Agenda Item 6

North Area Committee 7 April 2011 Central, South and West Area Committee 12 April 2011 Strategic Development Control Committee 28 April 2011

Application Number: 11/00513/FUL

Decision Due by: 10 May 2011

Proposal: Erection of 3 storey building to accommodate relocated Jericho Health Centre on ground floor with accommodation for University Department of Public Health Care and for University Press at upper levels. Provision of car and cycle parking accessed from .

Site Address: Former Radcliffe Infirmary Site, south of 118 Walton Street, Appendix 1.

Ward: North Ward

Agent: Turnberry Consulting Applicant:

Recommendations:

(i): North and Central South and West Area Committees are recommended to support the proposals. (ii): Strategic Development Control Committee is recommended to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Reasons for Approval.

1. The Council considers that the proposal accords with the policies of the development plan as summarised below. It has taken into consideration all other material matters, including matters raised in response to consultation and publicity. Any material harm that the development would otherwise give rise to can be offset by the conditions imposed.

2. The planning application seeks to provide replacement health facilities for the Jericho Health Centre located nearby at Cranham Street to the west side of Walton Street, plus accommodation for the University’s Department of Public Health Care, as supported by Local Plan policy and allocation DS.66 of the Plan. It also provides additional accommodation for the located nearby to the south. The development would relate positively to surrounding conservation areas and to the Grade 1 listed and would provide sustainable accommodation accessible by a variety of modes of transport. The development would not generate additional traffic and would link to new pedestrian and cycle routes to Woodstock Road secured by other development proposals on the former Radcliffe Infirmary site. Improvements to the public highway and public realm of Walton Street are secured by condition.

3. Many of the comments received in response to public consultation undertaken both by the University or as part of planning application process relate to design issues or architectural detailing and preferences, but with only the Georgian Group and St. John’s College raising a full objection. The proposals have evolved as a consequence of a Masterplan prepared for the former Radcliffe infirmary site and follow principles established there to create developments of a scale and architectural style appropriate to the site. The relationship to the Radcliffe Observatory is considered acceptable and the views of the Georgian Society and St. John’s College not accepted for the reasons indicated in the body of the report. Detailed matters relating to the use of materials, finer architectural detailing, landscaping and public realm works etc can be addressed by condition. No objections are raised to the proposals from those statutory or other bodies who responded to consultation, including Oxfordshire County Council (as a Planning and Highway Authority), Thames Valley Police, Environment Agency, Thames Water and Natural England.

Conditions.

1. Development begun within time limits. 2. Approved plans. 3. Samples of materials. 4. Architectural and constructional details. 5. Withdraw “permitted development” rights. 6. No occupation until student numbers not in provided accommodation falls below 3000. 7. Landscape plan. 8. Landscaping: carry out after completion. 9. Landscape: maintenance. 10. Landscape management plan. 11. Car parking before occupation. 12. Control of vehicular access. 13. Off site highways / public realm works. 14. Cycle parking before occupation. 15. Scheme of lighting and CCTV. 16. Travel Plan. 17. Construction Travel Plan. 18. Construction Environmental Management Plan. 19. Ground contamination and remediation. 20. Ground contamination: verification. 21. Cooking fumes. 22. Mechanical plant: noise attenuation and mitigation. 23. Sustainable surface water drainage scheme. 24. Petrol / oil interceptors. 25. Compliance with Natural Resource Impact Analysis. 26. Public arts strategy. 27. Wildlife habitats.

Main Local Plan Policies:

CP1 - Development Proposals CP5 - Mixed-Use Developments CP6 - Efficient Use of Land & Density CP8 - Design Development to Relate to its Context CP9 - Creating Successful New Places CP10 - Siting Development to Meet Functional Needs CP11 - Landscape Design CP13 - Accessibility CP14 - Public Art CP17 - Recycled Materials CP18 - Natural Resource Impact Analysis CP20 - Lighting CP22 - Contaminated Land TR1 - Transport Assessment TR2 - Travel Plans TR3 - Car Parking Standards TR4 - Pedestrian & Cycle Facilities TR5 - Pedestrian & Cycle Routes TR11 - City Centre Car Parking TR12 - Private Non-Residential Parking TR14 - Servicing Arrangements NE12 - Groundwater Flow NE13 - Water Quality NE14 - Water and Sewerage Infrastructure NE23 - Habitat Creation in New Developments HE2 - Archaeology HE7 - Conservation Areas HE9 - High Building Areas HH2 - PCT Facilities / Purpose Built Health Care facilities DS66 - Radcliffe Infirmary, Woodstock Rd - Ox University Use

Core Strategy Policies.

