|
APPLICATION NO. |
|
|
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.
|
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 20th 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 20th 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.
|
||||||
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 8th Earl Berkeley, in part historic interest due to its specific connection to the 8th 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 8th 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:
|
||||||
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
PLANNING
PRACTICE GUIDANCE
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990
|