Environmental Statement
Environmental Statement
April 2021
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Document title: CBSV Environmental Statement
Project: Clive Booth Student Village
Client: Oxford Brookes University
Job number: 448408
File location: \\pdvmfs18\WimbornePlanning\
Date Revision Prepared by
04-2021 - PT
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Contents
Non-Technical Summary
Environmental Statement 1 Introduction
2 Site description and local context
3 Scheme description
4 Approach to assessment
5 Heritage
6 Ecology-biodiversity 7 Landscape and visual effects
8 Noise during construction
9 Transport 10 Air quality
11 Consideration of other environmental aspects
12 Summary of mitigation, residual and interaction effects Figures MICA-19000-PL1 Site plan existing MICA-19001-PL1 Site plan proposed MICA-19002-PL1 Proposed phasing MICA-19005-PL1 Demolition MICA-19020-PL1 Proposed – section AA MICA-19021-PL1 Proposed – section BB MICA-19022-PL1 Proposed – section CC MICA-19023-PL1 Proposed – section DD MICA-19024-PL1 Proposed – section EE MICA-19025-PL1 Proposed – section FF MICA-19026-PL1 Proposed – section GG
(those in italic text are set in the pages of the ES text) 1.1 Location plan 1.2 Site application boundary 2.1 Aerial image showing CBSV 2.2 Existing buildings at CBSV 3.1 Buildings to be demolished (MICA-19005) 3.2 Construction Phase 1 / Phase 2 (MICA-19002) 3.3 Proposed layout (MICA-19001)
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
3.4 Landscape Masterplan (LDA-7967_002) 3.5 Typical composition of construction waste 5.1 Magnitude of change 6.1 Habitat plan 7.1 Site and Study Area 7.2 Site and Local Context 7.3 Policy Context and Access 7.4 Zone of Theoretical Visibility Study and Representative & Illustrative Viewpoint Locations 7.5 Landscape / Townscape Character 7.6 Topography 7.7i Representative Viewpoints 7.7ii Illustrative Viewpoints 7.7iii Historic View Cone Appraisal Views 7.8 Historic View Cone Visualisations 7.8 LVIA Visualisations 7.9 Historic View Cone Viewpoints Zone of Theoretical Visibility 7.10 Illustrative Photomontage Visualisation – John Garne Way Allotments 8.1 Noise monitoring locations across the existing site 8.2 Residential receptors identified for the proposed development 8.3 Proposed locations of air source heat pumps 9.1 Site location 9.2 Local context 9.3 Local facilities 10.1 Construction dust buffers
Appendices 1.1 Assessor information 3.1 CEMP 4.1 EIA scoping opinion 5.1 Heritage assessment 6.1 Ecological Appraisal Report 6.2 Ecology Surveys 6.3 Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report 7.1 Glossary 7.2 Methodology 7.3 Visualisations and ZTV Studies 7.4 National Planning Policy 7.5 Extracts from Landscape Character Assessment 7.6 Appraisal of Effects on Views of the Historic City of Oxford in its Landscape Setting 8.1 Construction plant and equipment noise assumptions Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
10.1 Legislation, policy and guidance 10.2 Consultation with Oxford City Council 10.3 Methodology for baseline conditions 10.4 Sensitive receptors 10.5 Methodology for construction effects 10.6 Methodology for operational effects 10.7 Construction traffic assessment results 10.8 Operational phase assessment results 10.9 Mitigation for construction dust
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
1 Environmental Statement for Clive Booth Student Village
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 This Environmental Statement has been prepared on behalf of Oxford Brookes University. Oxford Brookes University (OBU) has submitted a planning application to Oxford City Council (the Council) seeking planning permission to redevelop part of Clive Booth Student Village at John Garne Way, Oxford. 1.1.2 The general location of the Application Site is shown below on Figure 1.1.
Site location
1.1.3 The description of the planning application is: Demolition of twelve buildings (including main accommodation Blocks C, F, G, H, J, K, L & M) and erection of twelve buildings to provide student accommodation, with ancillary communal and social facilities and associated administrative building (Class C2). Erection of children’s nursery (Class E).
Alterations to car parking, installation of cycle parking structures and associated landscaping works, including reorganisation of existing footpaths and cycle ways, drainage features and ancillary development. Installation of a waste compactor unit and alterations to an existing road to enable access.
The need for the development proposed 1.1.4 The student village was developed during the 1990’s and currently provides accommodation for 1,621 students. The age of the accommodation is such that it does not meet the requirements for modern student accommodation. Many of the existing buildings have reached the end of
1-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
their functional life and require substantial remediation work. However, the configuration of the existing buildings is not conducive to retention or extension, nor is the current layout a particularly effective use of the land. 1.1.5 An objective of OBU's strategic estate plan is to increase its self-managed student accommodation. This has resulted in a focus upon making more effective use of the existing land within OBU’s estate. 1.1.6 Within the adopted Oxford Local Plan 2036, the Site, along with the adjacent Headington Hill Hall is allocated under Policy SP17 for a number of possible uses related to the University, including additional student accommodation. Specifically, the supporting text to Policy SP17 of the Local Plan states, at paragraph 9.99, that “Oxford Brookes has plans to develop this site to create a vibrant academic community with better facilities for students, staff and the community, using the estate more efficiently. As well as enabling Oxford Brookes to relocate from their Wheatley campus, it will also contribute to their aim of reducing the number of students living outside of university-managed accommodation, as a significant increase in the number of student rooms can be accommodated in a redeveloped Clive Booth Student Village.” 1.1.7 The Site is well related to the academic facilities at Headington Hill and Gipsy Lane. An increase in the availability of on-site accommodation would also contribute towards meeting Oxford Local Plan objectives to restrict the number of full-time degree course students living outside university-provided accommodation, and to reduce student demand on the general housing stock (Pages 45-48. Student Accommodation. Paras. 3.38-3.48 and Policy H8).
Planning application red line boundary (blue line identifies other land in the control of OBU)
1-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
The Application Site 1.1.8 Clive Booth Student Village is developed with a number of 2 and 3 storey residential blocks and ancillary facilities linked by footpaths and roadways. Vehicular access is via John Garne Way. Pedestrian access is available from Cuckoo Lane to the south, and from Pullens Lane to the east.
Environmental Impact Assessment 1.1.9 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process that formally considers the construction and operational aspects of a proposal that may have significant effects on the environment. The findings of an EIA are described in a written report known as an Environmental Statement (ES). An ES provides environmental information about the scheme, including a description of the development, its predicted environmental effects and the measures proposed to mitigate adverse effects: information that is taken into account in the planning decision. 1.1.10 This document is the ES submitted with the planning application for the Proposed Development and sets out the results of the EIA undertaken. This ES is prepared in accordance with The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (as amended) (the ‘EIA Regulations’). A separate Non-Technical Summary (NTS) provides a summary of the main findings of the ES. 1.1.11 During the preliminary stages of the EIA process, a request was made to the Council for its EIA scoping opinion. The purpose of this is to identify what the Council considers to be the main environmental issues associated with the Proposed Development. The Council consulted with statutory consultees and issued a formal EIA scoping opinion in January 2021 (see Appendix 4.1). 1.1.12 EIA has been undertaken for the Proposed Development described in Chapter 3 and illustrated by the application drawings. 1.1.13 When the Council is deciding whether to grant planning permission, it can do so in the full knowledge of any significant effects predicted, and take this into account in the decision making process. EIA is a procedure, rather than a requirement to demonstrate no adverse effects. In cases where an assessment predicts that adverse effects could occur, planning legislation does not direct that permission should therefore be refused.
1.2 This Environmental Statement
1.2.1 This ES comprises the main report, figures, supporting appendices and a separate NTS. Following this introductory chapter, the main ES is organised as follows: 2. Site description and local context 3. Scheme description, design iterations and mitigation 4. Approach to assessment 5. Built heritage 6. Biodiversity 7. Landscape and visual effects 8. Noise during construction 9. Transport 10. Air quality 11. Commentary on other environmental aspects 12. Summary of mitigation, residual effects, interaction effects, and cumulative effects
1-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
1.2.2 Chapter 2 provides a description of the Site and its context, and how this has influenced the scheme assessed. Chapter 3 explains the Proposed Development and, with the application drawings, defines the physical and operational aspects assessed in the EIA. 1.2.3 The alternative options considered during the scheme design process in relation to the matters raised during the consultation are explained. Environmental issues assessed in the EIA process are then reported in Chapters 5 to 11, with the majority of associated figures provided separately, although some are within the text of the Chapters. Chapter 12 provides a summary of the mitigation and residual effects. It also identifies any potential for interaction of effects to affect specific receptors, and whether effects are likely to be different when considered in cumulation with other developments or projects. 1.2.4 The framework used to express the predicted significance of the environmental effects identified and assessed is explained in each ES chapter. Effects can either be positive or negative and can be temporary or permanent.
Mitigation measures 1.2.5 Those elements of the scheme design introduced to avoid or mitigate potential adverse effects are set out in Chapter 3 and may also be identified within the relevant topic chapter. Mitigation can be categorised into two types, ‘inherent’ and ‘additional’ mitigation. Inherent mitigation is a fundamental part of the scheme and is explained in Chapter 3 (also sometimes called embedded mitigation). Such mitigation can generally be represented in the plans provided. 1.2.6 Additional mitigation is generally not capable of being shown in the plans because it may, for example, involve contributions towards the provision of measures off-site, or require controls on the construction or operation of the Proposed Development that cannot be shown visually. The delivery of additional mitigation measures can be secured through the imposition of planning conditions or legal obligations associated with a grant of planning permission for the Proposed Development. 1.2.7 Together with the imposition of planning conditions, the completion of a legal obligation demonstrate the commitment to deliver mitigation and the Council's power to control its delivery.
The project team 1.2.8 Those working on the project design and the EIA of the Proposed Development are: MICA for the scheme design, application drawings, Design and Access Statement; LDA for landscape and visual effects; BSG Ecology advising on biodiversity; Worlledge Associates: Heritage; Key Transport; Arup for noise and air quality assessment; Savills: EIA co-ordination, planning consultancy. The EIA has been coordinated by Savills with the technical assessments and input undertaken by this project team. An outline of the experience of the assessors is provided in Appendix 1.1.
Availability of information 1.2.9 The Environmental Statement and other planning application documents can be viewed on the Council’s planning applications website: https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20066/planning_applications 1.2.10 A copy of the ES on USB Flash Drive can be obtained for a charge of £25 from: Savills, telephone 01865 269000. A printed copy of the NTS can also be obtained free of charge from Savills.
1-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
2 The Application Site and local context
2.1.1 The Clive Booth Student Village (CBSV) is located within the Headington area of Oxford, just north of Headington Hill Hall and Headington Road. The planning application site (the Site) is 4.8 hectares in area (4.61ha for the main part and 0.19ha for the waste compactor area). It forms the eastern part of the accommodation within CBSV (the wider site), and is part of the Oxford Brookes University Headington campus. The Site is developed with a number of student accommodation blocks. Ancillary facilities, including a nursery are present within the Site. The nursery provides facilities for users coming from outside the Student Village, primarily comprising University staff, but also some local families. 2.1.2 Vehicular access to the buildings is via existing culs-de-sac off John Garne Way, accessed itself from Marston Road. Pedestrian access is available from Cuckoo Lane which connects Marston Road with Pullens Lane, and from Pullens Lane. Paved footpaths and roadways link the buildings, with grass amenity areas and semi-mature trees located between the blocks. 2.1.3 The topography slopes down from Pullens Lane to Marston Road, with the gradient reducing towards the base of the hill. The total change in level across the Site is some 20m and forms part of a shallow valley of Headington Hill, itself part of the Cherwell Valley (Figure 7.6). The eastern boundary of the Site has a steeper slope (north / south).
Aerial Image showing Clive Booth Student Village (Google Maps, March 2021)
2.1.4 In terms of designations affecting the Site, it lies within the Headington Hill Conservation Area (in which, trees have statutory protection). However, there is no evidence that the CBSV buildings, designed and constructed in the mid-late 80s and early 90s, are of any heritage significance.
2-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
2.1.5 The Environment Agency’s online planning flood map shows that the Site is within Zone 1, the area with the lowest level of flood risk. The Site also appears to have a generally low-level risk of Surface Water Flooding. 2.1.6 An Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) covers the whole of the city, including CBSV.
Existing buildings: A & B to be retained (image by MICA Architects Ltd: looking east)
2.2 Local context
2.2.1 The Site is located in an area that comprises a mix of higher education, residential and open space (Figure 7.2). To the north of the Site are the John Garne Way allotments and residential properties in Feilden Grove and Pullens Field. This area is suburban in character with detached residential properties set within gardens and trees. Pullens Lane allotments and residential properties are located to the east, with the Clive Booth Postgraduate Halls of Residence located to the west. The route of Cuckoo Lane runs adjacent to the southern part of the Site, providing a link between Marston Road and Pullens Lane. 2.2.2 The Headington Hill University Campus is located to the south of Cuckoo Lane, with pedestrian access from the Site and Headington Hill Park to the west, and with the campus to the south of Headington Road. 2.2.3 Immediately west of the Site are the Clive Booth Postgraduate Halls and the remainder of the Clive Booth Student Village which is being retained. These areas comprise 3-4 storey structures and are characteristic of areas to the south and east of the Site. The Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies is to the west, on Marston Road. 2.2.4 The woodland to the north of the Site is designated as a ‘Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation’. This woodland area is not included within the planning application and is not subject to development proposals, but does form part of the wider OBU ownership (Figure 1.2).
2-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
2.2.5 Oxford City Council designated the Headington Hill area a conservation area in 1977 and has identified the most important attributes of this part of the Conservation Area as its role in providing a green landscape background to the City Centre, the retention of trees and characteristic buildings, the provision of public paths and the protection of viewpoints looking down on Oxford. 2.2.6 Parts of the Site are visible from certain tall buildings within the city’s Central Conservation Area and form part of the ‘green backcloth’ to Oxford. As such it is visible within a number of the established Oxford view cones, including Raleigh Park, as well as viewing points such as St Mary’s church on the High Street. 2.2.7 There are no listed buildings within the Site, however, there are various listed buildings within the wider area, including: Grade II* Headington Hill Hall and its associated listed lodges, bridge and boundary walls, and a Grade II Stone at the junction of Marston Road and the Footpath to Pullens Lane. Relevant designations 2.2.8 The following environmental designations are of relevance:
The Oxford Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), which covers the whole of the city. The Site lies within the Headington Conservation Area / St Clements and Iffley Road Conservation Area extends west of Marston Road; Part of the Site is within the Headington Hill, Pullen’s Lane and John Garne Way Allotments Oxford View Cone.
2-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
2-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
3 The scheme assessed
3.1.1 The development scheme would involve the demolition of eight of the existing main accommodation blocks C, F, G, H, J, K, L & M, the ‘Steel House’ and other ancillary buildings, so that overall, twelve buildings would be removed. 3.1.2 The development proposed is for the erection of new buildings containing 1,035 rooms. These would be built in two phases, and overall, represent a net gain of 573 student rooms. 3.1.3 There would also be additional new social and ancillary service spaces within the new buildings, and the nursery that currently operates at the site will be retained as part of the new development, accommodated within one of the new buildings (Building 6). The scheme also includes a new ‘Welcome Pavilion’ (Building 5) near the John Garne Way site entrance. 3.1.4 Additionally, in terms of new structures, the scheme incorporates the provision of a new waste compactor and associated service compound on that part of the Site identified within the separate red line to the west of Clive Booth Postgraduate Halls (Figure 2.1). The collection vehicle egress from the waste compactor will be via the existing service roadway, onto Marston Road. 3.1.5 Vehicular access to the proposed buildings is via John Garne Way, accessed itself from Marston Road. Pedestrian access into the Site can also be gained via Cuckoo Lane to the south and Pullens Lane to the east. 3.1.6 The EIA has assessed:
The demolition of eight existing student accommodation buildings; The retention of two existing buildings; Development of new buildings that will provide a total of 1,035 student rooms, communal and social facilities, including a nursery; An overall net gain of 573 student rooms; Associated landscaping and sustainable drainage; A new waste compactor compound in the area of the existing bin storage; Pedestrian and cycle links. 3.1.7 Around 1,000sqm of social space will be provided as part of the development, including common areas available to students for studying and socialising, as well as shared communal areas like kitchens, laundry rooms and bike stores. 3.1.8 Drawings used in the assessment are: MICA-19000-PL1 Site plan existing MICA-19001-PL1 Site plan proposed MICA-19002-PL1 Proposed phasing MICA-19005-PL1 Demolition MICA-19020-PL1 Proposed – section AA MICA-19021-PL1 Proposed – section BB MICA-19022-PL1 Proposed – section CC MICA-19023-PL1 Proposed – section DD MICA-19024-PL1 Proposed – section EE MICA-19025-PL1 Proposed – section FF MICA-19026-PL1 Proposed – section GG
3-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Demolition and construction 3.1.9 The demolition work will be managed in accordance with a Construction and Environment Management Plans, secured via planning condition to control and minimise the impacts of the work, including the effects of noise, dust, vibration and traffic. These issues are considered in detail in chapters 8, 9 and 10. An extract from Drawing MP-XX-DR-A-19005 by MICA Architects below shows the buildings to be demolished identified by a red star.
Demolition (MICA-DR-A-19005)
3.1.10 It is intended that the development would be constructed in two phases (Figure 3.2). The first phase, on the western part of the Site, would see the demolition of the existing blocks (retaining A & B) and construction of buildings 1 to 7. These are intended to be ready for occupation by September 2023. The second phase, on the eastern portion would remove the remaining buildings and deliver the construction of buildings 8-12, with occupation envisaged by September 2025.
3-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Construction Phase 1 (blue), Phase 2 (pink) (MICA-DR-A-19002)
3.1.11 For the purpose of assessment, it is assumed that during construction, retained blocks A and B will be occupied, as will the accommodation buildings adjacent to the west of the Site, and the buildings on the eastern part of the application site (Phase 2) during Phase 1 of development. A temporary re-location of the nursery will be in place during the first phases of development. Working hours would be confirmed and specified in a planning condition, and are expected to be 0800-1800 Monday to Friday and 0800-1300 on Saturdays. Development proposed 3.1.12 The layout of the development largely follows the footprint of the existing built development, with a series multi-functional external spaces of different scale that respond to the Site and integrate with the mature landscape setting. The heights of the buildings range between four and six storeys and have been carefully designed to minimise visual impact (some are two storey buildings). Existing accommodation Blocks A and B will be retained. The location of these can be seen as the building coloured dark grey on the plan below and also on Figure 3.4. 3.1.13 No changes are proposed to the existing primary vehicle access arrangements - vehicle access will be maintained from via John Garne Way. Enhanced pedestrian and cycle routes would be provided through the Site, connecting access to the Site will be available from John Garne Way, Cuckoo Lane and Marston Road.
3-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Site plan – proposed layout. Existing buildings A & B retained. (MICA-DR-A-19001)
Landscape Masterplan (LDA Design Consulting Ltd dwg.7967_002)
3-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Design evolution 3.1.14 A core objective of the proposed development is the aim to conserve and enhance the woodland setting of the Site, whilst accommodating the functional requirements created by intensification of residential use. A 'mitigation by design' approach has been taken during the course of the design process, so buildings have been repositioned during the design stage where possible to allow for retention of trees. The likely effects on trees and key ecological features has been considered iteratively as the layout has evolved, taking into account all relevant issues relating to the construction and operational phases. 3.1.15 The proposed buildings have been carefully designed to minimise visual intrusion and preserve the prevailing character in so far as possible. This has been achieved by using the footprint of existing buildings where possible; positioning new buildings to retain the majority of existing tree cover in addition to new planting; and keeping the building's height as low as possible and orientating them with consideration to potential views towards the Site. 3.1.16 Whilst, the scheme has been designed to minimise the amount of tree loss, some tree loss is unavoidable (approximately one third of the trees surveyed within the Site are proposed to be felled), and the majority of trees will be retained and additional tree planting proposed, with the aim of doubling the tree cover currently on the Site. 3.1.17 The landscape strategy will retain and reinforce woodlands, create new spaces and manage lighting. The development will retain individual trees of high amenity value, and woodland on the northern part of the Site, along with tree belts providing boundaries and trees that contribute to views, screening or wildlife corridors. 3.1.18 This approach means that ecological mitigation measures form an integral part of the Development and have been designed specifically to reduce ecological effects at the design stage wherever possible. The aim of the strategy for ecology is to provide a beneficial contribution to biodiversity by ecological enhancement, proportionate with national and local policy. 3.1.19 Following the previously scheme proposed in 2018, the following changes have been made in response to the key concerns raised:
Buildings heights and footprints have been reduced where possible to mitigate potential visual impact; retain additional tree cover; and increase light and openness within the Site. Building 4 has been spilt into two separate buildings to allow for the retention of category A trees, and to improve the permeability of the Site. The southern wing of Building 1 (fronting onto Cuckoo Lane) has been adjusted to retain a category A tree and to assist with filtering views from the southern edge of the Site. Building 5 has been set back from the Site's boundary with John Garne Way Allotments and adjusted in height to replicate similar characteristics presently on Site. Similarly, Building 10 has been pulled back from northern boundary to create greater separation from residential properties along Pullens Field. The position and orientation of Building 9 has been adjusted to better incorporate itself into its wooded surroundings. The height and massing of Building 3 has been adjusted to make available a greater degree of visibility to the Site’s wooded surroundings. Surface water drainage 3.1.20 A surface water drainage strategy has been developed that incorporates a sustainable drainage system (SuDS). The proposed SuDS will ensure that rain water will be managed on site and
3-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
that flood risk will not be increased elsewhere. A 40% allowance in accordance with EA guidance for climate change has been included in the SuDS assessment to take account of the predicted increase in rainfall intensity over the lifetime of the development. 3.1.21 The proposed SuDS will maintain the quality of surface water run-off from the development and will ensure that current or future water quality objectives are not compromised. Designs that function effectively can also include features to enhance biodiversity and contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity within the Site. Foul drainage 3.1.22 The existing foul drainage network will be reused where possible with replacement drainage to suit the new layout and the increase in the amount of accommodation. A pre-development enquiry to Thames Water confirmed the need for TW to carry out modelling design and reinforcement of their off-site network within the timescale of the construction programme. Cycle parking 3.1.23 Cycle storage would be provided in secure areas within the new buildings (500 spaces), and an additional 50 external Sheffield stand spaces will be provided for visitors to the site, situated in convenient and accessible locations such as outside the building entrances. Additional cycle parking spaces are to be provided at the nursery. 3.1.24 An allowance has also been made within the Site layout for a further 485 cycle parking spaces to be provided in external secure stores, if this is shown to be required through the monitoring of cycle use/storage on site. Vehicle parking 3.1.25 The proposal will not create additional car parking at the Site. Additional trips associated with enlargement of the nursery will balance with the reduction in trips from the rest of the proposal, when compared with the existing situation – so that no significant net change in the number of overall trips is anticipated. Students will be bound by tenancy agreement not to bring vehicles to the site, unless they are permitted to do so due to a disability. A system of temporary parking will be provided to manage the flow of vehicles during student arrivals weekend: the use of barriers is not proposed. Residential waste 3.1.26 When completed and occupied, broadly, there would be a 35% increase in the amount of waste and recycling collected at CBSV. The existing bin storage area will accommodate new waste and recycling compactors. It has been assumed that these would be operated daily, during ‘normal’ day-time working hours. Removal of the container by vehicle for emptying off-site will be undertaken on a 4-week cycle. 3.1.27 All residual waste will be sent to an energy recovery facility, continuing the current arrangements (not disposal to landfill). Materials for recycling will be collected by OCC for segregation and re- processing. The current approach to the processing of food waste into organic fertiliser will continue, unless and until an on-site digester/composter is operational (feasibility is under consideration). Climate Change and Energy Use 3.1.28 In terms of planning, addressing climate change is one of the core land use planning principles which the National Planning Policy Framework expects to underpin both plan-making and decision-taking. It recognises that planning plays a key role in minimising vulnerability, providing resilience and managing the risks associated with climate change.
3-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
3.1.29 An effective approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new development is the use of efficient designs and insulation products to achieve high levels of thermal efficiency – the ‘fabric first’ approach. New buildings that benefit from the latest heating systems, very high levels of thermal insulation of walls, floors, ceilings, windows and doors can achieve a
substantial reduction of CO2 emissions.
3.1.30 For the development, the focus of the design would limit the energy consumption and CO2 emissions through optimising the building performance together with energy efficiency measures following the steps of the energy hierarchy, as set out in the Energy and Sustainability Strategy prepared for the application:
Be lean – reduce energy demand using passive measures; Be clean – supply energy efficiently by using high efficiency / low carbon technologies; Be green – use renewables. 3.1.31 In addition, climate change mitigation and adaptation considerations have been considered to promote sustainable management of surface water drainage, and planting and landscape measures resilient to predicted climate change. Control of construction activities 3.1.32 The assessment of effects assumes that construction will proceed in accordance with industry standard best practice techniques and that all legislative requirements will be met. Standard measures can be secured through planning conditions. The principal management control is a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). This would be prepared to control construction activities on site. 3.1.33 The CEMP, secured through an appropriately worded planning condition, would set out how the works would be constructed and implemented to ensure amongst other things, the protection of local amenity, highway operation and the environment. Should further mitigation measure be identified for the construction phase, the CEMP can be a mechanism for the implementation of these measures. The CEMP would be agreed with the Council prior to commencement of works at the Site and the appointed contractor would be required to comply with the CEMP. An outline of the CEMP is provided at Appendix 3.1. 3.1.34 Construction compounds would be provided to serve the different phases of the development. The safe storage and use of fuels for the plant would be a priority in site management. Drainage within the temporary secure site compounds where construction vehicles would park and where any diesel fuel would be stored, would be directed to an oil interceptor to prevent pollution should any spillage occur. Diesel storage and refuelling would be within a designated area or a self- bunded tank to equal the quantity of oil held. This is regarded as industry standard practice. Spill kits and mandatory spill reporting would also form part of the management regime in line with standard procedures. 3.1.35 Water used during construction would be sourced from the existing grid. Primary uses for water during the construction phase would include: use in welfare facilities; dust suppression; cleaning (of plant, materials, surfaces etc.); wheel wash; commissioning/testing of water supply services. 3.1.36 Trees that are identified for retention that lie within or adjoining the working area would be physically safeguarded using tree protection fencing and guarding to avoid harm to the trees. 3.1.37 For the construction phase, it is envisaged that there would be approximately 56 2-way HGV movements per day, and <100 LDVs. This includes movements required to manage waste arisings. All construction traffic would be expected to access the Site via John Garne Way,
3-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Marston Road, and Headington Road/London Road to the A40 junction. Construction waste and management 3.1.38 The Buildings Research Establishment (BRE) has developed benchmarking to aid in the estimation of construction waste arising at the design stage of a new development. The benchmarks are derived from data reported from a range of completed projects which are used to inform the BRE SMARTWaste Tool. 3.1.39 These benchmarks have been used to forecast the construction waste that would potentially be generated when developing the proposal. The chart below illustrates the general composition of construction waste types that would be generated, based upon SmartWaste benchmark data from UK construction projects. 3.1.40 In order to minimise the volume of waste generated, a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) would be prepared. This would be agreed with the Council prior to commencement of works at the site and with which the appointed contractor(s) would be required to comply. The implementation of this would ensure that significant adverse effects from the management of waste would be unlikely.