CS9 - Energy and natural resources CS10 - Waste and recycling CS11 - Flooding CS12 - Biodiversity CS13 - Supporting access to new development CS14 - Supporting city-wide movement CS15 - Primary healthcare CS17 - Infrastructure and developer contributions CS18 - Urban design, town character, historic environment CS19 - Community safety CS25 - Student accommodation CS29 - The universities

Other Material Considerations.

1. PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Communities. 2. PPG3: Transport. 3. PPS5: Planning and the Historic Environment. 4. PPS22: Renewable Energy. 5. PPS23: Planning and Pollution Control. 6. PPS25: Development and Flood Risk.

Public Consultation

Prior to the submission of the planning application the University undertook its own public consultation exercise in the form of an exhibition at the former St. Luke’s Chapel in Woodstock Road on 13th and 14th January 2011. 18 feedback forms with written comments were received and are summarised in Appendix 2 to this report. The main issues raised related to details of the design and architectural form of the building with some respondents describing the building as exciting and innovative, others as uninteresting and bland. Others still felt its style related poorly to the Victorian architecture of Walton Street and Jericho, and on points of detail that amendments could be made to the entrance arrangements and that the retained high stone wall would obscure views of the building. On other issues concerns were raised about the small number of car parking spaces and about accessibility on foot and by cycle. Comments were also made about the desirability of public art being included.

A separate presentation and exhibition for key stakeholders also took place on 11th January 2011. In total approximately 150 people attended the exhibitions.

On submission of the planning application full public consultation was undertaken including the following statutory and other consultees: Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust, English Heritage Commission, Walton Manor Residents' Association, North Oxford Association, Jericho And St Barnabas Community Association, Jericho Living Heritage Trust, Environment Agency Thames Region, Thames Water Utilities Limited, Natural England, Thames Valley Police, Oxford Waterside Residents' Association, Highways And Traffic, Victorian Society, Oxfordshire Fire Service, Georgian Group, Oxford Civic Society, South East Regional Design Panel, Oxford Preservation Trust,

Representations Received: County Highway Authority: No objection of principle; car parking levels acceptable; cycle parking in excess of policy requirements; further cycle spaces to be allocated to patients; detailed comments made on draft Travel Plan; Travel Plan, Construction Management Plan and Drainage Strategy required by condition; adjustments to proposed highways works required. (See text). Thames Valley Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor: Recommendations are recorded in Design and Access Statement; no objections. Oxfordshire County Council, Strategic Planning: Consultation not required. Natural England: No objection; unlikely to have any impact on protected sites; application provides opportunities to enhance biodiversity. Thames Water: No objection. Environment Agency: No objections; suggest conditions relating to ground contamination and remediation. Environmental Development: Details of external lighting required; concur with Environment Agency’s recommendations on ground remediation. Georgian Group: Not within a conservation area but a number of historic buildings in the area; design totally inappropriate; would not enhance setting of Radcliffe Observatory; proposed design, scale and materials would cause visual conflict with it and with the historic and architectural character of the area in general. Oxford Civic Society: Building likely to be controversial; needs to relate to both Walton Street and grander buildings; appropriate therefore that building is unique and original; ” crinkles” break up walls and create interesting shadows; distinctive window arrangement attractive to some, but disturbing to others; cheering internal character; careful attention to materials needed; light colour brick is pleasant; cycle parking needs attention to ensure enough spaces. Savills (for St. John’s College): Overbearing impact on 112 to 118 Walton Street and 39 Observatory Street; noise and pollution from access to north of new building; health centre likely to be in use 24 hours a day; overlooking from north facing windows of building; request windows here to be high level and obscure glazed; object, as proposal is inappropriate at this location and fails to preserve amenities of 112 to 118 Walton Street and 39 Observatory Street.

Officers Assessment.

Proposals & Background to Case.

