Progress Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
NORTH OXFORD VICTORIAN SUBURB CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL Consultation Draft - January 2017
NORTH OXFORD VICTORIAN SUBURB CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL Consultation Draft - January 2017 249 250 CONTENTS SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE 5 Reason for appraisal 7 Location 9 Topography and geology 9 Designation and boundaries 9 Archaeology 10 Historical development 12 Spatial Analysis 15 Special features of the area 16 Views 16 Building types 16 University colleges 19 Boundary treatments 22 Building styles, materials and colours 23 Listed buildings 25 Significant non-listed buildings 30 Listed parks and gardens 33 Summary 33 Character areas 34 Norham Manor 34 Park Town 36 Bardwell Estate 38 Kingston Road 40 St Margaret’s 42 251 Banbury Road 44 North Parade 46 Lathbury and Staverton Roads 49 Opportunities for enhancement and change 51 Designation 51 Protection for unlisted buildings 51 Improvements in the Public Domain 52 Development Management 52 Non-residential use and institutionalisation large houses 52 SOURCES 53 APPENDICES 54 APPENDIX A: MAP INDICATING CHARACTER AREAS 54 APPENDIX B: LISTED BUILDINGS 55 APPENDIX C: LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS 59 252 North Oxford Victorian Suburb Conservation Area SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE This Conservations Area’s primary significance derives from its character as a distinct area, imposed in part by topography as well as by land ownership from the 16th century into the 20th century. At a time when Oxford needed to expand out of its historic core centred around the castle, the medieval streets and the major colleges, these two factors enabled the area to be laid out as a planned suburb as lands associated with medieval manors were made available. This gives the whole area homogeneity as a residential suburb. -
North Oxford Victorian Suburb
North Oxford Victorian Suburb Conservation Area Appraisal North Oxford Victorian Suburb Contents Statement of Special Interest 3 1. Introduction 5 2. Context 7 3. Historical Development 8 4. Spatial Analysis 12 5. Buildings 16 6. Character Areas 23 Norham Manor 23 Park Town 26 Bardwell 29 Kingston Road 33 St Margaret's 36 Banbury Road 39 North Parade 42 Lathbury and Staverton Roads 45 7. Vulnerabilities, Negative Features and Opportunities for Enhancement 47 8. SOURCES 51 9. APPENDICES 52 1: Listed Buildings 52 2: Positive Unlisted Buildings 58 3: Maps 59 1 1. Summary of Significance Statement of Special Interest This conservation area’s primary signifi- cance derives from its character as a distinct area, imposed in part by topography as Summary well as by land ownership from the 16th century into the 21st century. At a time Key positive features when Oxford needed to expand out of its • Diversity historic core centred around the castle, the • Village-like enclaves medieval streets and the major colleges, these two factors enabled the area to be • Quality of the buildings laid out as a planned suburb as lands asso- • Residential houses a special feature ciated with medieval manors were made • Gothic, Italianate, Arts and Crafts, Vernacular styles available. This gives the area homogeneity • Purpose-built college teaching and as a residential suburb. In the eastern and residential accommodation central parts of the area as a whole, this • Contribution of 20th and 21st centuries to the area is reinforced by the broad streets and the feeling of spaciousness created by the • Three ecclesiastical buildings generously proportioned and well-planted • 73 listed buildings and a further 21 buildings gardens. -
Jericho and Walton Manor Low Traffic Neighbourhood Concept Scheme Assessment - Technical Note
Jericho and Walton Manor Low Traffic Neighbourhood Concept Scheme Assessment - Technical Note Prepared by: C Proctor Engineering Limited Status: Final Report-Issued Date: 24/11/2020 Document Ref: OXF/003/JER/FR Version 1.3 Jericho and Walton Manor LTN Proposals Review – Technical Note Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Background and Area Context ........................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Study/LTN Area ....................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Background Information ......................................................................................................... 7 3. Jericho Low Traffic Neighbourhood Group LTN Proposals ............................................................. 8 3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 8 4. Traffic Data .................................................................................................................................... 11 4.1 Traffic Volume ....................................................................................................................... 13 4.1.1 Jericho Cordon Data ...................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Traffic -