Bricks (8%) Concrete (11%) Inert (30%) Metals (1%) Packaging Materials (3%) Plasterboard/Gypsum (3%) Plastic (2%) Timber (9%)
Typical Construction Waste Composition (Benchmark Data 2017)
3-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
4 The approach to assessment
4.1 EIA scoping
4.1.1 During the preliminary stages of the EIA process, a request was made to the Council for its EIA scoping opinion. The Council consulted with statutory consultees and issued a formal EIA scoping opinion in January 2021 (see Appendix 4.1). 4.1.2 A summary of the comments received and any additional specific matters identified by the consultees is provided below. EIA Scoping consultation Topic Summary of comments / advice Refer to Scoped in Planning policy Planning policy is set out as it relates to each topic 1.1.6 – 7; ES Sections 6.2; chapter in the ES. 6.15; 7.3; 8.2 & 9.2; ES appendix 10.1. LVIA See Heritage and Trees below See below Built heritage Scope and methodology is considered to be Figure 7.8 visualisations; appropriate; consider design and materials not just Appendix 5.2; Archaeology wirelines. Consider potential impacts on non- desk-based assessment; designated features. Trees ES should be informed by a Tree Survey and AIA and Tree Canopy Arboricultural Impact Assessment & a Tree Canopy Reports provided in the Cover Assessment. submission in support the DAS also. Transport Policy SP17 requires demonstration of how the 9.5.12 – 23, Tables 9.2 and development mitigates traffic impacts – transport 9.3; Section 9.6; should be included in the ES – site access and connectivity. Air quality The proposed scope and methodology seem 10.1.2; 10.2.3; adequate, as long as the most up-to-date and Section 10.3; Appendix 10.2. relevant information is used. Noise No specific requirements included in scoping 8.2.13 opinion. Ecology Aim for 10% net gain in biodiversity. 6.16.8 Mitigation provided through a Construction Section 6.10. Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and Landscape Ecology Management Plan (LEMP). Energy and Design to achieve 40% carbon reduction. Energy and Sustainability sustainability Statement submitted Scoped out Flooding Drainage Strategy and Flood Risk Assessment Report submitted Archaeology Archaeology desk-based assessment submitted ES Appendix 5.2 Land quality Geo-environmental assessment Report submitted
4-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
4.2 Alternatives and design evolution
4.2.1 Schedule 4, Paragraph 2 of the EIA Regulations, requires an outline of the reasonable alternatives studied by the Applicant. Alternative sites 4.2.2 The current accommodation is such that it does not meet the requirements for modern student accommodation. Many of the existing buildings have reached the end of their functional life and require substantial remediation work. However, the configuration of the existing buildings is not conducive to retention or extension, nor is the current layout a particularly effective use of the land. 4.2.3 An objective of OBU's strategic estate plan is to increase its self-managed student accommodation. This has resulted in a focus upon making more effective use of the existing land within OBU’s estate. 4.2.4 The Site is well related to the academic facilities at Headington Hill and Gipsy Lane, and an increase in the a on-site accommodation would contribute towards meeting Oxford Local Plan objectives to restrict the number of students living outside university-provided accommodation. For these reasons, it is not appropriate to consider alternative sites for the development proposed. Design iterations 4.2.5 The proposals that form the basis of this application can be viewed, to some extent, as an update to the planning application submitted in 2018 under reference 18/02587/FUL. The committee report for that planning application indicated that officers recommended approval, subject to a section 106 agreement. However, the application was subsequently refused by Members of the East Area Planning Committee, with reference to the siting, scale, density, and height of that proposal. 4.2.6 In 2021, an alternative scheme for student accommodation is proposed, which seeks to address both the reasons for refusal associated with 18/02587/FUL, and a revised brief for the architect from OBU relating to the nursery facility, reducing the number of townhouses and incorporating changes to the sustainability strategy. 4.2.7 As a result, the key changes to the proposal have been to retain more of the existing trees, reduce the height of the proposed buildings, provide greater connectivity between spaces, and improve the relationship of buildings within the landscape. (The previous scheme included buildings up to seven storeys high with many of the elevations incorporating little modelling or articulation, resulting in a rather austere set of buildings that seem to have a rather disengaged relationship with their immediate surroundings. 4.2.8 As the 2021 designs have been developed, the role of the landscape and how this will enhance the setting ensuring the Clive Booth Student Village becomes and active community, rather than just a series of accommodation blocks, has been at the fore front of the design. This has resulted in a scheme where the architecture and the landscape are inherently linked ensuring that the scheme beds itself into the site and becomes part of the setting. Consultation 4.2.9 The extensive and pro-active community engagement process has also introduced some positive changes to the designs which have been incorporated into the submitted proposals. These include adjusting buildings to retain more of the existing trees and adjusting building locations and heights to respond to boundary conditions, most notably in the area nearest the
4-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
John Garne Way Allotments. 4.2.10 So whilst the development proposed seeks to meet the aspirations of OBU, it also strives to accommodate the feedback provided by interested groups during the community engagement. Feedback that has been influential in the design evolution are summarised below. 4.2.11 A significant feature of consultation related to the likely shadowing of allotments by the proposed new buildings. Predictive shadow modelling at different times of the year has been used to refine the scheme design. Building 3 was lowered in height and Building 5 was relocated. Concern about potential shadows caused by Building 6 resulted in further changes, including the relocation of the nursery to the ground floor of Building 7, and the provision of a basement to Building 6, thus reducing the height of Building 6 by one storey. 4.2.12 This change to the design significantly reduces the early winter morning shadow cast on the allotments, and additionally improves sunlight to the nursery play area. The predicted shadow area was notably reduced across the south east corner of the site, although (because the main elevation of Building 6 remains unchanged) early morning winter shadowing is still likely to be present, but the shadow is expected to clear the zone by circa 9am (according to modelling). 4.2.13 Concerns also covered issues such as the impact of the proposed buildings on views both towards and outwards from Oxford city centre, the views across into Oxford centre from both of the nearby allotments; and the colour and nature of building materials. In response, further work on predicted visual impacts across various zones in Oxford and from the allotments - both short term and longer term (when trees are more mature) has refined the proposed scheme. This study highlighted the range of brick tones across existing buildings on the hillside and led to the idea of blending different brick tones on different buildings throughout the scheme. This allows each building to have its own identity within the long range views, but with similar elevational treatments locally.
4.3 Assessment of effects
4.3.1 An appropriate way to link a planning permission to proposals that have been subject to EIA is through a set of plans that are included as part of the formal planning application. The plans define the development ‘envelope’ and assumptions that are subject to EIA, and upon which the planning decision is based. This approach seeks to ensure that the scheme assessed contains sufficient detail to identify, predict and assess the significance of the main environmental impacts (based on a cautious, or ‘worst case’ approach) and is representative of the development to be approved. 4.3.2 The primary study area for the EIA covers the physical extent of the Site shown on Figure 1.2. It is defined by the area of land to be used, the nature of the environmental conditions and the manner in which impacts are likely to be generated. Each assessment topic defines its wider study area geographically in relation to the assessment of the Proposed Development and for the consideration of potential cumulative effects. 4.3.3 The temporal scope considers the construction, arranged over two phases, and thereafter when the development is completed and occupied (often referred to as the ‘operational’ phase). For example, the assessment of landscape and visual effects considers residual effects when the landscaping within the scheme has had time to mature. 4.3.4 It is envisaged that construction will commence in 2022, with the occupation of phase 1 in 2023, with occupation of phase 2 envisaged for September 2025. The proposed development is designed as a permanent provision i.e., decommissioning is not an aspect considered in the
4-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
EIA. 4.3.5 In order to determine the scope of the EIA, the process has identified:
the key characteristics of the Site and the establishment of the environmental baseline through a series of desk and site studies; initial consideration of the potential sources and nature of environmental impacts; and definition of the assessment methodologies to be used (where available). 4.3.6 In addition, the EIA studies are interconnected with the following key documents that have been prepared as part of the planning application: Design and Access Statement; Tree Survey and Arboricultural Impact Assessment; Tree Canopy Study; External Lighting Strategy; Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy.
Climate change 4.3.7 UK Climate Projections 2018 (UKCP18) is the official source of climate projections in the UK. It is funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affair (Defra), the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the Met Office and the Environment Agency. 4.3.8 The UKCP18 Projections highlight that the general trends of climate change in the 21st century show a progressive increase in mean air temperatures during summer and winter, a reduction in the rate of precipitation during the summer months but an increase during the winter months, with a slight reduction in average wind speed in the summer and a small increase during the winter. 4.3.9 The potential impact of climate change on the findings of the assessment by each specialist consultant is presented within a section of each technical chapter in the ES. Utilising the UKCP18, each chapter has considered how potential climate change may alter the predicted effects for the receptors in the assessment with reference to the highest emissions scenario (RCP8.5, 50th percentile) for future years in the 2080s.
Cumulative assessment 4.3.10 Schedule 4(5)(e) of the 2017 EIA Regulations requires a description of the likely significant effects of the development on environment resulting from ‘the cumulation of effects with other existing and/or approved projects, taking into account any existing environmental problems relating to areas of particular environmental importance likely to be affected or the use of natural resources’. 4.3.11 In respect of potential cumulative effects with other development, national planning practice guidance advises that ‘Each application (or request for a screening opinion) should be considered on its own merits. There are occasions, however, when other existing or approved development may be relevant in determining whether significant effects are likely as a consequence of a proposed development. The local planning authorities should always have regard to the possible cumulative effects arising from any existing or approved development.’ (ID 4-024-20170728). 4.3.12 In accordance with the scoping opinion, the EIA will consider the following for potential cumulative effects in the assessment.
The approved development of the Headington Hill Hall replacement building, assuming that it is constructed simultaneously with demolition/construction at CBSV. This is factored into the vehicle movements used by Key Transport, and considered in the construction noise and air quality assessments.
4-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
The potential cumulative effects with the proposed development of the ‘Cuckoo Lane Footpath / Headington Hill Hall Link’, which comprises the proposed development of pedestrian/cycle routes on adjacent land to the south of CBSV. This will be submitted as a separate planning application by OBU. An outline of the potential implications with development identified by OCC Local Plan Policy SP16. Whilst OCC’s scoping opinion advised the effects of SP16 need to be included, there is no proposal in place. As the SP16 allocation is adjacent to the CBSV site, the ES includes a high-level commentary on this Policy provision for residential use (>70 units), student accommodation and academic use, i.e., uses compatible with CBSV. 4.3.13 Each of the assessment chapters considers which of the above have the potential for cumulative effects when the construction and/or operational phases could be concurrent, and where there are sensitive receptors common to both developments.
4-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
4-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
5 Built heritage
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 This chapter considers an assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the identified built heritage assets within the vicinity of the Site 5.1.2 It has been prepared by Worlledge Associates and should be read in conjunction with the Heritage Impact Assessment (ES Appendix 5.1) and Appraisal of Effects on views of the Historic City of Oxford in its landscape setting (ES Appendix 7.6).
5.2 Scope
5.2.1 The historic environment comprises archaeological remains, structures, monuments or heritage landscape within or immediately around the application Site, that are considered to have heritage significance because of their archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic interest. Where elements of the historic environment have been identified as holding interest, they are called heritage assets – designated and non-designated. Heritage assets include listed buildings, Conservation Areas, Registered Parks and Gardens and any non-designated heritage assets. This chapter focuses on above ground designated heritage assets and their settings. 5.2.2 The scope of the assessment is sufficient to provide a robust evidence base that can be relied on to assess the impact of the proposed development and includes:
Plotting the history of the development of the Site (including its context);
Defining the contribution that the setting of assets makes to their significance (this will include grouped heritage assets);
Describing the direct or indirect effects on all above ground heritage assets;
Defining the nature and extent of impact and whether harmful, benign or beneficial; and
Discussing any heritage benefits the proposed development would deliver of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral. 5.2.3 The Study area includes the historic core of Oxford and its landscape setting, identifying any aspects to this setting that may be affected and identifying individual designated assets that may have a setting that extends to include Headington Hill. The area also includes individual heritage assets adjacent to or in close proximity to the Site and Headington Hill Conservation Area. Any likely effects on St Clements and Iffley Road Conservation Area are also assessed. The historic city centre, Headington Hill and St Clements and Iffley Road statutorily designated conservation area boundaries define the extent of these areas of study and the setting of the historic core of the city is defined by reference to the 10 Local Plan views cones.
5.3 Methodology
5.3.1 The assessment follows the advice set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Policy Guidance Notes and the guidance and methodology suggested by Historic England in its Good Practice Advice Notes. For clarification the NPPF defines Significance as
5-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
‘The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest,'
which can be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic, and defines Setting as:
‘The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.
5.3.2 The proposed development will not have a physical impact on any buildings or structures included in the National Heritage List for England, but has the potential to impact on their settings. 5.3.3 Analysis follows Historic England guidance in its Good Practice Advice Note 3 The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England 2017), which recommends a staged approach for assessing the implications of development proposals: Step 1: identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected; Step 2: assess whether, how and to what degree these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s); Step 3: assess the effects of the proposed development, whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance; Step 4: explore the way to maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm; Step 5: make and document the decision and monitor outcomes.
5.4 Assumptions and Limitations
5.4.1 The assessment relies on available data, and historical material held online and in national and local libraries. Best endeavours have been made to ensure that the information is accurate and that the historical material can be relied on as a record of events or circumstances at the time recorded. 5.4.2 Illustrations used for the assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed development record views whilst trees are in leaf. However, the potential effects have been considered during those seasons when there is no leaf cover, but it is a limitation of the visual material used in the report such that some of the images illustrate summer scenes. It should be noted that the report author has a detailed knowledge of the views of Oxford through the seasons and this is reflected in the analysis and the conclusions.
5.5 Significance Criteria and assessment of impact
5.5.1 The EIA Regulations stipulate that an ES should identify, describe and assess the likely significant effects of a development on the environment during the construction and operational phases. Where there are definitive standards, environmental effects can be evaluated and quantified. Where it has not been possible to quantify effects, qualitative assessments need to be carried out, based on available knowledge and professional judgement. 5.5.2 The chapter details the methodology followed, a review of the baseline conditions in the defined study area, and the results of the assessment. 5.5.3 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (2018) seeks to provide an objective methodology for quantifying significance and heritage impacts. It sets out in a table the relative importance of
5-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
designated heritage assets. Designated heritage assets (grade II) are identified as having high value. This table is then used to help assess the degree of harm of any impacts, essentially by equating the level of intervention against the level of significance to produce a significance of effects matrix (see Figure 5.1 below).
Figure 5.1 Magnitude of change DRMB 2018 (http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol11/section3/ha20807.pdf)
5.5.4 Whilst these tables can be helpful to quantify the results of assessment, the methodology adopts broad categories and can fail to properly identify the significance of an asset, the contribution its setting makes and the vulnerability or robustness to change. It also leads to the assumption that the higher the significance of an asset the more vulnerable it would be to change. This is not necessarily the case. So, for example there are some assets that may have lower significance (such as a small simple vernacular building) but be vulnerable to change that could risk the complete or significant loss of significance. Conversely, those assets of high significance may be more robust and capable of accommodating change without significant loss. Historic England suggests that a narrative can often be helpful to identify significance and the nature and extent of impacts. It is also helpful in providing a framework to discuss the more subtle or sensory impacts that a development may have of people’s understanding and appreciation of a historic place, in a way that a tabular format cannot
5.6 Evaluating the Significance of Heritage Assets: Historic England
5.6.1 The assessment of an asset’s significance is considered in accordance with the Historic England methodology described in Historic England’s Conservation Principles (2008) and as set out in Historic England’s GPA3. This methodology has been agreed as appropriate by the City Council in its scoping opinion. Significance lies in the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations. The determination of the significance of these assets is based on statutory designation and/or professional judgement against the following values: Evidential Value: the potential of the physical remains to yield evidence of past human activity. This might take into account date, rarity, state of preservation, diversity/complexity, contribution to published priorities, supporting documentation, collective value and comparative potential. Aesthetic Value: this derives from the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual
5-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
stimulation from the heritage asset, taking into account what other people have said or written. Historical Value: the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through heritage asset to the present, such a connection often being illustrative or associative. Communal Value: this derives from the meanings of a heritage asset for the people who know about it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory. Communal values are closely bound up with historical, particularly associative, and aesthetic values, along with educational, social or economic values.
5.7 National Planning and Policy Guidance
5.7.1 Conservation principles, policy and practice seek to preserve and enhance the value of heritage assets. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) confirmed the Government aim 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. 5.7.2 Headington Hill Hall and Lodge are listed, and the application Site sits within a Conservation Area and are thus defined as designated heritage assets. In relation to development affecting a designated heritage asset the NPPF states in paragraph 193 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.
Clarifying in paragraph 194 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.
5.7.3 The Planning Practice Guidance seeks to provide further advice on assessing the impact of proposals explaining that what matters in assessing the level of harm (if any) is the degree of impact on the significance of the asset. It states: In determining whether works to a listed building (or its setting) constitute substantial harm, an important consideration would be whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest. It is the degree of harm to the asset’s significance rather than the scale of the development that is to be assessed.
5.7.4 The NPPF explains in paragraphs 195 and 196 the differences between ‘substantial’ harm and ‘less than substantial’ harm, advising that any harm should be justified by the public benefit of a proposal. Local planning policies carry a similar message, seeking to resist development that would cause harm to designated heritage assets and the character of an area 5.7.5 Specifically, paragraph 196 provides a framework for planning permission to be granted notwithstanding that a particular proposal may cause harm to an asset, provided that there are compensatory public benefits. 5.7.6 The Planning Practice Guidance also seeks to provide a clearer understanding of what constitutes ‘public benefit’; as it is the public benefit that flows from a development that can
5-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
justify harm, always ensuring also that considerable weight and importance is given to the desirability to preserve the setting of listed buildings in weighing the public benefits against the harm. It states (paragraph 20): Public benefits may follow from many developments and could be anything that delivers economic, social or environmental progress as described in the National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 7). Public benefits should flow from the proposed development. They should be of a nature or scale to be of benefit to the public at large and should not just be a private benefit. However, benefits do not always have to be visible or accessible to the public in order to be genuine public benefits.
5.7.7 From this summary of the national heritage management policy framework, it is clear that there is a complex assessment decision-making process to navigate when considering change within the historic environment. Central to any decision is the recognition that history is not a static thing, and that the significance of our historic environment derives from a history of change. To understand the significance of a place, the dynamics that help to create what we have inherited from previous generations and the challenges that we face to sustain and manage the places we value (and for future generations to enjoy is a significant responsibility.
5.8 Local Planning Policy
5.8.1 At full Council meeting on 8th June 2020 the City Council voted to adopt THE OXFORD LOCAL PLAN 2016 - 2036. The forward states; Oxford’s Local Plan is a vital document that sets out the shape of our city, and how it will look and feel in years to come. It will guide and shape new developments, so that they respect the past and present of Oxford, while improving its future by supporting our city’s people and their environment.
This new Local Plan will determine the homes, jobs, community facilities and infrastructure for the next twenty years, striking the right balance between the different pressures that Oxford and its people face. It also sets out our priorities as a city.
5.8.2 The issues and policies in relation to Oxford’s heritage are contained in Part 6. Enhancing Oxford’s heritage and creating high quality new development. It explains managing change in a way that respects and draws from Oxford’s heritage is vital for the continued success of the city, stating: The value and benefits of good design and improvements to quality of life are so significant that good design is not a nice extra, it is essential. A successfully designed scheme will be a positive addition to its surroundings. It may blend in or stand out, but it should not detract from existing significant positive characteristics in the area, and it may add interest and variety. A well-designed scheme will meet the needs of all users and will stand the test of time.
5.8.3 It discusses and addresses the following issues and sets outs policies to guide future development:
High quality design and placemaking DH1;
Views and building heights DH2;
Designated heritage assets DH3;
Archaeological remains DH4;
Local heritage assets DH5.
5-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
5.8.4 In relation to heritage the policies most relevant to the proposed development are DH1, DH2 and DH3: Policy DH1 stipulates that planning permission will only be granted for development which shows a high standard of design, and which respects the character and appearance of an area and uses materials appropriate to the Site and surroundings. Policy DH2 seeks to retain significant views both within Oxford and from outside, in particular to and from the historic skyline. Planning permission will not be granted for any building or structure that would harm the special significance of Oxford’s historic skyline. Policy DH3 requires development to respect and draw inspiration from Oxford’s unique historic environment (above and below ground), responding positively to the significance character and distinctiveness of the heritage asset and locality. These policies closely reflect the advice and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. 5.8.5 The Site is also allocated for development in the Local Plan. Policy SP17 envisages a significant increase in the number of student rooms in a redeveloped student village with improved links to other parts of the University’s sites. The policy identifies the need to respond appropriately to the heritage and landscape values the Site holds and to its contribution to the setting of listed buildings and conservation areas (Headington Hill and City and University areas). In particular the views out over the city and the views back from the city that illustrate the green backdrop setting to the city and the views over the dreaming spires require particular consideration. 5.8.6 The Site lies within the boundaries of the Headington Neighbourhood Plan which was designated as the Headington Neighbourhood Plan Area (HNPA) by Oxford City Council on 23rd April 2014. It contains a number of heritage focussed Spatial Planning Policies relevant to the Site. CIP1 Development to respect existing local character; CIP2 Protecting locally important views; CIP3 Innovative design; CIP4 Protecting important assets.
5.9 Designated Heritage Assets
5.9.1 The Clive Booth Student Village, developed in the early-mid 1990s lies to the north of Headington Hill Hall, now part of the Oxford Brookes University Campus, which lies in the Headington Hill Conservation Area. A history of the development of the area is contained within the Heritage Report (WA) (see Appendix 5.1). Briefly its history derives from agricultural use, incorporated as part of two farms after enclosure, continuing in farming use into the 19th century. The land was parcelled up for development and began to be developed from 1899. Development continued throughout the 20th century (with land outside but adjacent the conservation area also being developed). The conservation area includes the designed parkland associated with Headington Hill Hall (now public parks and the grounds to Oxford Brookes University) and the colonised slopes of Headington Hill. 5.9.2 Nearby is the listed Headington Hill Hall (Grade II*) and its associated listed lodges, bridge and boundary walls (Grade II). There would be no direct impact on these listed buildings, but potentially an effect on the contribution their setting makes to their significance. The application
5-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Site sits within a wooded hillside that provides a green backdrop to the historic city centre, which is designated as a conservation area and contains a high number of higher graded and grade II listed buildings. There would be no direct impact on these designated heritage assets, individually or as a group, but there is the potential for their settings (and overlapping settings) to be affected. The extent of the setting and contribution to significance is discussed below.
5.10 Statement of Significance
5.10.1 Significance is defined in the National Planning Policy Framework Annex as comprising: “The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.”
Headington Hill Hall 5.10.2 Heritage significance. Evidential: Evidence to help understand the physical, economic and social considerations that influenced the form and development of the house and grounds, illustrating the trend for wealthy Oxford merchants to establish small estates outside the city. Historical: These works illustrate the historical, social and economic aspects of the development by the Morrells, a wealthy family of Oxford Brewers, to created most lavish among the mansions built by Oxford’s 19th century merchants Evidence of the house’ function as a place for entertainment, in addition to being a family home. The landscaped gardens and grounds, illustrates the enormous interest in Victorian England of all aspects of gardening, and the status that a well landscaped garden and park provided to the setting of a house, and its use for social and local community occasions. Aesthetic: Headington Hill Hall is an architectural and aesthetically significant example of a substantial predominantly mid 19th century house in the Italianate / Louis XIII style - As an important example of the work of sculptor and architect John Thomas. The interior maintains a wealth of mid-late 19th fabric and architectural detailing integral to the architectural and aesthetic significance of Headington Hill Hall. The surviving landscaped gardens and park grounds to the west of the house, provide a significant aesthetic setting to the house, reflecting the wealth, status and architectural quality of the mid- 19th century Headington Hill Hall. The 1878 bridge, adds a visually pleasing component to Headington Road Communal A sense of identity, a well understood aspect of the British landscape, a substantial house in a landscaped garden and parkland setting, a reminder of the privilege and power that created such properties, but also of the 19th and 20th century wealthy owners who enlarged and maintained them.
Headington Hill Hall has, at various periods, played an important role in the social and economic life of Oxford - Important role in the provision of tertiary education to the local, national and international community.
5-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Headington Conservation Area 5.10.3 Heritage significance
A symbolic point of arrival on the edge of the city since at least the sixteenth century, with important routes into the city running through a rural setting down the hillside.
The crest and eastern slopes of the hill have offered distinguished views of the city that have been depicted by artists and writers over the past five centuries and form a green backcloth to the City from the west.
Walks and open spaces that have been valued by the University academics and local residents as a space for recreation on the city’s edge since the late 17th century
Evidence of the area’s rural character prior to suburban development is preserved as green open spaces, agricultural buildings and a network of narrow lanes with green verges and hedgerow boundaries.
Part of the circuit of Parliamentarian siege works erected during the Civil War and depicted on historic maps existed through this area, with potential for survival of associated archaeological features.
A pronounced transition in the historic character of the conservation area from south to north.
Public and private institutions within the landscape of early and mid-19th century country estates dominate the south of the conservation area.
Late 19th to mid 20th century residential suburb created an established character of large houses in mature landscaped grounds on tranquil lanes in the north of the area.
Mansions designed landscapes and boundaries of country estates built for wealthy merchants and professionals in the early and mid-19th century as an escape from the urban environment of the city (in the south).
A Victorian and early 20th century picturesque suburb with sylvan character built along rural lanes, partly as a response to the expansion of the University in the 1860s and 70s, and influenced by the attractive views across the city and the locations healthy reputation (in the north).
Detached Victorian Villas of a high architectural quality and a strong sense of unity created through the use of a common scale and palette of materials with a variety of styles and evidence of service culture.
Buildings set-back from the road in large plots providing privacy and green space, which are often richly planted.
Buildings of high architectural quality in the Arts and Crafts and Vernacular Revival styles that contribute to the rural character of the area.
Headington School in the south of the conservation area illustrates Oxford’s developing reputation as a centre for excellence in education. Oxford Brookes University and Cheney School illustrate the development of the city’s citizens’ _need for further education establishments.
Buildings and open space given or taken into public ownership to conserve their contribution to the quality of the city’s environment as part of the development of the
5-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
conservation movement in the early 20th century.
The area is green and verdant, with areas of dense tree cover and large areas of green open space that provide a corridor of wildlife habitat.
John Garne Way Allotment 5.10.4 Heritage Significance
The previous application (2018) for the redevelopment of the student village was refused on the basis of the impact on views from the John Garne Allotments, which lie to the north west of the Site. Research demonstrated that the establishment and development of allotment gardens from the end of the nineteenth century onwards in Great Britain was a significant cultural movement. In Oxford the earliest allotments provided by local government date from the 1890s. The John Garne Way allotments, which appear to have been developed between 1956 and 1961, are one of the last areas of allotments to be provided in Oxford. They lie outside the boundary of the Headington Hill Conservation Area, and not considered to be of heritage significance.
Central (University and City) Conservation Area 5.10.5 Heritage significance
The historic centre of Oxford forms one of the masterpieces of European architectural heritage. It is also a major regional commercial centre. Many of its historic buildings still function for the purpose for which they were built and provide accommodation for the University of Oxford and its colleges. It contains a high number of highly graded listed buildings, set within a small tight urban area, that sits on a gravel terrace about the floodplain and elevates the roofscape of the historic city into the view from high points around the city and within it.
Since 1962 the Council has protected the prospect of the city’s unique skyline with its high buildings policy. The complementary views out of the city to its open country background have been similarly protected by the Green Belt and other policies.
The geology and soils of Oxford and its immediate environs have been a significant factor in the selection of the site and the persistent occupation of the area.
Oxford has a green setting that is of visual and historic interest and that has been enjoyed by inhabitants and visitors throughout history.
The character of the urban centre as a low-rise city punctuated by towers and spires has meant that since the 16th century views of Oxford from the surrounding hills have become an important part of the national and international image of Oxford.
The growth of a Saxon town, and the appearance of houses, a castle, numerous churches and monastic sites, and then the university with its colleges has added to the rich diversity of the city’s built form.
The building materials (often limestone of local and regional origin; and later brick) have contributed to the Oxford’s architectural character and aesthetic.
The skyline of dreaming spires.
5-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
5.11 Contribution of setting to significance
5.11.1 In relation to the setting of a heritage asset the National Planning Policy Framework Glossary defines setting as: The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.
5.11.2 Historic England’s advice in Historic England’s Good Practice Advice Note 3 – The Setting of Heritage Assets, December 2017 (GPA3) para 9) is similar stating: Setting is not a heritage asset, nor a heritage designation, though land within a setting may itself be designated... Its importance lies in what it contributes to the significance of the heritage asset or the ability to appreciate the significance.
5.11.3 It explains (GPA3 para 10) that the contribution of setting to the significance of a heritage asset is often expressed by reference to views – a visual impression of an asset. 5.11.4 It comments (page 6) that: Some views may contribute more to understanding the heritage significance than others. This may be because the relationships between the asset and other historic assets or places or natural features are particularly relevant.
5.11.5 And furthermore, (GPA 3 para 9) comments that the setting of heritage assets will change over time and that this can be a positive element in our understanding of places and how we experience the historic environment and heritage assets. It cautions that where unsympathetic change has affected the setting of a heritage asset further cumulative negative changes could sever the last link between an asset and its original setting but pointing out that sympathetic new development has the potential to enhance setting, successfully illustrating the cycle of change that shape our towns and countryside. 5.11.6 GPA3 Part 1- Settings and Views, discusses the issue of setting stating: Setting is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced, and may therefore be more extensive than its curtilage. All heritage assets have a setting, irrespective of the form in which they survive and whether they are designated or not. The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations. Although views of or from an asset will play an important part, the way in which we experience an asset in its setting is also influenced by other environmental factors such as noise, dust and vibration from other land uses in the vicinity, and by our understanding of the historic relationship between places.
Setting of Headington Hill Hall 5.11.7 Historic illustrations record the views of Oxford that open up to travellers approaching from London. It is these views that influenced the siting of Headington Hill Hall, which, as it was expanded by generations of the Morrell family, effectively took control of the views, out of public access and into the private hands. In doing so and as the parkland trees began to mature it closed off views from some parts of Headington Hill. 5.11.8 Ordnance Survey maps 1876–1956-8 (images 5, 7, 8, 9 and13) and aerial images (figures 14, 15 and 16) (See Heritage Report Appendix 5.1), show that the historic garden and landscape
5-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
setting of Headington Hill Hall has changed over this period, and in particular has been radically changed, post-1960, when Pergamon Press moved onto the site, resulting in new buildings and car parking. 5.11.9 In the Post WWII period, the Estate gradually became divided with two public parks, South Park, across Headington Road, and Headington Hill Park being created to the west of the house and grounds, following the acquisition of the site by the Oxford City Council. The balance of the land both north and south of Headington Road forms the major campus of Oxford Brookes University. The land to the north, partly used for War and Government Offices with the remainder being Allotments, has been developed as the Clive Brooks Student Village.
Setting of the City 5.11.10 Oxford sits on a raised gravel terrace within the Thames Valley. This has the effect of raising the historic core above city’s suburbs and setting it up for long distance views from the hills surrounding the city. These viewing points outside the city have provided sources and inspiration for painters and artists to record the view and the viewing experience. Identified in Planning Policy in the 1960s there are now ten ‘view cones.' 5.11.11 Thus Oxford countryside provided locations for a series of views of Oxford as it was approached by travellers, just as it was a place to go out and find views of the city to enjoy and commemorate in verse or watercolour. Much of this historic sense of the place can still be appreciated despite all the changes in the city and its surrounding roads. Approach roads on Wytham (west), Hinksey (south-west) and Shotover (east) provided classic views of Oxford. At Elsfield (north- east) the spires could be seen from a rural retreat. The series of views of Oxford from the west, from Cumnor, Hinksey and Boars Hill were celebrated by Matthew Arnold and visited by literary pilgrims
5.12 The Proposed Development
5.12.1 The development proposal will involve the demolition of eight of the existing main accommodation blocks (C, F, G, H, J, K, L & M) and the ‘Steel House’, with a loss of 462 rooms, and a number of other ancillary buildings – totalling twelve buildings for removal overall. 5.12.2 The development proposal also involves the erection of twelve new buildings, containing 1035 rooms, to be built as two phases. Overall, this will represent a net gain of 573 student rooms. There will also be additional new social and ancillary service spaces within the new buildings, and the nursery that operates at the Site currently will be retained as part of the new development, within one of the new buildings 5.12.3 The scheme also includes a new ‘Welcome Pavilion’ (Building 5) near the John Garne Way site entrance and incorporates the provision of a new waste compactor and associated service compound on part of the Site
5.13 Effects
5.13.1 There will be no direct impacts on listed buildings or on Central (City and University) conservation area, but potential to impact on the contribution their settings make to their significance. 5.13.2 The Site falls within the Headington Hill Conservation Area and therefore has the potential to directly affect its character and appearance. 5.13.3 There will be short term effects, derived from demolition works, removal of trees and
5-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
construction infrastructure (cranes), and long-term effects derived from the replacement buildings, taller and at a higher density than existing, hard/soft landscaping and new tree planting.