1. The application seeks the construction of a 3 storey building on a 0.4 ha (1.0 acre) site to the north - west corner of the 4 ha (10 acre) former Radcliffe Infirmary site. The land in question was most recently occupied by a 250 space car park serving the infirmary, and prior to that housed undistinguished hospital buildings demolished in the 1960s. A total of 4,273 sq m of floorspace would be provided with the ground floor given over to 3 general practices transferring from the Jericho Health Centre located in Cranham Street close to its junction with Walton Street. The first floor would be occupied by the Oxford University Press, the publishing arm of the University controlled by a group of delegates appointed by its academic staff. The second floor would be occupied by the University’s Department of Public Health Care, part of the University’s Medical Sciences Division. Occupiers of this accommodation will transfer from the University’s medical science research campus at Old Road as new development proposals come forward there.

2. The development would possess vehicular access from Walton Street for 20 car parking spaces for health centre staff only, plus disabled spaces. Cycle and pedestrian access would also be available from the northern east - west route across the former infirmary site already permitted to some 110 cycle parking spaces.

3. In 2006 committees received a report on a proposal by the Primary Care Trust (PCT) on a much larger parcel of land which included the current site. This so called “LIFT” project would have possessed over 3 times the amount of floorspace as the current proposals over 3 and 4 floors, as well as an underground car park for 160 vehicles. It would have included accommodation for 5 general practice surgeries, resource centre, various medical facilities, pharmacy, cafe, retail uses and 35 key worker flats. This was far in excess of what was envisaged for the site in the adopted Local Plan however. Indeed the Inspector into the Local Plan inquiry had commented in his 2005 report:

“On the evidence before me, it would appear as though the Primary Care Trust is under the impression that the relocation of the Jericho Health Centre would involve the expansion of complementary uses and encompass a far larger area than either the University of Oxford or the Council envisage. It is unclear why this confusion has arisen. However it would appear that since the University owns the site and the Council supports the primary use of the land for University purposes there is little opportunity to provide complementary health uses on the site as part of the replacement Jericho Health Centre. Given the critical importance attached to the use of the site by the university...... I support the restriction placed on the use of the land ....”

4. In the event the LIFT project was refused planning permission for a variety of planning policy and other reasons, and was not pursued further. Rather on full possession of the land in 2007 the University embarked upon a Masterplan for the infirmary site, followed by individual planning applications from 2009 in line with planning policy requirements and the principles established in the Masterplan referred to later in this report. To date permissions have been granted for student accommodation for Somerville College (now on site); for the conversion and restoration of the original 1770s Infirmary Building, Outpatients Building and St. Luke’s Chapel; for a new Mathematics Department; for an Humanities Division; and for various service infrastructure requirements. These permissions are now the subject of ongoing discussions in relation to matters of detail required by condition with a view to commencement of work in earnest on the larger projects in the near future. The general disposition of the sites these developments would occupy is indicated in Appendix 3.

5. The remaining parts of this report consider the planning application under the following headings: • planning policy; • historical context; • built forms; • highways, access and parking; • sustainability; and • archaeology.

Summary of Planning Policy.

6. Successive planning policy documents from the 1980s onwards have recognised the importance of supporting the University as a world leading educational, academic and research institution and in one form or another have allocated the greater part of the former Radcliffe Infirmary site for the further growth and expansion of its facilities. However the current Local Plan also recognises the need to replace the existing Jericho Health centre in Walton Street, now too small and inadequate for its intended purpose. Thus the current adopted Local plan allocates part of the infirmary site for a replacement facility. Policy Dc.66 of the Plan reads

POLICY DS.66 - RADCLIFFE INFIRMARY SITE, WOODSTOCK ROAD - UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD USE Planning permission will be granted at the Radcliffe Infirmary site for the development of University of Oxford academic research / teaching / administration uses and that includes all of the following uses: student accommodation; and the relocation of the Jericho Health Centre. Provision should be made for a footpath/cycle route linking Walton Street and Woodstock Road.

The University purchased the Infirmary site from the NHS in 2003. Following a short period when a leaseback arrangement was in place whilst the Children’s Hospital and West Wing were constructed at the in Headington, the University finally took possession in the early part of 2007. In the meantime work on the Masterplan was under way and subsequently brought before the November 2008 cycle of committees.