Map of the University Science Area
A 10 55 B C D E 1 1 42 C H A D L I N L I N TO N R D C G H T O A R N L R B O U A R N D Y O R R R I O V T A E H D R M C O H O E R R W BA N B U RY R D R RAWLINSON RD E O L A L D 48 2 WOODSTOCK RD BARDWELL RD 2 ST MARGARET’S34 RD 7 8 N O R H A M R D CANTERBURY RD W I N C 15 H 2 E S T 24 E N PARADE AVE R R D 3 14 CH U R CH W K 45 D R BA N B U RY R D R D 20 O 14 K F 49 3 C S 3 L E 52 N G D 23 A M R H 1 4 N O WOODSTOCK28 RD 44 BEVINGTON RD PLANTATION RD WA LTO N W 27 EL L ST BERNARD’S RD R D University Parks 32 9 OBSERVATORY47 ST 27 28 PA R K S R D T O S N 57 35 X O J U 53 T 15 S M 66 R A I H V N 38 E A R R 60 4 C WA LTO N S T C 4 University Science Area H K E B L E R D E R 16 W (See detailed map) E L B L A L L A B C 13 E F E 34 K R T H T S A L S N L ST CROSS RD T O R D D N 51 72 R E L L A T CLARENDON ST C L 50 SOUTH PARKS RD T L A I R E E L N G 42 W G T 19 O 64 65 39 M 6 13 R N 12 29 S A C S N Q TO 29 N A L 62 S G 36 43 W F I E 37 11 L S T G I L E S’ D 17 44 I R 30 I CH M O N D R D 26 R S T J O H N S T D V 25 31 PA R K S R D PUSE Y S T M A N O R R D 26 PUSE Y L N E S T E R PL WO R C 3 38 WA LTO N S T 35 9 41 21 31 10 5 46 J OW E T T W K 5 OX F O 22 R D C A N A M N M 5 A A L G D H O LY W E L L S T 43 W BEAUMONT ST A J L O C E A R 33 N 39 T C 70 T 21 E S E T S S Bridge R 2 T T E G l o u ce s t e r E R of Sighs E 68 B R OA D S T E W 71 T R E G r e e n L T E S T D Y 54 H 11 R D LONGWALL ST RADCLIFFE Q 8 U E E N ’ S L N G E O R G E S T T U R L S T 58 SH I P S T SQUARE CORNMARKET ST 12 BRASENOSE LN HYTHE BRIDGE ST NEW INN HALL ST K 67 18 32 Water -
Three Oxford Architects'
Three Oxford Architects' By ANDREW AlNT HE local professional architect is a new figure in the social and commercial life of English pro\'incial towns in the early 19th century. I n Oxford this is especiallyT noticeable. From the time of Wren onwards, the largest and most prestigious of university commissions tended to fall into the hands of London architects or educated Oxford dilettanti, and the town and surrounding countryside provided no comparable alternatives. Therefore local men like the Birds and the Townesends happily combined the professions of architect, mason, and builder. Howe"er, after about 1820, the national increase of population encouraged the growth in London and elsewhere of an architec tural profession, and Oxford was not slow to attract a number of vigorous practitioners. The two earliest figures of any interest are Daniel Robertson (/I. 1826-33), designer of St. Clement's Church and the University Press, and Henry Jones Underwood (1804-52), who was accomplished in 'either style' and is now most often remembered for Littlemore Church, a landmark of early ccclesiology, and St. Paul's Church, Walton Street. Of course, there was a natural tendency for the more talented or ambitious architects to move to London once they had secured a flourishing practice. George Edmund Street is a good example; he laid the foundations of his career at ~Ta ntage (1850-2), and at Oxford (1852-5), and then removed to London, although he remained Diocesan Architect until his death in 1881 . • Those who have helped with this article are unfortunately too many to be named individually. -
Ken Robinson Had Passed Away
Issue 2021-1 February 2021 FACS A C T S The Newsletter of the Formal Aspects of Computing Science (FACS) Specialist Group ISSN 0950-1231 FACS FACTS Issue 2021-1 February 2021 About FACS FACTS FACS FACTS (ISSN: 0950-1231) is the newsletter of the BCS Specialist Group on Formal Aspects of Computing Science (FACS). FACS FACTS is distributed in electronic form to all FACS members. Submissions to FACS FACTS are always welcome. Please visit the newsletter area of the BCS FACS website for further details at: https://www.bcs.org/membership/member-communities/facs-formal-aspects- of-computing-science-group/newsletters/ Back issues of FACS FACTS are available for download from: https://www.bcs.org/membership/member-communities/facs-formal-aspects- of-computing-science-group/newsletters/back-issues-of-facs-facts/ The FACS FACTS Team Newsletter Editors Tim Denvir [email protected] Brian Monahan [email protected] Editorial Team: Jonathan Bowen, John Cooke, Tim Denvir, Brian Monahan, Margaret West. Contributors to this issue: Jonathan Bowen, Cliff Jones, Carroll Morgan, John V Tucker BCS-FACS websites BCS: http://www.bcs-facs.org LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/2427579/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/BCS-FACS/120243984688255 Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCS-FACS If you have any questions about BCS-FACS, please send these to Jonathan Bowen on [email protected]. 2 FACS FACTS Issue 2021-1 February 2021 Editorial Dear readers, Welcome to FACS FACTS for 2021. Despite an understandably quiet year for all activities, including FACS, we nonetheless have quite a packed and diverse issue for you.