Headington Hill Hall and Conservation Area 5.13.4 There is no evidence that the buildings at the Clive Booth Student Village, designed and constructed in the mid-late 80s and early 90s, are of heritage significance. It is not considered that the demolition of the existing buildings will have any adverse impacts on the setting of Headington Hill Hall, or on the setting of the conservation areas. Historically, they evidence the gradual colonisation of the slopes of Headington Hill, a process which began in the 19th century with substantial architect designed villas set in their own grounds. This took a change in shape during the war period with the military use of Headington Hill Hall and the development of new buildings at the Marston Roadside of the Hill. During the 1970s local community interest in preserving the verdant character of the Headington Hill led to the designation of the Headington Hill Conservation Area. 5.13.5 Early 18th century illustrations of the area show that when in agricultural use the tree cover was sparse (and views over the city more open). As the hillside was colonised so also the level of tree cover increased (much of it associated with the parkland landscape to the Hall). The recognition that the hillside provided a green backdrop to the city was not identified until the 1980s, by which time the tree cover had begun to mature. One effect of the increased tree cover was the loss of views over the historic city. The Site historically did not form part of the designed landscape to Headington Hill Hall, lying outside the walled enclosure of the Park, the land being farmed before being subdivided for development and use as allotments. It is thus not a part of the Hall’s original designed setting, though its student use and current built forms intrinsically link the Site with the University’s use of the Hall 5.13.6 From the documentary evidence associated with the designation and management of the conservation area it is clear that the City Council sought to find a balance between the tensions of preserving the rural character of the area and the demand for new housing to serve Oxford’s needs. This led to the endorsement of a policy that accepted new development on the hillside but intended to be delivered in a way that retained the rural character. 5.13.7 A similar tension exists with this proposed development - meeting the student housing needs of Oxford Brookes University and preserving the qualities of the conservation area. Some of the proposed new buildings will be taller and the density of the development greater than as currently exists. This has the potential to change the character of this part of the conservation area and the potential to erode the verdant character and that of the lanes that lead around the area. This tension is resolved by modulating heights of buildings and by careful siting of the individual blocks to allow the verdant landscape to remain dominant. The selection of materials and the proposed landscaping further help to mitigate any harmful impacts on the character or appearance of the conservation area. 5.13.8 As explained in the Design and Access Statement and Planning Statement the existing physical environment of the Student Village is poor. The layout and connectivity of routes does not integrate well with the surrounding routes and the there is a lack of any sense of place or local distinctiveness. This proposal offers the opportunity to raise the urban design qualities of the place and allow it to make a more positive contribution to the appearance of the conservation area. The Council’s conservation area appraisal notes that this part of the conservation area (No 6 Cuckoo Lane character area) is defined by the verdant qualities of Cuckoo Lane as it passes through the area from north to south – a historic route that has channelled views, a
5-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
sense of enclosure from overhanging trees and boundary walls and a sense of seclusion that separates it from the noise of and activity of a busy urban environment that is all around. As a part of the proposed development connecting to the existing verdant lanes and paths (Pullens Lane and Cuckoo Lane) gives opportunities for users to experience the ways in which the landscape of the Hill is managed – allotments, designed parkland and ‘natural’ woodland and to understand the history of its use. This also helps the new development to connect with the history of the place, representing the latest chapter in its evolution, retaining and benefitting from the existing verdant qualities of Cuckoo Lane. 5.13.9 The proposed development will change the qualities of this part of the conservation area for the better, contributing to the creation of a local student community that is physically better integrated with an improved sense of place. This will change the experience and understanding of the place, but not in a way that would be harmful. The existing built environment of the student village is poor. The fact that the Council’s conservation area appraisal is silent on its built environment qualities and sense of place evidences this and highlights the opportunities to create something better. In the way that the 19th century villa’s capitalised on the verdant qualities of the Hill when first developed – to create desirable residences in a ‘healthy’ environment so also this proposed development seeks to provide new healthy and safe living environment, defined and inspired by our understanding of the heritage values the Site possesses. 5.13.10 The increased height and density of development will have an impact on views from the Hill and towards the Hill. Throughout the design process the nature and extent of impacts has been fully considered and addressed. This approach seeks to achieve the objective set out in the NPPF to avoid or minimise conflict between the conservation of heritage assets and any aspect of the proposal. Assessment of the landscape impacts of the proposals on the identified views are covered in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Chapter 7) and also in the Appraisal of Effects on Views of the Historic City of Oxford in its landscape setting (Appendix 7.6), which considers the heritage impacts of the proposals on the views, as summarised next.
Setting of the City 5.13.11 The proposed development has the potential to affect the setting of the Central (City and University) Conservation Area and the setting of the listed buildings that contribute to the historic group of domes, spires and towers, an iconic characteristic of the city. The design process has sought to eliminate or minimise any harmful impacts. 5.13.12 The LVIA (LDA) and the Historic Views study (LDA and WA) discuss the contribution the application Site makes to the city’s landscape setting and the nature and extent of impact that would result from the proposed development. It is identified that there will be an impact on some of the views, but a minor or negligible impact. 5.13.13 In views from high points within the city (St Mary’s Church) the proposed buildings will sit below the skyline and not directly behind any spire, dome or tower (see Figure 7.8 LVIA Views). The view from St Marys (similar but less extensive views are possible from Carfax Tower and St Michael’s in Northgate) captures the city’s roofscape, as something that the viewer will focus on. The high viewing points within the city provide opportunities to understand the city in its historic valley setting with the tree-lined hills around it. Also in the view is evidence of how Oxford is growing and the measures taken to accommodate this development within its setting. With the exception of the John Radcliffe Hospital, which demonstrates the effects of siting buildings on the skyline and the visual effects of using light coloured building materials, new development has been absorbed in a way that ensures the verdant characteristics of the city’s setting remain
5-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
predominant. Though there is evidence of development, the muted tones of the building materials used help to ensure that those buildings are not strident or intrusive in the view. This is the approach being pursued here, acknowledging that there will some evidence of the development, but mitigating its impact by careful siting, selection of building materials and a robust landscaping scheme. 5.13.14 The effect of this on the views from the city’s high points and the contribution its setting makes to its significance will be sustained:
Views out illustrate the relationship of the historic core to its surroundings. This understanding will be preserved;
Views out illustrate the city’s landscape setting surrounded by hills. This aspect of its setting will be preserved;
Views out illustrate how the city’s suburbs in the 19th and 20th centuries have expanded the city’s boundaries. Understanding of the city’s historic and more recent development will be preserved. 5.13.15 The proposed development would form part of that history, evidence of the continuing colonisation of the hillside. 5.13.16 Where the development would be visible in the view (the extent of which will vary according to the seasons) its scale, mass, detailing and use of materials seek to minimise that impact and ensure that the development would not intrude in the view. 5.13.17 The extent to which the proportion of tree cover to roofscape would change is small in relation to the range of the view of the hillside. Where visible the new buildings would not create any focus to the view (indeed The JR hospital is an unwelcome focus) and the eye will still be able to wander across the view picking up small incidents of interest.
John Garne Way Allotments 5.13.18 It is clear that the City Council envisage change on the Site. As part of its recently adopted local plan the Site is allocated for student related development. The changes will be most evident in the more immediate views, in particular, from within other parts of the University’s site and from John Garne Way Allotments. This does not necessarily equate to harm to the affected heritage assets. 5.13.19 The Allotments and the lower part of the student village lie outside the Headington Hill Conservation Area. Of themselves they do not hold any special architectural or historic interest. The character of the allotments is one in which it is enclosed by buildings, although to the east the tree cover reduces the prominence of the Feilden Grove estate. As an area of land under cultivation, it is characterised by the absence of trees, whereas the nature of the conservation area is one that is characterised by tree cover. This means that from the far, upper part of the allotment there are views across it to the city centre. This view will remain. 5.13.20 The view across the Student Village is a changed view and of recent derivation. Arguably, the viewing experience is not one that could be described as positively contributing to the setting of the conservation area. It allows understanding of the treed back drop to the city and reveals some evidence of the development of the designed park to Headington Hill Hall, but the view over the existing student village detracts from that understanding and experience. Whilst the presence of built form in this view will be more evident than currently, the tree canopy along the skyline will still be visible. The effect will be to introduce a different experience to the immediate
5-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
view, with buildings of higher design quality, carefully sited to give variety and interest to the view with a materiality and supporting landscaping provision that will ensure that the development assimilates with its surroundings positively. The views from the allotment, north, east and west (which include views of surrounding built forms) will remain unchanged.
5.14 Mitigation
5.14.1 As set out in the Heritage Report (Appendix 5.1) and in the Design and Access Statement the design process has sought to mitigate or eliminate any adverse impacts by design – siting, heights, and use of materials and by landscaping. The design approach adopted, as explained in Chapters 3 and 4, has been founded on eliminating or minimising any harmful heritage impacts by design, exploring how to then mitigate any residual impacts, by landscaping.
5.15 Summary of impacts
Short term impacts. 5.15.1 There will be some harm to the setting of the conservation areas and the groups of listed buildings during the construction period, deriving from the removal of trees, views of construction cranes and scaffolding, the temporary effects on the sensory qualities of Cuckoo Lane from, for example, construction noise. Oxford’s skyline and views of it in its landscape setting have been marked by the presence of construction cranes, noticeably during the 1960s and also during the last 20 years. As ‘skeletal’ structures the presence of cranes does not generally block or dominate the views, they become part of it – marking the growth of the city and areas of re- development. In any event the impacts are temporary – for the duration of the development. Until such time as new landscaping and tree planting matures and performs the role intended the new buildings would be more visible than intended, though the level of impact would be very minor.
Long term impacts 5.15.2 As discussed above the proposed development will not result in harm to the defined character and appearance of this part of the conservation area. Indeed, it will result in improvements to the built quality of the student village. The increased height in buildings will have an effect on existing views, but that effect is very minor, intruding into, but not eliminating views of parts of North Oxford that are available only from the privately accessible Pullen’s Lane allotment. Other identified views from the Conservation Area would not be affected. In views of the Site from the hills around Oxford’s the impact on the contribution the setting makes to the significance of designated heritage assets would generally be very minor due to the combination of limited visibility, and that the proposed development would be similar to the current built forms within the Site. The roofs of the proposed buildings will be seen set amongst trees in some more distant views from slopes to the west of the city. However, due to the distance from the application Site, the scale of the proposals as seen in these views where they will sit below the treed skyline, is such that the development would preserve the contribution the green hills make to the landscape setting of the city. This is also the case for views from within the city, where the experience will be similar - views of roofs amongst trees set below the horizon-line. The view from St Mary’s is somewhat closer than the view from the western hills, such that the form of the buildings will be more easily discernible, marking the presence of the student village, but the buildings will not intrude on the viewing experience which is characterised by buildings of different types and ages in the view.
5-15
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
5.16 Cumulative Effects
5.16.1 Historic England point out that the development over time can cumulatively (and incrementally) erode the significance of a heritage asset and the contribution that its setting makes to its significance. In this instance, the character and appearance of the hillside as a green backdrop to the city will be sustained. The development where it will be seen will not have a cumulative effect with other development that is currently visible in long views from and across the city. From within the conservation area the proposals offer the opportunity to consolidate the existing development forms and pattern in a better considered and better designed manner. This would not have an adverse cumulative impact with existing development. The replacement Helena Kennedy Building may be visible in some of the views from the city’s high viewing points. The nature of the view would be similar to that of the recently demolished building and set within its own landscaped setting, thus maintaining the existing verdant qualities. The cumulative effect of the two developments would not undermine the contribution Headington Hill makes to the conservation area. 5.16.2 Two sites are allocated in the Local Plan in close proximity to the Site – Government Buildings and Harcourt House. These are both located to the south west of the Site adjacent to Marston Road, at or towards the bottom of the hill. Subject to the design, height and use of materials of any new buildings on these sites, any cumulative effect would not undermine the current contribution the verdant qualities of Headington Hill make to the setting of the city centre in views from high points within the city or from the hills outside the city. It is clear that the City Council envisage change on the site. As part of its recently adopted local plan the Site is allocated for student related development.
5.17 Conclusion
5.17.1 The Clive Booth Student Village was built in the 1990s to provide accommodation for the Oxford Brookes University, the headquarters of which are located in Headington Hill Hall, adjoining to the south. The use of this previously vacant land reinforces the important function of Headington Hill Hall as part of a premier tertiary institution. 5.17.2 Its re-development to provide increased accommodation will have no physical impacts on Headington Hill Hall and its landscaped grounds, nor the lodge and bridge within the grounds of the Hall, all of which are included in the National Heritage Register for England. 5.17.3 The increase in the height of a number of the replacement blocks will make the student village visually more prominent from within parts of the grounds of Headington Hill Hall and alter its current setting. This change, however, is not considered to materially impact on the identified heritage significance of Headington Hill Hall and grounds. 5.17.4 The existing development does not make a positive contribution to the appearance of the conservation area. Historically it is part of the colonisation of Headington Hill. This proposal seeks to reorganise this part of the student village to increase the provision of student accommodation, but in a way that will add interest and generate a sense of place. That will represent an improvement in the quality and character of this part of the conservation area. The increase in height of buildings will affect some views, but these views have already been effectively lost as a result of tree growth (creating a verdant character that it is desirable to maintain). 5.17.5 The hillside also provides a backdrop to the city, its green characteristics being an important component of the visual experience that allows understanding of the historic city in its landscape
5-16
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
setting. In views out from the city towards Headington Hill and across the city from the western hills the application Site represents a small component to the view where any change would have a minor or negligible impact on the appreciation of the hillside as a green backdrop. Table 5.1 Summary of effects Receptor Sensitivity Impact Mitigation Residual Significant / effect not significant
Construction phase Headington Hill Hall High Negligible None required Negligible Not significant Headington Hill Conservation High Minor None required Minor Not significant Area adverse adverse Central (City and University) High Minor None required Minor Not significant Conservation Area adverse adverse John Garne Way Allotments Negligible Moderate None required Moderate Not significant adverse adverse
Completed development Headington Hill Hall High Negligible None required Negligible Not significant Headington Hill Conservation High Minor Design, materials, Negligible Not significant Area adverse landscaping Central (City and University) High Minor Design, materials, Negligible Not significant Conservation Area Adverse landscaping John Garne Way Allotments Negligible Minor Design, materials, Negligible Not significant adverse landscaping
5-17
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
5-18
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6 Ecology-biodiversity
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 This chapter of the ES assesses the likely significant effects of the Development on the environment in respect of biodiversity and ecology. 6.1.2 This chapter has been prepared by BSG Ecology and makes reference to industry standard guidance on Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) published by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM, 2019). 6.1.3 It should be read in conjunction with the Ecological Appraisal Report (BSG Ecology, 2021a; Appendix 6.1). Update Ecology Surveys 2020 Report (BSG Ecology, 2020; Appendix 6.2), and the Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report (BSG Ecology, 2021b; Appendix 6.3).
6.2 Legislation, Policy and Guidance
Legislation 6.2.1 There are legislative requirements that are relevant to nature conservation, ecology and development. These are listed below:
The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006) The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2017) The Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, as amended). 6.2.2 Where relevant, this Chapter refers to Habitats and Species of Principal Importance; these are listed in response to the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. This list is used to guide decision-makers such as public bodies, including local authorities in implementing their duty to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity, when carrying out their normal functions, including development control and planning. 6.2.3 In addition, Government Standing Advice (GOV.uk) provides guidance and information regarding planning and the environment including biodiversity to those involved in decision making on planning and development. Gov.uk advises that planning authorities are required to use Natural England’s standing advice to review applications that may affect protected species and to take the standing advice into account when making this decision. Gov.uk also provides advice on protected species surveys, how they may use the Site and mitigation requirements. Standing advice is a material consideration in the determination of the planning application in the same way as any advice received from a statutory consultee (ODPM, 06/2005).
Policy and Guidance 6.2.4 There are a number of national and local policies and guidance documents that relate to nature conservation and ecology within the planning process that are relevant to the Development. As the planning application lies within the Oxford City Council (OCC) area reference is made to local planning policies for this area to provide an indication of the likely requirements and expectations of statutory authorities and others in relation to planning applications and nature conservation and ecology. The relevant national and local planning policies are listed below:
National Policy Planning Framework; Government Circular ODPM 06/2005 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; OCC Policy CS12 ‘Biodiversity’ of the Oxford Core Strategy 2026; OCC Oxford Local Plan 2036 policies:
6-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
o G2: Protection of biodiversity and geo-diversity o G7: Protection of existing Green Infrastructure features o G8: New and enhanced Green and Blue Infrastructure Network Features 6.2.5 Oxford City Council have also developed a planning application guidance document that is relevant to the development - Technical Advice Note: Biodiversity. 6.2.6 Policy CS12 ‘Biodiversity’ of the Oxford Core Strategy 2026 is particularly relevant to the mitigation hierarchy, which requires the determination of planning applications to: “Provide a hierarchy of protection for Oxford’s biodiversity resource” and “Protect and where there is opportunity, to enhance Oxfords biodiversity” via “on-site requirements, developer contributions, [or] other sources of funding.” The policy sets out targets for “no net reduction in BAP priority habitats and species [broadly equivalent to NERC Act (2006) Habitats and Species of Principal Importance]” and “No net reduction in areas designated for their intrinsic environmental value, i.e. SAC, SSSI’s, RIGS and locally designated sites”. The OCC website’s biodiversity page in reference to Policy CS12 states that development should:
“Be sensitive to potential impacts on biodiversity, and consider alternative designs or locations. Avoid damaging areas of nature conservation value (whether designated or not). Aim to minimise any unavoidable effects through appropriate mitigations. Offer compensation for those impacts that cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated. Seek opportunities to enhance biodiversity within new developments. Establish linkages between habitats to create functional ecological networks.” Biodiversity Action Plan for Oxfordshire 6.2.7 The Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) for Oxfordshire focuses on Conservation Target Areas (CTAs), of which the site does not fall within or adjacent to, and Oxfordshire BAP habitat targets, and lists UK BAP habitats and species that are present in Oxfordshire. 6.2.8 Habitats present at the Sites for which habitat action plans (HAPs) have been devised include ponds, woodland, and hedgerows (Oxford Nature Conservation Forum, 2018); local species plans which are produced in the Oxfordshire BAP and relevant to the site are limited to bats (Oxfordshire Nature Conservation Forum, 2018).
6.3 Survey
6.3.1 All survey methodologies used within the assessment followed the published guidelines as accepted by the statutory and non-statutory agencies, including Natural England (NE) and the Chartered Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM). This EcIA follows the standard current guidance in place at the time of writing in 2021, as set out by the CIEEM and recommended by NE.
Terminology and Descriptions 6.3.2 For the purposes of this assessment, the following terminology is used throughout:
The “Site” refers to the Application Site area, as set out in Chapter 2: Site description and local context in this Environmental Statement (ES). The “Proposed Development” refers to the planning application proposals as set out in Chapter 3: Scheme description, design iterations and mitigation.
6-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Data Sources and Guidance 6.3.3 Guidance documents referred to when undertaking the field work and Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) include:
CIEEM (2019) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom developed by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management; JNCC (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey - a technique for environmental audit; Collins (2016) Bat Surveys – Good practice Guidelines, 3rd Edition. Bat Conservation Trust; Oldham, R. S., Keeble, J., Swan, M. J. S. and Jeffcote, M. (2000). Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal, 10, 143 - 155. Harris S, Cresswell P and Jefferies D (1989). Surveying Mammal Society.
6.4 Survey Methodology
6.4.1 Baseline data used to carry out the EcIA were obtained from the following sources.
Desk Study 6.4.2 Species records and information on local non-statutory designated sites were obtained via a data search request submitted to the Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre (TVERC) in April 2017. Data were returned on 28 April 2017 (see 6.8.1 for context). 6.4.3 The desk study also made use of publically available internet resources including the Multi- Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) database, and Bing and Google maps to review Ordnance Survey maps and aerial photographs of the local area to provide contextual information, all of which were interrogated in April 2017 for the desk study. The MAGIC database was reviewed to obtain information on statutory designated sites, including internationally designated nature conservation sites (Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar sites) within 5 km of the Site boundary, and nationally designated sites within a 2km radius including SSSI Impact Risk Zones. Further information regarding these sites was then obtained where relevant from Natural England’s website (Natural England, 2017).
Field Survey 6.4.4 Extended Phase 1 habitat survey information was collected via surveys of the Site carried out by BSG Ecology on 12 April 2017 and 18 April 2017. A walkover of the site was undertaken on 15 May 2018, confirming that the site conditions had not changed. An update extended Phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken on 18 August 2020. A new area of the Site was surveyed on 17 February 2021. The Extended Phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken with reference to industry standard guidelines for Phase 1 habitat survey (JNCC, 2010). The survey was ‘extended’ to assess the potential of the Site and areas adjacent to the Site to support protected or notable species. 6.4.5 Protected species and botanical information for the Sites was obtained through a series of field surveys carried out by BSG Ecology in 2017 and 2020 (see Table 6.1: Ecology Work Completed at the Site). Reference was made to current survey guidance for relevant species and habitats to inform the survey methods and effort employed. 6.4.6 The baseline ecology survey work undertaken in relation to the Development at the Site is summarised in Table 6.1.
6-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Ecology Work Completed at the Site Ecology Work Details Ecological desk study Completed April – October 2017.
Extended Phase 1 habitat survey Fieldwork carried out on 12 April 2017 and 18 April 2017.
Assessment of habitat suitability for dormice, During Extended Phase 1 habitat survey in nesting birds, reptiles, and invertebrates. Search for April 2017. evidence of and invasive botanical species.
External preliminary building bat roost assessment Fieldwork carried out 12 April 2017 and February 2017.
Interior of building G preliminary building bat roost Fieldwork carried out 29 June 2017, internal assessment access to all other buildings not possible.
Preliminary ground level bat roosting tree Fieldwork carried out during extended phase assessment 1 habitat survey in April 2017 and on 26 September 2017.
Bat dusk and dawn emergence surveys Fieldwork carried out July, August and September 2017.
Automated bat detector surveys June, July, August and September 2017 (at six locations within the site).
Great crested newt habitat suitability assessment During the extended Phase 1 habitat survey in April 2017.
Great crested newt eDNA survey Fieldwork carried out 27 June 2017.
Walkover of the Site to confirm no change in Site 15 May 2018. conditions
Update survey 12 December 2018.
Update extended Phase 1 habitat survey 18 August 2020.
Update external building and ground-level tree bat 18 August 2020. roost assessment
Update Habitat Suitability Impact Assessment for 18 August 2020. great crested newt
Update bat dusk emergence surveys of buildings F, August and September 2020. G, H and J
Extended Phase 1 habitat survey of new area 17 February 2021.
Achieving a Net Gain in Biodiversity Value 6.4.7 Government policy as set out in the NPPF (2019) states that ‘planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment’ by methods including ‘minimising impacts on and providing net gains in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures’ (paragraph 170). Paragraph 174 builds on the broad elements of sustainable development highlighted in
6-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
paragraph 170 stating that plans should ‘identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity.’ In addition, the Oxford Local Plan 2036 produced by Oxford City Council states in Policy G2 that ‘Compensation and mitigation measures must offset the loss and achieve an overall net gain for biodiversity… this should be measured through use of a recognised biodiversity calculator [and] demonstrate an improvement of 5% or more from the existing situation.’ 6.4.8 The above method based on that set out for EcIA in CIEEM (2019) aims to assess effects on important ecological features. The effect on biodiversity more widely, including common and widespread habitats and species is difficult to assess through this method. Therefore, to ensure compliance with local and national government policy to achieve no net loss and a net gain of at least 5%, a biodiversity offsetting calculator has been used as a tool to determine whether the Development as a whole is likely to be compliant with government policy on biodiversity net gain. 6.4.9 In order to demonstrate measurable biodiversity net gain, the Defra Biodiversity Metric 2.0 has been used to calculate the biodiversity value of the Site both for the existing baseline conditions and for the post-development landscaping scenario. This enables determination of whether the Development is likely to result in no net loss, loss or gain in Biodiversity Units. The calculator is a metric used to numerically quantify the value of biodiversity at any site and can form an evidence base on required mitigation for a development, the amount of residual biodiversity impact and if necessary the amount of required compensation. Further details on the calculation are provided in the Biodiversity Impact Assessment Report (Appendix 6.3).
6.5 Assessment Methodology
Identification of Important Ecological Features 6.5.1 A first step is determination of which ecological features (habitats, species, ecosystems and their functions/processes) are important. Important features should then be subject to detailed assessment if they are likely to be impacted by the Development. It is not necessary to carry out detailed assessment of features that are sufficiently widespread, unthreatened and resilient to project impacts such that there is no risk to their viability. 6.5.2 Ecological features can be important for a variety of reasons and the rationale used to identify this explained below. Importance may relate, for example, to the quality or extent of designated sites or habitats, to habitat/species rarity, to the extent to which they are threatened throughout their range, or to their rate of decline. Determining Importance 6.5.3 The importance of an ecological feature should be considered within a defined geographical context. The following frame of reference has been used in this assessment:
International (European); United Kingdom; National (England); Regional /County (Oxfordshire); District (OCC area); Local (Headington to Oxford city centre and surrounding area); and Site. 6.5.4 Features, including those at the Local and Site levels, are included in the assessment taking
6-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
into account the CIEEM (2019) guidance with respect to the importance and significance of ecological features. In addition to designated sites, the CIEEM (2019) EcIA guidance (Paragraph 4.3 and Box 14) advises that important ecological features can include:
Habitats and species of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity listed on Country Biodiversity Lists (Listed under S41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006); UK and Local Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats and Species; and Red Listed, Rare and Legally Protected Species. 6.5.5 The CIEEM (2019) guidance (Paragraph 5.25) advises in respect of significance that: “A significant effect is simply an effect that is sufficiently important to require assessment and reporting so that the decision maker is adequately informed of the environmental consequences of permitting a project. A significant effect is a positive or negative ecological effect that should be given weight in judging whether to authorise the project: it can influence whether permission is given or refused and, if given, whether the effect is important enough to warrant conditions, restrictions or further requirements such as monitoring. A significant effect does not necessarily equate to an effect so severe that consent for the project should be refused planning permission.”
6.5.6 Therefore ecological features, including at the Local and Site Levels, are included in the assessment where their importance fits within that set out in the CIEEM (2019) guidance and their significance is such that their assessment allows the decision maker to be adequately informed of environmental consequences, either positive or negative, of the Development. Identifying Impacts 6.5.7 The impact assessment process involves:
identifying and characterising impacts; incorporating measures to avoid and reduce (mitigate) these impacts; assessing the significance of any residual effects after mitigation; identifying appropriate compensation measures to address significant residual effects; and identifying opportunities for ecological enhancement. 6.5.8 It is only necessary to assess and report significant residual effects (those that remain after mitigation measures have been taken into account). However it is good practice to make clear both the potential significant effects without mitigation and the residual significant effects following mitigation (CIEEM, 2019). This process of assessment without mitigation helps to identify necessary and relevant mitigation measures that are proportionate to the size, nature and scale of anticipated impacts. 6.5.9 The assessment only needs to describe those characteristics of impacts that are relevant to understanding the ecological effect and determining the significance. It should consider, as appropriate: direct, indirect, secondary and cumulative impacts and whether the impacts and their effects are short, medium, long-term, permanent, temporary, reversible, and/or irreversible. In this Chapter, positive effects are referred to as beneficial; negative effects as adverse. The assessment of impacts then takes into account the baseline conditions to describe:
how the baseline conditions will change as a result of the project and associated activities; and cumulative impacts of the proposal and those arising from other developments.
6-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6.6 Significance
6.6.1 The CIEEM (2019) guidance sets out information about the concept of ecological significance, such as that outlined above, and also how this relates to the ability to deliver biodiversity conservation objectives for a given feature. 6.6.2 Significant effects are qualified with reference to an appropriate geographic scale, and the scale of significance of an effect may or may not be the same as the geographic context in which the feature is considered important. 6.6.3 The nature of the identified effects on each assessed feature is characterised. This is considered, along with available research, professional judgement about the sensitivity of the feature affected, and professional judgement about how the impact is likely to affect the Site, habitat, or population’s structure and continued function. Where it is concluded that an effect would be likely to reduce the importance of an assessed feature, it is described as significant. The degree of significance of the effect takes into account the geographic context of the feature’s importance and the degree to which its interest is judged to be affected.
