of the proposed site access along with the vehicle tracking - The plan showing a coach entering and exiting the site access in a forward gear shows a 15m coach would encroach onto the grassed area outside the car park. A minor amendment to the car park is required to ensure the coach is able to manoeuvre within the car park without encroaching on the grasses area, this can be covered by condition. - The Stage 1 Road Safety Audit is acceptable - A planning condition should be placed on the application that students will not operate a car whilst resident in Oxford or at the University. - Detailed plan of number, location and form of cycle parking required by condition. - Revised Travel Plan statement required by condition. First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - The 5.5m dimension proposed carriageway for the Jarn way access is acceptable however the 4.0m radii should be increased to 6m. - The amendments to the Jarn Way site access should be submitted on a separate plan. Tracking for a 15m coach should also be provided on the revised site access plan. - A long section of the Jarn way site access should be submitted indicating the vertical alignment to determine appropriate carriageway and footway gradients. These need to be DDA compliant. - The visibility splays for Jarn Way are acceptable - The site remains remote from public transport services, the nearest bus stop is 1.9km from the site at the junction of Hinksey Hill and Foxcombe Road served by S8 hourly route. - The Transport Statement (TS) states that the applicant is willing to provide a bus shelter and cycle parking stands adjacent to the northbound bus stop at this junction, this is welcomed - The university currently operates an in-house shuttle minibus service between the site and student accommodation in Temple Cowley. The TS references an additional shuttle between the site and the Old Abingdon Road where minibus users could then interchange to public bus services to the city centre and beyond. The applicant may wish to consider whether this is the most suitable interchange point or whether Redbridge Park and Ride is more appropriate. - The applicant has addressed previous points made by the County in previous applications regarding the licensing arrangements for the existing and new shuttle bus services. Assuming the University is a not-for-profit organisation a Section 19 permit would be sufficient, however the County prefers the provision of public services which are advertised as such and can be used by others without the need for prior arrangement - The trip rates proposed by the applicant are accepted - The TS states that the proposed development is expected to generate 28 vehicle movements (22 arrivals and 6 departures) during the AM Peak and 24 vehicle movements (6 arrivals and 18 departures) during the PM Peak. Given that the existing development is expected to currently generate 14 vehicle movements in the AM Peak and 12 during the PM Peak this would result in an increase of 14 vehicle movements in the AM Peak and 13 during the PM Peak. It is accepted that the increase in vehicle trips on the local highway impact would be minimal - Car parking spaces will be available for staff and visitor use only and students will not be permitted to park a car on site, except for disabled students. - The proposed level of parking is in excess of local plan parking standards as only 13 spaces would be required for the number of staff proposed. The applicant however states that using the worst case scenario that all 26 staff drive to work by care then the proposed 40 spaces would be sufficient to accommodate this/ In reality it is expected that staff will use a variety of modes including driving, car share, shuttle bus, walking, cycling and public bus. Although the 40 spaces proposed are in excess of standard it is accepted that the excess would be used to accommodate parking for ad-hoc events. The numbers of spaces proposed is therefore acceptable. - The proposal to open up the on-site car park at weekends for use by recreational walkers is welcomed - Students will be informed that there is no student parking available at the site and University policy is that students (except disabled students) are not permitted to bring cars onto site at any time. It is still considered that all students residing in University-provided or arranged accommodation should be asked to sign a confirmation that they will not operate a car whilst a resident in Oxford. Policy H8 of Oxford City Local Plan 2036 does not prevent students from having a car only from obtaining a permit (For clarity, this is a Policy from Oxford City Council’s Local Plan, not the adopted plan of the VOWH DC). - The applicant should also consider the provision of on-site electric vehicle charging facilities for cars and bicycles. - Details of cycle parking should be required by condition - It is understood that in addition to daily teaching the university will host academic seminars (twice per month, attending of up to 40 delegates comprising existing students and staff with no external delegates) and academic conferences (four-six per year, up to 100 delegates with half consisting of existing students and staff) - There will be no additional vehicle trips onto the network as a result of the academic seminars. Whilst the academic conferences will attract additional visitors, it is recognised that they are not day to day events and with event planning and sustainable transport measures their impact can be minimised. - There is no change to the refuse collection arrangement - A required Travel Plan Statement is required by condition
Oxfordshire County Council – Lead Local Flood Authority	Third Consultation (March 2022) No objection, subject to conditions - The Cv values have now been corrected and the flow situation resolved. Minor matters to be resolved can be covered by condition e.g., calculation of the network, designing out of the longer half-drain time and indication of size of hydrobrake. Second Consultation (November 2021) Objection - The FRA and drainage strategy suggests that the current drainage will be maintained which is against the principle of sustainable drainage where it is desirable to get the runoff as near to the greenfield runoff as possible. - It is acceptable that infiltration drainage will not be possible, but the site can discharge via attenuation storage at a restricted rate as near as possible to the greenfield Q1-year rate. - The Cv values are the default settings for the software and are not appropriate. The Cv values should be set to 0.95 or 1.0 whilst MADD value should be 0.0 First Consultation (May 2021) Objection - Full infiltration test data is required to ascertain the appropriate SuDS methodologies required to manage surface water flow and volume. - Without this information it is not possible to establish whether a sustainable surface water drainage strategy can be delivered on site
Oxfordshire County Council - Archaeology	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No objection - The amendments do not alter original comments. First Consultation (May 2021) No objection - The application is situated within an area of archaeological potential. The assessment submitted notes the potential for previously unrecorded archaeological remains of prehistoric and roman date to be present that could be disturbed by development but also recognises that any such remains are likely to have been subject to varying degrees of disturbance or truncation as a result of previous and existing development within the site. Concur with this assessment and consider that the extent of existing structures and the scale of the proposed works would not justify archaeological investigation beyond a programme of monitoring and recording (a watching brief). - The applicant should be responsible for ensuring the implementation of an archaeological monitoring and recording action (watching brief) to be maintained during the period of construction to be secured via condition.
Planning Policy	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) - The site is not allocated for a specific use in the Development Plan and therefore more generic polices are applicable for consideration of the application including: - CP13 – Green Belt. The site can be considered as a ‘previously development site’ within the Green Belt though we note that the proposal increases heights compared to the current buildings/ setting. - CP44 – Landscape highlights that ‘measures will be sought’ for any proposed development ‘to integrate it into the landscape character and/ or the townscape of the area. Proposals will need to demonstrate how they have responded to the above aspects of landscape character’. - CP23 – Housing Density explains that ‘higher densities will be encourages in locations where it will result in the optimum use of land, where there is good access to services and public transport routes and where it would contribute to enhancing the character and legibility of a place’. This should be considered alongside CP33 – Promoting Sustainable Transport and Accessibility and CP35 – Promoting Public Transport, Cycling and Walking. It is noted that the site not currently on a public transport route and the implication of this will need to be considered. - CP30 – Further and Higher Education confirms that ‘the Council will support the development and enhancement of further and higher education facilities to help support the local economy and to ensure the local labour force is equipped to take advantage of the opportunities likely to arise in the future’. The applicant states that the number of full time equivalent employees would increase by 11. - It is noted that Foxcombe Hall has been utilised for higher educational purposes historically and the proposed development would expand and intensify this use. Such an intensification is supported by CP30 as it would be an extension of existing education facilities.  - The proposed development includes 60 student dwellings not identified in the Local Plan. This additional development is likely to result in extra vehicle movements, OCC should comment on this matter. - CP39 – The Historic Environment highlights that new development should ensure it ‘conserves, and where possible enhances, designated heritage assets and non-designated heritage assets and their setting in accordance with national guidance and legislation’ - CP38 – Listed Buildings highways that such development ‘must demonstrate that they will preserve or enhance its special architectural or historic interest and significance’ and for proposals within a listed building setting they must ‘respect, preserve or enhance features that contribute to the special interest and significance of the building’. - CP40 – Sustainable Design and Construction highlights the need for a ‘sensitive approach to safeguard the special character of the heritage assets or where historic assets would be affected’. - CP46 – Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity addresses the council’s viewpoint regarding ‘development likely to result in the loss, deterioration or harm to habitats or species of importance to biodiversity’ and sets out what exceptions would be acceptable in such situations. - The following policies within the Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan should also be considered when determining this application: - SS1.1 Green Belt protects the Green Belt ‘to maintain its openness and permanence’ and upholds the principles from CP13 of the local plan - IN4.1 Transport Opportunities states ‘development proposals for sites in excess of 10 dwellings should be accompanied by a travel plan that explores options to enhance transport and accessibility as well as to minimise and mitigate severe impacts on transport infrastructure and safety’. - Policies IN4.2 and IN4.3 additionally support the improvement of sustainable transport infrastructure for existing communities and also the re-opening of, or new, connections for public use on foot, by bike or horseback. - DG1.1 Spatial Context asks for development that ‘respects local character, and should provide for the integration of environmental or landscape context and built form’ supporting documents ‘providing and protecting views of the landscape context within the development – both expansive views and snatched glimpses’ - DG1.2 Temporal Context highlights developments respecting heritage, local distinctiveness, incorporating features ‘appropriate to its scale and context’ and ‘encouraging the appropriate re-use of historic sites that takes full account of their significance’ - DG3 1-6 Design requirements should also be considered, surrounding its requests for landscaped development, access requirements, security and future proofing.
Crime Prevention Design Adviser	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) - Secured by Design accreditation should be secured via condition - Concerns with the proposed location of cycle storage, detailed plans of the local and design should be provided. It must be located in an area where it will be overlooked by sufficient natural surveillance to help safeguard it from crime and antisocial behaviour.
Thames Water	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) No objection - Would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures will be undertaken to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under Water Industry Act 1991. - With regards to surface water drainage if the developer follows the sequential approach to the disposal of surface water would have no objection. - Condition requested requiring a Piling Method Statement as the proposed development is within 15 metres of a strategic sewer. - No objection with regards to wastewater network and sewage treatment works infrastructure capacity. - No objection with regards to water network and water treatment infrastructure capacity.
Waste Management Officer	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) No objection - The applicant states that they will continue with the existing private commercial waste collection.
Economic Development	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) Support - Community Employment Plan submitted includes benefits that would be anticipated under standard CEP agreements such as local supply chain and employment opportunities, but it is noted that the proposal goes further in extending numerous additional benefits for the Vale area including but not limited to paid scholarships for local students, collaboration in establishing regular business skills courses and facilitated international networking opportunities for UK and Chinese businesses. - The proposed CEP would help the Council meet objectives outlined within the Corporate Plan 2020-2024, specifically those highlighted within section five ‘Working in Partnership – strengthen any existing network of local business groups to increase awareness of the council’s economic development programmes and communication throughout the district’. - The proposed development would also help the Council to meet objectives outlined in the Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy (LIS) that outlines the ambition for Oxfordshire to be one of top three innovation ecosystems worldwide by the year 2040. Key to achieving this objective is to create greater ties with innovative international markets and to secure foreign direct investment (FDI). - The proposed development will provide the opportunity for links with high tech companies in Shenzhen (China’s first Special Economic Zone) and that PHBS represents the beginning of FDI in the area - The campus would help to create links with Shenzhen which is considered to be a highly innovative area and world leading technology hub. It is expected that this link would enable Vale based businesses to engage new markets, customers and suppliers. - Direct benefits of the development include: o Support 32 full time jobs, equating to 20 net additional jobs being created o These jobs are expected to generate £1.6 million in GVA o Anticipated to be 60% increase in supply chain expenditure to approximately £1.5-£2 million a year. There is the potential for this increased spend to benefit local businesses and lead to further job creation o The increased number of students studying at the site should lead to £1.6 million of student expenditure in the local area each year. Whilst it is anticipated that this spend would be spread across the wider Oxfordshire and UK economy, it will be possible for the Economic Development team to work with the applicant to ensure that the Vale of White Horse District is sufficiently promoted to students o Work with the applicant to promote the Vale to visitors linked to the development is of further importance as it is anticipated that the development would attract additional international visitors to the area through regular conferences and visits of family and friends of students o It is noted within the Government’s post pandemic Tourism Recovery Plan that business visitors are a key component of the UK’s offer providing a super-marketing platform for leading UK sectors such as life science and finance to showcase their products and latest innovations. The proposed development would help meet Objective six from the UK Tourism recovery Plan for the UK to be leading European nation for hosting business events o Whilst difficult to measure pre pandemic estimates were that average overseas visitors to Oxfordshire contributed £484 to the economy per trip - There are also temporary benefits anticipated within the construction phase of the proposed development including: o Generation of 64 person years of temporary construction employment which would provide £569,722 in GVA o Promotion of activity within the construction sector to support the use of apprentices to reduce skills shortages - These temporary benefits would help the Council support objectives outlined within the Oxfordshire Economic Recovery Plan to support career pathways in strong, future proofed industries such as construction - The proposed development offers significant long-term benefits for the local area and the proposed development is strongly supported.
Private Sector Housing	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) No further comments First Consultation (May 2021) No objection - Advice regarding the requirements for student accommodation and HMO licensing
Friends of Boars Hill	Third Consultation (March 2022) Fourth response (25/3/2022) – Objection - Technical information submitted does not change the fundamental issues associated with the application and previous comments still stand Transport - With the cessation of the S8 service three of the four measures identified by OCC for improving the sustainability of the site are now redundant namely, installation of a bus shelter, provision of a bike stand at the bus stop and highways works to enable access to the bus stop at Hinksey Hill Top bus stop. - The changes proposed to the shuttlebus service in terms of a service to the villages, linking to Redbridge Park and Ride instead of the Go Outdoors store and increasing the number of weekend services will not make the Foxcombe Hall site sustainable in transport terms. - There will be no evening service and students will be wholly dependent upon taxis in the evenings and are likely to utilise taxis at the weekend due to its frequency If a bus was missed there would not be another bus coming within a reasonable waiting period. - The site is not accessible by walking as it is approximately 4km from the bus stops on Old Abingdon Road with much of the journey uphill and unlit in the evenings. The desirable walking distance to a bus stop is 400m, acceptable distance is 800m and the preferred maximum is 1,200m. - Students would not cycle as there is a steep hill to negotiate to get to the campus - When the shuttle bus is not operating in the evenings which are dark in the winter and much of autumn and early spring and dark by later evening all year round - Foxcombe Road at night is pitch black and dangerous - Most of the students will be international young people not familiar with British transport practices, encouraging them to cycle on a dark unlit road in the evening is distinctly dangerous and does not give evidence of any serious regard for their safety - The withdrawal of the S8 service shows the vulnerability of the site which is completely dependent on the shuttle service for any sustainable transport. - There is no long-term legal commitment to providing the shuttle bus service - Even if it were to be secured through a S106 agreement the applicant could apply to have it reviewed after 5 years - If the shuttle bus ceased there would be a remote campus with no means of sustainable transport to it where the long-term aspiration of the applicant would undoubtedly be to increase student numbers to make the campus viable (or more viable). - Concern regarding the viability of the shuttle bus service given that the number of students on campus per term will be 135 in 2023/24, 80 of which will be accommodated on site especially as a second shuttle bus will be provided between the site and the off-site accommodation and therefore many of the students living off campus would not need to use the service connecting to Redbridge Park and Ride. - No viability assessment has been undertaken of the shuttle bus service and with rising fuel costs with a year or two it could easily be found to be costing a large sum of money to run which the university may consider they cannot justify which could result in the service terminating. - There will be very little community benefit from the services serving the villages as the timings are too short to serve commuters and too long for someone wanting to shop in Oxford. The Thames Travel 44 service and Stagecoach S8 service were withdrawn due to lack of passengers, it is unlikely that once a day shuttle bus service would be any better patronised - There is an existing non-residential education use and the question arises as to whether the continuance of this use would be more sustainable than the proposed change to a residential campus with students accommodated in Oxford or Botley. - At Botley there is student accommodation available with regular buses to Oxford and train station for onward travel - In the submitted documentation it indicates that students will not be required to be on campus every day or for a whole day, so it is inevitable that they will not want to spend all of their time of campus and therefore it would be more sustainable for students to be located off-site which a shuttle bus service giving access to the site for taught sessions - CRM student accommodation in Botley has over 250 units of recently constructed high quality purpose designed student accommodation at West Way Square in Botley, enquiries have determined that 100 units are available immediately for block booking and their website states that buses are available to Peking University and CRM have indicated they would welcome a block booking. - This would be a more sustainable option than the proposed development as students would be able to access the site by shuttle bus service for educational service whilst also having access by walking, cycling and public transport to the educational, leisure and retail facilities of Oxford and further afield. The availability of student accommodation in Botley with a shuttle bus demonstrates that there is no justification for arguing that there are very special circumstances justifying the construction of a large block of student accommodation in the Green Belt. - The OCC Draft Local Transport and Connectivity Plan has been published and it sets out OCC’s aspiration for the delivery of a zero-carbon transport system by 2040 - The proposed development fundamentally conflicts with the aspiration to deliver a zero-carbon transport network by 2040 and a transport network that contributed to a climate positive future by 2050 because the site has no public transport access, has steep and dark roads with virtually no local facilities preventing cycle and pedestrian access to the campus. - The plan is promoting 20-minute neighbourhoods and highlights that Boars Hill as an area that is most deprived in Oxfordshire in terms of access to services - Students from China will want to visit sites beyond the campus in Oxford, London and other cities - The applicant’s claim that the demand for taxis would be minimal amounting to no more than 4 per day is not plausible given the number of students to be accommodated on site - There is no realistic prospect of improving cycle access to the site - The Connecting Oxford website has a map showing the proposed more development cycling and walking network for Oxford in 2050. There are no links to the Boars Hill area, an indication that Boars Hill will continue to be isolated in terms of access by cycling, walking and public transport in 2050 - Approving this application would set a long-term pattern which is likely to result in unsustainable patterns of transport to the site past 2040 when OCC are seeking to be carbon neutral in transport terms and would still be the case in 2050 when the aspiration is to have a transport network that contributes to a climate positive future - In February 2019 the Vale of White Horse District Council declared a climate emergency and its targets are to become a carbon neutral district by 2045 with an aim for a 75% reduction in carbon emissions in the district by 2030 - Achieving these aims cannot be done by improving walking, cycling and public transport, some locations such as this one the location severely limits the potential to improve their accessibility by sustainable modes of transport. - The objective of making walking, cycling and public transport the natural first choice relies on a locational strategy which locates uses which generate significant travel demand such as residential business school campuses in places that are accessible by public transport, walking and cycling - If approved this application would maintain long-term unsustainable travel patterns - If the Vale’s ambitious climate change targets are to be reached it is essential that new developments in unsustainable locations such as this are refused. - The orientation of Building A is unsustainable as over 50% of the bedrooms face north with tall evergreen trees outside of the window resulting in very low light levels and requiring the use of electricity in all seasons and times of the day. - Of the view that the evergreen trees to be planted will receive very little natural water requiring permanent watering to become established - Building A and the landscaping has been designed in a way that will accentuate the need for electricity and water usage contrary to local plan policies and the NPPF paragraph 157 - It is unclear whether the rainwater storage tank would have sufficient capacity to keep these new trees regularly watered. Second Consultation (November 2021) Fourth response (23/12/21) – Objection - The applicant has made small and insignificant changes to the proposals - No substantive changes have been made to address the extensive concerns expressed by the Friends and the local community about the increased amount of development and activity Economic Review - A letter from Hatch in response to the applicant’s letter and economic review by WSP has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website - The economic benefits submitted by the applicant are negligible and do not constitute very special circumstances - The development concerns primarily the provision of on-site student accommodation therefore whatever the economic benefits derived from the Business School’s teaching activities will continue irrespective of this planning application. - Greater economic benefit will accrue if students reside in a more urban location with immediate access to shops, restaurants, public transport options and leisure facilities such as at the CRM post-grad student accommodation in Botley. - The applicant’s reference to paragraph 95 of the NPPF is a serious misinterpretation of the NPPF which relates to meeting existing and new communities needs arising as a result of new residential development. It is plainly not relevant to a proposal for a business school serving international students, many of whom are on short one term courses. - The applicant has offered scholarships to local residents yet local residents do not need to live on campus and this offer is of no relevance to the Change in Use application. Effect of proposal of green belt purposes - The effects of the proposals on the five purposes of the Green Belt is highly pertinent to the assessment of the application and would overall be negative particularly owing to the volume of development proposed and the dominance of Building A which will have a detrimental impact on the openness of the green belt including views from Jarn Way, Berkeley Road and Bedwells Heath - It is acknowledged that the 1970s and 1990s extensions on the Berkeley Road frontage are intrusive but the proposal involves remodelling and/ or replacement by a large and visually dominant building which would have the effect of further obscuring the views of the listed George and Yeates Building. - This historic building has higher significance than any other building on the site and in terms of historic character of the site the façade of the hall facing Berkeley Road is the single most important historic view of the buildings available from a public viewpoint. - A development that proposed the removal of the extensions to open up significant views would enhance the green belt setting however the proposed development has the effect of further obscuring views of the historic building and cannot be said to have a beneficial effect on the green belt purpose of preserving the setting and special character of historic towns. - The applicant identifies no very special circumstances for the underground hall itself and we conclude that the sole reason for putting it underground is to hide the volume and bulk it would present if located on the surface - The applicant’s make reference to having regard to the Oxford Brookes Appeal however there is nothing remotely like the Wheatley Tower on the Foxcombe Hall site so it is misleading to claim that there would be similar benefits to green belt openness as the Oxford Brookes appeal which involves the removal of the 12-storey tower. - Disagree with applicant’s assessment of the site against green belt purposes. The implication that the site is part of a site having urban characteristics is fundamentally wrong and clearly contrary to the Council’s own landscape assessment of the site which designates it as part of the open countryside and not part of an urban settlement. - Boars Hill has been included in the green belt and therefore the Council took the view that the open character of Boars Hill means that it makes an important contribution to the openness of the Green Belt and development must be restricted. Assessment against green belt policy - Paragraph 149c of NPPF is a relevant consideration. - There is no definition of what is or isn’t ‘disproportionate’ other than the decision taker must compare it to the original building as of 1948 and not the current situation. - Paragraph 149g of the NPPF is more relevant to the proposals in relation to Buildings A, D and L - There is a very significant increase in volume that will have a substantial impact on the openness of the green belt and thereby conflicts with paragraph 149g of the NPPF which is in addition to the previous increase in volume permitted under application ref. P17/V2693/FUL of 4.9% volume increase and all other incremental increase since 1948. - The past site development now represents an end point to reasonable development of the site, given its original footprint and volume during the period of time it has been located in the green belt. Development has to stop at some point otherwise green belt legislation is ultimately of no effect. - The LPA entered into a S106 agreement in 1996 with the then owner agreeing not to extend further buildings at the site. This agreement was rescinded following application by the Open University prior to marketing the site in 2016 but goes to the heart of the matter that 25 years ago the council was concerned to stop incremental development continuing on the site Spatial or volumetric factors - Appeal decisions have found that putting development underground is not an acceptable way of avoiding harm to the openness of the green belt including example of Fir Tree Cottage, Romford. - The development of underground elements at Foxcombe Hall would have both visual and spatial effects as the proposal is to excavate the ground but Building A would be visible to its full four-storey height within the site. Visual impact of Building A - Building A will only be set back 4.8-5 metres from the boundary wall which is not a significant distance, the building will also be bulky at 12.3 wide at the upper ground and first floor levels with windows both sides and at the end creating a much more bulky and dominant building than the current Old Dairy which has no outward facing windows above the boundary wall. - The proposal is to plant trees that are over 25 years old which is difficult if not impossible proposition especially given the very small space. Mature trees have extensive lateral root systems and it would seem that the constrained space in which they are to be planted would result in a significant risk that root growth will undermine the footings of the boundary wall alongside. - Trees in the location proposed will receive very little natural water, the steel plate retaining wall will prevent lateral movement of water leading to even more likelihood of roots seeking moisture from the far side of the boundary wall and the evergreen canopy would prevent rainfall reaching the roots. There will be a permanent requirement for watering. The proposal is contrary to CP43 which seeks to ensure that developments make efficient use of water and CP40 which states that the district is located in an area of water stress and is applying higher standards of water efficiency in new development. - If the trees could survive there would be very little natural light entering into student bedrooms and the rooms facing Jarn Way are single aspect units facing north and windows will be screened by the trees. The rooms will most likely rely on artificial lighting at all times of day and night. - At least 50% of student units would have poor light levels which is environmentally unsustainable and contrary to CP37, CP40 and CP43. - The design of Building A that has half of the units facing north and dense canopies of evergreen trees extending up to the windows is a design fundamentally at odds with policy requirement for consideration of orientation of buildings.  This will create poor living conditions for students, particularly acute on lower ground floor where rooms are 3.6 metres below existing ground level and windows only 2 metres from the steel plate retaining wall. This is contrary to DP24. - In windy conditions branches on windows will create noise and disturbance creating substandard living conditions and a poor standard of amenity which will likely result in pressure for the trees to be removed which would result in Building A being unscreened and a substantial negative impact on the openness of the green belt and the rural character of Jarn Way. - Significant concern regarding the effect of the construction of Building A and the planting of mature trees on the boundary wall fronting Jarn Way and Berkeley Road with the foundations of the wall likely undermined and create a significant risk of collapse. The roots of the new trees and their removal of water from soil once established is likely to further undermine the wall. - Loss of this wall would further increase the visual dominance of Building A on Jarn Way adversely affecting the landscape character and the openness of the green belt as well as the setting of Foxcombe Hall and would result in light pollution from additional exposed bedroom windows. - There is significant risk that the existing sycamore tree at corner of Jarn Way will be lost Visual impact of entrance to car park - Disagree with applicant regarding entrance gates, drawing indicates they will be 10 metres wide. - The entrance to the bell mouth will be 38 metres wide, given than Jarn Way is characterised by its green verges and domestic curtilages the provision of this excessive entrance splay to enable coaches to drive into the car park is not a minor surface change but a significant surface change which will have a lasting detrimental impact on the character of Jarn Way. - The removal of the car parking surface of gravel, tarmac and concrete to be replaced with a cellular confinement system will have a detrimental impact on the trees. A letter from Aspect Arboriculture in response to amendments has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website - car parking spaces should not be reduced due to the very limited and probably ineffective sustainable transport proposals given that with the intensification of use on the site the number of vehicles needing to be parked would likely increase parking pressure on the surrounding roads. - The requirement for coaches to swing into the car park and turn around will impinge dramatically on the remaining car park A Transport review by David Tucker Associates on the amendments has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website Duration of development and degree of activity generated including traffic generation - The existing lecture theatre is shown on the existing plan as a Multi-Function/ Lecture Theatre, seats do not appear to be an in-built feature of the room and it appears the floor is level. It appears that it is a multi-functional space and that use as a lecture theatre may not be its primary use. - It is clear that currently no use is made of lectures to large groups of students and this will become a feature as the use of the site intensifies - The applicant claims that the new theatre is needed to hold academic conferences 2-3 per semester and that the new lecture theatre does not represent a significant expansion in teaching capacity. These assertions lack credibility. It cannot be viable to build the lecture theatre including below ground excavation to only be occupied for a few conferences over a year. It must be concluded that the new theatre represents a significant expansion of teaching and in particular conference capacity catering for significant numbers of delegates which would result in large numbers of people travelling by car to the Campus. - The comparison to Plumpton Agricultural College in terms of trip rates is not appropriate. - The applicant’s conclusion that the proposals will not result in a significant additional degree of activity or traffic generation compared to the existing permitted educational use is difficult to compare given unknowns and is unfounded Very special circumstances - Many of the suggested benefits are not significant or would be far greater if the residential element was located elsewhere - Economic benefits of local employment and apprenticeships will be insignificant. Economic gains to the local community will be far greater if students have easy access to local facilities and transport options such as if they were housed in purpose-built accommodation e.g. Botley. - The proposal claims that students will be largely confined to the campus with their accommodation and dining facilities provided on site to remove the need to travel, therefore the claims of educational and business collaboration sit strangely with the proposal. The opportunity for engagement with British culture will be limited. The international benefits would be much greater if the campus and student accommodation were located in Oxford or adjoining or within an urban area. - The applicant’s claims that the improvements to Foxcombe Hall will require significant financial investment which will only be realised through the business school’s comprehensive vision and requirements for the site would need to be supported by a viability assessment which is not provided and is therefore speculative. - Similarly it cannot be verified without a viability assessment that the improvements and enhancements to the Berkeley Road frontage requires significant financial investment. In any case, Foxcombe Hall does not intrude into the vista of the historic core of Oxford and the proposed development would reduce the visibility of the Grade II listed Hall and therefore does not represent the very high level of benefit needed to demonstrate very special circumstances - Peking University already operates a shuttle bus service for its students - Measures to reduce the sites fundamental lack of sustainability which will probably be largely ineffective and likely result in a significant increase in vehicular traffic cannot provide very special circumstances necessary to justify a significant increase in the volume of development - The community use of the Campus would be strictly limited - Provision could be made for renewable energy provision without significantly increasing the volume and floorspace of development in the green belt. In addition, Building A will required significant watering of the screening conifers and the use of electricity in all seasons for internal lighting so does not reflect building sustainability - The environmental improvements stated are not dependent upon large scale development at the site - None of the arguments put forward form a convincing case to meet the exceptionally high standard required to prove very special circumstances. - The very special circumstances case is even more diminished because enquiries have revealed ample capacity at CRM Student Post Graduate student accommodation building at the West Way development in Botley. Proposed change of use to C2 and development in the open countryside - The change of use to C2 represents a very significant intensification in the use and character of Foxcombe Hall from a daytime education institution to a 24/7 facility which will have a significant detrimental impact on the rural character of the area surrounding Foxcombe Hall. - If the principle of establishing a residential institution at Foxcombe Hall were to be allowed, it would be very difficult if not impossible to prevent future increases in numbers. - The present application would therefore effectively lead to the establishment of a University Campus at Foxcombe Hall which with the current proposals and further expansion would destroy the openness of the green belt in this location and the rural character of Boars Hill which is not an appropriate location for an international campus. - The proposal does not consist simply of the expansion of an existing facility but also involves its change of use from a non-residential educational institution