7. The intention of the Masterplan was to form a framework within which major redevelopment proposals would be brought forward at the former infirmary site over a period of years, to include the new health centre. It was not a planning application however but represented a context within which individual proposals could be drawn up with some flexibility in response to changing circumstances. The University chose this approach due to the uncertainties of how the site would be developed in detail, and the complexities involved in submitting a single outline planning application. It was envisaged at an early stage however that a replacement health centre would be one of the earliest elements to come forward, and the current application site was set aside for the purpose

The Masterplan did not propose a single or preferred layout, but sought instead to establish certain principles. Officers concluded that the following key objectives should be adopted in terms of the built form and layout of the whole site:

• optimising floorspace requirements should be informed by detailed design considerations and assessments of impact; • the extent and location of any 5 –storey development should be informed by an assessment of impact on views and context; • taller buildings generally to front primary routes; • development to Walton Street frontage to generally be no more than 3 storeys; • a hierarchy of streets and spaces to be created across the redeveloped site with east - west routes at the head of the hierarchy; • the primary east - west routes to constitute “public spaces” at all times; • the principal entrances to buildings to front publicly accessible spaces, especially the east - west cross routes; • active frontages to be provided to all publicly accessible spaces; • the redeveloped site to be linked by a series of high quality formal and informal landscaped spaces; and • provision for periodic review and revision of Masterplan.

8. In addition to the framework established by the Masterplan and adopted Local Plan and Core Strategy policies listed at the head of this report, government advice in PPS5 “Planning and the Historic Environment” published in 2010 emphasises the need to manage change to heritage assets in a manner that does not diminish their significance and stresses the importance of integrating the old and the new as a way to ensure the continuing viability of heritage assets in creating vibrant and successful places. Applicants are expected to show their understanding of the value of such assets affected, assess the impact of the proposals, and justify why the proposals should be accepted.

9. As part of this application relates to accommodation for the University’s Department of Public Health Care then committees are also reminded of newly adopted Core Strategy policy CS25. This replaces Local Plan policy ED8 and requires that new teaching and administrative floorspace for the University should be matched by new residential accommodation for its students and should only be permitted providing no more than 3,000 students live outside purpose built student accommodation.

10. Although precise figures are difficult to interpret as many of the University’s research fellows have both teaching and studying roles, it appears that that figure may not yet be met. However major developments recently completed, under construction or at the planning stage at St. John’s, Lady Margaret Hall, Keble, Pembroke, St. Hilda’s and St Hugh’s will bring the figure below the 3,000 threshold in the near future. Moreover the central University also holds an extant planning permission for 590 graduate student study rooms at its development at Castle Mill, Roger Dudman Way, of which only a first phase of 208 rooms have yet been built out and occupied. As the 3000 threshold is anticipated to be reached before the occupation of the development, and there are other sound planning reasons to support the proposals, then the current application is not opposed in terms of policy CS25 of the Core Strategy. A condition is suggested however requiring the 3000 ceiling is met prior to occupation.

11. Lastly, prior to the submission of the planning application, the applicant submitted a request for a “Screening Opinion” under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 as to whether an Environmental Impact Assessment was required to accompany the planning application. This is a formal determination and having examined the case against the advice contained within Circular 1/99: “Environmental Impact Assessment” and other sources, the Council as local planning authority determined that no such assessment was required in this case.

Historical Context.

12. The Radcliffe Infirmary dated from the 18th century when the Radcliffe Trust commissioned the building of a new hospital on agricultural land given by Thomas Rowney, MP for Oxford. Works commenced in 1758 and the Radcliffe Infirmary opened on 18th October 1770. The Radcliffe Trust used

money left over from the project to found a new Observatory on land immediately to the north of the hospital. Work began in 1772. The original architect Henry Keene died in 1776 and James Wyatt took over finishing the project in 1795. The Observatory was used until the 1920’s when the telescope was moved to South Africa for better light conditions, and the Infirmary took over the Observatory expanding into its grounds erecting new wards and facilities including a Maternity ward, X-Ray department and Children’s ward. After the John Radcliffe Hospital opened in the 1970s major development on site ceased. The hospital finally closed at this site in 2007.

13. The Radcliffe Infirmary was the first hospital to be set up in Oxford as an early and unusual example of a philanthropic charitable institution known as a ‘voluntary’ hospital. The use of the term “Infirmary” distinguishes it from earlier forms of pauper hospitals or almshouses. However, it was not the first of its kind in the country. The first was in Winchester in 1738 and by 1800 there were a total of 38 in the country. In terms of the additions of wards and other facilities on the site, they follow the pattern of other sites and do not represent any cutting edge technological or medical advances, apart from the original outpatients building, which was an early example of its type erected in 1857, but subsequently replaced with a new outpatients wing in 1910-13.