6.7 Mitigation, Compensation or Enhancement
6.7.1 Where significant effects have been identified, the mitigation hierarchy is taken into account CIEEM (2019). This sets out a sequential approach of avoiding impacts where possible, then applying mitigation measures to minimise unavoidable impacts, and then compensating for any remaining impacts. Once avoidance and mitigation measures, and any necessary compensation measures have been applied, and opportunities for enhancement incorporated, residual effects have then been identified and their significance assessed. 6.7.2 The potential impacts of the Development and subsequent mitigation are considered in relation to its two main phases: (1) the construction phase and (2) the operational (i.e. occupation) phase. 6.7.3 Certain environmental effects will be permanent. For example, permanent loss of areas of certain types of habitat to the Development may occur during the construction phase. Other effects may cease when construction activities are complete. 6.7.4 Where mitigation and compensation has been proposed, this is proportionate with the geographical scale at which an effect is significant. The CIEEM (2019) guidance provides the following advice: “mitigation and compensation for effects on a species population significant at a county scale should ensure no net loss of the population at a county scale. The relative geographical scale at which the effect is significant will have a bearing on the required outcome which must be achieved.” 6.7.5 The specified mitigation also takes into account the potential of the Site for ecological enhancement, and proposes appropriate and reasonable enhancement measures for all ecological features, whether these are necessary for mitigation purposes or not, as required under national and local planning policy.
6-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6.8 Assumptions and Limitations
6.8.1 Although records secured through the desk study and supplied by third parties provide useful background information and contextual information to inform the ecological baseline, they can include individual records supplied by members of the public or be the result of ad hoc surveys. The information can therefore help to inform the likelihood of a particular species being present in the area, but should not be relied upon to definitively or conclusively determine the status (presence or absence) of individual species. 6.8.2 The assessment is based on baseline survey results that are accurate at the time of survey. However, the baseline can change due to the high mobility of certain species (such as changes in land management and natural processes of vegetation succession. Baseline data for this assessment have been collected from numerous site visits in 2017, together with an update site walkover undertaken in May 2018, August 2020 and February 2021 by BSG Ecology. It is therefore considered that the status of the baseline data is up-to-date for the purpose of the assessment. 6.8.3 Two discreet sections of the Site were inaccessible during the surveys: the play area of the Nursery and the garden to the west of Steel House (total area less than 0.1 ha). It is considered that there is a low likelihood that any features of ecological interest were missed given the current amenity uses of these areas and their limited extent. 6.8.4 The roof voids of Buildings C, F, H, J, K, L, M, the office, the nursery, and Morals Bar were inaccessible during the preliminary bat roost buildings assessments due to their occupancy. Buildings A, B and the steel house were assessed as offering negligible potential for roosting bats. Building G only was accessed internally. 6.8.5 Automated bat detectors deployed at locations 3 and 5 failed to record in June, and the detector deployed at location 4 failed to record in August 2017. The level and coverage of the surveys undertaken on the buildings during the dusk emergence and dawn re-entry surveys is considered sufficient to have taken both the lack of internal access and automated detector failures into account and to characterise the use of the buildings, and the Site as a whole, by bats. 6.8.6 The bat survey on 19 August 2020 was preceded by a day of rain. Rain restarted 1 hour after the survey commenced and a decision was made to stop the survey 1 hour after sunset. This is not considered to be a limitation to the survey as emergence times for species considered likely to emerge from the buildings (e.g. common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle) were covered by the survey, bats were observed during the survey and an emergence was recorded. 6.8.7 In 2020 the new feature surveyed on Building H, a moderate potential building, was surveyed on two occasions at dusk. Due to the COVID-19 restrictions at the time, and for the safety of the surveyors, no accommodation was used and therefore a dawn survey was not possible. This is not considered to be a limitation as the feature on Building H was considered to be sufficiently surveyed during the two emergence surveys, which were timed at appropriate times of year and undertaken in suitable weather conditions. 6.8.8 During the great crested newt eDNA survey, the pond (Pond 1) in the northern part of the Site was dry and therefore could not be surveyed using this technique or traditional survey methods such as bottle trapping/torching. Pond 2 lies within 150m of Pond 1, in the south-western part of the Site, and Pond 2 gave a negative result from the eDNA survey. Taken together, the negative eDNA result for Pond 2, desk study records and the suitability assessment of the habitats present, it is considered likely that great crested newt is also absent from Pond 1.
6-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6.9 Baseline Conditions
Current Baseline 6.9.1 This section sets out a summary of the results of the relevant baseline ecological survey work and desk study. It then goes on to assess the interest of the identified ecological features. 6.9.2 Ecological features are considered in the following order:
Protected sites – both statutory (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or Local Nature Reserves (LNR)) and non-statutory (e.g. County Wildlife Sites (CWS)) protected sites; Habitats – including a description of the habitats present within the Site; including consideration of those habitats of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity in accordance with Section 40 and Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006 (Habitats of Principal Importance); and Protected or otherwise notable species – this includes consideration of those species protected under UK or EU derived legislation (e.g. bats) and consideration of those species listed as being of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity in accordance with Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006 (Species of Principal Importance). 6.9.3 It has been possible to “scope out” of the assessment, at this stage, several species and habitats that are not likely to be significantly affected (for example by virtue of their distance from the Development, or because they are very commonplace). Where it has been possible to scope out a particular ecological feature, this is described in the following text together with a clear rationale for doing so.
Designated Sites Statutory Designated Sites 6.9.4 Sites of Conservation Importance with the potential to be affected by the Development are listed in Table 6.2. There is one internationally designated nature conservation site within 5 km of the site and three statutory designated sites within 2 km of the site; these are two SSSI, one of which is also an LNR. Statutory Designations within the search radius of the Site Site Name Distance and Direction Description New Marston Approximately 530 m to A series of agriculturally unimproved neutral Meadows SSSI the west of the Site at its meadows on the flood plain of the River Cherwell closest point. which forms a natural corridor through the centre of Oxford.
Lye Valley SSSI Approximately 1.6 km to One of the best recorded examples of a calcareous & LNR the south-east of the valley fen in southern England. Site.
Oxford Meadows 2.8 km north west of the Designated primarily due to the presence of an Special Area of Site. Annex I habitat, lowland hay meadow, and Annex II Conservation species Creeping marshwort Apium repens. 6.9.5 The Site is located within the Impact Risk Zone (IRZ) for New Marston Meadows SSSI only. Non-Statutory Designated Sites 6.9.6 The TVERC provided records for 20 non-statutory site designations within a 2 km radius of the
6-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Site, as described in Table 6.3 below which shows the local designations in order of proximity to the Site (nearest first). Non-Statutory Designations within 2 km of the Site Site Type* Site Name Location Area (ha) Habitat Types Supported SLINC Headington Hill Lies partially within 0.5 Secondary woodland Viewpoint the north of the Site. LWS Milhamford Field and 0.25 km North 3.84 Lowland meadow Quad Conservation Target Thames and Cherwell 0.4 km West 660.36 Lowland meadows, wet Area (CTA) at Oxford grasslands, fen / swamp / reedbeds SLINC N/A 0.45 km West 1.68 Agriculturally unimproved neutral meadows LWS Great Meadow 0.5 km West 5.82 Wet woodland and scrub LWS Magdalen meadow 0.7 km South West 6.01 Lowland meadow SLINC Park Farm Meadows 0.75 km North West 8.36 Permanent pasture Potential Local Lye Valley and Cowley 1 km South East 2.11 Fen, wet woodland, Wildlife Site (p-LWS) Marsh proposed reedbed, lowland extension calcareous grassland. SLINC Oriel Wood 1 km South East 0.99 Secondary woodland SLINC St Cross Cemetery 1 km West 0.61 Rough grassland (part) LWS University Parks 1.1 km North West 28.97 Historic parkland Other (site type not Warneford Hospital 1.1 km South East 5.9 Rough grassland and given) Meadow and Orchard traditional orchard p-LWS Marston Brook 1.2 km North West 1.39 Lowland meadow Meadow SLINC Peasmoor Piece 1.2 km North West 1.25 Scrubby woodland LWS Lye Valley and Cowley 1.2 km South East 34.26 Fen, wet woodland, Marsh reedbed, lowland calcareous grassland. LWS St Hilda's College 1.4 km South West 0.45 Lowland meadow Meadow LWS Long Meadow 1.55 km South 3.32 Neutral grassland and fen West SLINC Bayswater Brook 1.7 km North 0.57 Stream (supporting water voles) SLINC Aston's Eyot and The 1.7 km South West 17.53 Unimproved grassland, Kidneys scrub and woodland SLINC Land at rear of former 1.8 km South East 0.63 Lowland meadow bus depot * Conservation Target Areas (CTAs), LWS, Potential Local Wildlife Sites (pLWS) (receive partial protection under local planning policy CS12), Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC).
Designated Sites Evaluation 6.9.7 New Marston Meadows SSSI is located 530 m to the west of the Site; the Site is located within the Impact Risk Zone (IRZ) for this SSSI. The IRZ indicates that residential development of 100 units or more requires further consideration with regard to potential indirect impacts. The development has been assessed as equivalent to 163 housing units (a net increase of 573 student bedrooms) and therefore the local planning authority (LPA) should consult Natural England on likely risks on the SSSI associated with the Development of the Site. The OCC, as
6-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
the main decision maker, will be likely to consult with Natural England to consider whether the Development is likely to affect the SSSI. 6.9.8 Natural England list operations likely to damage the special interest of the New Marston Meadows SSSI. One operation relative to the Development is listed: “Recreational or other activities likely to damage the flora or fauna”. This could include increased human presence for recreation resulting from the Development. Natural England detail that the site is managed via both grazing the sward as pasture and cutting it for hay. Natural England also summarise the site to be in ‘favourable condition’ (accessed 25 June 2018). As the site is in favourable condition and managed, and a review of OS maps and aerial imagery (accessed 07 June 2018) shows the SSSI has an existing established network of footpaths and cycle ways that would likely absorb any additional recreational use resulting from the Development, it is considered that impacts to the SSSI will be negligible. The New Marston Meadows SSSI is therefore ‘scoped out’ at this stage and is not considered further in this assessment. 6.9.9 Lye Valley SSSI is located 1.6 km to the south-east; due to geographical distance and the presence of several recreational spaces and New Headington providing a partial barrier to increased human presence from the Development, it is considered unlikely that the SSSI will be affected by the Development. In addition, a review of OS maps and aerial imagery (accessed 07 June 2018) shows the SSSI has an existing established network of footpaths and cycle ways that would likely absorb any additional recreational use resulting from the Development. It is therefore considered that impacts to the SSSI will be negligible. The Lye Valley SSSI is therefore ‘scoped out’ at this stage and is not considered further in this assessment. 6.9.10 The woodland in the north of the Site, which comprises part of the Headington Hill Viewpoint SLINC, is a non-statutory designation and is protected under policies in the local plan, as highlighted under Policy CS12 of the Oxford Core Strategy 2026 and shown on the ‘Policies Map 2013, North East and City Centre Inset Map’. The SLINC woodland is assessed to be of District level importance. No tree removal will occur within the SLINC and the SLINC with be retained under the current development proposals. The recreational visitor pressure as a result of the Development is not considered to be significant as well defined footpaths currently exist within the SLINC which is used recreationally. The Headington Hill Viewpoint SLINC is therefore ‘scoped out’ at this stage and is not assessed further. 6.9.11 The remaining non-statutory designated sites within the search area are not considered likely to be affected by the Development due to geographical distance and the habitat based nature of the qualifying habitat features. Such that additional recreational pressure as a result of the development is not anticipated be a significant impact, due to the existing number of amenity spaces in the local area to the site available for use.
Habitats 6.9.12 Habitats present at the Site are described below and shown on Figure 6.1. Full results of the Phase 1 habitat survey of the Site are reported in the Ecological Appraisal Report (Appendix 6.1), and Update Ecology Surveys 2020 report (Appendix 6.2). The results of the additional area surveyed on 17 February 2021 are included below. Buildings and hard-standing 6.9.13 A significant proportion of the Site is covered with buildings and their associated car parks, footpaths and access roads. The buildings are discussed further in the following sections, where their suitability for bats and birds are considered. The hard-standing areas are devoid of vegetation and, as such, are considered to be of negligible ecological interest. This habitat does
6-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
not have any conservation status i.e. it does not meet any of the priority habitat or HPI descriptions according to Maddock (2011). Amenity grassland 6.9.14 Amenity grassland is the dominant habitat present on the Site. The majority is used for informal green space. These areas are generally frequently mown resulting in a short sward of limited structure. Species that are present in most grassland areas include daisy Bellis perennis, common mouse-ear Cerastium fontanum, dandelion Taraxacum officinale agg., greater plantain Plantago major, creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens, cock’s-foot Dactylis glomerata, fescue Festuca sp. and bent grass Agrostis sp. Other species that occur locally within the sward include Germander speedwell Veronica chamaedrys, broad-leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris common ragwort Senecio jacobaea, thyme-leaved speedwell Veronica serpyllifolia, cat’s-ear Hypochaeris radicata and self-heal Prunella vulgaris. This habitat does not have any conservation status i.e. it does not meet any of the priority habitat or HPI descriptions with reference to Maddock (2011). Broadleaved Woodland and Scattered Trees 6.9.15 Secondary broadleaved woodland is present in the northern part of the Site which comprises part of the SLINC known as Headington Hill Viewpoint (see Table 6.3). This woodland is considered to meet the broad criteria for the ‘Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland’ HPI (Maddock, 2011). The trees are predominantly oak Quercus sp. with some silver birch Betula pendula. There is an established shrub layer consisting of yew Taxus baccata, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, hazel Corylus avellana, willow Salix sp., sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, elder Sambucus nigra and dog rose Rosa canina. The ground flora includes bramble Rubus fruticosus agg., broad-leaved dock, ivy Hedera helix, wood avens Geum urbanum, herb Robert Geranium robertianum, Spanish bluebell Hyacinthoides hispanica, cleavers Galium aparine, lords-and-ladies Arum maculatum, wood spurge Euphorbia amygdaloides and Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus. An area in the centre is used by the Nursery for play activities, and is predominantly bare ground. 6.9.16 The western boundary of the Site is predominantly formed by broadleaved plantation woodland. The south of the area, and a narrow strip adjacent to the car park in the north are mostly comprised of semi-mature trees, including poplar Populus sp., ash Fraxinus excelsior, willow, beech Fagus sylvatica, elder and oak. Bramble scrub is abundant here, with a ground flora including lords-and-ladies, common dog-violet Viola riviniana, common nettle Urtica dioica, and pendulous sedge Carex pendula with some ivy cover. 6.9.17 In the far north-east of the Site, a narrow woodland strip is present with a diverse range of young to semi-mature trees including cherry Prunus sp., hawthorn, elm Ulmus sp., blackthorn, oak, elder, sycamore, a willow species, hazel and Norway maple Acer platanoides. 6.9.18 There are scattered trees throughout the Site including oak, beech, horse chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum, sycamore, willow Salix sp. and a range of fruit trees Prunus sp. The scattered trees habitat does not meet any of the priority habitat or HPI descriptions. Tall ruderal 6.9.19 Discreet areas of tall ruderal vegetation are present in the north-eastern part of the Site, including along the northern and southern sides of a path that runs east towards Pullens Lane. Species present include broad-leaved dock, creeping buttercup, common nettle, red campion Silene dioica, teasel Dipsacus fullonum, dandelion and ground elder Aegopodium podagraria. This habitat does not have any conservation status i.e. it does not meet any of the priority habitat
6-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
or HPI descriptions. Scrub 6.9.20 Two small areas of bramble scrub are present in the north-eastern part of the Site. The area near the northern Site boundary is dominated by bramble but also includes cow parsley, hybrid bluebell Hyacinthoides sp., white comfrey Symphytum sp. and garlic mustard Alliaria petiolate. The area near the southern boundary (of the north-eastern part of the Site) is also dominated by bramble but also has blackthorn and honeysuckle Lonicera sp. with a ground layer of yellow archangel Lamium galeobdolon, ground elder Aegopodium podagraria and lords-and-ladies. A further area is present behind a wooden bike shed in the west of the Site. This is dominated by blackthorn, with abundant bramble and a single willow sapling. This habitat does not have any conservation status i.e. it does not meet any of the priority habitat or HPI descriptions. Introduced shrub 6.9.21 Predominantly non-native introduced shrubs are present as ornamental planting within the site. This habitat does not have any conservation status i.e. it does not meet any of the priority habitat or HPI descriptions. Ponds 6.9.22 A small pond, approximately 3 m by 5 m in area and 10 to 20 cm deep, is present to the south- east of Building C (this pond was dry during the survey on 27 June 2017). At the time of the survey it was noted as containing abundant leaf litter. Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus is present around the pond margin and no other aquatic plant species were present. Two willow trees on either side shade about half of the pond area. The banks are dominated by tall ruderal vegetation with docks, nettle and bramble. There appeared to be evidence of oil pollution on the water surface. 6.9.23 A ditch / linear pond approximately 20 m long and 2 m wide, with maximum depth 20 cm, is present in the south-west corner of the Site. This feature contains abundant leaf litter and twigs; the bank vegetation is dominated by ivy and cow parsley. 6.9.24 The ponds meet the broad criteria for the ‘ponds’ HPI (Maddock, 2011). Hedgerows 6.9.25 A recently planted hawthorn hedgerow (< 8 years) is present in the north of the Site, along the eastern side of Building A. A second unmanaged hedgerow approximately 5 m tall and 1 m wide, is present in the southern part of the Site. This runs in a southerly direction towards Cuckoo Lane. The hedgerow is dominated by hawthorn; other species present include cherry, yew and elder. Cleavers is present in the ground layer. 6.9.26 A third hedgerow / tree line, which is 2 m wide and 10 m high, is present near the south-western boundary of the Site. Species present include Wych elm Ulmus glabra and sycamore. 6.9.27 The ditch/linear pond in the south-west of the Site is bounded by a recently planted hawthorn hedgerow (<5 years). Close to this on the southern boundary of the Site is a laurel Laurus nobilis hedgerow, which is 1.5 m wide and 2 m high. 6.9.28 A continuous species-poor hedge is present on the north-western site boundary. This is dominated by hawthorn, with abundant ivy. 6.9.29 A highly managed ornamental hedge forms part of the north-western boundary of the Site. This is approximately 1 m high, and 35 cm width, and is a single species hedge of blackthorn. 6.9.30 All of the hedgerows are species-poor (and unlikely to qualify as important hedgerows under
6-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
The Hedgerow Regulations (1997) wildlife criteria) but they are considered to meet the broad criteria for the ‘hedgerows’ HPI (Maddock, 2011).
Habitat Evaluation 6.9.31 The hedgerows in the Site are categorised as HPI following the habitat descriptions of Maddock (2011). Hedgerows are listed as an Oxfordshire Local BAP habitat. This habitat also receives protection under Policy G7 ‘Protection of existing Green Infrastructure features’, which states that “Planning permission will not be granted for development that results in the loss of green infrastructure features such as hedgerows […] where this would have a significant adverse impact upon […] ecological interest”. The hedgerows are assigned Site level importance; this is due to a lack of species diversity and fragmentation via hardstanding and buildings in an amenity context. The hedgerows are assessed to be of Site level importance. 6.9.32 Both waterbodies meet the broad criteria for the ‘ponds’ HPI description (Maddock, 2011), however due to a lack of vegetation community, their seasonal nature, and their amenity setting, it is considered that the ponds are of local importance. Ponds are listed on the Oxfordshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Both ponds are at the periphery of the Site and offer habitat connectivity to off-site habitats in the local area. 6.9.33 The assemblage of scattered broadleaved trees within the site does not meet the HPI definition (Maddock, 2011) for ‘wood-pasture or parkland’ due to a lack of grazing animals, micro-habitats and open grassland. The trees within the Site are part of an important scattered tree network, forming an ecological feature in the local landscape offering ‘stepping stone’ habitat connectivity between the areas of broadleaved woodland at the north and south of the Site for various species including birds and bats, and across the wider landscape between Headington and Oxford City centre. The scattered broadleaved trees are considered to be of local value. 6.9.34 The majority of the habitats within the Site (amenity grassland, tall ruderal vegetation, shrubs, ornamental planting, scrub, buildings and hardstanding) do not conform to any of the habitat descriptions in (Maddock, 2011), are not considered to be local priority habitats in the Oxfordshire BAP and are of low intrinsic ecological value. These habitats are common and widespread in the surrounding area. Given this assessment, detailed consideration of impacts upon these habitats is not considered necessary and therefore these habitats are not considered further in this assessment. 6.9.35 The woodland in the north of the Site, which comprises part of the Headington Hill Viewpoint SLINC, is a non-statutory designation and discussed in the ‘Designated Sites Evaluation’ section above. The woodland has been scoped out of further assessment.
Species 6.9.36 Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre returned 1,995 records of 192 species within 2 km of the Site. Field study was carried out to further assess the presence/ likely absence of protected or notable species. Relevant protected and/or notable species that have potential to occur within the Site or be impacted by the development are discussed below, along with species that can be scoped out of the assessment. Bats 6.9.37 Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre provided 51 records of at least five bat species, information was not provided as to whether these records relate to roosts:
Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus: six records Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii: one record
6-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus: four records Daubenton’s bat Myotis daubentonii: two records Noctule bat Nyctalus noctula: one record Bat species: 37 records 6.9.38 Using the MAGIC Maps ‘Granted European Protected Species Applications’ search function within a 2 km radius of the Site, one common pipistrelle/ soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus non – maternity licence has been granted in 2016 for roost destruction at a distance of 1.9 km north east of the Site, and one common pipistrelle/ soprano pipistrelle licence has been granted in 2016 for roost damage 1.4 km west of the Site. 6.9.39 The area of woodland in the northern part of the Site which comprises part of the SLINC known as Headington Hill Viewpoint and the trees, shrubs and scrub located elsewhere within the Site may provide some commuting and foraging opportunities for bats. 6.9.40 The commuting and foraging habitat on-site forms part of a network for the local bat population linking the Site to foraging and commuting habitat in the local area. The north-eastern part of the Site falls within a wooded corridor that extends north to the B4495 Headley Way. The Site is also connected via a scattered tree network to the River Cherwell corridor and floodplain to the west which may also be used by foraging and commuting bats. 6.9.41 The preliminary building bat roost assessment, and subsequent dusk and dawn emergence surveys for roosting bats recorded:
One common pipistrelle roosting in Building G in 2017. One common pipistrelle in 2017 and one soprano pipistrelle in 2020 roosting in Building J. One soprano pipistrelle in 2017 and 2020, and two common pipistrelles in 2020 roosting within building F. 6.9.42 Each of these roosts are considered to be occasional day roosts supporting individual or very low numbers of bats. 6.9.43 During the preliminary ground-level tree bat roost assessment, one oak tree was noted as having moderate suitability for roosting bats in the south-west of the Site. One dusk roost emergence on 14 September 2017 and one dawn roost re-entry survey on 29 September 2017 were undertaken on the tree with reference to best practice guidelines (BCT, 2016), during which no bats were observed to emerge from or re-enter the potential bat roost features on the tree, suggesting the likely absence of roosting bats in the tree. Two trees in the north of the site offered low bat roosting potential and were not subject to further survey with reference to best practice guidelines (BCT, 2016). 6.9.44 In 2020 seven trees identified for possible removal were subject to ground level tree assessments, as documented in the Update Ecology Surveys 2020 report (Appendix 6.2). One oak tree in the north-east of the Site was identified as having moderate bat roosting suitability. During the Site visit on 17 February 2021, one poplar tree was identified as having low suitability. No further surveys have been undertaken of these trees to date as at the time of writing it had not been confirmed if they have been selected for removal. 6.9.45 Static bat detector surveys (detailed in the Ecological Appraisal Report (Appendix 6.1)) confirmed the wooded areas recorded the highest number of bat passes. The woodland in the northern part of the Site and the wooded areas adjacent to the southern boundary of the Site recorded the highest level of bat activity. The static bat detector surveys recorded the following species, with the relative abundance of each species expressed as bat passes recorded per
6-15
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
hour (B/h): common pipistrelle (20.73 B/h), soprano pipistrelle (8.75 B/h), common/ soprano pipistrelle (4.73 B/h), common/ Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii (0.26 B/h), noctule (0.05 B/h) Myotis sp. (0.01 B/h), brown long-eared bat (0.01 B/h), Nyctalus sp. (0.01), serotine Eptesicus serotinus (<0.01 B/h) and Leisler’s bat Nyctalus leisleri/ serotine (<0.01). Bats are therefore considered further in this assessment.
Birds 6.9.48 The TVERC provided 953 records of 77 bird species within the desk study area, none of which relates to the Site, many of which are from local amenity spaces. This included 25 Species of Principal Importance (SPIs) such as bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula, cuckoo Cuculus canorus, and dunnock Prunella modularis, and 18 species listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act such as red kite Milvus milvus, peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus and fieldfare Turdus pilaris. Dormouse 6.9.49 No records of dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius were returned within the search area. 6.9.50 Due to the presence of low diversity and poor connectivity of hedgerows the majority of the Site is unsuitable for dormouse. The woodland in the north of the Site which forms part of the Headington Hill Viewpoint SLINC offers suitable habitat for this species but will be retained in the development. Dormouse is therefore scoped out of the assessment. Great crested newt 6.9.51 The Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre (TVERC) provided 13 records of great crested newt Triturus cristatus within 2 km of the Site, all of which are from post-2004. The nearest of these records is from Peasmoor Piece in New Marston, 1.2 km north of the Site, recorded in 2015. 6.9.52 The terrestrial habitat suitable for great crested newt is limited to dense scrub, woodland and hedgerows, predominantly at the peripheries of the Site. The majority of the Site comprises mainly amenity grassland of short sward height fragmented by hardstanding. The habitat suitability assessment (Oldham et. al. 2000) carried out in both 2017 and 2020 categorised both ponds on-site as being of ‘poor’ suitability for breeding great crested newt. The eDNA survey of the pond at the south west corner of the site was negative, and the pond in the north east of the site was dry and could not be tested. It is inferred that great crested newts are likely to be absent from Pond 1 due to the low HSI score of the pond and the fact that Pond 2 returned a negative result for eDNA (as Pond 1 is located approximately 250 m away from Pond 2 it is likely newts, if present, would move between the two ponds). The desk study has also revealed that the nearest record of great crested newts is 1.2 km north (further than great crested newts are likely to travel), and the surrounding habitat is of low quality for this species. This species is scoped out of further assessment.
6-16
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Invertebrates 6.9.53 Seven hundred and fifty-one records of 69 invertebrate species, were returned within the search area including 47 Species of Principal Importance (SPIs) comprising three butterflies, one beetle, 41 moths, and two true flies. None of these records are within the Site boundary. 6.9.54 It is considered unlikely that the Site will support an important assemblage of invertebrates due to the limited habitat types, limited botanical species diversity, and lack of structural diversity recorded, primarily as a result of the current land management for amenity purposes. Invertebrates are therefore scoped out from further assessment. Reptiles 6.9.55 Seventeen records of grass snake Natrix natrix, one record of slow-worm Anguis fragilis and nine records of common lizard Zootoca vivipara were provided by TVERC. The nearest record of grass snake is from 0.3 km west of the Site dating from 2001. The common lizard and slow- worm records are all from Lye Valley c. 1.8 km south-east of the Site, the most recent records dating 2011 and 2001, respectively. 6.9.56 The Site is considered to have negligible potential to support reptiles as the predominantly short sward amenity grassland, buildings and hard-standing provide poor foraging and refuge opportunities for reptiles. Reptiles are scoped out of further assessment. Botanical species 6.9.57 One unidentified orchid was noted during the extended phase 1 habitat survey in an area of amenity grassland in the southern part of the Site. It is considered that this is likely a single occurrence seeded from off-site habitat, and the Site itself does not support a significant assemblage of orchid species as no other orchids were noted during the Site surveys. No other botanical species of conservation significance were noted during the surveys. 6.9.58 No invasive plant species were recorded on the Site. 6.9.59 Botanical species of nature conservation importance and invasive plants are scoped out of further assessment.
Species Evaluation 6.9.60 Due to their likely absence from the Site the following species have been ‘scoped out’ of the assessment and are not considered further as part of the assessment: significant assemblages of breeding birds and SPI birds, dormouse, great crested newt, invertebrates reptiles, and botanical species. Measures for nesting birds and are discussed further in relation to legal compliance; however these species are not significant in ecological impact assessment terms and they are also scoped out of the assessment. Bats 6.9.61 All UK bats are European protected species and all bat species which have been recorded in Oxfordshire are included in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan. Bats are partially protected under Policy CS12 ‘Biodiversity’, Policy NE.21 ‘Species Protection’, and Policy NE.23 ‘Habitat Creation in New Developments’, which detail vulnerable species should be protected and enhancements sought.
Roosting bats 6.9.62 A total of four common pipistrelle and three soprano pipistrelle bat roosts were recorded within the Site, each of which comprised a single bat. Pipistrelle species are the most common and widespread species in Oxfordshire. Common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle are both
6-17
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
common and widespread species in England; common pipistrelle populations are currently increasing, whilst soprano pipistrelle populations remain stable BCT (2017). The bats roosts at the Site are therefore considered to be of Site level importance.
Commuting and Foraging bats 6.9.63 The commuting and/or foraging bat species assemblage recorded during the static bat detector surveys was limited mostly to common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle with low levels of Myotis sp. , brown long-eared bat, noctule, serotine and Leisler’s bat activity. Of the bat species recorded; noctule, soprano pipistrelle, and brown long-eared bats are SPIs. Brown long-eared bats, noctule, common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle are considered common and widespread. Leisler’s bat and serotine are less common species in England, though their relative abundance at the site is low averaging <0.01 bat passes per hour compared to common pipistrelle which were recorded at 20.73 bat passes per hour. 6.9.64 The Site supports foraging and/ or commuting bats of common and widespread species and a low number of bats of less common species. Areas of woodland in the north and west of the Site and at the south Site boundary, and scattered trees, offer a foraging resource. An absence of other linear features (such as mature hedgerows, and rivers or streams), the current light levels, and the managed amenity nature of the grassland limit the quality of the Site for foraging and commuting bats. A geographical level of importance of Site level is assigned to the Site for foraging and commuting bats.