to a residential university campus. CP30 is designed to support the expansion of existing facilities not those which involve change of use. - The proposal involves provision being made for the education of international students not local people. CP30 does not therefore support the proposal. Landscape impacts - The character of Boars Hill is as a quiet, leafy, rural area almost exclusively comprising private homes, the construction of Buildings A and L will extend an institutional built form along the boundary to Jarn Way and Berkeley Road by replacing the smaller Old Dairy building of which all that is visible from the public domain is the tiled roof, chimneys and cupola with a building of very considerable bulk and scale. - The existing building is of domestic proportions with only a modest tiled roof visible over the boundary wall; whereas the replacement building will be significantly bulkier, wider and taller and with outward facing windows above the level of the boundary wall and with a uniform roof height 40 metres long. - Building A would be visible to its full height within the campus where it would appear as a bulky replacement to the existing Old Dairy and will inevitably adversely impact on the openness of the green belt. - The impact of the building would be increased by the student windows rising above the boundary wall and the roof of the student accommodation having no attractive features such as the chimney and cupola on the Old Dairy - Building A would introduce a building of much greater scale, massing and bulk with a distinctly urban character that would be out of place in the rural location and would not respond positively to the site and its surroundings as required by CP37. - The applicant acknowledges that it would not accord with the existing character by proposing the planting of a row of evergreen trees that are intended to screen the building but for which there is insufficient space for them to grow into their natural form and have a good relationship to the proposed building. Arboricultural Impacts A review of the Arboricultural Addendum Statement by Aspect Arboriculture has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website - The review states that the arboriculturist remains unconvinced that the Arboricultural effect has been either fully explored or sufficiently demonstrated and that the proposals should be considered harmful to the amenity of the exiting trees in the planning balance - Concern remains regarding the removal of the existing surface and its replacement in the car park, the inadequate provision for large trees in the proposed planter in front of Building A and the proposed continued retention of the Sycamore tree with development of Building A within its crown contrary to best practice with regard to siting of development and opportunities for unmaintained canopy growth - If the sycamore tree is lost the visibility of Building A from Bedwells Heath/ Jarn Way would substantially increase Transport and highways A Transport review by David Tucker Associates on the amendments has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website - Do not consider that the applicant has adequately and robustly assessed the traffic impact of the proposed development, in particular there is no evidence as to historic demand generated by the site. The applicant concludes that the proposals will not result in a significant additional degree of activity or traffic generation compared to the existing permitted educational use of the site however it is difficult to compare two unknowns and this assertion is unfounded - With regards to the isolated nature of the location the claimed benefits from the co-location of accommodation on the site needs to be balanced against the dis-benefits and there remains no appreciation of the travel demands from students seeking to maximise their experience of visiting the UK - Locating student accommodation in a rural location with no sustainable transport option is a mistake. - PHBH already operates a shuttle bus to deliver students to the campus from their accommodation elsewhere at the beginning and end of the teaching day and it is considered on balance more sustainable to continue this pattern than to construct significant new accommodation in the green belt which will increase student demand for private cars and taxis in the evenings and at weekends - The claim that the provision of cycle parking at the Hinksey Hill top bus stop to provide students with an alternative means to access onward travel by bus to Oxford outside of the shuttle bus operating times is distinctly implausible, the shuttle bus will not run in the evenings which are dark during the winter, much of autumn and early spring, Foxcombe Road is unlit and dangerous - Most of the students will be international young people not familiar with British transport practices, to encourage them to cycle on a dark unlit road is distinctly dangerous and does not give evidence of any serious regard for their safety. - Amendments are required at the access with regards to kerb lines and turning area which would have a more significantly adverse impact on trees and the rural character of the area - The location is not sustainable, nor can be made demonstrably sustainable and the development does not support or reinforce the sustainability of the community within which it will be sited therefore with respect of the test in paragraph 110(a) of the NPPF appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes cannot be taken up given the location. - If the decision maker accepted the impacts of the development to not be severe the development should still be refused on sustainability grounds - The figures for taxi use are inaccurate and no basis is given for the figures. A development with no evening shuttle service and very limited service at weekends on an isolated site is likely to generate very significant taxi use Conferences and Event Traffic - A recent conference at the campus did not discourage conference delegates from driving the campus and given the proposals include a 200-seat lecture theatre it can be expected that considerable numbers will drive to the Campus with significant implications for traffic on narrow roads and parking on verges to the significant detriment of the setting of the site and the green belt Construction Traffic - The construction period will likely be over a two or three year period and the impact would be very significant - It is not acceptable that there is no forecast of vehicle movements, including a breakdown of vehicle type, load, by time of day and day of week. This is likely to be large in number given the excavation of material required and the delivery of materials. - The suitability of Jarn Way, Berkeley Road and the issues of safety at the junction with Foxcombe Road have not been presented. Economic Benefits A response from Hatch to the economic review technical note submitted by the applicants has been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website - There will be a degree of economic benefit arising from a scheme that is able to support net additional employment however the applicant has not been able to robustly present or justify the assertion that these benefits are significant, substantial or justify very special circumstances. - CRM Students have over 250 units of purpose designed student accommodation at West Way Square in Botley. Recent enquiries have determined that 100 units are available immediately for block booking on a long standing basis and the website states that bus are available to Peking University. - There would be greater prospect of higher expenditure from students located in close proximity to local amenity and services and this expenditure could be achieved more sustainably by being in closer proximity to existing public transport networks and walkable amenity. There would be increased benefit to students health and wellbeing in being located in purpose-built student accommodation with access to amenity and services and alongside students from other universities to facilitate networking opportunities and shared experiences of student life. Student retention rates are influenced by the experience of living in a an area. - There would be significantly greater economic benefits from having student accommodation in an urban area with ready access to services and facilities including public transport options. Lighting and effects of Fauna - It is the applicant’s responsibility to demonstrate that there would not be an adverse lighting impact. The 31 significantly sized windows facing Jarn Way, 10 above the boundary wall and 9 just below would inevitably cause significant light pollution and breach CP44 which refers to the need for development proposals to protect tranquillity and the need to protect against intrusion from light pollution, noise and motion. Ripon Lodge application and historic S106 agreement - Permission was refused in October 2020 for the conversion of Ripon Lodge to allow Bed and Breakfast accommodation for academics visiting Peking University. - This would have provided five guest rooms and one for the owner/ manager with a maximum capacity of nine guests. The present proposal will have a vastly greater impact on the character of the area and openness of the green belt so which it is acknowledged that each application must be considered on its merits it is important that there is consistency in decision making so if permission is granted for the current application it would clearly be inconsistent with the decision made on Ripon Lodge - An indication of the importance which the Council has historically given to the preservation of the openness of the green belt at the site is a Section 106 agreement in 1996, the council had concerns about the potential for further development adversely impacting on the openness of the Green Belt to restrict further development on the site. This obligation was discharged in 2016 on the grounds that it duplicated planning controls, however the Council 25 years ago considered it necessary to enter into this agreement, which shows the importance the Council has historically given to maintain the openness of the green belt at the site. - Green belt policy has not changed substantially since 1996 and therefore the considerations that led to the Council entering into the agreement are still pertinent today. Planning Balance - The proposed development will have a significant impact upon the openness of the green belt and is inappropriate development - The applicant has not demonstrated very special circumstances that would outweigh the harm - The change of use and associated development would adversely affect the landscape character of the area and the important trees found on the site, urbanise a site within an area of open countryside and impact upon the amenity of local residents while its unsustainable location in a rural area with no bus service, pedestrian links to local facilities and at the top of hill with unlit roads makes it an unsustainable location for a residential campus. - The economic benefits are not significant and would be greater if students were housed off site and bused to Foxcombe Hall as they are at present. - The proposals would have a significant detrimental impact on the environment and are contrary to both local and national policy. The detrimental impacts of the scheme significantly outweigh the positive so the planning balance is negative. First consultation (May 2021) – Third response (27/10/21) Objection - Concern regarding the amount of taxi travel that takes place to Foxcombe Hall which already seems to far exceed the minimal level that according to PHBS’s transport consultants would occur after the completion of the development proposed - The trip generation table is not clear on the number of taxi trips generated by the proposed development with inconsistencies in figures used and do not appear to make provision for evening taxi use. - This error calls into question all of the other traffic figures given in the report particularly the transport impact of out of term courses and conferences. - Taxi figures are a serious underestimation. First consultation (May 2021) - Second response (13/9/21) Objection - Concern regarding comments from the Council’s Urban Design Officer who has discounted the effect of an increase of volume in creating a conflict with green belt policy which is an erroneous interpretation of green belt policy - The application proposal would not involve removing land from the Green Belt as the Urban Design Officer suggests which can only occur through a local plan review and is not in the Council’s power to do through consideration of a planning application. - Planning Practice Guidance indicates that volume is a matter which needs to be taken into account in the assessment of a proposal. If volume is increased it must have a visual impact and thereby impact on the openness of the green belt which is the key consideration when considering development proposals in the green belt. This is confirmed by a number of appeal decisions (A number of appeal decisions have been submitted with this consultation response which are available on the website). - The appeal at Athlone House supports the Friends of Boars Hill’s contention that the 43.35% increase in floorspace and nearly 40% increase in volume is a significant increase which would have a detrimental impact on the openness of the green belt and therefore conflicts with the advice in paragraph 149 of the NPPF. - Appeal decisions for Oxford Brookes University Wheatley, Stevens Yard Windsor and Nutfield Road Redhill are also relevant. - The Urban Design Officer acknowledges that there is probably insufficient space to provide the landscaping to screen Building A but does not argue that the building needs to be reduced in size or set further back. The officers comments are inaccurate with regard to the comparison with the Old Dairy and Building A as the proposal is for a three storey building with one floor of student bedrooms with windows above the boundary wall whereas currently the Old Dairy has the appearance of a single storey building with only the roof visible. Having no screening would substantially increase the impact of Building A on the openness of the green belt and would be a dominant feature on the corner of Jarn Way and Berkeley Road significantly urbanising its character and impacting on the openness of the green belt. - The officer’s comments regarding the impact due to an increase in occupation do not take account of the fact that there is no public transport to the site and only an infrequent shuttle bus service is proposed with no services in the evening and only 3 on a Saturday and Sunday. Many students will therefore be forced to rely on taxis and hired cars in order to access the educational, leisure and retail resources of Oxford. There will therefore be significant increase in vehicular travel to the site First Consultation (May 2021) – First response (23/6/21) Objection - Object to both the large-scale built development and the change of use - Conflicts with the fundamental aim of green belt policy and would have a significant effect on rural character of Boars Hill - In consistent with national and local policy and does not accord with the presumption in favour of sustainable development Green Belt - Proposal will detrimentally impact on the openness of the green belt - Strongly disagree with assessment that the site makes a limited contribution to the purposes of the green belt, consider it makes an important contribution to green belt purposes, emphasised in the Oxford Green Belt Study - The proposed new buildings will not impinge on the important view of Oxford across the Old Berkeley Golf course but the surrounding area also makes an important contribution to the setting of the view and if the character of the Foxcombe Hall site is adversely affected by new built development it would adversely affect visitors experience of the iconic view of Oxford - The site makes an important contribution to safeguarding the countryside from encroachment - The fact that there are buildings along the frontage of Berkeley Road which make some impact on the openness of the green belt means that it is all the more important to ensure that additional development does not further impact on the openness of the green belt. - All green belt is equalled protected and it is not open to an applicant to argue that a lower standard of protection should be applied because a particular site does not make a significant contribution to green belt purposes - Increase of volume from alterations or extensions should be based upon the original building as was in 1948 not the existing building. - The net increase in volume across the site from 1948 to that proposed is over 80%, compared to existing it is over 40%. - This indicates how harmful to the openness of the green belt the proposal is - The applicants have sought to minimise the effect of the increase in volume and floorspace by constructing one and a half storeys below ground, however this does not mean that there is no harm to the openness of the green belt, building A will become a three-storey building compared to the single storey Old Dairy building it replaces. The fact that part of the building lies below ground level does not mean that there is no resulting harm on openness of the green belt particularly when combined with an increased footprint, bulk and size of building. - Building A is much bulkier than the Old Dairy and its dominance will be emphasised by student accommodation windows projecting above the boundary wall compared to the inconspicuous sloping tiled roof of the existing. This will make a significant visual change to the existing character of Jarn Way where there are no other buildings with windows in close proximity to the road - Car parking will be harmful to openness both in itself and in terms of related traffic activity, the oversized entrance will increase the visual impact of the built form and associated access from Jarn Way - The need for conferences is not established in the Statement of Need which suggests that the lecture hall is also over-sized - Question statements made by the applicant with regard to the degree of activity and level of harm it generates on openness of the green belt - There will be no mini-buses in the evenings and only 3 on Saturdays and Sundays students will use taxis in order to access services, facilities, leisure and recreational services available in Oxford which is likely to result in a substantial number of car journeys to the site. - The amount of activity on the site will also be increased by the use of the site for conferences especially out of term times - There is capacity for Foxcombe Hall to be used more intensively that the current intimations of the application. At 64% occupancy there could be a total of 280 students in designated teaching spaces. Including potential for tutorial space a total of 324 students could be accommodated which would generate a substantial increase in activity at the site and thereby detrimentally impact on the openness of the green belt. - The development is inappropriate development within the green belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances - Many of the benefits listed by the applicant as very special circumstances could be achieved through a smaller scheme without the student accommodation or on an alternative site - Economic benefits would arise from all commercial developments in the green belt and would equally arise if the students were accommodated outside of the green belt. If they were accommodated in Abingdon or Botley there would be greater economic benefit through their use of local services, this will not arise to the same degree at Boars Hill owing to the isolation of the site and the absence of bus services to nearby service centres. This does not constitute very special circumstances. - Educational purposes would be served if the site continued its use as a non-residential institution. If student accommodation was located off site in Botley or Abingdon students would have greater access to the educational resources of Oxford and other education and cultural resources. This does not constitute very special circumstances. - The improvements to Foxcombe Hall do not necessitate a disproportional amount of development in the green belt including the creating of a large block of student accommodation. This does not constitute very special circumstances. - The improvements to Berkeley Road frontage do not necessitate a disproportionate amount of development in the green belt including the creation of a large block of student accommodation. This does not constitute very special circumstances. - Providing accessible and inclusive buildings should be standard practice and does not constitute very special circumstances - Creating a low energy campus utilising renewable energy sources should be standard practice and can be achieved without significantly increasing the volume and floorspace of buildings on the site and therefore does not constitute very special circumstances - Promotion of sustainable transport, enhanced facilities for the local community and the provision of landscaped areas and woodland management are all unrelated to the scale of the proposed buildings and does not constitute very special circumstances - The requirement to demonstrate very special circumstances should include a full argument as to why the development should be built in this location and a robust assessment of why alternative sites are not available and have been discounted, no such evidence has been provided within the submitted planning application. - New student accommodation has been created in the new development at West Way Square in Botley which could accommodate the students without the need to build new accommodation in the green belt. - An assessment of green belt purposes from a landscape perspective is not available Other policy conflicts - Foxcombe Hall is located within the open countryside where core policy 4 of LPP1 stipulates that development is not appropriate unless specifically supported by other relevant policies set out in the development plan or national policy. The significant increases in the volume of development and the intensification of activity would have the effect of urbanising this area of open countryside country to the spatial strategy - It was not envisaged that core policy 30 of LPP1 would apply to the change of use of this site for international students rather than the local labour force - This policy also identifies the most suitable locations for further and higher education as comprising the main settlements and other locations with good pedestrian and cycle access and well served by public transport connections between the proposed facility and its likely student catchment. This site is set within a remote rural location, not served by buses and with no pedestrian access to any facilities, poor cycle access and does not fulfil any of these criteria. - The proposal will result in the use of the accommodation and educational facilities for conferences which will be a further significant change from the sites current use for non-residential educational use Demolition of the Berkeley Laboratories - The laboratories make an important contribution to the significance and setting of the designated heritage assets of Foxcombe Hall and an indispensable element of the wider settlement - Its demolition will be harmful by the loss of historic fabric per se but its removal will also result in a loss of significance to the setting of the designated heritage assets. The building hosted an important laboratory search function which increases the heritage significance of the building - The demolition of the non-designated heritage asset constitutes a high quantum of harm to the designated heritage asset and its setting Landscape and trees - The construction of the proposed buildings A and L will significantly change the character of the area, replacing the Berkeley Laboratory which currently forms a harmonious part of the view. The windows of the new building A would obtrude above the boundary wall which would be an urban intrusion and create light pollution - The space between building A and the boundary wall on Jarn Way is insufficient for the proposed trees to be planting to create screening. This is reduced further by the below ground accommodation so there will be a lack of water for the trees, the design and access statement acknowledge that they will need intensive watering which is neither sustainable or visually acceptable. It is unlikely that the trees will establish and if they do will have a poor relationship with building A. - The proposals for building A will not be adequately screened and will be contrary to CP37 of LPP1 and will have an adverse impact on the openness of the green belt. - There is no assessment on the impact of trees to be affected including their capacity to tolerate the impacts - The new car park will encroach onto root protection areas of 27 protected trees of good and high quality as well as proposals for crown lifting - Lime tree T11 would block the sole access to the car park - There has been no proper assessment of the effect of the car park proposals on protected woodland and it has not been shown that the trees would remain viable or that mitigation would be effective An Arboricultural Review by Aspect Arboriculture and a Review of Landscape and Visual Matters by Aspect Landscape Planning have also been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website. Transport and highways - The site is located in a remote location with poor accessibility by public transport with no local facilities accessible by walking. Cycle access is limited by the site’s location at the top of Boars Hill which is unlikely to be attractive to cyclists with average levels of fitness - The restricted service of the proposed minibus service will significantly limit the ability of students living on campus to access services and facilities or to cater for their education, retail, leisure and cultural needs during the evenings and weekends by visiting Oxford. The service will only be hourly at peak times, so inconvenient if missed. - There is no reference to a commitment to continue the shuttle bus service in the S106 heads of terms - There are no details of how the no car policy for students would be enforced and it is not included in the proposed matters to be covered by a S106 Agreement. Only through such provision could it be made legally enforceable. - Students cannot be expected to stay on campus 24/7 and will want to visit Oxford and further afield. Without public transport options from Foxcombe Hall it is reasonable to expect significant use of taxis and private cars which will intensify the use of the surrounding road network much of which is unadopted and privately owned. - With a residential capacity proposed of some 80 bedspaces intensification will also be acutely felt in the surrounding roads resulting in a detrimental impact upon the tranquil nature of the neighbourhood - Transport impact of out of term courses for businesspeople attending short courses, they will not use the mini-bus and will either drive or use taxis. Parking provision will not be enough and will overspill onto local roads causing obstruction and damage to verges. - There is significant probability that transport to the site will be dominated by use of the car and therefore the proposal does not accord with CP33 - A substantial amount of material will need to be excavated to construct the lower floors of the buildings, this material will need to be re-used within the site which could affect the setting of the listed buildings or removed off-site for land fill which is not sustainable or to another location for re-use. This would involve significant number of large lorries removing the material, no information is provided within the application regarding this process. - The Transport Statement gives no information about construction traffic. Estimation that it will involve 390 x 32 tonne trips to remove spoil from the site which would be 780 HGV movements to/from the site for excavation alone. - In addition, there will be need for delivery of materials - Construction traffic in this area will be very disruptive as the roads are narrow with grass verges but no footways. - Construction traffic will last for over a year adversely affecting local amenity including churning up verges. A Review of Transport implications by David Tucker Associates has also been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website. Economic Benefits - A number of the reasons for economic benefits claims in the submission will be very limited, e.g. the provision of an on-site canteen and café shop will mean that staff and students will not need to travel off-site for groceries which will reduce the benefit to local businesses. - The Socio Economic assessment asserts that there will be ‘significant opportunities for graduates to stay on in the local area’ to improve the UK’s skills base and driving innovation through research and development activities. The likelihood of the campus generating these sorts of impacts is minimal given that students will predominantly consist of international students attending short-term courses and the campus is wholly owned by an international University. - Any such benefits would accrue wherever the campus is located, there is no compelling argument to locate within Oxford’s Green Belt where this would result in conflict with green belt policy. - Greater economic benefits will accrue if students reside in Oxford, Abingdon or Botley etc as they will have better access to shops, restaurants, bars and with good public transport links allowing access to Oxford University, Said Business School, libraries, attractions and with better links to London and other UK locations. Residing in a rural location with no public transport links is illogical for overseas students An Economic Review of Foxcombe Hall by Hatch has also been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website. Lighting and Ecology - Lighting of the campus will significantly change the character of the area as it will result in significant light generation creating an area of light pollution in an area currently characterised by dark skies. - This will have a detrimental effect on wildlife that occupies the adjoining Foxcombe Woods particularly bats which are often sensitive to lighting. There has been no assessment of the importance of the woodland area for bats and bat activity surveys were confined to the existing buildings, a significant omission in the background information supporting the application. - Page 149 The DAS states that wildlife friendly lighting design should be developed and that essential lighting for security purposes is low level and cowled to minimise light spill, however the Secured by design section contradicts this by stating that low level lighting will be avoided and lighting will be mounted on buildings or columns to allow an even spread of illumination. This is likely to result in a significant impact on bats and also the rural character of the site and its surroundings. - The applicants have proposed requiring curtains to be drawn to reduce light pollution but it would not be practically possible to enforce this requirement.  A Sustainability Paper has also been submitted with this consultation response which is available on the website.
Oxford Preservation Trust	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) - Welcome the amended plans and additional information provided on transport, drainage, landscaping, economics and forestry - Cannot agree that the site falls under paragraph 149g of the NPPF as a brownfield site in the Green Belt - The very special circumstances should be set out and how the benefits can outweigh any harm resulting from the proposals First Consultation (May 2021) - OPT looks after 200 acres of land at Boars Hill including the Old Berkeley Golf Course which lies directly to the east of the application site - Foxcombe Hall forms part of the backdrop of Oxford and its treatment needs to be carefully managed to ensure that it does not detract from the enjoyment of this - Peking University has offered the use of its site to provide free parking at weekends for visitors to the area to relieve pressure on the existing highway network, this is a temporary arrangement and does not form part of this application. - What is presented is a much more thoughtful proposal which addresses many of our concerns (from previous withdrawn applications) about the quality and design of the buildings and within their setting and issues regarding the overall scale and detailing. - No justification has been provided to demonstrate very special circumstances which would enable development to take place within the green belt. - Welcomes the reduction in built footprint at ground level and above on the site (compared to previously withdrawn scheme). The reduction in built volume mitigated against the potential impacts of the scheme on the surrounding green belt - Cannot accept that the proposed additional development within the site constitutes any of the exempt forms of development set out within paragraph 145 of the NPPF. - Fundamental issue is whether the scheme constitutes a permitted use within the protected area and if not what the very special circumstances are which would outweigh the presumption against development - The development will be visible from the public domain and surrounding green belt land and the change of use from a non-residential to a residential campus will change the intensity of the site’s use and could impact upon the general openness and special character of the immediately surrounding area - Do not consider that the exemptions of paragraph 145 of the NPPF can be applied and additional information setting out the very special circumstances should be provided - Supportive of the reduction of built volume above ground level and consider the proposed new buildings to be thoughtful and well designed and respond sympathetically to the existing development on the site - Regret the loss of the Old Dairy building and cannot see that the justification for this loss has been provided - The proposed development will have an impact on the wider landscape setting with new development being visible from Berkley Road, the Old Berkley Golf Course and Jarn Way - Great thought has gone into ensuring the design approach is sympathetic with a more open feel allowing glimpses into the site of both the old and proposed new development and the designs take reference from the arts & crafts of the original house and its outbuildings. - The treatment of buildings on the street side will be an improvement on the existing unfortunate extension which is out of keeping
Oxford Green Belt Network	Third Consultation (March 2022) Objection - Comments in previous responses are still valid - The proposed development is inappropriate in the Oxford Green Belt and there are no valid very special circumstances which could justify the grant of planning permission - The recent letter from the agent presents an unrealistic assessment of all the possible benefits to the community from the proposed development but greater weight should be given to the potential harm which this inappropriate development is most likely to cause near to this site in the Oxford Green Belt. Second Consultation (November 2021) Objection: - Development is not appropriate or sustainable in this sensitive part of the green belt, comments still stand - There are no valid very special circumstances which could justify the harm which the development would cause to the functioning of the green belt in this location and the suggestion that the wider economic and educational benefit to the locality would outweigh the harm is not based on evidence - There is no evidence provided that there has been any reasonable evaluation of alternative non green belt sites for expanding this specific business university First Consultation (May 2021) Objection: - Inappropriate development in the green belt - Very special circumstances are required where the value of the positive advantages to the local community near to the development outweigh the value of the negative harmful impacts on the green belt and on the delivery of the policies in the adopted local plan to protect the amenities enjoyed by the local community - No valid very special circumstances or evidence for their existence have been presented - The suggestion that the student residential accommodation is sustainable is flawed when it is clear that a much greater volume of motor traffic would be generated through minor roads - The proposal to provide bicycles for all resident students is an unreal alternative to the use of motor transport to access Oxford given the busy road and steep gradient. - The proposal to refuse students the right to own a car would be unenforceable - The road congestion likely to be caused in Boars Hill would have an unacceptable negative impact on residents and other road used - The introduction of significantly more motor traffic would be in contradiction of the strategy in the local plan to reduce noise and air pollution and to reduce motor traffic in response to the Climate Emergency which requires a more sustainable response to the challenge of climate change - The submitted Statement of Need is not based on matters which are material. The education requirements of the university are not a material issue for the provision of education as this applicant does not represent a part of any rural outpost of either the University of Oxford or Oxford Brookes University - There is no specific geographical or functional reason why the Applicant could not locate in a more sustainable location in the UK - Whilst it is highly advantageous for China and the UK to work together to develop higher education facilities and to collaborate in research and promote valuable and friendly international understanding and cooperation, this site is not an appropriate location for the further building expansion and intensification.
CPRE	Third Consultation (March 2022) Objection - The plans and information received still do not address the issues of inappropriate development in the green belt, negative impact upon the character of a semi-rural location and change of use resulting in high levels of student activity which will irreparably harm a green belt site of international renown. Second Consultation (November 2021) Objection - Nothing in the amended plans would lessen the detrimental impact of the development on the local environment, reiterate previous objection First Consultation (May 2021) Objection: - The application does not demonstrate very special circumstances and no benefits or other considerations have been put forward to outweigh the potential harm - There will be material harmful impact upon the openness of the green belt because of the significant increase in the volume and footprint of a new development which will far exceed planning policy allowing only limited redevelopment of previously developed sites within the green belt - The principle has already been addressed by planning committee in its consideration and refusal of the application at Ripon Lodge. If a commercial bed and breakfast operating for up to 9 residents is considered to cause harm to the character of the area this application with 100 resident students will cause even more harm to the setting of the green belt - The location, scale and quantum of development will have a significant impact on the character and appearance of the immediate and wider landscape - The massing and style of proposed buildings is overbearing and inappropriate for a residential area, an application in 1995 for a 2-level extension was refused and a single-storey building subsequently approved - The proposals will have a detrimental impact on the site’s designated heritage assets, they will not enhance or conserve the assets or their setting as required by planning policy - The introduction and use of the development for conferences and other events is not in keeping with the character of the surrounding area, the site’s isolated, rural location does not lend itself to this type of development. - There will be significant pressures on traffic and parking in and around the site - The location in sustainability terms does not provide good seven days a week access to everyday services and facilities by public transport, on foot or by bicycle and will have a negative impact on the transport system between the site and Oxford contravening CP33 and CP35
Cecil Pilkington Charitable Trust	Third Consultation (March 2022) No further comments Second Consultation (November 2021) Objection - The Cecil Pilkington Charitable Trust is the largest boundary landowner - The habitat either side of the boundary of the site is the same; mixed semi-natural woodland containing veteran native trees, a watercourse and wet seepage habitats, sub-canopy and ground level layers with much of the wildlife identified cross-boundary traffic - The Foxcombe Woods Nature Reserve is a nationally recognised site or great biodiversity, woodland management education, woodland crafts and private recreation - Two Forest School sites are located within the site and no assessment of the increased use of the application site has been made on the use by the many small children who visit the reserve - The impact of greatly increased and seemingly unpoliced or controlled use of the Foxcombe Hall land has resulted in the boundary fence being cut at least 12 times, very evident trespass and impactful noise with effects on the nature reserve significant - The current proposals are out of all proportion to prior use, ill-considered in terms of impact on neighbouring wildlife and habitats and include no attempt to mitigate appropriately for the impacts on the nature reserve - The impacts of the proposals on the biodiversity and natural capital of the application site and of the adjacent nature reserve have not been suitably assessed. The proposals would have a significant and irreversible effect on the whole ecological functionality of the, the nature reserve and the whole local habitat network of Boars Hill. - No survey work has been attempted on the adjoining land and therefore a proper assessment of impacts on local habitats and biodiversity cannot at this time be assessed. First Consultation (May 2021) No response received
Layla Moran MP	Third Consultation (March 2022) - Have been contacted by numerous constituents who are extremely concerned about the impact that this proposed development will have on their community and local environment - Share residents’ concerns and ask their objections are thoroughly considered and addressed Second Consultation (November 2021) No response received First Consultation (May 2021) No response received