14. Most of the buildings on the site, (except the listed buildings plus Harkness and Gibson buildings to the northern part of the infirmary site temporarily retained), have been demolished. These demolition works have not needed planning permission, listed building consent or conservation area consent. They were of limited or little architectural or historic interest and those that were had been much altered. English Heritage assessed all the buildings on the site for their suitability for inclusion in the statutory register of buildings of special architectural or historic interest, including the maternity wing, which had been identified as having local interest, in 2001. No buildings were added to the list however, though the existing list descriptions were revised. The University has carried out an inventory and recording of all buildings on the site, including a photographic record.

15. The current application site occupies the north - east corner of the former infirmary site. Although falling outside a conservation area there are a number of statutory listed buildings on the former infirmary site or nearby, some of them within conservation areas:-

Main infirmary buildings (Grade II*) Fountain and walls (Grade ll) Former St. Luke’s Chapel (Grade ll) Observatory (Grade I) Observer’s House (Grade I) Somerville College Library (Grade II) Oxford University Press (Grade II*) Former St Paul’s Church (Freuds) (Grade II) Former St Paul’s School (Grade II) 13-36 Woodstock Road (Grade II)

16. Principal amongst these in relation to the current proposals is the Grade 1 Observatory to the east. It was only the second permanent facility to be built in Britain after the Royal Observatory in Greenwich in 1675. It is orientated on an east west alignment to allow astronomical observation to make use of the south meridian to measure the time and position of the stars. Henry Keene was surveyor to Westminster Abbey, and on his death succeeded by James Wyatt. The Tower is based on the Tower of Winds in Athens (a water clock) with sculptures of the 8 winds by John Bacon RA. There are also decorative panels, including the signs of the zodiac in Coade Stone. It is a nationally important building. It has high architectural quality, is prominent in some views and its historic use, which dictated its orientation and height is of high significance. Originally its setting was one that was secluded, in its own extensive grounds. That setting has been lost over time however and the hospital buildings (before demolition) had a negative impact on its modern setting and views of it. The remaining high stone wall to Walton Street with its tree canopies behind, frame the view and provides a reminder of the enclosed nature of the Observatory and the gardens it was originally set within. The wall is punctuated by a number of existing gateways.

17. The immediate vicinity of the Observatory was developed during the late 18th and early 19th century onwards and consists of development fronting Woodstock Road and Walton Street. Woodstock Road has variety in the age, scale of use of its buildings,with Walton Street more consistent in scale and age. To the north are residential streets, to the south educational and religious buildings. Overall the area is characterised as a residential suburb, interspersed with college buildings and including what used to be three key employment ‘hubs’ - the Eagle Iron Works, Oxford University Press and Radcliffe Infirmary. In the area certain key historic and modern buildings stand out, by virtue of their quality, individuality of design and purpose. The Jericho area to the west of Walton Street arises from more modest19th century artisan origins however and has recently been designated as a conservation area in its own right. As such the former infirmary site is now surrounded by conservation areas - Jericho to the west, Walton Manor to the north, the North Oxford Victorian Suburb to the east and Central Conservation Area to the south.

18. PPS5: “Planning for the Historic Environment” has re-affirmed its commitment that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. It advises that when making planning decisions local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and the positive role that their conservation can make to the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic viability. It recognises that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term, and explains that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets and that the more significant the asset the greater the presumption in favour of conservation should be.

19. In this case the application is supported by material that assesses the heritage value of historic buildings on or near the application site and the character and appearance of surrounding area. The supporting information shows how the proposals have been informed by this analysis and examines the impact of the proposed new buildings, in particular on the Grade 1 listed Radcliffe Observatory, but also in the context of the conservation areas which surround the former infirmary site.

Built Forms.

20. The proposed building is laid out in a generally rectangular form, set behind the retained high stone wall which formerly enclosed the garden to the Observatory. Vehicular access to the site is taken from an enlarged, currently unused access to the north adjacent to 118 Walton Street which is envisaged in the future to also provide limited access to a service area for the kitchens of Green Templeton College. Disabled parking and drop off points are located along this side of the building with operational parking for the health centre to the rear. A secondary entrance to the health centre is provided along this northern side, but its main entrance is to the south side fronting the east - west pedestrian and cycle route linking Walton Street and Woodstock Road already permitted as part of earlier permissions at the infirmary site. Here a double height glazed and recessed entrance announces arrival at the health centre; provides a separate entrance to the upper floor accommodation and serves to activate the east - west cycle and pedestrian route it fronts.