Future Baseline 6.9.65 The Site is currently providing student accommodation for Oxford Brookes University and the sounding habitats, such as the amenity grassland, are regularly managed. In the absence of the proposed development it is likely that the future baseline conditions of the Site would remain unchanged and the Site would continue to be used for student accommodation.
6.10 Development Design Mitigation
6.10.1 This section describes potential environmental effects of the Development in relation to both the construction and operational phases, taking into account incorporated mitigation (good practice) and design measures which are embedded within the design of the Development, as detailed within Chapter 3, Scheme Description. 6.10.2 Effects are described for each ecological feature (i.e. each site of interest, habitat or vegetation community, and species). They are assessed firstly in this section, with only incorporated (good practice) and design measures and then with mitigation measures. Residual effects, which are anticipated to exist following the application of mitigation measures, are identified. The significance of any effects is assessed at an appropriate geographical level using the levels of significance derived from the CIEEM (2019) guidance, and defined as significant where appropriate.
Incorporated Mitigation 6.10.3 The Development has been designed with awareness of ecological features throughout the timeline of the project. Impacts and likely effects on key ecological features have been considered iteratively as the Development has evolved, taking into account all relevant issues relating to the construction and operational phases. This approach means that the incorporated ecological mitigation measures form an integral part of the Development and these measures have been designed specifically to reduce ecological effects at the design stage wherever
6-18
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
possible. The aim of the strategy for ecology is also to provide a beneficial contribution to biodiversity by ecological enhancement wherever possible, in line with national and local policy and proportionate to the Development effects. The incorporated mitigation measures applicable to ecology are discussed below. Protection and management of habitats 6.10.4 Details of site work necessary to retain, create and manage ecological features during and after construction will be provided in an overarching Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and Landscape Environmental Management Plan (LEMP) for the Development. It is recommended that production of the detailed documents and their approval by OCC is subject to planning condition (An outline CEMP is included at Appendix 3.1). Protection of trees 6.10.5 The buildings have been repositioned at the design stage where possible to allow for retention of trees. The woodland within the north of the Site will be retained and not subject to tree removal. 6.10.6 As part of the incorporated mitigation any retained trees that lie within, or adjoin, the working area would be physically safeguarded using tree protection fencing and guarding to avoid harm to the trees. Avoidance of harm to birds 6.10.7 Active bird nests are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). In the absence of mitigation the development at the Site has the potential to result in an offence relating to nesting birds (e.g. destruction of an active bird nest during removal of habitat supporting nesting birds during construction). As a matter of legal compliance avoidance of nesting bird habitat (vegetation and buildings) removal during the nesting bird season (March to September) will negate this. If the avoidance cannot be carried out via timing of works, the feature to be removed will first be checked for active nests by a suitably experienced ecologist; if active nests are present, clearance works in the vicinity of the nest would need to cease until nesting has finished and the young have fledged. Nesting birds have been ‘scoped out’ of the present assessment, firstly because they are not assessed as ‘important’ in environmental impact assessment terms, and secondly because they are relevant in a legislative context which is dealt with in the mitigation described.
6-19
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Avoidance of harm to bats 6.10.11 One tree of moderate bat roosting potential was subject to two nocturnal surveys; no roosting bats were observed. However, as detailed in best practice guidelines (BCT, 2016) “In trees, it is very difficult to have confidence that roosts are absent and therefore, even where no bats are found, it may still be necessary to apply precautionary measures when carrying out tree felling or pruning activities”. Two other trees with suitability for roosting bats have not been assessed further. Should any tree with bat roosting potential be scheduled for removal or pruning works, the tree shall be reassessed, and further survey undertaken where required before soft felling techniques are used under the supervision of a bat licenced ecologist. Habitat re-instatement on completion of the works 6.10.12 Areas of amenity grassland removed or damaged during construction will be replaced with enhanced meadow seed mixes and their management included in the LEMP to maximise biodiversity gain. 6.10.13 The hedgerow and tree losses within the Site will be replaced with an increased diversity and number of native species of local provenance. A total of 202 new trees will be planted, which will result in a ratio of 2:1 between planted and lost trees respectively. Two hundred and ninety metres of native species-rich hedgerow will be planted to replace the 330 m of species-poor heavily managed hedgerow to be lost. Enhancement 6.10.14 The existing ground flora and grassland within the Site will be enhanced with diverse species mixes and sensitive management for biodiversity. Nectar-rich planting will be incorporated throughout the Development, such as in the proposed green roofs and embankments, species rich woodland ground flora, species rich grassland and species rich wetland and marginal planting. This will provide a resource for invertebrates, which in turn will provide a food source for birds and bats. 6.10.15 New tree and hedgerow planting will provide foraging, commuting and resting areas for birds, bats and small mammals such as hedgehogs. 6.10.16 A total of 42 bird nesting boxes will be incorporated into the scheme (equivalent to 1 per 250 m2 of building area). These will be provided on suitable trees and buildings within the Development, in a shaded position on a northern elevation at least 2.5 m from ground level. There will be a variety of boxes provided to suit different species. These are likely to include boxes similar to those as follows:
1B Schwegler nest box, (26 mm and 32 mm entrance holes) suitable for a number of garden and woodland cavity nesting birds such as great tit, blue tit, house sparrow and wren 1SP Schwegler Sparrow Terrace Woodstone swift nest box Vivara Pro Woodstone house martin nest 6.10.17 Specific enhancement for invertebrates will include a total of 21 bug hotels which will be incorporated into the scheme (equivalent to 1 per 500 m2 of building area). These will be located in a sunny, south-facing, sheltered position, close to nectar sources and will predominantly be of pre-formed hotels such as Green & Blue Bee Bricks and blocks, and National Trust Apex and Hexagon insect houses. However, a quarter of these will be created using wood and branches from felled trees which require removal to facilitate the Development. Other materials such as wooden pallets, bamboo canes, pinecones and bricks with holes will also be utilised. As well as
6-20
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
providing shelter and nesting areas for invertebrates, these will also benefit amphibians, reptiles and small mammals such as hedgehogs. 6.10.18 Whilst the bird boxes and bug hotels meet the provision for building area rather than floor space as detailed in the Oxford City Council’s Technical Advice Note on Biodiversity, the habitat enhancements as detailed above provide enhancement of greater value to wildlife and is therefore considered sufficient to meet requirements.
Potential Construction Phase effects 6.10.19 Potential construction phase effects include:
Loss of 81 trees due to the Development, and 20 trees due to poor health, which would result in a site level negative temporary effect. Loss of hedgerows which would result in a site level negative temporary effect. The destruction of three bat roosts as a result of building demolition and removal of scattered trees would result in a site level temporary negative effect for roosting, foraging and commuting bats.
Potential Operational Phase effects 6.10.20 Potential operational effects include:
Impacts on roosting, foraging and commuting bats as a result of increased lighting within the Site. This would represent a negative effect at site level. 6.10.21 The habitat losses identified for the construction phase remain in the operational phase of development. There are no additional habitat losses predicted at the operational phase. 6.10.22 The newly created habitats which form part of the development design will become established during the operational phase and provide long term compensatory habitats for species such as birds and bats. 6.10.23 A reasonably high level of confidence can be applied to each of the identified ecological effects during the construction and operation phases referred to above, however, where there is uncertainty about the predicted residual effects or the certainty of success of the design based or other ecological measures, this is reflected in the confidence level given to the assessment of significance of the residual effects referred to in the following section.
Features to be excluded from further assessment 6.10.24 At this stage of the assessment it is possible to scope out particular ecological features from further assessment of potential significant adverse impacts, taking into account the likelihood of an impact occurring, the evaluation of the feature, incorporated design mitigation and good practice measures during construction. 6.10.25 Ecological features to be excluded from further assessment and those to be taken forward within the assessment are summarised in Table 6.4 below. A clear rationale for excluding a feature is provided.
6-21
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of ecological features to be assessed or for which adverse impact can be excluded from further assessment Feature Evaluation Assess Scope Rationale out Statutory National The nearest SSSI site is in favourable condition and Designated managed, and a review of OS maps and aerial imagery Sites shows an existing established network of footpaths and cycle ways in the SSSI that would likely absorb any additional recreational use resulting from the Development.
Headington District No tree removal will occur within the SLINC and the Hill SLINC will be retained in the Development. Additional Viewpoint recreational pressure as a result of the Development is SLINC not anticipated to be significant as well-defined foot paths exist within the SLINC which is currently used recreationally. The CEMP will detail measures to protect the woodland from accidental damage during works.
All other County/ Additional recreational pressure as a result of the Non- District Development is not anticipated to be a significant Statutory impact, due to the geographical distance, the habitat- Designated based nature of the qualifying features and the number Sites (LWS/ of existing amenity spaces available for use in the local CTA/ SLINC) area to the Site.
Amenity Site These habitats do not conform to any of the habitat grassland descriptions in (Maddock, 2011), are not considered to be local priority habitats in the Oxfordshire BAP and are Tall ruderal Site of low intrinsic ecological value. These habitats are common and widespread in the surrounding area. Buildings Site and hard- standing
Scrub Site
Introduced Site shrub
Broadleaved Local Does not meet the HPI definition (Maddock, 2011). Scattered Replacement new tree planting will be undertaken on a Trees one-to-one basis, to comprise native species of high value including oak, birch, hawthorn and willow. Tree planting will be undertaken in proximity to existing wooded areas, to extend woodland cover and increase connectivity throughout the Site. The CEMP will detail measures to prevent damage to retained trees during the construction phase. See ‘Headington Hill Viewpoint SLINC’, which falls partly within the Site, for a summary of on-site broadleaved woodland.
6-22
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Feature Evaluation Assess Scope Rationale out Hedgerows Site Broadly meet the HPI definition (Maddock, 2011); however the hedgerows are not of high ecological value owing to a lack of species diversity, their heavily managed amenity nature, and their lack of connectivity which does not form a connected coherent habitat network of significance to wildlife commuting through the Site or local area.
Ponds The ponds will be retained as part of the design and protected during construction work; the CEMP will detail measures to achieve this.
Bats Site The Development will result in the loss of three bat (roosting) roosts of low conservation value.
Bats The Development will potentially result in the (foraging and degradation of foraging and commuting bat habitat as commuting) lighting is required for buildings adjacent the woodland and habitats at the Site peripheries.
Birds Site No evidence that SPI birds or significant assemblages of breeding birds are present at the Site. Nesting birds will be protected via the CEMP. On this basis, it is considered that significant effects will not arise and that birds can be scoped out of the assessment.
Dormouse N/A No evidence to indicate these species / species groups are present at the Site. Great crested newt These species / species groups are therefore scoped out of the assessment. Invertebrate assemblage
Reptiles
Botanical No evidence of invasive non-native or significant species assemblages of protected or notable botanical species is present at the Site. Botanical species are therefore scoped out of the assessment.
6-23
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Potential ecological effects and important ecological features taken forward for further assessment 6.10.26 After taking into account the Development design and good practice measures during construction; roosting, foraging and commuting bats are taken forward for further assessment.
Bats 6.10.27 The value of the Site for roosting, foraging and commuting bats is assessed to be of conservation importance at the Site level only, noting that the Site supports a typical assemblage of predominantly common and widespread bat species. Construction phase effects 6.10.28 Without mitigation during the construction phase there is potential for a significant direct effect upon bats associated with the roosting, foraging and commuting habitats through building demolition and the use of floodlighting if night working is required, and the temporary loss of habitats until compensation planting matures. It is assessed with a high level of confidence that construction phase effects upon roosting, foraging and commuting bats associated with the Site without mitigation will be significant and negative, but temporary, at the Site level only. A low level of confidence has been assigned to the effect of flood lighting as night working is considered unlikely. Operational phase effects 6.10.29 It is assessed with a high level of confidence that features important at Site level for foraging and commuting bats will receive an increase in the level of lighting in the operational phases. This will result from wall lighting and kick rail/bollard timber lights on buildings and along paths immediately adjacent to woodland in the north of the Site and west of the Site and column lighting and kick rail/bollard timber lights adjacent to woodland in the south of the Site. The assemblage of bat species recorded using the Site includes a very low proportion of light sensitive species (<0.01% of bat passes recorded) including myotis bats and brown long eared bat. Therefore, it is anticipated that the long-term operational effects upon foraging and commuting bats associated with the Site in the absence of mitigation will be significant and negative at Site level due to lighting.
6.11 Mitigation
6.11.1 This section of the chapter summarises mitigation or other measures (including compensation measures) which are proposed to reduce significant environmental effects on foraging and roosting bats associated with the Site. 6.11.2 Ecological measures are used to address the significant effects on the integrity and conservation status of the important ecological feature. Mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures are defined by CIEEM (2019) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment:
Mitigation includes measures to avoid or reduce the potentially negative impacts of a project; Compensation describes measures taken to make up for residual effects resulting in the loss of, or permanent damage to, ecological features despite mitigation; and Enhancement is the provision of new benefits for biodiversity that are additional to those provided as part of mitigation or compensation measures, though they can be complimentary.
6-24
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Construction Phase Mitigation 6.11.3 Night working during construction that requires artificial lighting within the active bat season (April to October, inclusive) will be avoided as far as possible. 6.11.4 If night working is required, the key areas of bat foraging and commuting habitat identified will be avoided via the use of directional flood lighting. These areas comprise the SLINC woodland in the north of the Site, woodland in the west of the Site, the site boundary habitats including the woodland adjacent to the south Site boundary, and retained mature trees. This will be detailed in the CEMP for the Site. 6.11.5 A European Protected Species Mitigation (EPSM) licence for bats from Natural England will be required to enable demolition works affecting the bat roosts to proceed lawfully. Details of the timings of works, working methods during construction and appropriate roost compensation (see ‘compensation’ below) for the permanent loss of bat roosts will be described within the EPSM. 6.11.6 The roosting bats within the Site will be addressed in the EPSM as a matter of legal compliance and their favourable conservation status at the Site in relation to the development secured. Compensation 6.11.7 The EPSM for bats will include the installation of up to six 1FF Schwegler bat boxes (or similar) on retained mature trees (location and positioning to be agreed by a suitably qualified ecologist). 6.11.8 The bat boxes within the Site will compensate for the loss of roost sites within the buildings at the Site. The inclusion of tree species in the planting scheme with high biodiversity value (such as oak and willow) which readily develop bat roosting features (such as woodpecker holes, lifted bark, etc.), offer a long-term solution and net gain of bat roosting features within the Site. Enhancement 6.11.9 There are no enhancement measures proposed during the construction phase of the Development.
Operational Phase Mitigation 6.11.10 During the operational phase, unnecessary or excessive lighting will be avoided, particularly adjacent to existing semi-natural habitat, such as the woodland in the northern and western parts of the Site and wooded areas adjacent to the southern boundary of the Site. Unnecessary or excessive lighting in areas of new habitat or in proximity to installed bat boxes will also be avoided. 6.11.11 Light spillage onto sensitive habitats including the woodland in the north and west of the Site and the southern boundary of the Site will be minimised by following best practice guidance (ILP, 2018) and adopting the following methods:
Use of low level downward directional lighting to retain darkness above. Fitting lighting near sensitive habitats with either motion-sensitive timers or user operated timers. Limiting the height of the lighting columns and use of a focused downward pointing beam to minimise light spillage into adjacent areas used by bats (use cowls as necessary). Avoiding the use of blue-white (short wavelength) lights, as these can attract insect prey of bats away from key foraging areas. Use of warm-white (long wavelength, ideally
6-25
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
<2700Kelvin) lights is preferred. Increased spacing between light units will reduce the intensity and spread of light, thereby minimising the area illuminated. Use of the lowest lux of lighting possible to meet the design requirements. Compensation 6.11.12 There are no compensation measures proposed during the operational phase of the Development. Enhancement 6.11.13 The additional habitats created will serve to increase the prey (invertebrate) assemblage at the Site for bats. 6.11.14 A total of 21 bat roost boxes will be incorporated into the scheme (equivalent to 1 per 500 m2 of building area). These will be provided on/in suitable trees and buildings within the Development, on a south-east to south-west elevation at least 4 m from ground level. There will be a variety of boxes provided. These are likely to include boxes similar to those listed below:
Beaumaris Woodstone bat box. 2 F Schwegler bat box. 1FF Schwegler bat box. Habibat bat box.
6.12 Residual Effects
6.12.1 This section describes the significant residual effects on the important ecological features described (foraging and commuting bats) following the implementation of the mitigation (and other measures) described above. Positive residual effects arising from incorporated design are also considered. 6.12.2 A high level of confidence can be applied to the identified significant ecological effects during the construction and operation phases, as discussed above. Where there is uncertainty about the predicted residual significant effects or the certainty of success of mitigation or other ecological measures, this is reflected in the confidence level given to the assessment of significance of the residual effects.
Construction phase 6.12.3 There will be no significant residual effects on bats during the construction phase as a result of lighting in accordance with the CEMP. There will be a significant site level temporary negative effect on bats during the construction phase via a loss of foraging and commuting habitat resulting from tree loss. This effect will not be residual into the operational phase once planting has matured.
Operational Phase 6.12.4 There will be a significant temporary site level negative effect on bats during the time frame between habitat loss and the time it takes for created habitats to mature. This is not considered a long-term residual effect. 6.12.5 There will be a significant site level permanent beneficial effect on bats in the long term once the created habitats, of increased biodiversity value, have matured due to the anticipated increase in habitat structure and prey source (invertebrate) species assemblage. The provision of bat roosting opportunities will also be beneficial to bats in the long-term.
6-26
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Ensuring Delivery of Mitigation, Compensation and Enhancement 6.12.6 It is intended that details of the designed-in and additional mitigation measures will be provided in a CEMP covering the construction phase, and within a LEMP, covering the management and aftercare of the Development after construction, as appropriate. The detailed CEMP and the LEMP will be produced with joint input from a landscape architect and an ecologist. It is anticipated that the production of both documents will be subject to a planning condition requiring them to be produced to the satisfaction of OCC. The planning condition should ensure that together, the LEMP and CEMP must cover, and set out in detail, all ecology mitigation proposed in this ES.
6.13 Implications of Climate Change
6.13.1 The implications of climate change on bats (roosting, commuting, and foraging) have been considered, using the UK CP18 climate change projections, with a high-level assessment undertaken for the 2020s (the construction period); the 2050s (medium term); and the 2080s (long-term). The projections show a progressive increase in mean air temperature during summer and winter, a reduction in the rate of precipitation during the summer months but an increase during the winter months, with a slight reduction in average wind speed in the summer and a small increase during the winter. 6.13.2 It is not considered that the potential change in climate will alter the effects on bats as identified as a result of the Development. However, in general climate change has the potential to impact bats such as through overheating in roosting sites and a reduction in invertebrate prey, however the enhancements provided as a result of the Development including provision of additional roosting sites in a variety of locations, soft landscaping designed to provide nectar sources and provision of bug hotels, is likely to help mitigate these impacts to a degree in the immediate vicinity of the Development.
6.14 Cumulative Effects
6.14.1 The potential for cumulative effects has been considered in relation to the following developments:
18/00872/FUL | Demolition of existing Helena Kennedy building, and erection of replacement academic building for the Faculty of Technology, Design, and Environment | Helena Kennedy Centre Headington Hill Oxford OX3 0BT. Clive Booth Pedestrian Link | Alterations to the footpath connection to the Headington Hill Hall site, including alterations to boundary wall and railings, new surface treatments etc. Oxford City Council Local Plan Policy SP 16: Government Buildings and Harcourt House | Proposed residential development, with a minimum of 70 homes, student accommodation and academic institutional uses at the Government Buildings and Harcourt House site. 6.14.2 Development at the Helena Kennedy Centre has commenced, with the demolition of the existing building complete. The potential ecological impact of this scheme was considered in a bat survey report (BSG Ecology, 2018) which included details of a sensitive lighting scheme to be adopted to minimise the effects of light spill. It was concluded there would be no impacts on commuting or foraging bats. Considering the application of the lighting scheme proposed within the proposed Development and the 18/00872/FUL planning consent, there are no anticipated cumulative effects. 6.14.3 The ecological impacts of the proposed pedestrian link between Clive Booth and Headington
6-27
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Hall have been considered (BSG Ecology, 2021c). In the absence of a mitigating lighting strategy, it was considered there was potential for the disturbance to foraging and/or commuting bats through the woodland. Proposals are for low column lighting, which is to be restricted to the pathways. This will mitigate disturbance, and as such there are no anticipated cumulative effects with the proposed Development. 6.14.4 No proposals are in place for the development identified by OCC Local Plan Policy SP16. The allocation is adjacent to the Site, and assuming national and local planning policy and legislation in relation to bats is adhered to, with appropriate mitigation provided for bats where necessary (including lighting and retention of bat commuting and foraging habitat) there are no anticipated cumulative effects associated with the proposed Development and the allocated site.
6.15 Change in Biodiversity Value
6.15.1 The current and potential future biodiversity value of the proposed developments was evaluated by use of DEFRA’s Biodiversity Metric 2.0. 6.15.2 The full net gain assessment report and calculator are included as Appendix 6.3 with methods, results and justification. 6.15.3 The calculations provided an overall 11.87 % habitat net gain and 13.64 % hedgerows net gain for the Site, post development, which is in line with paragraph 170 of the NPPF and Local Planning policy G2.
6.16 Summary
6.16.1 An ecological assessment of the Site was conducted in 2017, and updated in 2018, 2020 and 2021, including a desk study, extended Phase 1 habitat survey, and further ecological surveys for protected species. 6.16.2 The desk study identified that there is one internationally designated nature conservation site within 5 km of the Site, three statutory designated sites within 2 km of the Site, and 20 non- statutory site designations within a 2 km radius of the Site. All were ‘scoped out’ at an early stage of the assessment, with any impacts arising from the Development not anticipated to be significant. 6.16.3 The extended Phase 1 habitat surveys found that the Site is dominated by buildings and hardstanding, surrounded by amenity grassland with broadleaved scattered trees. The Site also supports, among other habitats, broad-leaved woodland, two ponds and species-poor hedgerows. 6.16.4 Surveys for protected species found that the Site supports bat roosts in Buildings G, J and F. Preliminary ground-level tree bat roost assessments also identified a small number of trees with suitability for roosting bats. There is no evidence to indicate that other protected species are present at the Site, and no significant assemblages of other species groups such as birds or invertebrates are present. 6.16.5 The initial findings of the ecology work were carefully considered and the mitigation hierarchy of avoid, mitigate and compensate was used to minimise impacts of the Development. As such it was possible to exclude features from further assessment. Bat roosting, foraging and commuting were considered further for construction and operational phase effects. Mitigation measures for these effects have been proposed to ensure compliance with protected species legislation.
6-28
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6.16.6 It has been possible to incorporate mitigation, compensation or enhancement measures within the Development for the anticipated significant effects, and therefore as a result, there are no significant negative residual impacts predicted. 6.16.7 In addition, enhancements for biodiversity, both floral and faunal, in the form of hedgerow and tree planting, grassland creation, pond creation and enhancement has been incorporated into the Development. Provision of bat and bird boxes and invertebrate hotels for specific species enhancement is also outlined. 6.16.8 A net gain of 11.87 % of area habitats and 13.64 % of hedgerows will be achieved. This will increase the biodiversity value of the Site in the long term via habitat creation (scattered trees, species rich grassland, species rich hedgerow, and shrub planting) and associated management as secured through the LEMP, and will also bring a long term local benefit to protected species currently present at the Development and within the local area. 6.16.9 Given the mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures incorporated into the Development, it is considered that the Development will have no significant adverse residual effects. A summary of effects is provided in Table 6.5. There will be beneficial residual effects as a result of the Development through a net gain in biodiversity and protected species populations. It is considered that the Development conforms to relevant national and local planning policy and relevant wildlife legislation as set out in the ‘Legislation, Policy and Guidance’ section of this Chapter.
6-29
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of effects Important Ecological Sensitivity of Nature of potential Proposed mitigation Residual effect Significant / Feature Important impact not significant Ecological Feature
Construction phase Bats (roosting) Site Negative: Loss of - A European Protected Species None Not significant roosting from Mitigation (EPSM) licence for bats from building demolition Natural England will be required to enable demolition works affecting the bat roosts to proceed lawfully. - Appropriate roost compensation will be provided, with provision of up to six 1FF Schwegler bat boxes. Bats (foraging and Site Negative: temporary - Avoid night-working. None Not significant commuting) disturbance and/or - If night working is required, lighting is loss of foraging and to be directional. commuting as a result of floodlighting. Bats (foraging and Site Negative: temporary - New planting of trees and other Temporary residual Significant commuting) loss of habitats. habitats to replace those lost effect whilst temporary site planting is level negative maturing. effect
Operational phase Bats (foraging and Site Negative: temporary - New planting of trees and other Temporary residual Significant commuting) loss of habitats. habitats to replace those lost effect whilst temporary site planting is level negative maturing. effect Bats (foraging and Site Negative: - Unnecessary or excessive lighting will None Not significant commuting) Disturbance and/or be avoided. loss of foraging and - Lighting will follow good practice commuting as a lighting guidance result of increased lighting.
6-30
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6.17 References
Bat Conservation Trust (2018). The National Bat Monitoring Programme. Annual Report 2017. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Available at http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/nbmp_annual_report.html BSG Ecology (2018) Replacement Building Headington Hill. Bat Survey Report. BSG Ecology (2019) Clive Booth Student Village – Impact Assessment and Mitigation Strategy. BSG Ecology (2020) Clive Booth Student Village, Oxford Brookes University: Update Ecology Surveys 2020. BSG Ecology (2021a) Clive Booth Student Village, Oxford Brookes University: Ecological Appraisal. BSG Ecology (2021b) Clive Booth Student Village, Biodiversity Impact Assessment. BSG Ecology (2021c) Clive Booth Student Village, Pedestrian Link, Ecological Appraisal. CIEEM (2019) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine. Version 1.1. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester. ILP (2018) Bats and artificial lighting in the UK. Bats and the built environment series. Guidance Note 08/18. Oldham R.S., Keeble J., Swan M.J.S. & Jeffcote M. (2000). Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal 10 (4), 143-155. Oxford City Council. Technical Advice Note: Biodiversity. Planning Application Guidance. Oxford City Council (2011) Oxford Core Strategy 2026 Oxford City Council (May 2018) Biodiversity and Planning. < https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20000/planning/741/biodiversity_and_planning>. Accessed 24/05/2018. Oxford City Council (Adopted June 2020) Oxford Local Plan 2036 Oxfordshire Nature Conservation Forum (2018) Oxfordshire Habitat Action Plans Oxfordshire Nature Conservation Forum (2018) Oxfordshire Species Action Plans.
6-31
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
6-32
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
7.1 Introduction
Background 7.1.1 LDA Design was commissioned to carry out a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) of the proposed redevelopment of Clive Booth Student Village (CBSV), Headington, Oxford, hereafter referred to as "the Site". 7.1.2 The findings of this LVIA are presented in this chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES). Reference is made to appendices in support of the LVIA which include details of the methodology used in the assessment, a glossary of key terms, national planning policy and figures. Reference is also made to a separate appraisal of the effects of the proposed development on Views of the Historic City of Oxford in its Landscape Setting. 7.1.3 The LVIA defines the existing landscape and visual baseline environments; assesses their sensitivity to change; describes the key landscape and visual related aspects of the proposed development and the nature of the anticipated change upon both the landscape and visual environments; and assesses the effects during construction, the period following completion (prior to the maturing of mitigation planting) and the permanent effects once mitigation planting is mature. 7.1.4 This LVIA serves as a new assessment of the revised proposals of CBSV, which was originally refused by Oxford City Council in 2018 (Local Planning Application Reference 18/02587/FUL). LDA Design has worked closely with the consultant design team to ensure the revised proposals responds well to the landscape and visual context and addresses the reasons for refusal in relation to the original planning application. 7.1.5 The key design features of relevance to the landscape and visual context are set in Section 7.5. The Proposed Development of this chapter. Full details of the proposed development are presented in Chapter 3 of the ES, with further details regarding the design of the proposed development set out in the Design and Access Statement (DAS) which accompanies this planning application.
The Site and Proposals 7.1.6 Figure 7.1 illustrates the Site within its wider context, while Figure 7.2 illustrates the local context. The Site is located at the existing CBSV, which is situated within the Headington area of Oxford. The Site lies east of Marston Road and to the north of Headington Hill Hall, Headington Road / London Road. It is located entirely within the administrative area of Oxford City Council. 7.1.7 The Site, which is approximately 4.8 hectares in area, forms part of the undergraduate accommodation with CBSV for Oxford Brookes University Campus. It presently comprises a series of 14 student residential blocks that are 2-3 storey in height, alongside ancillary facilities such as service buildings, student bar and a children's nursery. Paved footpaths and roadways; surfaced car parking; and areas of amenity grass and semi-mature trees are also characteristic of the Site. Part of an area of semi-natural broadleaved woodland occupies the northern part of the Site. 7.1.8 Immediately west of the Site is the Clive Booth Postgraduate Halls and remainder of the CBSV. An established belt of trees defines the majority of the western boundary of the Site. To the north of the Site is the John Garne Way Allotments and the curtilage of residential properties off
7-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Feilden Grove and Pullens Field. East of the Site is Pullen’s Lane beyond which is the EF International Language Campus. Cuckoo Lane, a Public Right of Way (PRoW), defines part of the southern boundary of the Site along with the boundary of the adjacent Pullen’s Lane Allotments. South of Cuckoo Lane is Headington Hill Park. 7.1.9 There are no Definitive PRoWs crossing the Site. A PRoW follows Cuckoo Lane (Ref. 320/32/10)1 between Marston Road and Pullen’s Lane which in part defines the southern boundary of the Site. 7.1.10 The Site is located within the Headington Conservation Area. This is a planning designation that seeks to provide control over the built environment, but which also has provision for tree protection. The effect of this on the owners, managers or any persons wishing to undertake work on trees sited within a Conservation Area is to require them to submit 6 weeks written notice detailing the surgery or felling they plan to undertake. Effects on the Conservation Area are considered in Chapter 5 - Built Heritage. 7.1.11 The proposals are to demolish twelve existing buildings and construct 12 new buildings to provide student accommodation, along with ancillary communal / social facilities; associated administrative building; and a children's nursery. Two existing residential blocks and areas of established tree planting will be retained. Vehicular access would continue to be provided from John Garne Way and enhanced pedestrian routes would be provided through the Site, linking with John Garne Way, Pullens Lane, Cuckoo Lane and the Headington Hill Campus.