3.0	RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
3.1	P20/V0214/FUL – Refused (22/10/2020) Conversion of residential house to allow B&B accommodation for academics visiting Peking University P19/V2586/DIS - Approved (20/11/2019) Discharge of condition 8 - bat licence and registration of the site of planning application P17/V3013/FUL. (Extension and alterations to provide 10 en suite rooms for visitors accommodation (as amended by drawings received 22 January 2018) P19/V1798/DIS - Approved (17/09/2019) Discharge of conditions 4(materials), 5(joinery), 6 (louvre & flue) & 7(landscaping) on P17/V3013/FUL. (Extension and alterations to provide 10 en suite rooms for visitors accommodation) P18/V1964/FUL – Withdrawn (30/08/2019) Demolition of the existing 'Laboratory Building', and redevelopment to provide a purpose built student accommodation facility of up to 91 study rooms, subterranean teaching space, dining areas, gymnasium, and a 196 seat lecture theatre, including alteration to an existing administrative building and the provision of a publicly accessible cafe and WCs, to serve as an Oxford campus for PHBS-UK (amended transport statement received 6th August 2019). P18/V1242/LB - Approved (13/08/2018) Construction of temporary timber shed for on-site storage during building works phase currently underway. P18/V1241/FUL - Approved (13/08/2018) Construction of temporary timber shed for on-site storage during building works phase currently underway. (Retrospective) P17/V3013/FUL - Approved (02/02/2018) Extension and alterations to provide 10 en suite rooms for visitors accommodation (as amended by drawings received 22 January 2018) P17/V3365/DIS - Approved (01/02/2018) Discharge of conditions  3 - materials and 4 - materials on application ref. P17/V2693/FUL & P17/V2694/LB Enclose courtyard with glass atrium, relocate entrance, replacement of windows and internal refurbishment. P17/V2694/LB - Approved (01/12/2017) Enclose courtyard with glass atrium, relocate entrance, replacement of windows and internal refurbishment.(as amended by drawings received 8 November 2017 and 19 November 2017). P17/V2693/FUL - Approved (01/12/2017) Enclose courtyard with glass atrium, relocate entrance, replacement of windows and internal refurbishment.(as amended by drawings received 8 November 2017 and 17 November 2017).
3.2	Pre-application History P20/V1352/PEJ - Advice provided (17/12/2020) Demolition of laboratory building and ancillary buildings. Redevelopment and extension to include 60 student bedrooms (Use class C2), dining hall, cafe/shop, gym, extension to lecture theatre, teaching space and study space (Use class F1(a)) and associated external works. Advice provided that proposed works would amount to inappropriate development in the green belt and very special circumstances would need to be demonstrated. Comments also provided on trees, landscaping, ecology and heritage impact. P17/V2515/PEJ - Advice provided (23/11/2017) Demolition of the existing "dairy building" and redevelopment to provide a purpose built student accommodation facility of up to 118 study rooms,  subterranean teaching space, dining areas, gymnasium, and a 210 seat lecture theatre to serve an Oxford campus for PHBS-UK Advice provided that proposed development would need justification for green belt policy, mitigation for sustainable transport options would be required, heritage impacts, and comments on trees, landscaping, ecology and design. P17/V2360/PEM and P17/V2359/PEO- Advice provided (20/09/2017) Extensions and Internal alterations to The Lodge. To form 10 new bedrooms and 50 SQM of new extension. New internal alterations to entrance and hall. Addition of new glazed enclosure to rear foyer and walkway. Advice provided that provision of staff accommodation would be an ancillary use, small scale extension to The Lodge and glazed enclosure would be proportionate.
3.3	Screening Opinion requests P21/V1393/SCR – Negative opinion issued 11 June 2021 Request for Screening Opinion for Change of use from use a non-residential educational institution (use class F1(a)) to a residential university campus (use class C2), the demolition of the old laboratory building and ancillary buildings. Internal and external alterations to listed building. Redevelopment and extension to include 60 student bedrooms, dining hall, campus cafe/shop, gym, extension to lecture theatre, teaching space and study space and associated external works.