21. To the western side of the building adjacent to the retained stone wall cycle parking for occupiers of the building is provided in covered secured conditions with visitor cycle parking arranged near the main entrance. The cycle shelter is freestanding and does not interfere with the stone wall, and is interspersed with 5 new trees. Currently there are some 6 trees located here - 3 limes, 2 horse chestnuts and 1 crab apple. These range in height from 6m to 10m and are assessed as being category C trees, ie of low visual quality. These generally poor specimens are proposed for removal and may not have a long term future in any event. Replacement trees are therefore assessed as being the appropriate way forward in this case. The replacements would be semi mature of a species to be agreed by condition, and would mitigate the loss of the existing poor specimens.

22. The building itself is constructed essentially of brickwork with distinctive full height “crinkle crankle” indentations to all 4 facades providing an unusual architectural feature. Rising to 3 floors with a flat parapet roof, the building is taller to the southern end where the parapet rises to conceal an amount of mechanical plant required to serve some of the health centre rooms. Here the brickwork displays “knock out” detailing to break up the facade at this point whilst also offering natural ventilation to the enclosed plant rooms. The building is naturally ventilated in the main however with aluminium framed windows consistently spaced to express a regular rhythm, but with different window detailing explored in the form of recessed, flush and protruding examples. At ground floor level the window openings are full height to provide good lighting conditions to consulting and other rooms. At the leading edge to the building adjacent to the main entrance further brickwork detailing is expressed in the form of protruding brick elements. As brickwork in its several forms is the dominant material used in the building, then particular care is required to the final choice of brick; in the choice of mortar colour and its application; and in the module size which should repeat that of the Victorian properties to the north and elsewhere. These details would be agreed by condition.

23. Internally the ground floor accommodation for the 3 general practices to be transferred here is arranged around a central, oval shaped reception and waiting area flooded with light from a glazed roof. From here consulting and treatment rooms radiate outwards with the former generally to the perimeter where they can make the best use of natural lighting conditions. The upper floor accommodation for the Department of Public Health Care and University Press is arranged in a flexible form with their main entrances from the southern side of the building with a further escape staircase to the northern side. Again natural light is provided from perimeter windows and also from the central lightwell above the glazed roof serving the waiting area to the health centre below. The nature of use of the building and these internal arrangements have inevitably influenced its external form and appearance. This in turn places challenges on the design to relate the development to the tight urban grain of Walton Street and the yet to be building plots at the infirmary site.

24. Overall whilst the architecture of the proposed building may appear rather different to its commercial neighbours to the north, it nevertheless retains a scale and rhythm reminiscent of, and sympathetic to, them. With this in mind and with its rising parapet from north to south and its crinkle crankle facades, it is intended that the building would ultimately form a transitional element in the street between the rhythmical terrace of Victorian properties to the north and the perhaps grander institutional buildings still to come further south as the infirmary site gets built out over a period of years.

25. The proposals also involve enlarging existing access points in the existing high stone wall to facilitate vehicular access and to open up views towards the Observatory. These access changes are associated with some traffic calming and public realm improvement measures referred to later in this report and will on balance be beneficial. The opportunity also exists to rediscover chanelled views of the Observatory via these amended access points within the stone wall which will be an important and welcomed benefit, opening up views lost since at least the 1970s. The retention of the greater part of the stone wall onto Walton Street therefore preserves a relic of the historic setting of the Observatory whilst representing a mechanism to ensure privacy to the consulting rooms. The conclusions of both officers and the applicant is that this section of the wall has historic interest and as a means of enclosure makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area. Its retention is therefore supported.

26. The views from as well as towards the tower of the Observatory are also significant. These views have changed with the demolition of the infirmary buildings but will not be adversely affected by these proposals. In views from the west windows of the Observatory the roofscape of the proposed building, will be obscured from view if as envisaged the building ultimately to replace the Harkeness and Gibson buildings is, , of a larger scale and height, at least in part. The need to introduce roof mounted plant will not therefore harm the significance of the Observatory or views from it.