The Study Area 7.1.12 It is accepted practice within landscape and visual assessment work that the extent of the study area for a development proposal is broadly defined by the visual envelope of the proposed development Site and the anticipated extent of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) arising from the development itself. In this case, and based on the ZTV study and site visits, a study area of 5km has been judged to be appropriate, to cover all potentially material impacts. The study area is illustrated on Figure 7.1. 7.1.13 The extent of the 5km study area used for this application is based on the previous accepted LVIA study area agreed to in 2018.
Chapter Structure & Terminology 7.1.14 This assessment relates to a predominantly urban area, and in this context the term ‘townscape’ is generally more applicable than ‘landscape’. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition (GLVIA3) defines townscape as “…the landscape within the built-up area, including the buildings, the relationship between them, the different types of urban open spaces, including green spaces and the relationship between buildings and open spaces”. 7.1.15 GLVIA3 does not differentiate between approaches to assessment for areas of landscape and townscape and in this LVIA the word ‘landscape’ should be taken to also include ‘townscape’. 7.1.16 Supporting appendices have been prepared that supplement the sections regarding methodology, planning policy and baseline. The appendices are important to the assessment and should be read alongside this chapter. A Glossary of key landscape and visual terminology is also included at Appendix 7.1 and References are set out in Section Error! Reference source not found.. All Figures are visualisations are presented in Appendix 7.7.
1. https://www2.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/definitive-map-and-statement-online (accessed 16 March 2021)
7-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.2 Methodology
Overview 7.2.1 GLIVA 3 states in paragraph 1.1: “Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment is a tool used to identify and assess the significance of and the effects of change resulting from development on both the landscape as an environmental resource in its own right and people’s views and visual amenity.” (GLVIA 3, para. 1.1).
7.2.2 Paras. 2.20-2.22 of the same guidance indicate that the two components (assessment of landscape effects, and assessment of visual effects) are “related but very different considerations”. 7.2.3 The assessment method for this LVIA draws upon the established GLVIA3 (Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management Assessment, 2013); An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Natural England, 2014), Landscape Institute Technical Information Note (LI TIN) 05/2017 regarding townscape character; LI TGN 02/2019 Residential Visual amenity assessment (RVAA); LI Technical Guidance Note 06/19 Visual Representation of development proposals. 7.2.4 The methodology is described in more detail in Appendix 7.2.
Assessment Terminology and Judgements 7.2.5 A full glossary is provided in Appendix 7.1. The key terms used within this assessment are:
Susceptibility and Value – which contribute to Sensitivity of the receptor; Scale, Duration and Extent - which contribute to the Magnitude of effect; and Significance. 7.2.6 These terms are described in more detail below. Sensitivity of the Receptor Susceptibility of the receptor Susceptibility indicates the ability of a landscape or visual receptor to accommodate the proposed development “without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies.” (GLVIA3, para. 5.40). High Undue consequences are likely to arise from the proposed development. Medium Undue consequences may arise from the proposed development. Low Undue consequences are unlikely to arise from the proposed development.
7.2.7 Susceptibility of landscape character areas is influenced by their characteristics and is frequently considered (though often recorded as ‘sensitivity’ rather than susceptibility) within documented landscape character assessments and capacity studies. 7.2.8 Susceptibility of designated landscapes is influenced by the nature of the special qualities and purposes of designation and/or the valued elements, qualities or characteristics, indicating the degree to which these may be unduly affected by the development proposed. 7.2.9 Susceptibility of accessible or recreational landscapes is influenced by the nature of the landscape involved; the likely activities and expectations of people within that landscape and the degree to which those activities and expectations may be unduly affected by the development proposed.
7-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.2.10 Susceptibility of visual receptors is primarily a function of the expectations and occupation or activity of the receptors (GLVIA 3rd version, para 6.32). Landscape Value Landscape Value is “the relative value that is attached to different landscapes by society” (GLVIA3, page 157). National / Designated landscapes which are nationally or internationally International designated for their landscape value. Local / District Locally or regionally designated landscapes; also areas which documentary evidence and/or Site observation indicates as being more valued than the surrounding area. Community ‘Everyday’ landscape which is appreciated by the local community but has little or no wider recognition of its value. Limited Despoiled or degraded landscape with little or no evidence of being valued by the community.
7.2.11 Areas of landscape of greater than Community value may be considered to be ‘valued landscapes’ in the context of NPPF paragraph 170. Sensitivity of landscape visual receptors Sensitivity is assessed by combining the considerations of susceptibility and value described above. The differences in the tables below reflect a slightly greater emphasis on value in considering landscape receptors, and a greater emphasis on susceptibility in considering visual receptors. Landscape Sensitivity Susceptibility High Medium Low Value National / International High High-Medium Medium Local / District High-Medium Medium Medium- Low Community Medium Medium- Low Low Limited Low Low-Negligible Negligible Visual Receptor Sensitivity Susceptibility High Medium Low Value National / International High High-Medium Medium Local / District High-Medium High-Medium Medium Community High-Medium Medium Medium-Low Limited Medium Medium-Low Low
7.2.12 For visual receptors; susceptibility and value are closely linked - the most valued views are also likely to be those where viewer’s expectations will be highest. The value attributed relates to the value of the view, e.g. a National Trail is nationally valued for access, not necessarily for the available views. Typical examples of visual receptor sensitivity are plotted in a diagram in Appendix 7.2. Magnitude of Effect Scale of effect Scale of effect is assessed for all landscape and visual receptors and identifies the degree of change which would arise from the development. Large Total or major alteration to key elements, features, qualities or characteristics, such that post development the baseline will be fundamentally changed. Medium Partial alteration to key elements, features, qualities or characteristics, such that post development the baseline will be noticeably changed. Small Minor alteration to key elements, features, qualities or characteristics, such that post development the baseline will be largely unchanged despite discernible differences.
7-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Negligible Very minor alteration to key elements, features, qualities or characteristics, such that post development the baseline will be fundamentally unchanged with barely perceptible differences.
Duration of effects Permanent The change is expected to be permanent and there is no intention for it to be reversed. Long-term The change is expected to be in place for 10-25 years and will be reversed, fully mitigated or no longer occurring beyond that timeframe. Medium- The change is expected to be in place for 2-10 years and will be reversed, term fully mitigated or no longer occurring beyond that timeframe. Short-term The change is expected to be in place for 0-2 years and will be reversed, fully mitigated or no longer occurring beyond that timeframe.
7.2.13 Most effects will be Long term or Permanent; however, Medium or Short term effects may be identified where mitigation planting is proposed, or local factors will result in a reduced duration of effect (for example where maturing woodland will screen views in future). The effects arising from the construction of the development will usually be Short term. Extent of effects Extent of effects is assessed for all receptors and indicates the geographic area over which the effects will be felt. Wide Beyond 4km, or more than half of receptor. Intermediate Up to approx. 2-4km, or around half of receptor area. Localised Site and surroundings up to 2km, or part of receptor area (up to approx. 25%). Limited Site, or part of Site, or small part of a receptor area (< approx. 10%).
7.2.14 The Magnitude of effect is informed by combining the scale, duration and extent of effect. Diagram 1 below illustrates the judgement process:
7-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Diagram 7-1. Magnitude of Effect
7.2.15 As can be seen from the illustration above, scale (shown as the layers of the diagram) is the primary factor in determining magnitude; most of each layer indicates that magnitude will typically be judged to be the same as scale but may be higher if the effect is particularly widespread and long lasting, or lower if it is constrained in geographic extent or timescale. Where the Scale of effect is judged to be Negligible the Magnitude is also assumed to be Negligible and no further judgement is required.
7-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Significance 7.2.16 Significance indicates the importance or gravity of the effect. The process of forming a judgement of significance of effect is based upon the assessments of magnitude of effects and sensitivity of the receptor to come to a professional judgement of how important this effect is. This judgement is illustrated by Diagram 2 (based on EIA significance evaluation matrix, IEMA Special report 2011) below:
Diagram 7-2. Significance
7.2.17 The significance ratings indicate a ‘sliding scale’ of the relative importance of the effect, with Major being the most important and Minimal being the least. Effects that are Major-Moderate or Major are considered to be significant. Effects of Moderate significance or less are “of lesser concern” (GLVIA3, para. 3.35). It should also be noted that whilst an effect may be significant, that does not necessarily mean that such an impact would be unacceptable or should necessarily be regarded as an “undue consequence” (GLVIA3, para. 5.40). 7.2.18 Where intermediate ratings are given, e.g. ‘Moderate-Slight’, this indicates an effect that is both less than Moderate and more than Slight, rather than one which varies across the range. In such cases, the higher rating will always be given first; this does not mean that the impact is closer to that higher rating but is done to facilitate the identification of the more significant effects within tables. Intermediate judgements may also be used for judgements of Magnitude.
7-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Positive / Adverse / Neutral 7.2.19 Effects are defined as adverse, neutral or positive. Neutral effects are those which overall are neither adverse nor positive but may incorporate a combination of both. 7.2.20 The decision regarding the significance of effect and the decision regarding whether an effect is beneficial or adverse are entirely separate. For example, a rating of Major and Positive would indicate an effect that was of great significance and on balance positive, but not necessarily that the proposals would be extremely beneficial. 7.2.21 Whether an effect is positive, neutral or adverse is identified based on professional judgement. GLVIA3 indicates at para. 2.15 that this is a “particularly challenging” aspect of assessment, particularly in the context of a changing landscape. Cumulative Assessment 7.2.22 Cumulative assessment relates to the assessment of the effects of more than one development. A search area from the Site (typically of a similar scale to the study area) is agreed with the planning authority. For each of the identified cumulative schemes, agreement is reached with the Planning Authority as to whether and how they should be included in the assessment. 7.2.23 Only operational and consented developments are considered, unless specific circumstances indicate that a development in planning should be included, with progressively decreasing emphasis placed on those which are less certain to proceed. Typically, operational and consented developments are treated as being part of the landscape and visual baseline. i.e. it is assumed that consented schemes will be built except for occasional exceptions where there is good reason to assume that they will not be constructed. 7.2.24 The cumulative assessment within this LVIA focusses on combined effects with the proposed development of a replacement academic building at Headington Hill on the site of the former Helena Kennedy Building. At the specific request of Oxford City Council - see Scoping Opinion (dated 13 January 2021) - consideration is also given to Site allocations in the Oxford Local Plan 2036 that would lie within the surrounding area, identified as the Government buildings and Harcourt House detailed in Policy SP16. Consideration is also given to the proposed Pedestrian Link between Clive Booth Student Village and Headington Hill Hall, hereafter referred to as the 'Development for Cuckoo Lane / Headington Hill Hall scheme'. Residential Amenity 7.2.25 This LVIA does not include a separate residential amenity assessment. It is considered that the effects resulting from the proposed development would fall below the Residential Visual Amenity Threshold referred to in LI TGN 02/2019 as visual effects “of such nature and / or magnitude that it potentially affects ‘living conditions or Residential Amenity”. The guidance note further indicates that “It is not uncommon for significant adverse effects on views and visual amenity to be experienced by people at their place of residence as a result of introducing a new development into the landscape. In itself this does not necessarily cause particular planning concern. However, there are situations where the effect on the outlook / visual amenity of a residential property is so great that it is not generally considered to be in the public interest to permit such conditions to occur where they did not exist before.” Further details are presented in Appendix 7.2. Distances 7.2.26 Where distances are given in the assessment, these are approximate distances between the nearest part of the Site and the nearest part of the receptor in question, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
7-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Consultation 7.2.27 The scope of and approach to the assessment was described in the EIA Scoping Report, submitted to Oxford City Council November 2020. 7.2.28 Oxford City Council's Scoping Opinion (dated 13 January 2021) provides limited commentary on matters relevant to the LVIA, which are as follows:
Cumulative effects should consider any Site allocations in the Local Plan that would lie within the surrounding area, including the Government buildings and Harcourt house in Policy SP16. The LVIA considers potential cumulative effects of the proposed development with these schemes in Section 7.9. Cumulative Effects. The LVIA should be informed by a detailed assessment of the likely impacts on existing trees and tree canopy cover green infrastructure within the application Site. The following documents have been submitted in support of this application: o Tree Survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Preliminary Arboricultural Method Statement & Tree Protection Plan In Accordance with BS 5837:2012 (Hayden’s Arboricultural Consultants, April 2021); and o A Tree Canopy Study (LDA Design, April 2021) 7.2.29 Beyond the above, no further reference to the LVIA matters were provided. The 2021 Scoping Opinion does however refer to the previous Scoping Opinion from 2018 (dated 10 July 2018), stating: "…a full ES is required, which for consistency of approach, should consider the same issues as the previous ES, and would also represent a clearer comparison of the two schemes."
7.2.30 The 2018 Scoping Opinion set out the following requirements, which are taken forward in this new LVIA:
Production of verified views analysis with “…the proposed building mapped in rather than wireframes”. This LVIA includes photowires of the proposed development from key viewpoints. Views from tall buildings within the city - specifically Carfax and St Michael in the Northgate - should be included in the assessment of views. The LVIA references Illustrative Viewpoints from Carfax and St Michaels in the Northgate in the assessment of effects. The LVIA should be informed by a detailed assessment of the likely impacts on existing trees - details of which are set out in 7.2.28 above in response to the 2021 Scoping opinion. 7.2.31 No other substantial requests or recommendations were made specifically for this assessment in the 2018 Scoping Opinion. 7.2.32 In addition to the above, consultation has been undertaken with various stakeholders, both for the 2018 planning application and this new application in 2021. The table below sets out a brief summary of the relevant discussions to landscape and visual matters to date, and how this consultation has been addressed with this chapter. Stakeholder consultation Consultee Summary LVIA Response 2018 Planning Application: Friends of Headington Requested consideration to be Inclusion of viewpoint - see Hill given to views from within Illustrative Viewpoint A (Figure
7-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Headington Hill Park towards 7.7). the Site to represent visitors to the park. 2021 Planning Application: John Garne Way Requested that consideration Additional viewpoint from Allotments of views from Pullens Field is Pullens Field - see Viewpoint given. 11 (Figure 7.7). Oxford Preservation Requested consideration of Despite attempts to gain Trust views from St Mary's Church access to the St Mary's when sun illuminates the Site Church, due to the Covid-19 most prominent. pandemic, access to this location has not been possible at the time of assessment. Reliance on previous photography and professional judgements has been undertaken for this assessment. Local Residents Requested that consideration Additional viewpoint from of views from Pullens Field is Pullens Field - see Viewpoint given. 12 (Figure 7.7). Oxford City Council Reviewed selected viewpoints Additional viewpoint from and requested an additional Mesopotamia Walk added to viewpoint is included from the cover receptors in this location junction of the Marston Cycle - see Viewpoint 13 (Figure 7.7.) path and Ferry Road.
Assumptions and Limitations Desk-study & Fieldwork 7.2.33 The baseline conditions of the Site and the surrounding landscape described in the subsequent sections has been informed by desk-study and fieldwork (undertaken between January and April 2021). Photographs presented in Appendices 7.7 and 7.8 were recorded in 2018. Recently undertaken fieldwork has confirmed that these are reflective of the present baseline conditions and suitable for reuse in this assessment. 7.2.34 A ZTV study (Figure 7.4) has been produced and used as tools to inform the professional judgements made in this LVIA during the iterative masterplan process and stages. The ZTV study has been modelled on the maximum building height parameters available at the time of assessment. Further details are set out Section 7.4 under the sub-section Zone of Theoretical Visibility Study. Potential Night-time Effects and Lighting 7.2.35 The Site is located within the existing residential extent of Oxford, and presently is characterised by a student accommodation. Ambient illumination within the landscape comprises that from existing and adjacent residential properties within the immediate context of the Site. It is anticipated that any additional lighting produced and subsequently experienced by potential receptors would not be dissimilar to the amount of lighting presently experienced within the Site's general vicinity and the wider context of Oxford City. It is judged the any potential night- time effects to landscape character and visual amenity would not exceed the assessed effects presented in Section 7.6. Landscape and Visual Effects. 7.2.36 As set out in the DAS, it is anticipated that a detailed lighting strategy will be prepared for the proposed development, secured through relevant planning conditions. This will be based on the submitted External Lighting Strategy (Arup: DR-E-0001), and should aim to reduce sky glow,
7-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
luminaire intensity and light intrusion, and thus limit visual impact at night. These issues can be addressed by the careful selection of luminaires that would neither project light upwards nor throw too much light directly on to objects (thereby reflecting back upwards). Key lighting design measures should include:
Lighting should be to the minimum level necessary to provide the required level of illumination. LED lights are recommended that enable increased control, improve colour definition, and save on energy. Luminaires should be designed and oriented to restrict light directionality only to the areas necessary. This should include double asymmetrical luminaires and full horizontal cut-off designs to prevent light spill. In pedestrian or cycleway areas lights should be low-level cowled lighting design. Lighting should be zoned to provide higher lighting levels along main routes (albeit whilst aiming for minimum standards of illumination); lower lighting levels on minor roads; and no light at all on out outward facing private drives. If security lights are to be provided on houses these should be of a full horizontal cut-off design with appropriate accessories to prevent light spill. They should also be fitted with motion sensors with timers set to the minimum value.
7.3 Planning Policy
National Planning Policy 7.3.1 Relevant national planning policy is set out in Appendix 7.4.
Local Planning Policy 7.3.2 As illustrated on Figure 7.1, the Site is located within the administrative area of Oxford City Council. The eastern portion of the study area falls within South Oxfordshire District and in the west of the study area within Vale of White Horse District. Cherwell District extends into the north of the study area. 7.3.3 Given that the proposed development Site is unlikely to give rise to any significant landscape or visual effects in Cherwell District or South Oxfordshire District, local planning policy is only considered for Oxford City and Vale of White Horse District. 7.3.4 Current local planning policy relevant to this assessment is described in the following adopted documents:
Oxford Core Strategy 2026 (Adopted 14 March 2011) Oxford Local Plan 2036 (Adopted 8 June 2020) The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1: Strategic sites and Policies (adopted December 20216) The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2 (adopted in October 2019). 7.3.5 The Site is within the Headington neighbourhood plan area. Policies for this area are presented within the Headington Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2032. Aspects of policy also cover the historic environment. These matters are covered within the Chapter 5 - Built Heritage assessment and key views identified as important to townscape character are considered specifically in the separate Appraisal of Effects on Views of the Historic City of Oxford in its Setting (Appendix 7.6). 7.3.6 Policies relevant to this LVIA are outlined below, with a table set out in Section 7.5 outlining
7-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
how the proposed development's design has responded to relevant policies. Oxford Core Strategy 2026 (2011) 7.3.7 Policy CS18 Urban design, townscape character and the historic environment – This policy sets expectations in terms of how new development is designed and responds to its surroundings. It records that planning permission will only be granted for development that demonstrates high-quality design through (inter alia): “…responding appropriately to the Site and its surroundings; and creating a strong sense of place…”. It adds that “Development proposals should respect and draw inspiration from Oxford’s unique historic environment (above and below ground), responding positively to the character and distinctiveness of the locality” and that “Views of the skyline of the historic centre will be protected.” Oxford Local Plan 2036 (June 2020) 7.3.8 Policy RE2: Efficient use of land – This highlights the council’s expectations in regard to new development making efficient use of land within Oxford City. It records that [inter alia]: “Planning permission will only be granted where development proposals make efficient use of land. Development proposals must make best use of Site capacity, in a manner compatible with the Site itself, the surrounding area and broader considerations of the needs of Oxford, as well as addressing the following criteria:
The density must be appropriate for the use proposed; The scale of development, including building heights and massing, should conform to other policies in the plan. It is expected that sites at transportation hubs and within the city and district centres in particular will be capable of accommodating development at an increased scale and density, although this will also be encouraged in all other appropriate locations where the impact of so doing is shown to be acceptable; opportunities for developing at the maximum appropriate density must be fully explored; and Built form and Site layout must be appropriate for the capacity of the Site. High-density development (for residential development this will indicatively be taken as 100dph) is expected in the city centre and district centres.” 7.3.9 Policy RE7: Managing the impact of development – This sets out the council’s expectations to manage the \ Policy RE7 records: “Planning permission will only be granted for development that:
Ensures that the amenity of communities, occupiers and neighbours is protected; and Does not have unacceptable transport impacts affecting communities, occupiers, neighbours and the existing transport network; and Provides mitigation measures where necessary. The factors the City Council will consider in determining compliance with the above elements of this policy include:
Visual privacy, outlook; Sunlight, daylight and overshadowing; Artificial lighting levels; […] Impacts of the construction phase, including the assessment of these impacts within the Construction Management Plans; […].”
7-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.3.10 Policy DH1: High quality design and placemaking – This highlights the council’s expectations with regards to the quality of new development; and the necessity of the proposed scheme to meet the needs of all users that will stand the test of time. It records [inter alia]: “Planning permission will only be granted for development of high quality design that creates or enhances local distinctiveness. All developments other than changes of use without external alterations and householder applications will be expected to be supported by a constraints and opportunities plan and supporting text and/or visuals to explain their design rationale in a design statement proportionate to the proposal (which could be part of a Design and Access Statement or a Planning Statement), which should cover the relevant checklist points set out in Appendix 6.1. Planning permission will only be granted where proposals are designed to meet the key design objectives and principles for delivering high quality development as set out in Appendix 6.1."
7.3.11 Consideration of the 'Design Checklist' is detailed in the DAS. 7.3.12 Policy DH2: Views and building heights – This sets out the council’s expectation that new development would not adversely affect significant views both within and from outside Oxford. It records [inter alia]: “The City Council will seek to retain significant views both within Oxford and from outside, in particular to and from the historic skyline. Planning permission will not be granted for any building or structure that would harm the special significance of Oxford’s historic skyline. Planning permission will be granted for developments of appropriate height or massing, as demonstrated by the following criteria, all of which should be met:
Design choices regarding height and massing have a clear design rationale and the impacts will be positive; and Any design choice to design buildings to a height that would impact on character should be fully explained, and regard should be had to the guidance on design of higher buildings set out in the High Buildings Study TAN. In particular, the impacts in terms of the four visual tests of obstruction, impact on the skyline, competition and change of character should be explained; and It should be demonstrated how proposals have been designed to have a positive impact through their massing, orientation, the relation of the building to the street, and the potential impact on important views including both in to the historic skyline and out towards Oxford’s green setting". The area within a 1,200 metre radius of Carfax tower (the Historic Core Area) contains all the buildings that comprise the historic skyline, so new developments that exceed 18.2 m (60 ft) in height or ordnance datum (height above sea level) 79.3 m (260 ft) (whichever is the lower) are likely to intrude into the skyline. Development above this height should be limited in bulk and must be of the highest design quality. Applications for proposed development that exceeds that height will be required to provide extensive information so that the full impacts of any proposals can be understood and assessed, including:
A Visual Impact Assessment, which includes the use of photos and verified views produced and used in a technically appropriate way, which are appropriate in size and resolution to match the perspective and detail as far as possible to that seen in the field, representing the landscape and proposed development as accurately as possible; Use of 3D modelling so that the impact of the development from different locations can be
7-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
understood, including any view cone views that are affected; and An explanation of what the impacts will be in terms of the four visual tests of obstruction, impact on the skyline, competition and change of character; and Reference to how the guidance in the High Buildings Study Technical Advice Note has been followed. 7.3.13 Any proposals within the Historic Core Area or View Cones that may impact on roofscape and the foreground part of views (including proposals where they are below the Carfax datum point, for example plant) should be designed carefully, and should meet all the following criteria:
They are based on a clear understanding of characteristic positive aspects of roofscape in the area; and They contribute positively to the roofscape, to enhance any significant long views the development may be part of and also the experience at street level; Planning permission will not be granted for development proposed within a View Cone or the setting of a View Cone if it would harm the special significance of the view. The View Cones and the Historic Core Area (1,200m radius of Carfax tower) are defined on the Policies Map.” The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1: Strategic sites and Policies (adopted December 2016) 7.3.14 The Local Plan 2031 Part 1 (LPP1) was adopted in December 2016. It now replaces the Local Plan 2011 and sets a Strategic Policy Framework for the district, with the exception of some saved policies from the Local Plan 2011. The Local Plan 2031 Part 2 was adopted in October 2019, complementing the Local Plan 2031: Part 1 by setting out:
Policies and locations for new housing to meet the Vale’s proportion of Oxford’s housing need, which cannot be met within the City boundaries, as agreed by the Oxfordshire Growth Board Policies for the part of Didcot Garden Town that lies within the Vale of White Horse District Detailed development management policies to complement the strategic policies set out in the Part 1 plan and replace the remaining saved policies of the Local Plan 2011, where appropriate, and additional Site allocations for housing. 7.3.15 Core Policy 44: Landscape – identifies the most important landscape features that the council expect to be protected and enhanced. The council requires proposals to demonstrate how they have responded to these identified aspects of landscape character, and expect to see evidence of:
The incorporation of appropriate landscape proposals that reflect the character of the area through appropriate design and management, and Preserve and promote local distinctiveness and diversity and, wherever possible, enhance damaged landscape areas. 7.3.16 Whilst this policy only directly applies to development within the Vale of the White Horse District, its emphases on the value of the landscape and the provisions of this policy are considered in that light within the Section 7.4. Baseline conditions of this assessment. The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2 (adopted in October 2019) 7.3.17 No policies have been identified that are of relevance to this assessment. Headington Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2032 (2017) 7.3.18 GSP4: Protection of the Setting of the Site – This policy records that new development will
7-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
be permitted where “…its design responds appropriately to the Site and the character of the surrounding area.” 7.3.19 CIP1: Development to Respect Existing Local Character - This policy records that new developments (including additions, alterations, change of use and extensions) “…will only be permitted where they respond to and enhance the distinctive local character where it is described in the Character Assessments.” It adds that this may include consideration of aspects such as materials, scale, siting use, layout, form, design and intensity of activity within the built environment and setting of the Neighbourhood Plan Area. 7.3.20 CIP2: Protecting Locally Important Views - This policy notes that development will seek to protect important views within Headington itself, and out of the Headington Neighbourhood Plan Area (HNPA) as identified on the viewpoint map. It is noted that the viewpoint map, presented in Appendix C of the Neighbourhood Plan, illustrates views that would not be influenced by development at the Site. The nearest views are along Cuckoo Lane (east of Pullen’s Lane) which is recorded as an “Historic footpath which merits protection”; and Headley Way and described as a “Tree-lined avenue with a view out of the HNPA of the hills in the distance”. 7.3.21 CIP3: Innovative Design – This policy encourages high quality development proposals. It records that high-quality development proposals, which are of an innovative and/or contemporary design will be permitted where they (inter alia) “…respect and take account of local heritage; and enhance the distinctive identity, character and setting in terms of scale, layout, density, orientation and massing.” Local Guidance 7.3.22 In addition to the policy documents identified above, there are a number of local guidance documents relevant to this assessment, all of which are identified and summarised in Section 7.4. Baseline conditions below. Matters related to townscape / landscape character are considered within the sub-section Landscape / Townscape Character; whereas matters related to other visual considerations are contained within the sub-section Key Local Guidance Documents. 7.3.23 Where appropriate, information within these reports is used to define the scope of the landscape and visual assessment, and specific information relating to landscape and visual receptors is included alongside the assessment of effects. Any information relevant to the siting and design of the proposed development is discussed within Section 7.5. The Proposed Development in Table 7.8. 7.3.24 A further local guidance document ‘Assessment of the Oxford View Cones (2015)’ is covered by a separate appraisal (Appendix 7.6) although summarised below for reference.
7.4 Baseline conditions
Introduction - Current Baseline 7.4.1 An overview of the baseline study results is provided in this section with the full baseline description of the individual landscape and visual receptors being provided alongside the assessment below for ease of reference. 7.4.2 This section provides a review of the key local guidance documents and identifies those landscape and visual receptors which merit detailed consideration in the assessment of effects, and those which are not taken forward for further assessment as effects “have been judged unlikely to occur or so insignificant that it is not essential to consider them further” (GLVIA3,
7-15
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
para. 3.19). 7.4.3 Both this baseline section and the effects section describe townscape / landscape character and visual receptors before considering designated landscape. It is common for designations to encompass both character and visual considerations within their special qualities or purposes of designation. It therefore makes a more natural reading sequence to draw together those aspects of character and views which relate to the designation if they have been described earlier in the chapter.
Key Local Guidance Documents Assessment of the Oxford View Cones (2015) 7.4.4 In 2015 Oxford City Council (through the collaboration and support of Historic England, Oxford Preservation Trust and others) published a report to provide a basis of evidence and analysis, for use in the assessment of the impact of new development proposals and inform decisions in order to “…sustain the value of the contribution of the views to the city”. 7.4.5 The report records that the ten views assessed and described are not an exhaustive list of the important views of Oxford and are intended “…to form a sample”. The report also presents a methodology of view assessment that can be applied to other views of the city in the future, recognising that others have been identified as significant, including for example from Wytham Woods. 7.4.6 This report is referenced both in terms of the findings of the appraisal of several relevant views of Oxford, and also in terms of the approach in assessing and describing the views presented. Oxford High Buildings Technical Advice Note and Evidence Base Report (October 2018) 7.4.7 The Oxford High Buildings Technical Advice Note (TAN) seeks to inform decisions regarding the growth and intensification of Oxford in a positive and structured way. It takes a flexible approach that allows for the changing policy and development context, providing an advisory framework and common base for understanding in which officers, developers, decision makers and stakeholders can make judgements and decisions with greater confidence. The TAN encourages a positive and creative approach to be taken to the planning and design of high buildings, supporting innovative and imaginative design that enhances the city’s environment and built fabric. 7.4.8 The Oxford High Buildings Evidence Base Report (EBR) provides the evidence base for the TAN, summarising the current ‘baseline’ of Oxford. It utilises mapping and 3D city wide modelling, having been shaped by Stakeholder Workshops and OCC Officer workshops. 7.4.9 The TAN set out the principle visual characteristics of Oxford, and how these contribute to the city's distinct character and sense of place. It notes that the erosion or harm to these characteristics has the potential to affect the visual amenity and character of Oxford and also the setting and, consequently, heritage significance of heritage assets within it. It sets four 'visual tests' to ascertain any potential effects that may affect these characteristics as a result of proposed high buildings. 7.4.10 These tests are considered where relevant within this assessment.