4.0

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1

The proposed development constitutes Schedule 2 (category 10 (b) – urban development project) development, the area of proposed development exceeds 1 hectare, and the overall area of the development exceeds 5 hectares. A request for a Screening Opinion was received in 2021 (P21/V1393/SCR) and a negative opinion was given. The Local Planning Authority considers there are no material circumstances to require a rescreening of the proposal and that the proposed development is not EIA development.

5.0

MAIN ISSUES

5.1

The main issues are:

1. Principle of development and the Oxford Green Belt

2. Design and heritage assets

3. Landscape impact and Trees

4. Impact on residential amenity

5. Flood risk and drainage

6. Traffic, parking, and highway safety

7. Biodiversity

8. Other considerations

9. Developer contributions

5.2

Principle of development and the Oxford Green Belt

Section 38 (6) of the Planning Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Section 7 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provides that the local planning authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations.

5.3

The development plan for this proposal currently comprises the adopted Local Plan 2031 Part 1 (LPP1), the Local Plan 2031 Part 2 (LPP2) and the Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan.

5.4

Other material planning considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework, guidance within the National Planning Practice Guidance and the council’s adopted Design Guide and Developer Contributions supplementary planning documents.

5.5

Principle of development

The site has an established non-residential education use; having previously been owned and operated by the Open University. This application seeks a change of use to a residential university campus with redevelopment and extension of the campus to provide 60 student bedrooms, additional teaching space and associated facilities.

5.6

Core Policy 30 of the Local Plan 2031 Part 1 (LPP1) states that the council will support the development and enhancement of further and higher education facilities to help support the local economy and to ensure the local labour force is equipped to take advantage of the opportunities likely to arise in the future. It states that the most appropriate locations for further and higher education provision include by the extension or more intensive use of existing education or other suitable community facilities. This policy therefore offers support for the enhancement of higher education on this existing education site which will help to support the local economy.

5.7

Oxford Green Belt

The site is located within the Oxford Green Belt. Core Policy 13 of LPP1 states that the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt is considered inappropriate except where they are:

i) Buildings for agriculture or forestry

ii) Provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it

iii) The extension or alteration of a building provided it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building

iv) The replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces

v) Limited infilling in Shippon, South Hinksey, Wootton Old Village and Wytham

vi) Limited affordable housing for local community needs

vii) Limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites, whether redundant or in continuing use which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

This wording mirrors that in paragraph 149 of the NPPF and is reiterated by Policy SS1.1 of the Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan.

5.8

Paragraph 150 of the NPPF continues that certain other forms of development are also not inappropriate in the Green Belt, provided they preserve its openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it. This includes material changes in the use of land and the re-use of buildings provided that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction.

5.9

The proposed development includes the change of use of land and buildings, extensions and alterations to existing buildings and the erection of new buildings following demolition. Officers have assessed the proposed development as a whole and that is, as a complete redevelopment of a previously developed site (vii of policy CP13). Therefore, in considering whether the proposed development is inappropriate in the Green Belt, one must consider whether the scheme in its entirety would have a greater impact than the existing on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it. 

5.10

To that end, officers consider the proposed development would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing and therefore is inappropriate development for the reasons set out below.

5.11

It is useful to reconfirm for Committee the purposes of the Oxford Green Belt which are:

a) To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas

b) To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another

c) The assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment

d) To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns and

e) To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

5.12

The change of use of the campus will not itself impact the openness of the Green Belt in spatial or visual terms however, officers consider the change to the degree of activity at the site will, from increased presence and activity of students residing at the site and from associated travel movements; being pedestrian, cycle, shuttle bus use and vehicular.

5.13

The whole site redevelopment represents an approximate 35% increase in built volume and an approximate 43% increase in floorspace compared to the existing site. 

5.14

The definition of openness from case law is defined as the state of being free from built development and the absence of buildings. So, whilst some of this increase in volume is captured in subterranean development, from a physical, spatial aspect there will be a greater impact on the openness of the development.