27. In summary, then, these proposals involve changes to the way the site addresses Walton Street and changes to the setting of the listed Observatory. Retention of the wall along Walton Street reduces the degree of change, provides historical and physical continuity as well as serving a practical purpose for the users of the proposed building. The elevational treatment is designed to reflect, in a modern idiom, the pattern of development in this part of Walton Street and will provide interest to the square block form of the building. In the same way that elsewhere in Oxford streets contain buildings of contrasting appearance that happily coexist, making their own distinctive contribution to the streetscene and townscape of the city, officers have concluded that there is no reason why a well designed and proportioned building at this site cannot equally coexist with its neighbours. To guard against discordance however, attention to scale, rhythm of architectural elements, finer grain detailing and choice of materials all needed to be carefully considered to provide a sense of continuity. It is the officers’ view that the proposals have responded to these challenges whilst still respecting the pre eminence of the Observatory to its east by opening up views and public access where previously undistinguished buildings stood before demolition. On balance the proposals are not considered harmful but beneficial and can therefore be supported.

Highways, Access and Parking.

28. Entrance to the site is taken from the north side of the building via an enlarged access where the high stone wall has been breached in the past. This existing access has been unused for many years however. It is also intended that future access be taken via this route to the kitchens of Green Templeton College to the east when the still remaining Harkness and Gibson Buildings are demolished and that site redeveloped. In the meantime this access leads to some 3 disabled parking spaces and a disabled / ambulance drop off point on the north side of the building adjacent to the secondary entrance to the health centre, and to 20 operational parking spaces for medical staff of the 3 general practices to the rear. No car parking is provided for the upper floor uses. This level of parking equates to approximately the number now available to the health centre and reflects the local nature of the health centre and the accessibility of the site close to the city centre and to Woodstock Road on completion of the east - west cycle and pedestrian link through the infirmary site in due course.

Generous levels of cycle parking are provided however, made up of 102 spaces for staff in covered, secure conditions within the retained stone wall to Walton Street, plus 8 visitor spaces to the building’s frontage. This totals some 110 spaces in all, with showering facilities also provided within the building. Although only low levels of visitor cycle parking are provided in these proposals, it will recalled that the east - west route which runs to the frontage of the building will also provide large amounts of cycle parking intended to be used flexibly by all users of the former infirmary site. The level of provision for the current development is in excess of the requirement set out in the Local Plan in any event which would require 74 cycle spaces whilst the current health centre possesses no dedicated cycle parking facilities at all. Officers therefore take the view that the level of provision indicated is appropriate.

29. In addition to these facilities, officers of City and County Councils have been working with the University to secure on street highways / public realm improvements within Walton Street which would ease access to the site. This is likely to take the form of a “raised table” linking the newvehicular access with Walton Street and Jericho Street. A sketch of the emerging designs is attached as Appendix 4. Further discussions will continue on detailed designs and on relocating the bus stop currently to the west side of Walton Street at this point, and also examining whether the existing pedestrian crossing to the north should be relocated. Similarly it may be prudent to relocate the disabled parking spaces currently located outside the existing health centre to Walton Street instead. The works as finally agreed would be secured by a Grampian style planning condition requiring the work to be completed under the provisions of S.278 of the Highways Act in time for first occupation of the health centre.

Sustainability.

30. A detailed sustainability report accompanies the planning application which incorporates a Natural Resource Impact Analysis (NRIA) as required by Local Plan policy. The measures described in the analysis produce a score of 8 out of a possible 11, well above the minimum score of 6 and with the minimum standard achieved in each of the categories of energy efficiency, renewable energy, use of materials and water resources.

31. In terms of energy efficiency a range of features are built into the development to produce a high rating on the analysis. These include the provision of an internal courtyard at upper levels to provide cross ventilation and daylight penetration; natural ventilation throughout (other than part of core ground floor); solar control glazing; high levels of insulation; use of condensing boilers; lighting controls including presence detection and daylight sensors; high levels of air tightness; and A rated appliances. This is supplemented by the achievement of 20% on site renewable energy through the use of air source heat pumps and photovoltaics mounted at roof level. Recycled materials are intended to be used throughout where appropriate with new materials sourced locally wherever possible and timber products from sustainable sources. Rainwater harvesting is incorporated for use in WCs and low flow systems utilised throughout for taps, showers and WCs.

Archaeology.

32. Prior to the submission of the current planning application, extensive archaeological excavations took place across the whole of the former infirmary site including the site of these latest proposals to the north - west corner. The excavations revealed the remains of three prehistoric ring ditches, a rectangular enclosure, cremation burials, Saxon occupation and a range of features and finds associated with the 18th to 20th century infirmary and grounds. In view of the damage likely to have been caused by successive redevelopment of the site archaeological survival was assessed as localised and variable however. Finds were assessed as essentially local in significance, but of regional significance when combined with comparable sites and landscapes elsewhere.