Zone of Theoretical Visibility Study 7.4.11 A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) study was generated, based on the proposed design available at the time of assessment (April 2021) and modelled on its maximum development
7-16
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
parameters. The ZTV has been used as a tool to inform the professional judgements made in this LVIA during the iterative masterplan process and stages. 7.4.12 The ZTV is shown on Figure 7.4 and indicates areas of potential visibility. The analysis was carried out using a topographic model including settlements and woodlands (with heights derived from NEXTMAP 25 surface mapping data) as visual barriers in order to provide a more realistic indication of potential visibility. 7.4.13 The ZTV study was used to determine which landscape and visual receptors are likely to be affected and merit detailed consideration in the assessment of effects, and those which are unlikely to have visibility. 7.4.14 It should be borne in mind that the ZTV represents a theoretical model of the potential visibility of the proposed development. In reality, landscape features such as trees, hedgerows, embankments, landform and / or buildings found on the ground, but not accounted for within the surface mapping dataset, are likely to combine to screen the proposed development to a greater degree. As a result, the extent of actual visibility experienced on the ground will be less than suggested by the ZTV study. 7.4.15 The ZTV shows that potential visibility of the proposed development would be limited to a small number of locations within the study area:
The urban area immediately surrounding the Site; Areas of landscape between the River Cherwell and New Marston to the north-west of the Site; Areas of landscape to the north of the Site, between Summertown and New Marston (north of the B4495), and to the south and west of Woodeaton; and Rising land towards the edge of the study area to the west of the A34 at Wytham Wood and between North Hinksey and South Hinksey. 7.4.16 Site observations indicate that the ZTV study provides a realistic modelling of visibility. However, it should be noted that in the majority of areas where visibility would arise, Site observations have shown that it is likely that only part (s) of the proposed development would be visible, and in most case, some / most of the proposed buildings would be screened by intervening buildings or vegetation. Likewise, within areas of theoretical visibility, smaller local features such as wall and vegetation in the intervening landscape / townscape that are not accurately reflected within the surface model data might further screen views on the ground. This can be seen in Representative Viewpoints 3 - 5 and 7 - 9. (Figure 7.7). 7.4.17 It is important to note that the ZTV study does not illustrate potential views from tall buildings (including those within the centre of Oxford), although these have been assessed based on fieldwork undertaken during the course of the assessment.
Landscape / Townscape Character 7.4.18 Paragraphs 5.13-5.15 of GLVIA3 indicates that landscape character studies at the national or regional level are best used to ‘set the scene’ and understand the landscape context. It indicates that Local Authority Assessments provide more detail and that these should be used to form the basis of the assessment of effects on landscape character – with (appropriately justified) adaptation, refinement and interpretation where required. 7.4.19 Relevant assessments are:
National Character Area Profile: Midvale Ridge (2013);
7-17
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study (2004); Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting (2002); Vale of White Horse Landscape Character Assessment (2017); South Oxfordshire Landscape Character Assessment for the Local Plan 2033 (2017); Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995); Oxfordshire Historic Landscape Characterisation Project (2017); Assessment of the Oxford View Cones (2015); Headington Neighbourhood Plan Character Assessment, Character Area 02: Headington Hill North (undated); and Headington Hill Conservation Area Appraisal (2012). 7.4.20 Copies of relevant maps and character assessment descriptions of areas taken forward for assessment in Section 7.6. Landscape and Visual Effects and are included in Appendix 7.5. National Landscape Character 7.4.21 At a national level, the Site is located within the Midvale Ridge National Character Area (NCA) as identified in the National Character Area Profiles (2014). Whilst the NCAs profiles provide context to the assessment, given their scale in comparison to the Site and the presence of more detailed character areas at a local level, effects on the NCAs are not assessed in further detail. Regional Landscape Character 7.4.22 The Oxfordshire and Landscape Study (OWLS) (2004) is regional landscape character assessment covering the county of Oxfordshire. Given the scale of the landscape character types / areas in comparison to the Site and the presence of the more detailed character areas at a local, effects on the OWLs are not assessed in further detail but are referred too where relevant in the assessment. Local Landscape Character 7.4.23 The Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting provides the most up-to-date and comprehensive character assessment for areas within the administrative area of Oxford City. This will form the basis of the assessment of effects on the landscape within Oxford. This character assessment maps and describes landscape / townscape types and landscape/townscape character areas within the administrative area of Oxford City. In addition to a short generic description for each landscape/townscape type, detailed character area descriptions are accompanied by an evaluation of character and quality; indicators of landscape value; a description of sensitivity to change; and objectives, policy development and enhancement opportunities. 7.4.24 The South Oxfordshire Landscape Assessment and Vale of White Horse Landscape Character Assessment will be used as the basis for assessing effects in these administrative areas. 7.4.25 The Headington Neighbourhood Plan Character Assessment, Character Area 02: Headington Hill North (undated) does not present a separate assessment of the character of the local area as this “…has already been assessed by Oxford City Council in a Conservation Area Appraisal…”. 7.4.26 The remaining documents listed above are used to supplement the specific character assessments as required. 7.4.27 Local landscape / townscape character types/areas within the study area are shown on Figure 7.5. 7.4.28 The Site is located within the Garden Suburbs Townscape Type (TT 11) and Headington Hill
7-18
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Townscape Character Area (TCA 11A), as defined in the Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting (2002). This TT is described as displaying many features that are characteristic of the garden suburb. The TCA is noted as being a distinctive area occupying a prominent position at the crest of Headington Hill, which forms the skyline to the east of the Cherwell Valley. The Garden Suburbs TT and Headington Hill TCA is taken forward to the detailed assessment. 7.4.29 Analysis of the character assessment descriptions, along with a review of the ZTV and Site analysis indicates that there is potential for effects on the character of the following TTs/TCAs within Oxford City:
Open Hills with Institutions TT (TT 7)/ Headington Hill TCA (TCA 7A) (adjacent to the Site to the south, east and west). Victorian Suburbs and Villages TT (TT 4) / New Marston Village TCA (TCA 4H) (approximately 75m to the north of the Site). Historic City Core TT (TT 1) / Oxford City Core TCA (TCA 1A) (approximately 1km west of the Site). 7.4.30 In the landscape surrounding Oxford, it is judged that there is also potential for effects on the character of the following Landscape Types (LTs) and Character Areas (CAs) identified in the Vale of White Horse Landscape Character Assessment:
Wooded Corallian Limestone Ridge LT/ Wytham Hill Wooded Corallian Limestone Ridge CA. Corallian Limestone Ridge with Woodland LT/ Chawley to South Hinksey Corallian Limestone Ridge with Woodland CA. 7.4.31 The remaining landscape and townscape character types/areas within the study areas are excluded from more detailed assessment on the basis that effects would be Negligible. No material changes will arise from the proposed development as all changes will be as a result of a change in views. The ZTV and site analysis indicates that the effects on character arising from visual change would be very small due to a lack of intervisibility with the Site arising from a combination of enclosure created by buildings, intervening established vegetation, and distance from the Site; and their key characteristics would be largely unaffected.
Visual Receptors 7.4.32 Visual receptors are “the different groups of people who may experience views of the development” (GLVIA, 3rd edition, para 6.3). In order to identify those groups who may be significantly affected the ZTV study, baseline desk study and site visits have been used. 7.4.33 The different types of groups assessed within this report encompass residents within settlements; people using key routes such as roads; cycle ways, people within accessible or recreational landscapes; people using PRoW; or people visiting key viewpoints. In dealing with PRoWs and local roads, receptors are grouped into areas where effects might be expected to be broadly similar, or areas which share particular factors in common. 7.4.34 13 representative viewpoints have been selected to assess the effects on visual receptors. These are based on the 10 viewpoints (agreed with Oxford City Council in 2018) used in the previous LVIA, along with three additional viewpoints requested through consultation:
John Garne Way Allotments Pullens Fields Mesopotamia Walk
7-19
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.4.35 In addition, specific viewpoints may be identified where there are key promoted viewpoints within the study area, or illustrative viewpoints to “demonstrate a particular effect or specific issues, which might, for example, be the restricted visibility at certain locations” (GLVIA, 3rd edition, para 6.19). In this instant, consideration of the Oxford View Cones has been considered independently to this assessment in Appendix 7.6. Visual Environment of Existing Site 7.4.36 The existing Site consists of student accommodation on sloping land set amongst established and mature trees on Headington Hill to the north-east / east of Oxford City Centre. 7.4.37 In general, the existing Site is very visually contained due to the presence of existing trees and buildings within the Site and surrounding area. As a result, views outwards, to locations such as Oxford City centre, from within and around the Site are limited. Views towards the Site are similarly limited by the aforementioned landscape features and buildings within and around the Site. Visual Receptor Groups 7.4.38 Visual effects are assessed for groups of visual receptors within close proximity of each other and that are judged to experience similar visual effects arising from the proposed development. These are referred to as ‘visual receptor groups’ and include motorists on local roads, users of rights of way and local residents or visitors to settlements. 7.4.39 The following visual receptor groups are located within the study area and would have theoretical visibility of the proposed development, which is shown on Figure 7.4.
Residents, pedestrians on footpath along Cuckoo Lane (Ref. 320/32); and users of Pullen’s Lane and John Garne Way Allotments, in an area defined by Marston Road, Cuckoo Lane, Pullen’s Lane and William Street; Residents of streets north of William Street and Ferry Road as far north as Jack Straw’s Lane and Nicholson Road and visitors to Milham Ford Nature Park; Residents in streets off Mortimer Drive and footpath users/ users of Marston Road Sports Ground, Exeter College Recreation Ground, Hertford College Recreation Ground, Trinity College Recreation Ground and Magdalen College Recreation Ground east of river Cherwell; Users of permissive path from Botley Lodge to Wytham Woods and motorists on local roads (including A34/A420); Visitors to Raleigh Park, footpath users and local residents at Harcourt Hill; and Footpath users, residents and users of Hinksey Heights Golf Club (between Harcourt Hill and Hinksey Hill. 7.4.40 Site analysis confirms that visitors to tall buildings within the historic core of Oxford will also experience views of the proposed development and this group of receptors is included within the assessment in Section 7.6. Landscape and Visual Effects. Key Routes 7.4.41 Figure 7.1 shows the local context of the Site. The ZTV indicates that there will be very limited views from key road and rail routes within the study area as a result of intervening buildings and vegetation. Theoretical visibility is indicated at the A34 / A420 junction which is addressed in the relevant visual receptor group. 7.4.42 There is also limited to no visibility from Sustrans routes and promoted/ long distance walking routes within the study area, and therefore are not assessed in further detail.
7-20
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Specific Viewpoints 7.4.43 Ordnance Survey mapping does not identify any panoramic viewpoints within the study area. 7.4.44 Consideration of effects on views of the historic city of Oxford in its setting are addressed in a separate appraisal (Appendix 7.6), based on a ZTV study and fieldwork. This considers the following 6 specific views of the historic centre of Oxford where it has been judged a degree of visibility of the proposed development would be experienced:
South of High Field House; Raleigh Park (Oxford View Cone); Boars Hill (Oxford View Cone); John Garne Way Allotments; Pullen’s Lane Allotments; and Wytham Wood. 7.4.45 With regards to this assessment on potential landscape and visual effects (based on the same 6 specific views listed above), the following assessment has been made:
South of High Field House The Oxford View Cone viewpoint is enclosed by trees obscuring views to the city and the proposed development. Effects would be Negligible and are not assessed in further detail. Raleigh Park (Oxford View Cone) This is included as Representative Viewpoint 7 within this assessment and effects are considered in Section 7.6. Specific Viewpoints. Boars Hill (Oxford View Cone) This viewpoint lies outside the LVIA study area. John Garne Way Allotments This specific viewpoint (referred to as Headington Hill, Pullen’s Lane and John Garne Way Allotments) is assessed and in the accompanying appraisal in Appendix 7.6.With regards to the LVIA, this view is only available to members and users of the allotments, and not available to the general public without prior permission. Additionally, this view looks away from the Site and the proposed development. Therefore, it is judged effect would be at most Negligible, and is not assessed in further detail. Views from John Garne Way to the Site (beyond the direction of the specific view identified in Assessment of the Oxford View Cones (2015)) are however consider as part of this LVIA within Section 7.6. Visual Receptor Groups. Pullen’s Lane Allotments The Headington Hill Conservation Area Appraisal identifies a number of ‘significant view lines’, one of which looks from Pullen’s Lane Allotments (located to the east of the Site), as illustrated by Map 3 in the Conservation Appraisal. Detailed consideration of this view is set out in Chapter 5 - Built Heritage, being primarily related to heritage matters. However, consideration of this view is given in Section 7.6. Visual Receptor Groups, being represented from the publicly accessible route to the south of the allotments, Cuckoo Lane (See Viewpoint 1, Figure 7.7), as the allotments are only accessible to its member / users, and no the general public without prior permission. Wytham Wood Fieldwork has confirmed that the proposed development would have little to no impact on views from this location, and it is judged that effects would be no greater than Negligible. It also lies outside of the LVIA's study area, which has been agreed to as being the extent of where all potentially material impacts could occur. This view is therefore not assessed in
7-21
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
further detail in this LVIA, although it is considered as part of the separate appraisal in Appendix 7.6. Landscape Designations and Value
Designated Landscapes 7.4.46 No designated landscapes have been identified from adopted policy maps within the extent of the study area. Local Landscape Value 7.4.47 Within the study area there are a number of features that contribute to the value of the local landscape and townscape, such as areas of high quality and historic townscape including within the core of the city of Oxford, numerous landmarks, including historic buildings, several Conservation Areas, parks and open spaces and the contrasting environments of the built-up area of the city and its relationship to the River Thames and Cherwell and the hills that surround the city. 7.4.48 The historic core of Oxford is judged to be of National Value. 7.4.49 The Site and its immediate context on Headington Hill within the Conservation Area is judged to be of Local Value, reflecting its intrinsic qualities and the contribution made to the setting of the historic centre of Oxford. 7.4.50 Townscape areas designated as Conservation Areas and areas covered by local landscape designations are also considered to be of Local value and are of higher quality than the surrounding townscape. 7.4.51 All other areas are considered to be of Community value; while they may contain features or landmarks of local interest, they have little or no wider recognition of their value.
Future Baseline 7.4.52 Should the proposed development not come forward, it is most likely that the Site would continue to be used and manged as a Site of student accommodation.
7.5 The Proposed Development
The Proposal 7.5.1 A full description of the proposed development which is assessed in the following sections of this chapter are set out in Chapter 3 of the ES. Further details are described in more detail in the Design and Access Statement (DAS). 7.5.2 Those details of the proposed development relevant to this assessment are outlined below for reference:
The scheme is led by its landscape proposals and promotes the concept of a 'woodland village', with the vast majority of surrounding woodland retained and buildings arranged to maximise tree retention. In particular the woodland along the northern boundary will be retained and not developed. The scheme will comprise twelve new buildings, that will be made up from primarily residential accommodation alongside communal, social and administrative facilities. The heights of the buildings range between four and six storeys and have been carefully designed to minimise visual impact, with some two store buildings. The layout of the development largely follows the footprint of the existing built
7-22
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
development, with a series multi- functional external spaces of different scale that respond to the Site and integrate with the mature landscape setting. Vehicle access will be maintained would continue to be provided from via John Garne Way. Enhanced pedestrian and cycle routes would be provided through the Site, connecting access to the Site will be available from John Garne Way, Cuckoo Lane and Marston Road. Key Design Changes since 2018 Application 7.5.3 In light of consultation on the previously proposed scheme in 2018, the following key changes have been made to address in so far as possible, the key concerns raised. Reference should be made to the drawings contained in the design development chapter within the DAS:
Buildings' heights and footprints have been reduced where possible to mitigate potential visual impact; retain additional tree cover; and increase light and openness within the Site. Building 4 has been spilt into two separate smaller buildings to allow for the retention of category A trees to improve the permeability of the Site. The southern wing of Building 1 (fronting onto Cuckoo Lane) has been adjusted to retain a category A tree and to assist with filtering views from the southern edge of the Site. Building 5 has been set back from the Site's boundary (to John Garne Way Allotments) and adjustment in height to replicate similar characteristics presently on Site. Similarly, Building 10 has been pulled back from northern boundary to create greater separation from residential properties along Pullens Field. The position and orientation of Buildings 9 has been adjusted to better incorporate itself into its wooded surroundings. The height and massing of Building 3 has been adjusted to make available a greater degree of visibility to the Site’s wooded surroundings. 7.5.4 In addition to these changes, it should be noted that it has been necessary to increase the footprint of certain buildings to accommodate the necessary type / quantum of development. This includes a new nursery building added as a low-level link between Buildings 6 and 7; and slight increase in footprint / height of Buildings 1 and 7.
Site Fabric 7.5.5 A central objective to the proposed development is the aim to conserve and enhance the woodland setting of the Site, whilst accommodating the functional requirements created by intensification of residential use. Whilst tree loss is unavoidable, the majority of trees will be retained, and additional tree planting is proposed with the aim to double the existing tree cover on the Site. The landscape strategy will retain and reinforce woodlands, create new spaces and manage lighting. 7.5.6 During the construction phase a number of landscape features and fabric will be modified or removed as follows:
The demolition of 12 existing residential blocks; The retention and resurfacing of the existing carriageway through the core of the Site and existing footpaths; The felling / removal of trees and vegetation; and The gradual introduction of new buildings, external spaces, and new tree planting. 7.5.7 Approximately 90 trees are proposed to be felled, which amounts to around one third of the trees surveyed within the Site. The amended scheme will seek to further reduce the amount of
7-23
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
tree loss. The trees are located mainly in the vicinity of the existing blocks and in the intervening spaces. The development has aimed to retain woodland on the northern part of the Site, along with tree belts providing boundaries and trees that contribute to views, screening and wildlife corridors, or individual trees of high amenity value. 7.5.8 Further details of trees to be removed and retained is included in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Haydens, April 2021) and the Tree Canopy Study (LDA Design, April 2021), both of which have been issued as supporting documents to this application. Design approach in respect of townscape and visual matters 7.5.9 The various policies detailed above set out a number of similar policies' aims and objectives for the redevelopment of the Site. In addition, local guidance documents also provide design guidance. 7.5.10 As set out in the DAS, all relevant polices and guidance have been considered as part of the iterative design process. The table below sets out the key policies / guidance of relevance to the townscape and visual context and demonstrates how the design of proposed development responds. Summary of key policies / guidance of relevance to the townscape and visual context and the proposed response Policy Comments Oxford Core Strategy 2026 (2011) Policy CS18 Urban design, townscape character and the historic environment New development should demonstrate high- The proposed development respects the quality design by responding to the Site and pattern of existing development and the its surroundings and create a sense of topography of the Site. The proposed place. development has been arranged around retained groups of mature trees to maintain the wooded character of the Site. New development should respect and draw The proposed development includes inspiration from Oxford’s historic different building heights, creating a varied environment and protect views of the roofscape and skyline that responds to the historic centre of the city and its skyline. sloping topography of the Site. Key views have been considered during the design process. Views to the historic centre and skyline are considered in the appraisal included Appendix 7.6.
New development should retain and protect Existing trees are retained where important landscape and ecological features practicable and new native broadleaved and provide further landscape treatment planting is proposed to contribute to the appropriate to the area. wooded character of the Site and its ecological value. New development is integrated into its wider The proposed development removes area and creates an appropriate relationship several older structures currently on the Site with the form, grain, scale and materials of and replaces them with high quality the surrounding area and remove features buildings and public realm. Existing that detract from the local area. accommodation blocks to be retained are integrated into the new development through the arrangement of new and existing spaces. Proposed materials reflect the local context. New lighting should not result in Interior circulation spaces and kitchens will unacceptable levels of light pollution and be fitted with movement sensors, and light spillage. bedrooms with curtains or blinds to minimise
7-24
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
light from windows. External lighting is proposed to ensure any new light sources do not result in excessive light spill and glare. Conserve the rural wooded setting and The proposed development retains richness of built form. established trees and vegetation within the Site alongside the introduction of new tree planting to maintain its wooded character and continue to provide a well wooded context for student accommodation. The proposed development removes several older structures currently on the Site and replaces them with high quality buildings and public realm. Oxford Local Plan 2036 Policy RE2: Efficient use of land [inter alia]: "Planning permission will only be granted where development proposals make efficient use of land… :" - the scale of development, including The proposed development includes building heights and massing, should different building heights, creating a varied conform to other policies in the plan. roofscape and skyline that responds to the […] sloping topography of the Site. - built form and site layout must be appropriate for the capacity of the site Planning permission will only be granted for A 'mitigation by design' approach has been development that: taken during the course of the […] masterplanning process, with landscape - provides mitigation measures where and visual matters taken into account as an necessary integral part of the design of the proposed […] development. Landscape design has been - impacts of the construction phase, informed by key local guidance documents, including the assessment of these impacts which identify opportunities for landscape within the Construction Management Plans enhancements and improvement. This approach assumes that all mitigation measures are embedded into the proposed development as described in Chapter 3 of this ES, and therefore have been considered as part of the assessment of effects in Section 7.6 of this chapter. Effects during construction are also considered in Section 7.6. Policy DH1: High quality design and The proposed development retains placemaking [inter alia]: established trees and vegetation within the “Planning permission will only be granted Site and introduces new tree planting to for development of high quality design that maintain its wooded character and provide a creates or enhances local distinctiveness. well wooded context for student accommodation. The proposed development removes several older structures currently on the Site and replaces them with high quality buildings and public realm. Policy DH2: Views and buildings heights [inter alia]: "Planning permission will be granted for developments of appropriate height or massing, as demonstrated by the following criteria, all of which should be met:" (a) design choices regarding height and The proposed development includes massing have a clear design different building heights, creating a varied rationale and the impacts will be positive; roofscape and skyline that responds to the
7-25
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
(b) any design choice to design buildings to sloping topography of the Site. a height that would impact on character should be fully explained, and regard should Key views have been considered during the be had to the guidance on design of higher design process. Views to the historic centre buildings set out in the High Buildings Study and skyline are considered in the appraisal TAN. In particular, the impacts in terms of included Appendix 7.6. the four visual tests of obstruction, impact on the skyline, competition and Consideration of the Oxford High Building change of character should be explained; TAN has been undertaken as part of this c) it should be demonstrated how proposals assessment and within the DAS. have been designed to have a positive impact through their massing, orientation, the relation of the building to the street, and the potential impact on important views including both in to the historic skyline and out towards Oxford’s green setting. Headington Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2032 (2017) Policy GSP4: Protection of the Setting of The proposed development respects the the site [inter alia]: pattern of existing development and the Development will be permitted where “its topography of the Site. The proposed design responds appropriately to the site development has been arranged around and the character of the surrounding area.” retained groups of mature trees to maintain CIP1: Development to Respect Existing the wooded character of the Site. Local Character [inter alia]: Developments "will only be permitted where The proposed development includes they respond to and enhance the distinctive different building heights, creating a varied local character where it is described in the roofscape and skyline that responds to the Character Assessments.” sloping topography of the Site.
Key views have been considered during the design process. Views to the historic centre and skyline are considered in the appraisal included Appendix 7.6. CIP2: Protecting Locally Important Views [ Locally Important views are considered in inter alia]: this assessment as part of the view from Development will seek to protect important Cuckoo Lane within Section 7.6, with views within Headington itself, and out of Representative Viewpoint recording views the Headington Neighbourhood Plan Area from Cuckoo Lane (see Figure 7.7). (HNPA) as identified on the viewpoint map. The nearest views are along Cuckoo Lane (east of Pullen’s Lane) which is recorded as an “Historic footpath which merits protection”; and Headley Way and described as a “Tree-lined avenue with a view out of the HNPA of the hills in the distance” CIP3: Innovative Design [inter alia]: The proposed development removes It records that high-quality development several older structures currently on the Site proposals, which are of an innovative and/or and replaces them with high quality contemporary design will be permitted buildings and public realm. where they (inter alia) “…respect and take account of local heritage; and enhance the Existing accommodation blocks to be distinctive identity, character and setting in retained are integrated into the new terms of scale, layout, density, orientation development through the arrangement of and massing.” new and existing spaces. Proposed materials reflect the local context. Guidance Comment Headington Hill TCA (Garden Suburbs TT)
7-26
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Conserve the rural wooded setting and The proposed development retains richness of built form established trees and vegetation within the Site and introduces new tree planting to maintain its wooded character and provide a well wooded context for student accommodation. The proposed development removes several older structures currently on the Site and replaces them with high quality buildings and public realm. Provide opportunities for selective views Proposed buildings provide opportunities for over Oxford elevated views towards the city centre and its landscape setting.
Conserve stone and brick boundary walls No boundary walls will be affected by the and promoting the use of these materials for proposed development. the construction of new boundaries Ensure mature trees in the public realm are The landscape strategy is to use native replaced with similar species broadleaf species to reflect the character of existing woodland and trees within and in the context of the Site.
Conserve the rural character of Pullen's The proposals will not directly impact on Lane and Jack Straw's Lane (and Cuckoo Pullen’s Lane. A short stretch of Cuckoo Lane - Headington Hill TCA (Open Hills Lane will be modified through the (With Institutions) TT introduction of a new arrival space.
Oxford High Buildings Technical Advice Note Visual Obstruction Sensitive design has been undertaken to Visual obstruction is the physical obstruction position and orientate new buildings so that of a feature or component in the view the proposed development does not caused by a high building. This may result in obstruct existing key views (identified in full or partial blocking of the feature or other key local guidance documents) component and may affect the interpretation towards and from Oxford City centre. of the feature and / or the legibility or character of the townscape. If the affected view makes a positive contribution to the significance of a heritage asset, obstruction may harm that significance. Visual Competition / Complement The proposed development does not Visual competition / complement is the siting compete with views of any existing of a high building within the same view as buildings, and are generally well integrated the feature such that the two are viewed into landscape, sitting below the ridgeline together. The high building may be and against / within a woodland context. perceived to compete with the feature either in the foreground, middle ground or background of the view affecting the ability to discern or interpret the feature. If a heritage asset is currently appreciated as a prominent feature in views, the introduction of a high building that distracts the attention of a viewer, could harm the heritage significance of the asset. Skylining The proposed development does not break Skylining is when high buildings break the the skyline, siting below the ridgeline and skyline, horizon or silhouette, which may be against / within a woodland context. formed by built form or vegetation.
7-27
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Topography is often a critical factor with skylining and is most likely to occur around ridgelines of the surrounding hills although it can also occur beyond these areas where building heights interrupt the existing silhouette of built areas or vegetation. Skylining represents the breaching of an existing perceived ‘threshold’ and can often result in the high building acting as eye- catching feature within views drawing the viewer’s attention and increasing visual competition. The potential for harm to heritage assets created through increased visual competition and distraction must always be considered. Change of Character Test Overall, it is concluded that the composition Change of character occurs when the of the view is not discernibly different from composition of a view is altered to the extent that of the existing, and as such, the change the character of the view is discernibly of character test is not engaged. different to that of the existing. This may be a result of an individual high building strongly influencing the composition or cumulative small incremental changes within the view leading to a notable change. Change of character may include a combination of obstruction, competition / complement and skylining. If the existing character of an area of townscape makes a positive contribution to the significance of a heritage asset, any change has the potential to harm that significance.
7.6 Landscape and Visual Effects
Introduction 7.6.1 This section sets out the effects that the proposed development would have on both landscape and visual receptors. Effects are assessed during the Construction Phase and the period following completion (i.e. the Operational Phase) when construction is complete.
Construction Phase 7.6.2 At this stage of the planning process, it is anticipated that the key potential impacts during the construction phase might include the visual effect of construction work that would require a typical inventory of plant, including mobile cranes, compressors and power tools, piling rigs and vehicles such as tipper trucks, low-loaders, dump trucks and JCBs. Tower cranes are also likely to be required. Site vehicles, cranes and construction traffic, within the Site and in surrounding areas; other components typical of demolition and construction activities, including workers’ accommodation, stockpiles of materials, lighting; and gradual modification of the Site as part of a phased programme of works. Many of these changes such as lighting and vehicle movement are typical features of the surrounding townscape. The most noticeable construction activity would be during the demolition of existing structures and construction of new buildings, when cranes will be in operation. 7.6.3 Working hours would be subject to agreement, however typical hours are expected to be 0800- 1800 Monday to Friday and 0800-1300 on Saturdays.