5.15

The site is relatively well contained however views into the site from the public realm are available from Berkeley Road and Jarn Way. The proposed extensions to Building T will see built form brought forward closer to the site boundary with Berkeley Road and built form extending further to the east by approximately 4 metres. There will be a greater degree of two-storey built form closer to the Berkeley Road frontage that will be visible from the road, as described below officers consider this to be an improvement to the visual amenity of the area as existing unsightly facades are replaced with a higher quality contemporary elevation.  The ridge height of Building A will be approximately 0.46 metres higher than the ridge height of the Old Dairy building, with a shallower roof pitch which will mean that the eaves and part of the elevation and fenestration will be visible above the boundary wall from Jarn Way. Building A is also proposed to be approximately 5.4 metres longer along the Jarn Way frontage than the existing Old Dairy building. Trees proposed to be planted along this frontage will, once established, help to screen the additional built form, but the presence of the built form will still be appreciated from the public realm.

5.16

The additional built form, particularly of the roof form of Building A, will be visible from the public realm along Jarn Way and the corner of Berkeley Road to a degree where the increased massing will be noticeable even once the proposed trees have established. Officers consider the increased built form will have an impact upon the visual degree of openness in the Green Belt.

5.17

Overall officers consider that the proposed development will have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt spatially; as a result of the increased volume of the building proposed on site, visually; by the increased massing and height on Building A that will be visible from Jarn Way and the corner of Berkeley Road and from the increased degree of activity of students residing on the site and associated traffic movements of all types. The proposed development is therefore considered to be inappropriate development in the Oxford Green Belt

5.18

Much concern has been raised in consultation responses from residents and interested parties regarding the correct calculation of increases in volume and floor space compared to the existing buildings on site as provided by the applicant and that when assessing the increase in volume from alterations and extensions to buildings, the correct calculation should be compared to the original building on site as existed in 1948. Whilst the provision of volumetric calculations can be helpful to assess impact, they are not the sole assessment on whether the complete redevelopment of the site would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it. In any event, officers have concluded the proposal is inappropriate development.

5.19

Do Very Special Circumstances exist?

CP13 confirms that proposals for inappropriate development will not be approved except in very special circumstances. The NPPF at paragraph 147 reiterates this in stating that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

5.20

Paragraph 148 of the NPPF states that local authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt and that very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

5.21

In supporting documentation, the applicants have identified in their view numerous ‘very special circumstances’ in relation to this application which can be summarised as:

- Local economic benefits

- Educational benefits and supporting the UK’s national educational and economic objectives

- Locational requirements for the UK campus and assessment of alternatives

- Enhanced setting of Foxcombe Hall as a designated heritage asset

- Enhancing setting of Old Berkeley Golf Course and setting of Oxford as one of the Green Belt purposes

- Shuttle Bus and sustainable transport improvements

- Community use of campus facilities including teaching and event spaces and parking

- Inclusive and accessible facilities

- Improvements to building sustainability

- Landscape management and biodiversity enhancement

These are each considered in turn below.

5.22

Local economic benefits

The applicant states the following with regards to the economic benefits of the proposed development:

- The proposals contribute to the Council’s Business and Innovation Strategy, Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy and the Local Plan strategic objectives.

- The teaching will build on international academic research as well as local knowledge with a focus on the businesses and sectors in the Oxford-Cambridge region, aligning with Oxfordshire’s Local Enterprise Strategy (LEP) and will help to continue to bolster the Oxford-Cambridge region as a global innovation hub

- Creation of equivalent of 32 full-time jobs both direct and throughout the supply chain generating £1.6 million in gross value added per year

- The direct spend of the University through its supply chain is £1.2 million per year focussed on local supply and businesses and this is expected to increase by 60% due to the proposed development.

- The economic contribution from student expenditure per year will increase to £1.6 million per year by 2024 due to the proposed development.

- The economic and social benefits through the Community Employment Plan including construction phase apprenticeships, flexible part time and full time employment created, highly skilled jobs and the spill over of knowledge and improved mobility and interaction with the local community by the shuttle bus and public events.

- University’s appetite to connect with UK businesses and universities to increase knowledge and opportunities for students and for Chinese culture and business opportunities in the UK

5.23

Paragraph 81 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt and that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development. It continues that the approach taken should allow each area to build on it strengths, counter any weaknesses and address the challenges of the future and stresses and that this is particularly important where Britain can be a global leader in driving innovation and in areas with high levels of productivity which should be able to capitalise on their performance and potential. Paragraph 84 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should enable amongst other considerations, the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business in rural areas, both through conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings.

5.24

The Council’s Corporate Plan sets out the objective to strengthen any existing network of local and business groups to increase awareness of the council’s economic development programmes and communication throughout the district.

5.25

The Council’s Economic Development team strongly support the proposed development, stating that it will offer significant long-term benefits for the local area. They are supportive of the submitted draft Community Employment Plan (CEP) which whilst including benefits anticipated in standard agreements such as local supply chain and employment opportunities, it also goes further with numerous additional benefits for the Vale area. These include paid scholarships for local students, collaboration in establishing regular business skills courses and facilitated international networking opportunities for UK and Chinese businesses.

5.26

The Economic Development team advise that the commitments within the CEP would help the Council to meet the above objective from the Corporate Plan to ‘strengthen any existing network of local business groups to increase awareness of the council’s economic development programmes and communication throughout the district’. They advise that the proposed development would also help the Council to meet objectives outlined in the Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy (LIS) published by the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP) of which the Council is a member. The LIS outlines the ambition for Oxfordshire to be one of the top three global innovation ecosystems worldwide by 2040 and to continue to strengthen its role as a destination for international trade and investment. Key to achieving this is to create greater ties with innovative international markets and to secure foreign direct investment (FDI).

5.27

Furthermore, the Economic Development consider that the proposed development will provide the opportunity for links with high tech companies in Shenzhen (China’s first Special Economic Zone), the campus would help to create links with Shenzhen which is expected to enable Vale based businesses to engage new markets, customers and suppliers. The University represents the beginning of foreign direct investment in the area.

5.28

The Economic Development team also highlight direct economic benefits of the proposed development, namely:

- The provision of 20 net additional full-time jobs on site; the proposed development will support 32 full time jobs compared to the existing 12.

- The jobs are expected to generate £1.6 million in GVA

- Anticipated 60% increase in supply chain expenditure to approximately £1.5-2 million a year with the potential for this increased spend to benefit local businesses (as supported by the CEP) and lead to further job creation

- Increased numbers of students studying at the site should lead to £1.6 million student expenditure in the local area each year. This is anticipated to be spread across the wider Oxfordshire and UK economy but the economic development team can work with the applicant to ensure that the Vale of White Horse is sufficiently promoted to students.

- Development is anticipated to attract additional international visitors to the area through regular conferences and visits of family and friends of students.

- It is noted within the Government’s post pandemic Tourism Recovery Plan that business visitors are a key component of the UK offer providing a super-marketing platform for leading UK sectors such as life science and finance to showcase their products and latest innovations. The proposed development would help meet the objective within the UK Tourism Recovery Plan for the UK to be a leading European nation for hosting business events.

- Whilst difficult to measure, pre-pandemic estimates were that average overseas visitors to Oxfordshire contributed £484 to the economy per trip.

- Temporary benefits from the construction phase of the development which would help the Council to support objectives in the Oxfordshire Economic Recovery Plan to support career pathways in strong, future proofed industries such as construction:

o Generation of 64 years of temporary construction employment, providing £569,722 in GVA

o Promotion of activity within the construction sector to support the use of apprentices to reduced skills shortages in this field.

5.29

Officers consider that the proposed development will deliver many economic benefits to the local area above what is expected from any development in terms of construction and operational jobs and benefits to the local supply chain. These additional benefits include paid scholarships for local students, collaboration with the Council’s economic development team in establishing regular business skills courses, facilitating international networking opportunities, links to the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, opportunities for foreign direct investment and student and international visitor expenditure in the local area, Oxfordshire and the UK. Many of these benefits can be included in a Community Employment Plan to be agreed by the Council’s economic development team and OxLEP and secured by condition if permission is granted.

5.30

Officers are also mindful of paragraph 81 of the NPPF which states that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity taking into account both local business needs and opportunities for development. The proposed development supports the Council’s Corporate Plan in strengthening the existing network of local and business groups to increase awareness of the Council’s economic development programmes. Officers consider that the substantial local, regional and national economic benefits highlighted above should be awarded substantial weight in the planning balance and should be recognised as a very special circumstance.

5.31

Comments have been made that the economic benefits of the proposal would accrue wherever the university is located, and such benefits may be greater if students were to reside in Oxford, Abingdon or Botley with better access to shops, restaurants, bars, social life and public transport. Officers’ consideration of alternative options for off-site accommodation is set out further on and concludes that there are no realistic or feasible alternative options. It has also been suggested that as the proposal is primarily the provision of on-site student accommodation, the economic benefits that may accrue from the university’s teaching activities are not relevant and would continue irrespective of this application. Officers disagree as the proposal represents a full re-development of the site and an expansion of its activities, whereby the economic benefits identified are directly related to the development proposed.

5.32

Educational benefits and supporting the UK’s national educational and economic objectives

The applicant states the following with regards to the educational and associated economic benefits of the proposed development:

- The UK’s trade in education exports was the UK’s largest service export in 2018 and is recognised as a sector of significant potential growth

- UK-China collaboration on research concentrated on the technology sector is likely to underpin new products and processes of economic and societal significance

- The School promotes and facilitates the exchange of knowledge and provides space for collaboration in research, education and business

- The proposed development is supported by UK national policy objectives for the internationalisation of the education sector and increases the UK’s competitiveness in attracting high quality international students

- Supported by UK economic policy the internationalisation of the education system is an important economic driver and plays a significant role in integrating the Chinese and UK economy

- Chinese students will be able to take advantage of the unique learning experience in the UK and UK and European students will have access to education, industry and business experience in China

- Educational benefits to be captured in the Community Employment Plan including:

o 5 additional scholarships to cross border MA course

o Annual 3–5-day residential training event for local businesses funded by the applicant

o 3-5 business executive training events per year with facilities free of charge and speaker costs covered

o International business contact platform for local businesses providing contacts and exchange between local and Chinese businesses

o Develop local tourism program for students and academics with the Council’s economic development team.

- Drive innovation and entrepreneurship in the local area supporting the strategic economic plans for VOWH, OxLEP and Oxford to Cambridge Arc

- Provide links with high tech companies in Shenzhen, China’s first Special Economic Zone such as Huawei, Vanke and Tencent offering opportunities with the region for foreign investment.

5.33

Core Policy 30 of LPP1 states that the Council will support the development and enhancement of further and higher education facilities to help support the local economy and to ensure the local labour force is equipped to take advantage of the opportunities likely to arise in the future. It states that the most appropriate locations for further and higher education provision are, amongst other options, by the extension or more intensive use of existing education and other suitable community facilities.

5.34

The development proposes the more intensive use of an existing education facility to develop and enhance the higher education offer by the University. Officers also consider that the proposed development will offer considerable benefits to the local economy as set out above. The offer of scholarships, training events and networking opportunities for local businesses can be secured in a Community Employment Plan (CEP) as required by policy DP11 of LPP2, ensuring such benefits are available to the local community and local businesses.

5.35

The Oxfordshire Local Industrial Strategy (LIS) identifies that Oxfordshire has a knowledge-led economy as a result of the close ties between universities and businesses; the proposals within the draft CEP, which can be secured by condition, would contribute to such ties between PHBS UK and local businesses.

5.36

Recognising the support for the development and enhancement of higher education facilities on an existing site within the district by policy CP30 of LPP1, officers consider the educational benefits of the proposed development on an existing educational site amount to a very special circumstance.

5.37

Locational requirements for the UK campus and assessment of alternatives

Within supporting documentation, the applicant offers detailed analysis of the vision for the university in setting up a UK campus (first opened at Foxcombe Hall in 2017) and the benefits that can arise from this for students, businesses and the UK and Chinese economies aligning with local and national objectives for the internationalisation of education and the economy. They offer a summary of their considerations in establishing the UK campus at Foxcombe Hall, referring to the desire for the campus to be close to leading centres for UK higher education to foster opportunities for collaboration between other institutions and students.

In summary the applicant advises that the need for the development of student accommodation and additional facilities is because:

- To improve teaching and student facilities on-site, such as the sub-optimal lecture theatre without fixed theatre seating or audio-visual equipment, larger, purpose-built kitchen and dining space, expanding study spaces, improving energy efficient of current buildings

- For the provision of on-site accommodation for short term courses due to difficulties with sourcing suitable accommodation off-site (as described below), due to the intensive nature of the short-term courses and to reduce the number of students requiring transit between the campus and Oxford for returning to accommodation.

- For the provision of accommodation with disabled access

5.38

The applicant has provided an appraisal of alternative options for the proposed development. Reference is also made to an appeal at Harrow School (ref. APP/M5450/W/18/3208434) in which the Inspector and Secretary of State considered an assessment of alternative options to a proposal for the development of a multi-sports building within Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) (equivalent protection as Green Belt land). This decision confirmed that it was proper to consider alternative sites or locations where a proposal will result in harm to MOL land, but that such alternatives should be realistic and feasible to meet the identified need of the school. Officers have had regard to this decision in their assessment of this application.

5.39

The appraisal has reviewed:

- Alternatives options to accommodate whole campus in Oxford

- Alternative locations to be developed or used for student accommodation in Oxford

- Alternative on-site options

5.40

Alternative options to accommodate whole campus in Oxford

In considering the option to relocate the whole campus and operation to a new site to accommodate the teaching and accommodation needs of the university, the applicant considers that such an option for the university to acquire a new campus and to relocate is not a realistic option. Officers agree that such an alternative would not be realistic or reasonable to consider. The campus at Foxcombe Hall is established, operational, where significant investment has occurred already across the site and the university is already contributing to the local economy and educational sector.

5.41

Alternative locations to be developed or used for student accommodation in Oxford

The university offers a variety of courses from 3-year PhDs, one-year Masters programmes to 10-week short courses with the majority of students being visiting students on 10-week courses. Submitted projected student numbers for the campus shows growth across all courses, and it is projected that the total number of students per cohort/ term visiting for short courses will be around 80.

5.42

The applicant advises that short courses are on an intensive programme with teaching, informal study and networking continuing throughout the day and evening.

5.43

Students currently studying at the campus reside at off-site accommodation in Temple Cowley, Oxford which is currently leased by the University. The minimum term of the leases are 10 months, therefore an inefficient and expensive housing option for the short course programme but the applicant notes that this remains suitable for longer term students. The applicant comments that the private rental market in Oxford is crowded and tenancies are typically for a minimum of 6 months, in addition private short-let accommodation is prohibitively expensive for students.

5.44

The applicant has further considered purpose-built student accommodation developments in Oxford and the surrounding area but concludes that developments at Oxpens and West Way, Botley have a minimum rental agreement of 51 weeks and the Between Towns Court development has a minimal rental agreement of 42 weeks; all considerably longer than the 10 week courses the university seeks on-site accommodation for. Officers can confirm that the legal agreement secured with planning permission for the West Way development includes a restriction on the use of the student accommodation to only 9 weeks of the year for non-full time students, i.e. for 43 weeks of the year the accommodation is required to be used by full-time students.

5.45

The University’s intention is for students attending longer courses to continue to be accommodated off site.

5.46

Officers consider that it has been demonstrated that seeking off-site accommodation suitable for the needs of students on short-term courses has not presented a realistic or feasible alternative to the delivery of on-site student accommodation.

5.47

Alternative on-site options

Officers are satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that there are no realistic or feasible alternatives for providing the identified additional facilities for the university off-site. As outlined above, officers are satisfied that the identified need for the additional accommodation and facilities and enhancement of higher education on site is supported by CP30 and offer substantial local, regional, and national economic benefits. The purpose therefore of officers’ consideration of the applicant’s review of alternative options is to consider if any alternative options to the proposed development would have a less harmful effect on the Green Belt with regards to impacting upon its essential characteristics of openness and permanence. 

5.48

Whilst the University’s site is extensive, officers recognise that there are a number of constraints upon the University’s campus including the whole site being washed over by the Oxford Green Belt, landscape and key viewpoints, heritage assets and their setting and the majority of the site being woodland, the western corner of which is protected by a Tree Preservation Order. Built form on site is limited to the north-eastern corner.

5.49

The applicants firstly considered the proposed development submitted under the withdrawn application ref. P18/V1964/FUL. Whilst a decision on this application was not made by this authority, the proposed built form and massing was substantially greater than what is now proposed under this application and in the view of officers the previously withdrawn scheme would have had a much more harmful effect upon the openness of the Green Belt.