33. Much of the former infirmary site is intended to possess basement accommodation, but this is not a feature of the current proposal. Nevertheless a further report has been produced which concludes that no archaeological remains of high significance are anticipated on this part of the former infirmary, but that foundation arrangements for the new building works would truncate and possibly remove surviving archaeological remains. There may be further impacts from drainage runs and service trenches.

34. The new PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment states that where the loss of the whole or a material part of a heritage asset’s significance is justified, local planning authorities should require the developer to record and advance understanding of the significance of the heritage asset. Developers should publish this evidence and deposit copies of the reports with the relevant historic environment record. Local planning authorities should require any archive generated to be deposited with a local museum or other public depository willing to receive it. Local planning authorities should impose planning conditions or obligations to ensure such work is carried out in a timely manner and that the completion of the exercise is properly secured. Adequate post excavation study and publication is appropriate therefore in this case, plus a watching brief during construction. These matters can be secured by the imposition of appropriate conditions in the event of planning permission being granted.

Other Matters

35. On other matters, the application site is one which has been hard surfaced for many years and currently possesses no wildlife interest. However the opportunity exists to introduce new habitats such as bird boxes and a condition is suggested accordingly. The proposals also qualify for public art provision. A strategy is already being drawn up to relate to the whole of the former infirmary site, which will deliver both artwork for the public realm, and retain artifacts recovered from the former infirmary for display at new locations on site. A condition requiring that strategy to extend to include this current application is suggested.

36. Lastly, in relation to the objections from St. John’s College, no 118 Walton Street is a retail property currently occupied by a charity shop. It and the adjacent premises north to the junction with Observatory Street are commercial outlets with parking generally located to the rear accessed off a narrow lane. 39 Observatory Street is an estates yard for the college with an undistinguished storage building and open yard immediately north of the application site. As the proposed development is drawn some 10m from the common boundary with the estates yard in any event, officers are of the view that windows in this elevation need not be high level and obscure glazed as suggested. Although rear gardens to residential properties are present further east along this southern side of Observatory Street, these are set at an oblique angle with the nearest facing windows to houses there some 40m or more away. There have been no individual comments received from occupiers of any of the properties concerned. Nor is it intended that the health centre be in use 24 hours a day as intimated in the college’s comments. Its daily working hours will be 8.00 am to 6.00 pm.

37. 39A Observatory Street is a small residential property at a backland location sited along the common boundary with the application site, but with no windows within its southern elevation.

Conclusion.

38. The ground floor of the proposed development would house a much needed and long awaited replacement for the existing Jericho Health Centre which now occupies inadequate accommodation nearby in Cranham Street. The upper floors would house the University’s Public Health Care Department plus accommodation for the nearby University Press. The building displays a simple but distinctive contemporary architectural style with the intention that it also form a transitional building element in the street in due course, linking the typical Victorian terrace to the north with the grander institutional buildings likely to come forward on remaining plots to the former infirmary site to the south. Parking is restricted but good levels of cycle parking provided, with good cycle and pedestrian links to public transport facilities on Woodstock Road secured when the northern east - west link through the former infirmary site is completed in the years ahead. Highway / public realm works are also secured and a public arts strategy in formulation. There have been few expressed objections to the proposals.

Committees are recommended to support the planning application accordingly.

Human Rights Act 1998

Officers have considered the Human Rights Act 1998 in reaching a recommendation to grant planning permission, subject to conditions. Officers have considered the potential interference with the rights of the owners/occupiers of surrounding properties under Article 8 and/or Article 1 of the First Protocol of the Act and consider that it is proportionate.

Officers have also considered the interference with the human rights of the applicant under Article 8 and/or Article 1 of the First Protocol caused by imposing conditions. Officers consider that the conditions are necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others and to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest. The interference is therefore justifiable and proportionate.

Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998

Officers have considered, with due regard, the likely effect of the proposal on the need to reduce crime and disorder as part of the determination of this application, in accordance with section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. In reaching a recommendation to grant planning permission, officers consider that the proposal will not undermine crime prevention or the promotion of community safety.

Background Papers: 11/00513/FUL, 09/02534/FUL, 09/02535/FUL, 06/00457/OUT, 07/02592/CONSLT

Contact Officers: Murray Hancock / Nick Worlledge Extension: 2153 / 2147 Date: 28 March 2011