5.50

The applicant has considered options for adapting and reusing existing historic buildings on site to accommodate the additional facilities. Indeed, the proposed development being considered includes the conversion of the West Wing of the George and Yeates building to provide accommodation and a gym which can be achieved with minimal impact to the historic interest of the listed building as this part of the building has previously been eroded by modern partitions to form offices. The applicant states that further adaptation beyond that proposed to accommodate the educational and pastoral needs of the university would result in the loss of historic fabric and altering the character of the original buildings which would be detrimental to the special interest of the listed building. It is not considered that further residential accommodation can be achieved within existing buildings without causing more significant and harmful impact to the historic fabric of the Hall. Whilst the option for adapting and reusing more of the existing buildings on site may have a less harmful effect on the openness of the green belt than new built form, is it not considered a realistic or feasible option due to the likely significant harm to the historic fabric of the listed buildings.

5.51

The applicant has undertaken feasibility studies to understand the potential for the Old Dairy building to be retained and adapted. It would require substantial refurbishment, and its adaptation would be much less efficient environmentally than a new build of equivalent volume. The building has a steeply pitched roof and asymmetric eaves heights so its roof space cannot be effectively used to provide new accommodation; the only feasible design to increase floorspace within the same building would be to increase roof height, which is not considered desirable to neighbouring properties as it would increase built form close to the boundary wall of Jarn Way. Officers therefore accept that retention, adaptation and/ or alteration of the Old Dairy building has notable disbenefits including an inefficient use of space requiring an increase in the extent of built form within the green belt to meet the identified needs of the university. The Conservation Officer agrees that it would not be possible to accommodate the same amount of proposed accommodation in the existing building without significant extension and alteration to it. Officers consider that such a proposal would likely have a more harmful effect upon openness.

5.52

The proposed development pursues new development on the site, options that are of most benefit to the operation of the university, the setting of Foxcombe Hall and to the visual amenity of the local community, improving the façade onto Berkeley Road and increasing green infrastructure to improve the setting as seen from Jarn Way. The Design and Access Statement includes a detailed design evaluation which identifies areas which are constrained from development due to the existing woodland, gardens and historic buildings and identifies those areas where there are opportunities for new built form with the least impact on the openness of the green belt and where there may be opportunities for improvement to the site’s setting and appearance.

5.53

It is clear to officers the development proposed is directed towards the areas on site with the most opportunity for change in terms of limiting landscape and heritage harm and to have the least impact upon the openness of the green belt; this being the area to the west of the existing collection of buildings and a small area to the east. Design, heritage and landscape impacts of the proposed development are assessed in detail below, however officers are satisfied that there are no other suitable alternatives locations within the site to achieve the built form required for the identified need for the university.

5.54

Enhanced setting of Foxcombe Hall as a designated heritage asset

The applicant argues that the proposed development will further promote the conservation and maintenance of Foxcombe Hall and replaces unsympathetic 20^th Century additions to improve the setting. Officers acknowledge that there will be an improvement to the setting of Foxcombe Hall as a result of removing the unsympathetic façade fronting Berkeley Road and replacing with a high-quality, well-designed elevation. The overall conservation and maintenance of Foxcombe Hall as a heritage asset is the legal responsibility of the site owner regardless of the proposed development. Whilst the improvements to the setting of Foxcombe Hall as result of the Berkeley Road elevation do represent an enhancement to the site, officers do not consider that in isolation this benefit is substantial to amount to a very special circumstance but must be considered in the planning balance.

5.55

Enhancing setting of Old Berkeley Golf Course and setting of Oxford as one of the Green Belt purposes

The applicants refer to the view from the site across Old Berkeley Golf Course as being a key public view that is part of the Oxford view cone and the setting of Oxford. They state that the current 20^th Century buildings are a prominent eyesore which detract from the experience of the Old Berkeley Golf Course and the development proposes to replace them with buildings of high-quality design and that this improvement will be clearly appreciable from the Old Berkeley Golf Course and the historic setting of Oxford.

5.56

Reference is made to the Oxford Brookes Appeal in which the benefit to the openness of the Green Belt from the removal of a 10-storey tower was awarded very substantial weight. Notwithstanding that each application must be considered on its own merits, officers do not agree that parallels can be made between the proposed removal of a 10-storey tower and dispersal of this volume and built form across a wider site and what is proposed here on the Berkeley Road frontage which is the replacement of an unsightly façade with a higher quality elevational treatment with an extension to the built form in this location of the site.

5.57

As stated above officers do not disagree that there is some benefit of the proposed development from the replacement of the Berkeley Road façade in terms of the setting of the Listed Building and when appreciated from the important views of Oxford from the Old Berkeley Golf Course. Whilst this must be considered in the planning balance and in combination with other benefits of the proposed development, it does not constitute a very special circumstance in isolation.

5.58

Shuttle bus and sustainable transport improvements

The applicant references sustainable transport enhancements as a very special circumstance that should attract significant weight, including the shuttle bus for students and residents, restrictions on students bringing cars to site and the provision of on-site student accommodation itself to reduce travel demand.The traffic and highway impact of the scheme are discussed in detail further on. Officers however consider that such matters form part of the transport mitigation package to mitigate the impact of development as required by local and national policies and therefore do not represent very special circumstances in green belt terms.

5.59

Community use of campus facilities including teaching and event spaces and parking

The applicants have submitted a draft Memorandum of Understanding with a unilateral statement from PHBS UK to identify its commitments including community use of the lecture hall and other campus facilities, permissive public access to the Woodland Walk and community use of the campus car park at weekends to mitigate the impact of street parking associated with visitors to the Old Berkeley Golf Course. Officers understand that there is currently permissive public access to the Woodland Walk and community use of the campus car park at weekends.

5.60

The benefits to the community that may result from access to existing and proposed campus facilities, is acknowledged. However, officers do not consider that facilitating such benefits falls within the scope of this application, such community use is not the main function of the site and would be an ancillary use. Nor would securing such benefits as part of a S106 agreement meet the tests for planning obligations as set out at paragraph 57 of the NPPF, namely, necessary to make the development acceptable, directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. As such officers do not consider this element amounts to a very special circumstance, nor can it be controlled in perpetuity through this application and such benefits have no weight in the assessment of the proposal.

5.61

Inclusive and accessible facilities

The applicants refer to the new buildings being accessible and inclusive, a requirement of the UK’s Office for Students allowing UK accredited degrees to be offered which would make admissions directly from the UK and Europe more attractive. They refer to the fact that achieving this accessibility within the existing buildings on site would likely have a detrimental impact on the historic significance of Foxcombe Hall and as such new buildings are preferred to achieve these improvements.

5.62

The provision of fully accessible and inclusive facilities is a requirement for all new buildings under Part M of the Building Regulations and therefore is not considered to be a benefit or special circumstance of the scheme beyond what is expected of any new building. In addition, reference to the situation which could occur by enhancing the accessibility of the existing buildings is not relevant as that is not what is proposed in this application and may require listed building consent. In addition, Part M of the Building Regulations make allowances in the requirements for listed buildings. Officers therefore discount  accessibility of the proposed development as a very special circumstance.

5.63

Improvements to building sustainability

The applicant has referred to the proposed development creating a highly sustainable, low energy campus with high performing efficiency in new buildings, providing renewable energy sources for the existing Hall and estate and that energy and carbon use will be reduced across the site in addition to a range of new sustainable measures to reduce water usage and improvements to the ecological diversity of the site.

5.64

The new building is proposed to be built to Passivhaus principles with superinsulation building envelopes that exceed building regulation compliance, glazing which optimises internal natural daylighting whilst reducing heat gain and equipment that recovers and exchanges waste heat energy. The systems serving the existing buildings are to be unified with a central efficient energy centre that is in part to be energised by the systems and renewable energy sources of the new buildings. An energy centre will be located within the Main Plant Room of Building A. A condition can be attached which requires further details of the sustainable design and construction measures to be used including design details to achieve Passivhaus Classic standard for the new buildings, details of water recycling and potentially ground source heat pumps and appropriately located PVs which have been suggested by the applicant. Such a condition would need to be reviewed by the conservation team to ensure proposals are appropriate to the heritage setting and by the environmental health team to ensure there are no noise implications for example from heat pumps.

5.65

Whilst officers are supportive of the measures proposed by the applicant for sustainable design and construction of the new built form proposed and improvements to the functioning of the existing buildings, this is supported by CP40 of LPP1 and would weigh as a benefit in the planning balance,  this is a measure that would be supported by local plan policies for any development, irrespective of green belt policy and therefore officers do not consider that this represents a very special circumstance.

5.66

Landscape management and biodiversity enhancement

The applicant advises that the proposed development will protect existing trees as well as adding additional trees and will generate a net gain in biodiversity through new landscaping and woodland management which form part of the long-term commitment of the applicant to protect and enhance the Green Belt landscape. The landscape, tree and biodiversity merits of the application are discussed below. It is a requirement of CP44 of LLP1 that the key features of the landscape will be protected from harmful development and where possible enhanced and proposals are expected to incorporate appropriate landscape proposals that reflect the character of the area. It is also a requirement of CP46 of LPP1 for opportunities for biodiversity net gain to be actively sought. As such officers do not consider these matters as very special circumstances.

5.67

Summary of consideration of Very Special Circumstances

Overall, officers consider that very special circumstances have been demonstrated to outweigh the presumption against inappropriate development within the Oxford Green Belt. These are the substantial local, regional, and national economic benefits and the educational benefits of the proposed development. Officers also consider that there are no realistic or feasible alternatives to seeking accommodation off-site or any suitable on-site options with a less harmful impact upon the openness of the green belt and heritage assets. Such very special circumstances must however be weighed in the planning balance of other benefits or harm of the proposed development as discussed below.

5.68

Design and heritage assets

CP37 of LPP1 states that proposals for new development will be required to be of a high-quality design that responds positively to the site and its surroundings. CP44 states that measures should be sought to integrate development into the landscape character of the area and that development should preserve and promote local distinctiveness and diversity. DG1.1 of Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan states that development should ensure it respects local character and provide for the integration of environmental or landscape context and built form. DG1.2 of the neighbourhood plan states that development should respect heritage and local distinctiveness and be in keeping with the style, design and nomenclature of surrounding buildings, streets, and public spaces.

5.69

CP39 of LPP1 confirms that new development should conserve and where possible enhance designated heritage assets and their setting in accordance with national legislation. DP36 of LPP2 states that proposals for new development that may affect heritage assets (designated and non-designated) must demonstrate that they conserve and enhance the special interest or significance of the heritage asset and its setting, particularly where they make a positive contribution to local character, distinctiveness, and wider social and economic benefits.

5.70

When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight will be given to the asset’s conservation. Any harm or loss of the significance of a designated heritage asset will require clear and convincing justification. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets a balanced judgement will be made having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. This is reiterated by policy DG2.1 of the neighbourhood plan.

5.71

DP38 of LPP2 states that proposals for additions or alterations to, or the demolition of a listed building (including partial demolition), and/or for development within the curtilage and/ or setting of a listed building must demonstrate that they will preserve or enhance its special architectural or historic interest and significance. Proposals directly affecting a listed building must demonstrate that they will be sympathetic to the listed building and its setting in terms of its siting, size, scale, height, alignment, materials and finishes, design, form, and character to retain the special interest that justifies its designation.

5.72

Proposals within the setting of a listed building must demonstrate that they will respect, preserve, or enhance features that contribute to the special interest and significance of the building including structures, trees, the historic curtilage or context and its setting. Proposals for the change of use of a listed building or buildings within its curtilage will be viewed favourably where it can be demonstrated that the new use can be accommodated in a manner appropriate to its significance and historic character without any adverse effect on the special architectural and historic interest of the building and its appearance or character.

5.73

Paragraph 199 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.

5.74

Paragraph 200 states that any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of grade II listed buildings should be exceptional. Paragraph 201 confirms that where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significance of) a designated heritage asset, the local planning authority should refuse consent unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or loss.

5.75

Paragraph 202 states that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.

5.76

Paragraph 203 states that the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application and in weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. Paragraph 204 confirms that local planning authorities should not permit the loss of the whole or part of a heritage asset without taking all reasonable steps to ensure the new development will proceed after the loss has occurred.

5.77

The Conservation Officer raises no objections with the proposed development. In their response they clearly set out the structures and buildings on site designated as heritage assets and those which are not.

For clarity, the site comprises the following designated heritage assets:

- Foxcombe Hall

- The North Gateway

- The Garden Terraces and Structures to the south

These structures were listed Grade II in 2017 for their architectural and historic interest.

5.78

The following structures and features are explicitly excluded from curtilage listing by Historic England in their assessment of the site:

- North wing of 1964

- The square apse and the east end of the hall

- The 1977 extension of the north wing to the south and east (incorporates modern entrance)

- The interior of the service wing

- The former garages and the Old Dairy to the NW of the hall.

5.79

Demolition of the Old Dairy Laboratory Building

The Old Dairy (or Berkeley Laboratory as it is also known) is explicitly excluded from the listed curtilage of Foxcombe Hall. The Conservation Officer advises that the Old Dairy building is considered a non-designated heritage asset under the tests of paragraph 203 of the NPPF being of local interest. It has specific local interest as the former laboratory of 8^th Earl Berkeley, in part historic interest due to its specific connection to the 8^th Earl Berkeley’s tenure at Foxcombe Hall and in part architectural interest owing to his intention to create a mock estate building in keeping with his vision for a country estate.

5.80

The building was designed to respond to the Arts and Crafts style popular at the time and consistent with other elements of the site and later early C20 extensions to the main house, although the Conservation Officer advises that the detailing is not as refined as that seen on the West Wing of the main house or the Lodge building. There are no internal features that indicate it had a former academic research use. The internal layout and partitioning have been much altered through the building’s previous uses as a hostel, offices and training space. Damp issues have caused deterioration and damage to the flood of the ground/ basement level and to the floor of the western end.

5.81

A detailed heritage assessment has been submitted in support of the application and this provides a historic record of the site and the Old Dairy building, providing a more detailed understanding of the site’s former owner and the proposals for the laboratory building than can be understood specifically from the building as existing. This assessment also provides an adequate record of the fabric of the building and its historic and architectural interest.

5.82

The Conservation Officer advises that they do not consider that the extant building fabric of the Old Dairy is of such high historic or architectural interest that is should be retained and converted instead of the proposed development to demolish and relace with a purpose-built residential block which makes best use of the space available by increasing the basement level. This helps to reduce the overall massing required by the new building to achieve the quantity of accommodation, achieving the same amount of accommodation in the existing building would result in significant extension and alteration. The officer is content that the documentary research submitted with the application provides a greater level of detail about the history of the building and wider site than can be understood from the building itself.

5.83

Due to the current deterioration and poor condition of the interior of the building, much of the primary fabric and legibility of the primary plan form would be lost to bring the building up to a habitable standard, notwithstanding the significant extension and alteration that would be required to achieve the proposed quantity of accommodation.

5.84

The Conservation Officer acknowledges that the loss of the building would alter the existing setting of the listed building but would not harm the significance of the designated heritage asset which is identified as the more complete areas of the 1887-9 Country House and 1935 extension with interior decorative schemes contemporary to these two phases of the building.  Its removal is therefore acceptable to officers.

5.85

Overall Design, layout and appearance of new development

The Urban Design Officer has commented that the overall scheme represents a high-quality site-specific design response to the development context of the site, following extensive design dialogue and revision. Subterranean development is proposed to minimise the visual impact of the new built form on site and to make an efficient use of floor space. Officers consider that the proposed design narrative is of a high-quality contemporary style which avoids competing with the architectural interest of the historic buildings on site and would be a legible addition to the site creating a courtyard of buildings subservient to Foxcombe Hall. The use of timber cladding and large glazed areas across the new buildings and extensions also creates a cohesive design across the site.

5.86

Buildings A, D and L

The proposal uses changes in levels between Jarn Way and the internal site levels to provide a basement level to buildings A and L so that the height of building A is close to that of the Old Dairy building.  Officers consider this will minimise visual intrusion of the built form from the public realm and reduce light spill and to allow the roof height of building L to sit below the boundary wall.

5.87

Building D is designed as a detached, pitch roofed building adjacent to the West Wing of George and Yeates house, continuing the building line of the west wing, matching its roof pitch and eaves but in a contemporary style. A glazed gable will allow views to the historic gable end of the existing building.

5.89

Building A (proposed to replace the Old Dairy and provide residential accommodation), is designed to sit behind the existing site wall in broadly the same location as the Old Dairy building. The Conservation Officer advises that whilst of greater massing than the existing building it has no greater relationship with the exterior of the site than the current built form and would not obscure views towards the Lodge, the Tower and glimpses of the main house that can be experienced from the roads surrounding the site. They continue to advise that the building is designed so that the parts of the building that are visible in the street scene share traditional pitched roofs and proportions with the other buildings on the site but would be finished in a contemporary style and materials.

5.90

The Old Dairy building has a steeply pitched roof which means that the eaves sit below the highest section of the boundary wall along Jarn Way. The ridge height of Building A will be approximately 0.46 metres higher than the ridge height of the existing building, but with a shallower roof pitch this will mean that the eaves and part of the elevation and fenestration will be visible above the boundary wall to Jarn Way of the proposed building. This, coupled with Building A proposed to be longer than the Old Dairy building, will mean that greater massing of the new building will be visible from the public realm. The proposed building including its roof form is of a high-quality design, officers do not consider that its appearance from Jarn Way will be detrimental to visual amenity particularly when considered with the screening that will be provided by the existing tree on the corner of Jarn Way and the proposed tree planting, which is discussed below. The Urban Design Officer advise that Building A does not exceed in any unreasonable way the elevation or appearance in scale of the existing building and considers the scale and massing of the proposed building to be entirely acceptable

5.91

The Conservation Officer is satisfied that buildings A and D are designed to be architecturally subservient to the main listed building. Whilst the massing of the new buildings is greater than the existing buildings, the topography of the site has been used in the design (creating basements) so that floor space is increased without exceeding the ridge height of the West Wing of the house or The Lodge. The Conservation Officer is satisfied that the listed building will remain the dominant building on the site and the use of a contemporary C21 style for the proposed new buildings will ensure that the characteristic Arts and Crafts design of the listed building is not eroded by pastiche or diminished by statement architectural forms that would detract from their historic characteristics.

5.92

The new courtyard created by the proposed new buildings is considered to create a greater sense of enclosure at the north-western end of the site than the existing arrangement. This form is not considered to detract from the character of this part of the site or the experience or setting of the listed buildings.

5.93

West Wing of George and Yeates house

External changes to the West Wing are limited to the removal of an existing external metal fire escape stair as a fire escape is to be incorporated within the building. This will better reveal the façade of the building.

5.94

Direct works to the Listed elements

The proposed direct works to the listed elements of the site are:

- Demolition of the flat roofed west extension to the service wing

- Internal reconfiguration of the service wing to create a gym at the lower ground floor, new first flood bedrooms, shared kitchen and WCs.

- Additional first floor fire escape within the west wing and removal of external metal fire escape

- Reconfiguration of the Warden’s Flat in the Tower

5.95

The Conservation Officer raises no objection to the proposed works to the listed buildings and is satisfied that the works do not harm the historic building or its overall significance. Listed building consent for these works has been submitted and is considered under application ref. P21/V1379/LB.

5.96

Conclusion on design and heritage assets

The Conservation Officer is satisfied that the proposed works across the site preserve the prominence of the listed building and the features of its designed setting identified as making the greatest contribution to is significance and historic and architectural interest. Officers are satisfied that the proposed built form provides sympathetic, high-quality, contemporary additions to the site that are not detrimental to the visual amenity of the site or surrounding area. The Conservation Officer is satisfied that the listed building and its features of special architectural and historic interest will be preserved. The demolition of the Old Dairy and erection of new ancillary buildings within the setting of the listed building is considered to preserve the historic associated use of this area of the site as part of the setting of the main Hall but does result in an intensification of use of the area.

5.97

The scheme will result in the loss of a non-designated heritage asset and the intensification of new ancillary development in the setting of the Grade II listed Foxcombe Hall. It is considered that the harm to the significance of the listed building would be less-than-substantial, the harm results from the loss of an ancillary structure of subservient scale and character contemporary to the original listed building that provides some understanding of the development of the listed building and wider site. The harm is not considered to be greater than less-than-substantial harm as the building is not considered curtilage listed and its associative value has been adequately recorded by a heritage appraisal of the site. A low level of harm is also considered to arise from the intensification of built form in this ancillary area, this is considered a low level of harm as the proposed massing has sought to preserve the dominance of the listed building by proposed ancillary buildings remaining physically and materially subservient. As required by paragraph 202 of the NPPF this less-than-substantial harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, officers therefore have regard to the benefits described above considered under Green Belt policy.

5.98

Paragraph 203 of the NPPF requires a balanced judgement to be taken having regard to the scale of harm or loss to a non-designated heritage asset and its overall significance. Whilst the proposal results in total loss of the asset, officers consider that the application has demonstrated that the remaining building has been considerably altered from its original design as planned by the 8^th Earl Berkeley from whom it gains much of its local historic interest. The submitted heritage statement provides a very valuable record of the building’s history and development in the absence of surviving features within the building itself. Whilst the scale of loss of the non-designated heritage asset is high, the significance of the remaining building is considered to be low, and its demolition is considered to be a moderate level of loss which should be weighed in the planning balance. Paragraph 204 requires that planning permission for the loss of the Old Dairy should only be granted if there is a reasonable expectation that the proposed development will be implemented. The demolition of the Old Dairy is required to be replaced by the proposed accommodation block which is integral to the overall scheme proposed and the overarching ambitions of the applicant. Officers are satisfied that there is a reasonable expectation that the proposed development will be implemented.

5.99

Landscape impact and Trees

Landscape character and impact

A Landscape and Visual Appraisal has been submitted in support of the application and this has been reviewed by the Landscape Architect who raises no objection to the proposed development and is satisfied that the development would not result in landscape and visual effects significant enough to warrant refusal, acknowledging that the proposed development will alter the mass and appearance of built form on the site (as discussed in detail above).

5.100

The site is within the study area of the Oxford View Cones study (2015) and whilst the site is not located within a view cone it partially forms the backdrop, along with the wider area of Boars Hill, in the views from the east looking west across Oxford City. The Landscape Architect advises that the vegetation to the north of the site including Abraham Wood restricts long distance views to the western site area and that due to the distance and limited proposed changes to the eastern section of the site adjacent to Berkeley Road there would not be a perceivable change in the views from the proposed development.

5.101

Protection of existing trees

The Forestry Officer identifies that the trees within the site form a very significant feature of the landscape and that the vast majority are of sufficient arboricultural value to be considered a constraint to development. Many of the trees surrounding the western side of the site are protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

5.102

The Forestry Officer confirms that most of the new development proposed including basements have been designed to avoid the root protection areas (RPAs) of the surrounding protected trees. Concerns were raised by the forestry Officer regarding a proposed footpath from the car park along the western side of building D which encroached into the RPAs of protected trees to the south. Amended plans have been received which removes the section of path previously within the RPA of trees and returns this area to soft landscaping. This is to the satisfaction of the Forestry Officer.

5.103

Concerns have been raised regarding the potential risk to the existing Sycamore tree on the corner of Jarn Way from Building A as the building would be within the tree’s crown. The Forestry Officer has noted that the existing building is just as close to the tree as the proposed would be and therefore the impact would be minimal. They advise that there may need to be a small amount of pruning of the Sycamore to provide space for safe construction, but this would have no lasting impact on the tree. Such works can be agreed through an arboricultural method statement to be secured by condition.

5.104

Car parking areas

Both the Forestry Officer and the Landscape Architect have raised concerns with the proposed car parking extending into areas beyond the existing surfaced car parking areas due to the proximity of works close to the base of and within the RPAs of protected trees. Amended plans have been submitted which reduce the car parking areas to within the footprint of existing areas only. The car park is to be resurfaced using a ‘no dig’ cellular confinement system, the details of the methodology for this can be secured by condition as recommended by the Forestry Officer and a condition can also be required for submission of site levels details to ensure that ground levels in proximity to protected trees are not being altered. The Forestry Officer is satisfied that a cellular confinement system will improve the load bearing capacity with less compaction than the existing arrangement and therefore it will reduce the harm to surrounding trees than the existing car park surfacing and use.

5.105

Proposed tree planting along Jarn Way

The Forestry Officer and Landscape Architect have raised concerns with the feasibility of tree planting in the north-western corner between proposed building A and the existing boundary wall due to the limited space available, the likely need for structural support for the boundary wall and the resulting limited soil volume that would be available. The Landscape Architect questions the need for screening in this location, a view shared by the Urban Design Officer. As discussed above it is considered by officers that the increased massing of the proposed building compared to the existing that will be visible from the public realm along Jarn Way and the corner of Berkeley Road without screening is not detrimental to the visual amenity of the area. Officers understand from the applicant however that when consulting with residents prior to submission on this application, tree planting to screen additional built form in this location was strongly supported. As such, amendment and clarification on the feasibility of tree planting in this location has been sought.

5.106

The applicant has provided further detail of the design and specification for tree planting in this location and both the Landscape Architect and Forestry Officer are satisfied subject to full final details of species and tree pit design to be required by condition. The Forestry Officer acknowledges that the proposed planning in this area is tight, however the proposals indicate soil volumes of 20 cubic metres which is considered acceptable for the successful growth of trees, subject to the right age and species of trees and ongoing maintenance which can be agreed via condition. The Forestry Officer has advised that mature trees would struggle to establish, and it is likely that planting stock would need to be no larger than 12 to 14cm girth, likely around 3 metres tall. Dependent on the species the trees could be making a significant contribution to softening the built form within 10 years. It is not uncommon that new landscaping planted on developments will not provide screening immediately. The Forestry Officer also advises that some maintenance and pruning would be required to maintain clearance from the building, however the trees can be allowed to grow naturally on the highway side. It is considered that the level of maintenance needed is minimal, a small amount of pruning every 5 years and this can be secured by condition.

5.107

Concerns have been raised by Friends of Boars Hill that the root growth and water requirements of the proposed trees could undermine the footings of the boundary wall along Jarn Way. The Forestry Officer has advised that the tree pit design, to be secured by condition, can include root barrier material on the wall site to encourage lateral root spread. In addition, modern building regulations, to which the construction of Building A will have to comply, would include foundation design that would accommodate the site’s soil conditions and the influence of future tree growth. Given the building will have a basement, the extent of the foundations will be considerable, beyond the influence of tree roots. The Forestry Officer also notes that the root system of the existing Sycamore tree on the corner of Jarn Way does not appear to have undermined the wall’s structure.

5.108

The Forestry Officer advises that once the trees are established, they would require minimal watering, however a rainwater harvesting system from the roof of the adjacent building could be used and this can be secured by condition.

5.109

Light pollution

The Landscape Architect acknowledges that the proposed development will change the lighting of the site as a result of the change of use and provision of additional residential accommodation. They acknowledge however that the site is located in an area with numerous residential properties and the lighting associated with such properties and that there are existing street lights along Jarn Way. It is considered that the proposed extension and alterations to Building T and the façade onto Berkeley Road has been designed to reduce the amount of light pollution when compared to the existing building. In addition, there are existing residential properties along Berkeley Road which can be seen from the road at night. Whilst the proposed development of Building A would increase the amount of windows and possible night time lighting onto Jarn Way, there are existing houses fronting onto Jarn Way with their associated night time lighting and existing street lights. It is recommended by the Landscape Architect that a condition can be required for the proposed lighting scheme to be designed to an E2: Rural Environmental Zone as defined by the Institute of Lighting Professional Guidance for the reduction of obtrusive light. Such requirements can be combined with the recommendations of the Countryside Officer to ensure that the proposed lighting scheme is appropriate for wildlife, the landscape setting and adjacent neighbours.

5.110

Submitted with the application is a document which sets out accommodation rules for students residing on site which includes reference to curtains being required to be closed when it is dark outside. Such a restriction cannot be controlled via planning condition as it would not be enforceable, nor do officers consider such a restriction would be necessary. The Landscape Architect does however suggest that a condition can be attached which requires details of the window design to be submitted to ensure that windows are designed to use glass that reduces the visible light transmission to reduce light spill from internal room illuminance.

5.111

Impact on residential amenity

Policy DP21 of LPP2 states that external lighting will be permitted provided that there would not be an adverse effect on the character of the area, the amenity of neighbouring uses or on local biodiversity, there would not be hazard for pedestrians or people using any type of transportation and that the lighting is the minimum necessary to undertake the task it is required for.

5.112

Concern has been raised on light pollution. As set out above officers recommend the inclusion of conditions requiring a detailed lighting scheme to be designed to ensure lighting is appropriate for wildlife, the landscape setting and adjacent neighbours and requiring details of window design to ensure that windows are designed using glass that reduces the visible light transmission to reduce light spill from internal room illuminance. Subject to the above conditions, officers are satisfied that lighting of the proposed development will not result in a significant adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.

5.113

Policy DP23 of LPP2 states that development proposals should demonstrate that they will not result in significant adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring uses in relation to loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight, dominance or visual intrusion, noise or vibration, dust, heat, odour gases or other emissions, pollution and external lighting.

5.114

The environmental protection team have raised no objection to the proposed development. The nearest residential property to the north of the site is approximately 37 metres away from the boundary to the site. The nearest residential property to the west of the site is approximately 73 metres away from the boundary to the site. Given these significant distances, officers are satisfied that the proposed development will not result in a significant adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight or from dominance or visual intrusion. Officers accept that the proposed development will result in increased activity at the site due to more students present and residing there, however do not consider that this will result in a significant adverse impact upon the amenity of neighbouring properties. The environmental protection team has raised no concerns regarding noise pollution or disturbance from the proposed development.

5.114i

Concerns have been raised regarding the living conditions for students in rooms which will receive little natural light as a result of subterranean development or those rooms fronting onto Jarn Way where mature trees are proposed in close proximity to the building, screening windows. Officers consider that student rooms cannot be offered the same level of protection as a use class C3 residential property as the usage of such rooms is different with students having access to other spaces within the campus and will not spend all of their time in their rooms. Therefore, officers do not consider that the proposed development is harmful to the amenity of its future occupiers.

5.115

Concerns have been raised regarding disturbance to residents during construction of the proposed development. Unfortunately, some disturbance is inevitable during all construction works. It is recommended that a construction management statement be required by condition which can control some factors of disturbance for example routing of construction traffic, control of dust, construction hours and provision of wheel washing facilities.

5.116

Flood Risk and drainage

CP42 of LPP1 seeks to minimise the risk and impact of flooding by ensuring all new development addresses the effective management of all sources of flood risk, does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere and ensuring the wider environmental benefits of development in relation to flood risk. A site-specific flood risk assessment is required which must be assessed against the Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the Oxfordshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy to address locally significant flooding.

5.117

Surface water drainage

A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted in support of this application. The Drainage Engineer has confirmed that the site lies within Flood Zone 1 and is therefore at a low risk of flooding.

5.118

An attenuation discharge drainage strategy is proposed with surface water runoff directed to a cellular containment tank located in the courtyard south of Building A. This tank will be connected to an existing surface water drain and to an existing ditch within the woodland via existing pipework which requires some minor repairs.

5.119

The Drainage Engineer raises no objections to the proposed strategy subject to full details being provided by condition. Following the submission of further infiltration data, the Lead Local Flood Authority also raises no objection with the proposed surface water drainage strategy.

5.120

Foul drainage

The new buildings will connect to the existing public sewer to the north. The Drainage Engineer raises no objection to the foul drainage strategy subject to full details of the on-site network being provided by condition. Thames water also raise no objection to the proposed development and raise no concerns regarding network capacity.

5.121

Traffic, parking and highway safety

Policy CP33 of LPP1 states that the Council will work with Oxfordshire County Council to actively seek to ensure that the impacts of new development on the strategic and local road network are minimised, are designed to promote sustainable transport access and ensure that transport improvements are designed to minimise any effects on the amenities, character and special qualities of the surrounding area. Policy CP35 of LPP1 seeks to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport and support a modal shift to public transport, cycling and walking, ensure new development is located close to, or along, existing strategic public transport  corridors where services can be strengthened, ensure that new development is designed to encourage walking and cycling, ensure proposals are supported by a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan and that adequate parking is provided in accordance with Oxfordshire County Council’s standards.  Policy DP15 of LPP2 states that proposals also need to provide adequate provision for loading, unloading, circulation, servicing and vehicle turning at accesses and provide off-site improvements to the highway infrastructure where needed to service the development.

5.122

The application is supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) and an addendum was also submitted during the course of the application to address the withdrawal of the S8 public bus service which previously served Boars Hill via bus stops at the junction of Hinksey Hill and Foxcombe Road. Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) as Highway Authority has reviewed all of the information submitted and raise no objections, subject to a S106 agreement and conditions.

5.123

Access

The site currently benefits from two access points, the primary access is from Jarn Way which provides access to the car park and there is a secondary access from Berkeley Road. It is proposed that access to the site will remain via these access points, with the Jarn Way access as the main vehicular access for staff, visitors, deliveries, coaches, and the shuttle bus service. The secondary access will remain predominantly for pedestrian and cycles but with some use for deliveries and emergency vehicles. The Jarn Way access is to be increased to a 5.5 metre carriageway to facilitate a large coach entering the site. Following receipt of amended plans providing vehicle tracking, the Highway Authority are satisfied with the dimensions of the site access and consider it sufficient for coaches entering and exiting the site.

5.124

Highway impact

The submitted TA includes an assessment of the expected vehicle trips associated with the existing and proposed development taking into consideration the existing educational use of the site, proposed use of the shuttle bus service and the restriction on students bringing cars to the site. OCC accepts the methodology used and considers the increase in vehicle trips would have a minimal impact on the local highway network.

5.125

The applicant proposes a restriction on students (with the exception of disabled students) bringing cars to the site, this is supported by OCC and can be secured via a S106 agreement, requiring tenancy agreements to legally bind occupants not to bring cars to the site or park within the vicinity. A similar restriction was applied via a S106 agreement for student accommodation approved at Botley centre (application ref. P16/V0246/FUL).

5.126

Concerns have been raised with regards to significant taxi use by students particularly at evenings and weekends and the resultant impact upon the highways network. The Highway Authority has advised that if students utilise taxis during the evening as referenced by the applicant, then these vehicle movements could be accommodated on the local highway network without any capacity issues.

5.127

Public Transport and proposed shuttle bus service

An addendum to the Transport Assessment was submitted following the withdrawal of the Stagecoach S8 public bus service which previously served the nearest bus stops to the site at the junction of Hinksey Hill and Foxcombe road, 1.9km away. The S8 service formed part of the proposed sustainable transport strategy for the expansion and redevelopment of the site. The university currently operates an in-house shittle minibus service between the site and student accommodation in Temple Cowley where some students currently reside. The applicant proposes to operate an additional in-house shuttle bus between the site and Redbridge Park and Ride where minibus users could interchange to public bus services to the city centre and beyond. It is proposed to allow residents within the local community to also use the shuttle bus service in addition to students from the university following the removal of the S8 service. The applicant proposes to operate the service on an informal hail and ride arrangement along its route including the Hinksey Hill Top area previously served by the S8 service.  In addition, it is now proposed that the minibus service will serve the villages of Sunningwell, Bayworth and Boars Hill for one weekday service in the morning and one in the afternoon. These villages were previously served by a Thames Travel service that was withdrawn in 2016.

The Highway Authority and officers welcome the extension of the service to the surrounding villages and being available to the local community and Policy IN3.3 of the Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan is supportive of development proposals which provide for the enhancement of bus services.

5.128

Following the removal of the S8 bus service the applicant has proposed to increase the frequency of the shuttle bus service at weekends from three to six services per day. It is proposed that there will be eight services per day on weekdays. It is also proposed that a second shuttle bus service will operate between Foxcombe Hall and the location of off-site student accommodation, as currently operates and this will have 8 services per day during weekdays. These services can be secured through a S106 agreement.

5.129

Car parking

40 parking spaces are proposed which includes 4 disabled spaces and 2 spaces for the university minibuses. The amendment submitted to the parking area to avoid extending the surfaced area beyond the existing area to prevent impact on trees has not altered the number of spaces proposed. As referenced above, there will be a restriction on students bringing a car to site and therefore the parking spaces will be available for staff and visitor use as well as provision for ad-hoc events. The Highway Authority consider the proposed quantum of parking spaces to be acceptable and welcome the intended recreational use of the car park by walkers visiting the local area at weekends. It is recommended that a condition be attached requiring the provision of electric vehicle and electric cycle charging points.

5.130

The provision of cycle parking onsite can be secured by condition requiring details of number, locations and form of cycle parking to be agreed prior to occupation.

5.131

Event traffic

The applicant states that in addition to regular student teaching, the university will host events including academic seminars (twice per month for up to 40 delegates of existing students and staff with no external delegates) and academic conferences (approximately four to six per year for up to 100 delegates, approximately half will be existing students and staff). Such events are considered to fall within the existing education use of the site. Notwithstanding this the applicant proposes a management system to limit the number of people travelling to conferences and events by car as well a provision of the shuttle bus service for such events. The highway authority advises that whilst it is likely that such events will attract additional visitors to the site and therefore some additional vehicle movements, these events will not be regularly occurring and with event planning and sustainable transport measures in place their impact can be minimised.

5.132

A Travel plan statement and travel information packs for staff and students can be secured by condition to promote the sustainable transport measures available at the site. Policy IN4.1 of the Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan requires the submission of a travel plan to explore options to enhance transport and accessibility and to minimise and mitigate severe impacts on transport infrastructure and safety.

5.133

Construction traffic

Concerns have been raised regarding the impact of construction traffic on local amenity. Unfortunately, some disturbance and additional traffic movements are inevitable during all construction projects. It is recommended that a construction method statement be required by condition to provide details of construction vehicle parking facilities, location of site offices, storage and details of loading and unloading of plant and materials, wheel washing facilities, measures to control dust and construction vehicle routing details.

5.134

Biodiversity

Policy CP46 of LPP1 states that opportunities for biodiversity net gain will be actively sought and a net loss of biodiversity will be avoided. Development which is likely to result in the loss, deterioration or harm to habitats or species of importance to biodiversity either directly or indirectly will not be permitted unless the need for and benefits of the development in the proposed location outweighs the adverse effect on the relevant biodiversity interest, it can be demonstrated that it could not reasonably be located on an alternative site that would result in less or no harm to the biodiversity interests and measures can be provided that would avoid, mitigate against, or as a last resort, compensate for the adverse effects likely to result from development.

5.135

The Countryside Officer has identified that the woodland to the west and south of the building complex on site is identified as a priority habitat in addition to trees to the west being protected by a tree preservation order. All of the surrounding woodland is proposed to be retained and protected, as discussed earlier. Those habitats that will be impacted by the proposed development are considered of lower value and not a constraint upon development.

5.136

Bat emergence surveys submitted by the applicant have identified that the Old Dairy, to be demolished, and the Lecture Theatre, to be extended, support roosting bats with a maternity roost found in the Lecture Theatre. A licence from Natural England will there be required to carry out the proposed works. The Countryside Officer is satisfied that there is adequate scope for the provision of compensatory bat roosts following the demolition of the Old Dairy and works to the Lecture Theatre and that a licence from Natural England is likely to be granted.

5.137

The Countryside Officer raised concerns that the potential impact upon Great Crested Newts had been underestimated within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal as originally submitted due to the large pond on site, network of ponds and established populations in the vicinity of the site. As such the applicants undertook and submitted the results of an eDNA survey of the onsite pond which returned a negative result for great crested newts. The Countryside Officer is satisfied that the proposed development is unlikely to have any impact upon this species.

5.138

The applicant has submitted a biodiversity net gain report and the metric used for this assessment. The Countryside Officer is satisfied that subject to the woodland enhancements proposed the proposed development will result in a net gain for biodiversity as required by CP46 of LPP1. Submission of a woodland management plan can be secured by condition to secure this net gain.

5.139

The Countryside Officer also recommends the addition of a condition requiring submission of details of sensitive lighting scheme to ensure lighting of the site does not detrimentally impact fauna within and surrounding the site. A lighting scheme submitted by condition can be assessed to ensure that it provides adequate, safe lighting for residents and visitors as well as avoiding a detrimental impact upon biodiversity.

5.140

Concerns have been raised regarding the impact upon biodiversity of the adjacent nature reserve as well as on site biodiversity, and that such impacts have not been properly assessed as survey work on adjacent land has not taken place. The Countryside Officer has advised that the adjoining site is not formally recognised as a designated local nature reserve, local wildlife site or statutory designated site (e.g. SSSI) but is likely to support a range of habitats and species of biodiversity value. The Countryside Officer is satisfied that sufficient ecological information has been submitted to support the application. The adjoining land falls outside the zone of influence of the proposed development. Matters regarding construction, operational and drainage impacts have been considered in depth in terms of their ecological impact and conditions have been recommended to address impacts or risk of impacts such as a detailed lighting scheme, woodland management plan and construction management plan. The adjoining land is not accessible through public rights of way and officers are of the view that matters of trespass and damage to fencing are private civil matters between landowners. The Countryside Officer is satisfied that there would not be resultant harm to the ecological receptors of the adjoining land from the proposed development.

Overall, the proposal is considered compliant with policy CP46.

5.141

Other considerations

Enforcement matters

Officers are aware of an enforcement investigation which has been assessing whether there has been a change of use at levels 2, 3 and 4 of The Tower for use as self-contained flats. The applicant has confirmed that the three rooms are being used as guest bedrooms. The room layout of Level 2 has not been altered by the applicant and the previous en-suite has been upgraded. Listed building consent is sought via the accompanying application (ref. P21/V1379/LB) for internal works to reconfigure level 2 of the Tower to create a Warden’s flat. At level 3 an en-suite bathroom has been inserted and the applicant acknowledges that listed building consent has not been sought for these works. The applicant intends to submit an application to regularise these works.

5.142

At level 4 the room layout has not been altered by the applicant. The applicant advises that the three rooms were used as bedrooms under the ownership of Ripon College but less so by the previous owner, Open University. The applicant contends that the use of these rooms as guest bedrooms is ancillary to the permitted educational use of the site similar to the view arrived at when the Council considered the use of The Lodge onsite as visitor bedrooms under permission ref. P17/V3013/FUL.

5.143

Officers agree with this assessment and are satisfied that there has not been an unauthorised change of use in relation to these rooms and planning permission to regularise the works are not required, although listed building consent is required for the en-suite bathroom inserted at level 3.

5.144

Officers are also aware of other enforcement matters associated with other works at this site. Whilst these are not material to this application, a summary is provided below for context:

- Chandeliers installed in the hall of the listed building do not reflect details approved under listed building consent ref. P17/V2694/LB. It is understood that the applicant intends to submit a new application to regularise these works.

- Lighting installed in the Earl’s bedroom does not have listed building consent approval. It is understood that the application intends to submit a new application to regularise these works.

- The temporary permission for the erection of a timber shed under planning permission ref. P18/V1241/FUL and listed building consent P18/V1242/LB has expired. Officers understand the applicant intends to apply to extend the temporary consent for the timber shed under separate applications.

5.145

Developer contributions

The NPPF advises that planning obligations should only be sought where they meet all of the following tests in paragraph 57:

I. Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

II. Directly related to the development; and

III. Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

4.146

Policy CP7 of LPP1 provides that development will only be permitted where the necessary physical infrastructure and service requirements to support the development can be secured. Policy DP11 of LPP2 requires the submission of a site-specific Community Employment Plan for the construction and operation of major development sites via planning condition or legal agreement to demonstrates how opportunities for local employment, apprenticeships and training can be created and seek to maximise the opportunities for sourcing local produce, suppliers and services during construction and operation. Policy DP20 of LPP2 requires all proposals for major development to provide public art that makes a significant contribution towards the appearance of the scheme or the character of the area or which benefits the local community.

5.147

A Section 106 will be required to secure the provision of the shuttle minibus and the restriction on students owning or bringing cars to site or parking in the vicinity as described above.

5.148

The following developer contributions are considered fair and proportionate and should be secured though a section 106 agreement:

District Council	Amount (£)
Public art on site or in the vicinity	£10 per sqm of floorspace (In addition, a commuted sum for maintenance where the ownership of on-site art features is to pass to anyone other than the site owner/ developer. This will represent 7% of the value of the works to cover the costs associated with monitoring, repairs and maintenance over a 15-year period).
S106 monitoring fee	£1,763

5.149

Memorandum of Understanding

A draft Memorandum of Understanding has been submitted by the applicant as a unilateral statement by the University to identify its commitments regarding  the future use and management of the campus and to manage the operation and potential impacts of the development through management plans including a travel plan, event management plan, construction management plan and accommodation rules for students. Some of the commitments within the document are matters that are directly related to the proposed development and are sought by officers to be secured via conditions or a S106 agreement, including:

- Construction Method statement – to be secured by condition

- Lighting scheme – details to be secured by condition

- Travel plan – to be secured by condition

- Scholarship and business opportunities – be secured through a Community Employment Plan via condition

- Provision of shuttlebus to Redbridge Park and Ride and to the location of off-site accommodation – to be secured via s106 agreement

- Restriction on students bringing a car to site – to be secured via S106 agreement

5.150

Other matters in the Memorandum of Understanding, officers do not consider meet the tests set out in the NPPF for inclusion as conditions or within a legal agreement. These include:

- Establishing a Community Liaison Group with representation from the university, Council, local community, businesses, and other local organisations. Whilst involvement of the local community during construction and beyond is welcomed officers do not consider such a commitment is related in scale and kind to the proposed development.

- Management of the site including a restriction on the number of students residing at the campus and a commitment to no further new build development on site for the next 15 years. Such matters are not directly related to the proposed development and any future applications would be considered on their own merits.

- Compliance with the Accommodation Rules for students including closing curtains at night, unreasonable noise at night, restriction on pets and parties etc. Most of the items referred to in this document are not planning matters. The proposed restriction on the closure of curtains would not be enforceable.

5.151

The applicant also refers to the inclusion of commitments within a legal agreement for permissive public access to the woodland within the site and community use of the parking area at weekends. Whilst such commitments are welcomed officers do not consider that they are necessary to make the development acceptable or directly related to the proposed development.

5.152

Community Infrastructure Levy

A new Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging schedule has been adopted and implemented from 1 November 2021. CIL is a levy charged on new development in the district; the money raised will be used to fund infrastructure and support growth. In general, off-site mitigation would be sought via CIL and on-site elements and direct mitigation elements would still be sought via a S106 agreement and as such are listed in the table able. The charging schedule identifies that new student accommodation that is of a communal nature with shared living areas and/ or kitchens will be nil rated for CIL. This type of student accommodation is proposed here and therefore no CIL will be charged on this proposal.

6.0	CONCLUSION
6.1	This proposal seeks the change of use of a non-residential educational institution to a residential university campus with the demolition of the old laboratory building and ancillary buildings and internal and external alteration to the listed building. Redevelopment and extension is to include 60 student bedrooms, a dining hall, campus café/ shop, gym, an extension to provide a new lecture theatre, new teaching and study space and associated external works.
6.2	The proposed development will cause harm to the Oxford Green Belt by way of inappropriateness and such harm holds substantial weight in the planning balance.
6.3	In respect of Heritage Assets, less-than-substantial harm has been identified as a result of the loss of an ancillary non-designated heritage asset within the setting of the Grade II listed building and from intensification of built form within this ancillary area on site.
6.4	Officers consider that the identified harm is outweighed by identified very special circumstances, namely the local, regional and national economic benefits and educational benefits of the proposed development and the lack of realistic or feasible alternative options for accommodation off-sit or suitable less harmful options on site.
6.5	Officers also consider the proposed built form to be of a high-quality contemporary architectural design which responds positively to the constraints of the site and successfully mitigates for any impact upon the openness of the Green Belt and impact upon the setting of heritage assets and the local landscape.
6.6	The proposed development is not considered to result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety or to result in severe impacts upon the road network. In conclusion, officers consider the proposed development is acceptable and complies with the policies of the adopted Local Plan 2031 Part 1 and Part 2, the policies of Wootton and St Helen Without Neighbourhood Plan and the provisions of the NPPF when taken as a whole and should be approved subject to a S106 legal agreement and conditions.

The following planning policies have been taken into account:

CP01  -  Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

CP03  -  Settlement Hierarchy

CP06  -  Meeting Business and Employment Needs

CP07  -  Providing Supporting Infrastructure and Services

CP08  -  Spatial Strategy for Abingdon-on-Thames and Oxford Fringe Sub-Area

CP13  -  The Oxford Green Belt

CP13A  -  Oxford Green Belt

CP30  -  Further and Higher Education

CP33  -  Promoting Sustainable Transport and Accessibility

CP35  -  Promoting Public Transport, Cycling and Walking

CP37  -  Design and Local Distinctiveness

CP38  -  Design Strategies for Strategic and Major Development Sites

CP39  -  The Historic Environment

CP40  -  Sustainable Design and Construction

CP42  -  Flood Risk

CP43  -  Natural Resources

CP44  -  Landscape

CP46  -  Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity

DP11  -  Community Employment Plans

DP16  -  Access

DP17  -  Transport Assessments and Travel Plans

DP20  -  Public Art

DP21  -  External Lighting

DP23  -  Impact of Development on Amenity

DP24  -  Effect of Neighbouring or Previous Uses on New Developments

DP25  -  Noise Pollution

DP26  -  Air Quality

DP28  -  Waste Collection and Recycling

DP36  -  Heritage Assets

DP38  -  Listed Buildings

WOOTTON AND ST HELEN WITHOUT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

SS1.1 Green Belt

SS4.1 Locally Important Vistas

IN3.3 Bus service

1N4.1 Transport Opportunities Review

1N4.3 Improving Provision for Sustainable Transport

DG1.1 Spatial Context

DG1.2 Temporal Context

DG2.1 Heritage Assets

DG3.1 Site Suitability

DG3.2 Resource Efficiency

DG3.4 Security

DG3.6 Future Proofing

VALE OF WHITE HORSE DESIGN GUIDE

DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS SPD

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK 2021

PLANNING PRACTICE GUIDANCE

EQUALITIES ACT 2010

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998

PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990

Author: Penny Silverwood

Email: penny.silverwood@southandvale.gov.uk

Tel: 01235 422600