7-28
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.6.4 The construction period of the project is anticipated to commence in 2022 and be competed in 2025. Construction will comprise two phases:
Phase 1: Demolition of blocks G, J and K, Steel House and Morell’s Bar and construction buildings 1A, 1B 2 and 3; and Phase 2: Demolition of blocks C, H, L and M, the nursery and the CHP plant and construction of buildings 4-11. 7.6.5 The duration of the entire Construction Phase would be regarded as Medium-term and Temporary. It is judged that given the temporary nature of construction that potential effects on the existing baseline conditions (Site fabric, landscape character and visual receptors) would not give rise to effects that would exceed those experienced during the Operational Phase following completion. This is assessed in further details in the subsequent sections. Effects on Site Fabric 7.6.6 During the Construction Phase a number of landscape features, comprising parts of the Site’s physical fabric would be modified or removed as follows:
The demolition of several existing residential blocks; The retention and resurfacing of the existing carriageway through the core of the Site and existing footpaths; The felling / removal of trees and vegetation; and The gradual introduction of new buildings, external spaces, and new tree planting. Effects on Landscape Character 7.6.7 The Construction Phase will result in a modification of landscape / townscape character. The Site is presently characterised by student accommodation and the proposed development would be on similar building footprints and retain the majority of landscape features such as trees and woodlands. 7.6.8 Although construction activity is different in nature to the completed development, it is judged that the Construction Phase would not give rise to effects on landscape character over and above those of the completed development before the proposed planting has established, although it is acknowledged that it would be more likely that to be perceived as adverse than the permanent effects of the completed development – due to the presence of construction vehicles and activity. Effects on Visual Receptors 7.6.9 During the Construction Phase, visual receptors will experience views of construction activity, compounds and the movement of vehicles and plant. The nature of views and the visibility of construction works will vary over the period of the Construction Phase dependent on the phasing of works, as some activity may be screened by areas of completed development. 7.6.10 The greatest effects will be experienced during the early phases of construction (i.e. when there is no or limited new development to screen views) and when construction works are undertaken towards the perimeters of the Site. 7.6.11 Although construction activity is different in nature to the completed development, and will introduce elements of plant, for example cranes, that would be taller than any proposed buildings, it is judged that the construction phase would not give rise to effects on views or visual amenity over and above those of the completed development, before the proposed planting has established, although it is acknowledged that it would be more likely that to be perceived as adverse than the permanent effects of the completed development – due to the presence of
7-29
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
construction vehicles and activity.
Operational Phase 7.6.12 The assessment of effects during the Operational Phase differentiates between the period before and after designed in planting is fully established. During this period, effects will gradually reduce as planting along the Site boundaries and within the proposed development becomes established. 7.6.13 Proposed planting as part of the project will provide amenity value within the Site but will not significantly contribute to the mitigation of landscape and visual effects, which will be predominately mitigated by the existing mature vegetation in and around the Site. Taking these considerations into account, all effects are assessed as being Permanent. Effects on Site Fabric 7.6.14 As detailed above, during the Construction Phase, a number of landscape features, comprising parts of the Site’s physical fabric would be modified or removed. Given this will have occurred during the Construction Phase, effects during the Operational Phase would be minimal and not exceed those experienced earlier in the construction of the proposed development. Effects on Landscape Character 7.6.15 The Site is 4.8 hectares in area and comprises part of the Clive Booth Student Village. This consists of a series of 2-3 storey residential blocks, mainly constructed during the 1990s, together with ancillary facilities such as a boiler house and a nursery school. Paved footpaths and roadways, and areas of amenity grass and semi-mature trees separate the blocks. An area of broadleaved semi-natural woodland occupies the northern part of the Site. Vehicular access is provided from a series of cul-de-sacs off John Garne Way, itself accessed from Marston Road. 7.6.16 The Site slopes to the west between elevations of around 71-92m AOD, forming part of a shallow valley on the flanks of Headington Hill, which defines the eastern side of the Cherwell valley. Figure 7.6 shows the landform within the study area. 7.6.17 To the north of the Site are residential areas including off Pullens Field and Feilden Grove. This area is suburban in character with detached residential properties set within gardens and trees. To the north of the Site is the Grade II registered garden at High Wall and Doris Field Nature Reserve, along with the Site are the John Garne Way Allotments. 7.6.18 Immediately west of the Site are the Clive Booth Postgraduate Halls and the remainder of the Clive Booth Student Village which is being retained. These areas comprise 3-4 storey structures and are characteristic of areas to the south and east of the Site that includes educational establishments such as the EF International Campus and Oxford Brookes University. 7.6.19 The Site is located within the southern extent of the Garden Suburbs TT and Headington Hill TCA and adjacent the Open Hills with Institutions TT / Headington Hill TCA. The Site displays characteristics that are more typical of the adjacent Open Hills with Institutions TT/ Headington Hill TCA due to the presence of student accommodation, rather than suburban private residential land uses. 7.6.20 The Site is currently characterised by student accommodation and the proposed development would be on similar building footprints and retain the majority of landscape features such as trees and woodlands. 7.6.21 It is judged that Large- and Medium-scale effects would not occur as a result of the proposed
7-30
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
development. Small scale effects would occur within the Site itself as the change to the baseline environment will be noticeable, albeit very similar to the present character. 7.6.22 Beyond the Site's boundaries, the scale of effect on townscape / landscape character would reduce rapidly with distance due to the limited visibility of proposals beyond the Site's immediate contact, and the proposed development being very similar to the current built form within the Site. Effects beyond the Site's boundaries would be at most Negligible. 7.6.23 From locations further afield, the proposed buildings will be seen set amongst trees in more distant views from slopes to the west of the city. However due to the distance from the Site, and the scale of the proposals as seen in these views (refer to Representative Viewpoints 7 - 9, Figure 7.7), where they will sit below the horizon line amongst trees, effects on landscape character will also be Negligible. This is also the case for views from the city, where similar views of structures amongst trees and below the horizon-line will arise. 7.6.24 Taking the above considerations into account, only the host landscape character area is considered in detail below.
Landscape Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting (2002): Headington Hill TCA (Garden Suburbs TT) 7.6.25 This area includes the Site and the area to the north of the Site. It is surrounded to the west, south and east by the adjacent Open Hills with Institutions TT (TT 11) / Headington Hill TCA (TCA 11A) and the Site has some characteristics that reflect the transition from one character area to the other – showing characteristics of both areas. 7.6.26 Key characteristics noted within the character assessment include:
“… forms the skyline to the east of the Cherwell Valley” “…mixed development of detached houses dating from turn of the century to the present day…” “Curved streets and cul de sacs with large, detached buildings set in large plots at a low density” “High tree cover and avenues along lanes provide sense of enclosure” “Rural roads and lanes (eg Pullens Lane, Jack Straw's Lane) with few road markings or signs” “Mature garden and woodland planting provides contributes to the leafy character of the suburb” “Views over central Oxford where vegetation allows, but generally confined to short distance views within area with glimpses through gateways to properties and into private gardens” "Wooded hill forms a backdrop to the Cherwell Valley.” 7.6.27 The Conservation Area Appraisal notes: “Tension between residential character and academic uses - The historic and architectural interest of the conservation area includes both the development of the residential suburb, largely in the north, and the academic institutions, largely in the south… Nevertheless, some institutional uses have helped preserve the historic pattern of properties and open space surrounding each of the large properties”
7.6.28 The ‘tension’ described above suggests that although institutional buildings are not atypical for the area, they have the potential to disturb the character if not sensitively designed, or to help to maintain it where they preserve the characteristic spacing and tree cover.
7-31
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.6.29 On this basis, Susceptibility to development of this nature (i.e. student accommodation) is judged to be Medium. The character area is judged to be of Local Value, as reflected by its inclusion within a Conservation Area. Considering both Susceptibility and Value together, Sensitivity is judged to be Medium. 7.6.30 As set out at paragraphs above, effects would be confined to the Site itself. These Permanent effects would be Small scale and affect an Intermediate extent of the character area. Effects would be of Low magnitude, Slight significance and would be, on balance, Neutral, given the similarities of the proposed development to the present development already within this character area / type. 7.6.31 With regards to the Oxford High Building TAN's visual tests (see Section 7.5. Design approach in respect of townscape and visual matters), it is judged that potential effects on the visual characteristics of this TT / TCA as a result of the proposed development would not affect the visual character of the area to such a degree that the composition of the view is discernibly different from that of the existing character of the Site. Effects on Visual Receptors
Visual Aids 7.6.32 Annotated photographs for Representative Viewpoints and Illustrative Viewpoint photographs are shown in Figure 7.7, appended within the appendices supporting this LVIA (see Appendix 7.7). The method of visualisation selected for each viewpoint has been informed by the Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 06/19 Visual Representation of development proposals. 7.6.33 Verified visualisations (see Appendix 7.7) have been prepared for Representative Viewpoints 10 and 11 (Figure 7.8). Figure 7.8 presents photowire visualisations that show a 3D wireline model of the development correctly placed in its photographic context. Views of the model from the 'virtual' viewpoint within the 3D model are generated to show how the development would look from the viewpoint. They are based on the detailed layout of the proposed development allowing an appreciation of scale, massing and articulation of structures within the landscape, and illustrate the development at year 1 and year 15. Figure 7.8 also includes a wider horizontal field of view from Viewpoint 11, due to its close proximity to the site, to illustrate some of the context in which the proposed development would be seen. Further details about the visualisation methodology are provided in Appendix 7.3. 7.6.34 Viewpoint 11 has also been visualised for illustrative purposes in Figure 7.10. This illustrative photomontage shows a superimposed image of what the proposed development may look like from the John Garne Way Allotment. The 3D illustrative view has been rendered to match the likely surface finishes of the proposed development and lighting conditions according to the date and time of the viewpoint photograph. 7.6.35 Both sets of visualisations (verified and illustrative) are 'layered' to show how the proposed development would the appears in front of and behind intervening landscape features, such as vegetation and other buildings. Where vegetation is proposed as part of the development, this has been added to the final visualisations. 7.6.36 In addition to the two visualised representative viewpoints listed above, photowire visualisations (verified) have also has been produced to illustrate likely views from the Oxford View Cone locations considered in Appendix 7.6, following the same method as set out in Appendix 7.3. Views of the historic city of Oxford are referred to where necessary in this chapter for reference.
7-32
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.6.37 The viewpoint description, description of effects and scale of effect for each Representative Viewpoint (see Figure 7.4 for locations) is set out on the relevant photograph panel (refer to Figure 7.7). The scale of effect at each viewpoint is summarised below: Summary of scale of effects on viewpoints Viewpoint Distance, Permanent visual effects direction Scale of effect Adverse, Neutral, Positive 1) Cuckoo Lane 150m, SE Medium-Small Adverse (winter); Negligible (summer) 2) John Garne Way 150m, W Small (winter + Adverse summer) 3) Milham Ford Nature Park 500m, NW Small (winter); Neutral Negligible (summer) 4) Ferry Road 700m, NW Medium-Small Adverse (winter + summer) 5) Footpaths near Marston 1.5km, NW Negligible (winter Neutral Sports Ground + summer) 6) Wytham Road and A420 4.6km, W (excluded - no safe public viewpoint was identified) 7) Raleigh Park 4.2km, W Negligible (winter Neutral + summer) 8) Hinksey Heights Golf Club 3.9km, SW Negligible (winter Neutral + summer) 9) Footpath south of Chiswell 4km, SW Negligible (winter Neutral Copse + summer) 10) St Mary’s Church Tower 1.6km, SW Small (winter + Neutral summer) 11) John Garne Way 80m, N Medium - Small Adverse Allotments (winter + summer) 12) Pullens Field 30m, NE Negligible (winter Neutral + summer) 13) Mesopotamia Walk 400m, W Negligible (winter Neutral + summer)
7.6.38 The Representative Viewpoints are used as ‘samples’ on which to base judgements of the scale of effects on visual receptors. The viewpoints represent multiple visual receptors, and duration and extent are judged when assessing impacts on the visual receptors. Each of the viewpoints is a ‘sample’ of the potential effects, representing a wide range of receptors – including not only those actually at the viewpoint, but also those nearby, at a similar distance and/or direction. From these viewpoints it can be seen that: 7.6.39 There would be no Large or Medium scale effects outside of the Site, due to the screening provided by existing buildings and trees. Effects within approximately 500m would be slightly greater in winter than summer as some of the screening is provided by trees rather than dense woodland, and proposed buildings will become more visible in winter – set amongst other buildings and seen through branches. Viewpoint 4 looking along Ferry Road is an exception, which results in greater effects than for other views at a similar distance – it has a channelled view focussed on St Nicholas church tower with the Site providing a wooded backdrop. 7.6.40 Beyond approximately 500m from the Site, effects would reduce to Negligible scale and the development would only be visible from elevated locations including the tall buildings within
7-33
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Oxford City centre, where effects would typically be Small scale from closer towers (such as St Mary’s), reducing further to the west due to increasing distance and a greater number of intervening buildings and focal points. In open views across the city from the hills to the west, the proposed buildings would be seen set amongst trees and would be a very minor feature in panoramic views of the city.
Visual Receptor Groups 7.6.41 The assessment of effects on settlements focuses primarily on the visual amenity of public spaces, though views from groups of dwellings will also be noted in the descriptions where relevant. Effects on private residential amenity are a separate matter, and only require assessment when a development is likely to be ‘overwhelming’ or ‘overbearing’ (as set out within Appendix 7.2), which is not the case in respect of this development. 7.6.42 This assessment focuses on effects on groups of visual receptors, incorporating effects on views from public spaces and streets within areas of settlements (or around the houses), and the routes and accessible landscape in the surrounding area. Residents and visitors within these communities are assessed to be of High-Medium sensitivity. 7.6.43 As set out at above, visual effects tend to be Negligible beyond 500m of the Site and effects on the following visual receptors will be of Negligible Magnitude, Minimal Significance and Neutral:
Residents in streets off Mortimer Drive and footpath users/ users of Marston Road Sports Ground, Exeter College Recreation Ground, Hertford College Recreation Ground, Trinity College Recreation Ground and Magdalen College Recreation Ground on low lying ground east of river Cherwell. Users of permissive path from Botley Lodge to Wytham Woods and motorists on local roads (including A34/A420) Visitors to Raleigh Park, footpath users and local residents at Harcourt Hill. Footpath users, residents and users of Hinksey Heights Golf Club (between Harcourt Hill and Hinksey Hill. 7.6.44 The remaining visual receptors identified in Section 7.4 are assessed below.
Residents, pedestrians on footpath along Cuckoo Lane (Ref. 320/32) and John Garne Way and users of Pullens Lane and John Garne Way allotments, in an area defined by Marston Road, Cuckoo Lane, Pullen’s Lane and William Street 7.6.45 Effects on these visual receptors are represented by Representative Viewpoints 1 and 2; and Illustrative Viewpoints A and B (Figure 7.7). 7.6.46 These viewpoints illustrate that, even in the closest views, the proposed buildings would be seen set beyond existing retained buildings within the Site; the reminder of the retained Clive Booth student accommodation beyond the Site; and / or screened by retained trees within and along the boundaries of the Site. Effects would tend to be greater in winter when buildings would become more visible through trees when they are out of leaf. Visibility, as indicated by the ZTV and confirmed through fieldwork, would be limited to locations in close proximity to the Site boundary, including along Cuckoo Lane (as illustrated by Viewpoints 1 and A), and to views aligned along street (such as Viewpoint 2 from John Garne Way). Views from within Headington Hill Park (refer to Illustrative Viewpoint A) would be largely screened by intervening vegetation, although limited views from the north of the park, adjacent to Cuckoo Lane (refer to Illustrative Viewpoint B), would be possible through boundary vegetation. 7.6.47 Where the proposed development would be most apparent (i.e. during the winter months), from
7-34
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
the limited number of locations within the immediate surroundings of the Site, it is judged that the views would not be discernibly different from that of the existing baseline environment. The proposed buildings have been carefully designed to minimise visual intrusion and preserve the prevailing character in so far as possible. This has been achieved by using the footprint of existing buildings where possible; positioning new buildings to retain the majority of existing tree cover in addition to new planting; keeping the building's height as low as possible and orientating them with consideration to potential views towards the Site; and setting back the buildings from the Site's boundary where needed. 7.6.48 Visualisations from the private allotments to the east and north of the Site - Pullen’s Lane and John Garne Way allotments - are illustrated in Figure 7.8 and show the anticipated degree of change that would occur as a result of the proposed development for members of each allotment. Views from the John Garne Way allotments would comprise new and taller building in comparison to the buildings presently seen on-site, which would extend slightly to the left of the view up the rising landform. The form of the buildings would be different to those presently seen within the Site. Overtime, as proposed planting establishes, visibility would reduce as the new vegetation screens views towards the proposed development. From Pullen's Lane allotments would comprise partial visibility of the upper elevations of the proposed development, which would be taller than those presently on-site, although the majority of the proposed development would be screened by retained and proposed tree cover along the Site's boundary. Views would be seen within the urban context to the west of the Site, and there would be little disruption to long-distant views over Oxford City. It is important to note that both of these views would be limited to the members of these allotments and are not accessible to members of the general public without permission. 7.6.49 Permanent visual effects on this receptor group would be, in the worst case, Medium-Small scale, affecting a Localised extent of this visual receptor group. Views presently comprise visibility of the existing student accommodation within the Site, nestled within the wooded character of Headington Hill. Whilst the proposed development would increase the heights of the existing buildings to a degree, the view would remain largely unchanged, given similar built characteristics of the existing and proposed developments. 7.6.50 In combination with the proposed landscape strategy, which is set out in detail in the DAS and summarised in Section 7.5, the proposed development would be well integrated in the wooded character of Headington Hill as a result of the new planting along the Site's boundary that would screen the majority of the proposed development and soften views where the upper elevations of the new buildings would be possible. This would also strengthen the present wooded character of the area. The proposed development would form a partial alternation (at most) to the existing baseline environment. This is visualised in Figure 7.8 from Viewpoint 11. 7.6.51 The resultant effects would be Low magnitude, Moderate-Slight significance and, on balance, Adverse due to the increased visibility of built form amongst the trees where views are possible, albeit it that visibility would be limited to a comparatively small number of public locations, and the landscape strategy would positively integrate the proposed development into the prevailing landscape characteristics over time.
Residents of streets north of William Street and Ferry Road as far north as Jack Straw’s Lane and Nicholson Road and visitors to Milham Ford Nature Park 7.6.52 Effects on these visual receptors are represented by Representative Viewpoints 3 and 4 (Figures 7.7). 7.6.53 These illustrate that, where the proposed development is visible and not screened intervening
7-35
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
vegetation and buildings, the upper elevations of the tallest proposed buildings would be visible beyond the foreground and amongst the existing retained buildings and / or trees within and around the Site upon Headington Hill. 7.6.54 Effects would tend to be greater in winter when the buildings would become more visible through trees when they are out of leaf. As indicated by the ZTV, effects would be limited to a small number of publicly accessible locations. 7.6.55 Where views to the proposed development would be most apparent (i.e. during the winter months) within this visual receptor group, the proposed buildings have been carefully designed to minimise visual intrusion and preserve the prevailing character in so far as possible. This has been achieved by using the footprint of existing buildings where possible; positioning new buildings to retain the majority of existing tree cover in addition to new planting; keeping the building's height as low as possible and orientating them with consideration to potential views towards the Site; and setting back the buildings from the Site's boundary where needed. 7.6.56 Permanent visual effects would be, in the worst case, Small scale, affecting a Localised extent of this visual receptor group. Views presently comprise visibility (to a degree) of the existing student accommodation within the Site, nestled within the wooded character of Headington Hill. Whilst the proposed development would increase the heights of the existing buildings, the anticipated change would remain broadly similar, given the similarities between the new and existing development, and the anticipation that the proposed landscape strategy will mitigate effects over time as planting establishes. 7.6.57 In combination with the proposed landscape strategy, which is set out in detail in the DAS and summarised in Section 7.5. The Proposed Development, the proposed development would be well integrated in the wooded character of Headington Hill and would form a partial alternation (at most) to the existing baseline environment. 7.6.58 The resultant effects would be Low magnitude and Slight significance. Effects are judged to be, on balance, Neutral, as the proposed development would only result in a slight increase in visible built form within a wooded backdrop from a comparably small number of public locations. Where such views are possible, it is acknowledged that taller buildings would be visible, but over time, as the proposed landscape strategy would positively integrate the proposed development into its surroundings, visual effects would reduce. 7.6.59 to the slightly increased visibility of built form in the wooded backdrop seen in views out from the streets and Milham Ford Nature Park. However, it should be noted that visibility would be limited to a comparatively small number of public locations, and the landscape strategy would positively integrate the proposed development into the prevailing landscape characteristics over time.
Visitors to tall buildings within Oxford 7.6.60 Effects on these visual receptors, who are of High sensitivity, are represented by Representative Viewpoint 10 (St. Marys Church) (See Figure 7.7). Photowires presented on Figures 7.8, illustrate that the proposed buildings would be seen amongst the wooded backdrop formed by Headington Hill, set below the skyline. 7.6.61 The viewing experience from other tall buildings within the city will share many of these characteristics, but the degree to which the proposed buildings will be visible will vary, with glimpsed or no views possible from some buildings depending on location, orientation of view and the screening effects of other structures (refer to Illustrative Viewpoints C and D from Carfax Tower and the tower of St Michael at the North Gate - Figure 7.7).
7-36
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
7.6.62 Permanent visual effects on this receptor group would be, in the worst case, Small scale, affecting an Intermediate extent of this receptor group – reflecting that not all important views out from tall buildings are towards the Site. These effects would be Low magnitude, Moderate significance and, on balance, Adverse due to the slightly increased visibility of built form in the wooded backdrop seen in views towards Headington Hill, albeit it that visibility would be limited to a comparatively small number of locations. 7.6.63 As discussed in Section 7.5. Design approach in respect of townscape and visual matters, which considers the proposed development in accordance with the visual test criteria of the Oxford High Buildings TAN (2018), it is judged that the proposed development would not affect the visual amenity or character of the city to such a degree that would be detrimental, due to the similarities of the proposed development to its present baseline environment. In addition, the proposed buildings have been carefully designed to minimise visual intrusion and preserve the prevailing character in so far as possible. This has been achieved by using the footprint of existing buildings where possible; positioning new buildings to retain the majority of existing tree cover in addition to new planting; and keeping the building's height as low as possible and orientating them with consideration to potential views towards the Site. Further details are set out in the DAS of how the proposed development seeks to integrated itself well into the prevailing wooded character of Headington Hill.
Key Routes 7.6.64 No key routes have been identified as requiring detailed assessment.
Specific Viewpoints 7.6.65 As noted in Section 7.5. Specific Viewpoints, Representative Viewpoint 7 at Raleigh Park is considered as a specific viewpoint and is referred to within the separate appraisal considering views of the historic city of Oxford in its landscape setting. This assessment identifies that the important aspects of the view are not affected by the proposals and that effects on visual receptors at this location would be of Negligible scale. Effects on the specific viewpoint are accordingly judged to be of Negligible magnitude, Minimal significance and Neutral. The change in the view from Raleigh Park is illustrated within Appendix 7.7 to the ES.
Designated landscapes 7.6.66 No designated landscapes have been identified from policy maps requiring assessment.
7.7 Residual effects
7.7.1 The mitigation measures required to reduce the effect of the proposed development on landscape character and views has been incorporated into the design of the project and the assessment of effects assumes that this mitigation forms part of the proposed development. 7.7.2 No further mitigation measures are proposed, and as such, the residual effects will be the same as those described for Permanent effects of the proposed development.
7.8 Implications of Climate Change
7.8.1 The landscape is sensitive to gradual changes in climate and to more abrupt changes caused by extreme weather events. This could affect the resilience of existing landscape / habitat features within the application Site, in particular tree health which may be impacted by water stress, temperature change and pathogens and viruses. 7.8.2 In order to mitigate against the effects of climate change, the proposed development
7-37
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
incorporates a comprehensive green infrastructure strategy which seeks to make the landscape of the application Site more resilient, buffering and extending the area of woodland around the application Site; creating a more diverse mosaic of woodland, trees, scrub and grassland; and better linking existing areas of landscape / habitat. 7.8.3 The active management of the landscape will ensure it is appropriately maintained in the long- term, and the detailed landscape design should carefully consider species selection in order to provide diversity and resilience. 7.8.4 While climate change has the potential to alter the landscape in longer term, overall it is considered that such changes would not influence the judgements made in the LVIA and that the design of the proposed development incorporates sufficient measures to mitigate against the effects of climate change on the landscape.
7.9 Cumulative effects
Introduction 7.9.1 As indicated in the assessment methodology described in Section 7.2. Cumulative Assessment, the scope for potential cumulative effects of the proposed development includes effects in combination with the following proposed schemes:
Development at the Headington Hill site (replacing the former Helena Kennedy Building). Site allocations in the Oxford Local Plan 2036 that would lie within the surrounding area, including the Government buildings and Harcourt House detailed in Policy SP16. Proposed pedestrian link between CBSV and Headington Hill Hall, hereafter referred to as the "Development for Cuckoo Lane / Headington Hill Hall scheme". 7.9.2 The Headington Hill development would replace a demolished building with another of similar scale and footprint, and, like the Site, is surrounded by a context of established and mature trees and buildings. Observations from site work, including consideration from all of the assessed viewpoints, indicate that the combination of the two developments would not give rise to notably different effects on character, views, sequential views or designated landscapes than for the proposed development alone. 7.9.3 Accordingly, a detailed assessment is not required and cumulative effects from the two developments should be regarded as being of the same magnitude and significance, and of the same nature (positive/adverse/neutral) to those arising from the proposed development as set out in the assessment presented in this chapter. 7.9.4 Two sites are allocated in the sites and Housing Plan in close proximity to the Site. These are both located to the south west of the Site adjacent to Marston Road. 7.9.5 Policy SP16 (Government Buildings and Harcourt House) records that planning permission will be granted for "…residential development, student accommodation and academic institutional uses at the Government Buildings and Harcourt House Site”. There are no details of what development in these locations may comprise in terms of design or height. On the basis that new buildings do not exceed 3-4 storeys and are of sympathetic design, observations from site work, including consideration from all of the assessed viewpoints, indicate that the combination of these allocated sites with the proposed development would not give rise to notably different effects on character, views, sequential views or designated landscapes than for the proposed development alone. 7.9.6 The "Development for Cuckoo Lane / Headington Hill Hall scheme" is a proposed development
7-38
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
that will be submitted for consideration to Oxford City Council. Details available at the time of this assessment indicate that the development would comprise the following: "Alterations to the footpath connection to the Headington Hill Hall site, including alterations to boundary wall and railings, new surface treatments etc.”
7.9.7 On the basis that the proposed development would seek to improve the existing pedestrian link between CSBV and Headington Hall and be of a sympathetic design - avoiding tree loss and careful selection of appropriate materials - observations from site work, indicate that the combination of this scheme sites with the proposed development would not give rise to notably different effects on character, views, sequential views or designated landscapes than for the proposed development alone. Indeed, initial proposals indicate that the scheme could result in outcomes that would positively enhance the area in terms of landscape / visual matters whilst also significantly improving personal security for users passing through the area.
7.10 Summary of Landscape and Visual Effects
7.10.1 Effects on landscape character would be limited to the Site itself, where the change would be of Slight significance and Neutral. The proposed development maintains the character of the Site in terms of the uses, scale and spacing of buildings, and enclosure by mature trees. 7.10.2 The most significant impacts on views would be on visitors to tall buildings within Oxford City centre where the effects would be of Low magnitude, but Moderate significance and Adverse, reflecting the importance of these views and the slightly increased visibility of rooflines within the trees on Headington Hill, which forms an important backdrop to views from the City. 7.10.3 Closer to the Site, effects within approximately 500m - encompassing an area extending from Cuckoo Lane to Ferry Road, William Street and Milham Ford Nature Park - would be of Low magnitude and, in the worst case, Moderate-Slight significance and Adverse. The limited effects arise from the degree of screening provided by trees and buildings within and around the Site, and effects would be reduced in summer when trees are in leaf. 7.10.4 Effects on key routes, specific viewpoints and designated landscapes would be Negligible. 7.10.5 The proposal would not give rise to ‘overbearing’ or ‘overwhelming’ effects on residential properties. 7.10.6 Cumulative effects of the development in combination with the proposed Headington Hill building and nearby allocated sites, would not be notably different than for the proposed development alone. 7.10.7 Effects on the receptors assessed above are summarised in the Table 7.10 below. Significant effects are underlined and only those receptors assessed to receive greater than Negligible magnitude effects are included in the summary table. For receptors where the significance of effects varies, the distribution of effects is summarised.
Statement of Significance 7.10.8 As set out in the assessment methodology, effects that are Major-Moderate or Major are judged to be significant. Effects of Moderate significance or less are judged to constitute additional considerations. It should be noted that whilst an effect may be significant, that does not necessarily mean that such an impact would be unacceptable. 7.10.9 The findings of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment indicate that no significant effects would arise.
7-39
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of effects Receptor Sensitivity Nature of potential impact Proposed mitigation Residual effect Significant / of Receptor not Significant Construction phase Although construction activity is different in nature to the completed development, it is judged that the Construction Phase would not give rise to effects on landscape character and / or visual receptors over and above those of the completed development before the proposed planting has established. It is however acknowledged that it would be more likely that to be perceived as adverse than the permanent effects of the completed development – due to the presence of construction vehicles and activity. Operational phase Effects on Landscape Character Headington Hill TCA (Garden Medium Overall effects on the character Embedded into Slight Significance, Not Significant Suburbs TT) area Proposed Neutral Includes Site Development (Low Magnitude) Effects on Visual Receptors Visual Receptor Groups In an area defined by High - Up to 300m from Site. Embedded into Moderate-Slight Not Significant Marston Road, Cuckoo Lane, Medium Proposed Significance, Adverse Pullens Lane and William Includes residents, visitors, road Development (Low Magnitude) Street. users and allotment users and visitors. William Street / Ferry Road High - Between 300m and 600m, to the Embedded into Slight Significance, Not Significant to Jack Straw’s Lane and Medium north and west to the Site. Proposed Neutral Nicholson Road incl. Milham Development (Low Magnitude) Ford Nature Park. Includes residents, visitors, road users and park users. Visitors to tall buildings within High Between 1.5-2km west of the Site. Embedded into Moderate Significance, Not Significant Oxford. Proposed Adverse Includes visitors to tall buildings. Development (Low Magnitude) Key Routes None Specific Viewpoints None Landscape Designations None
7-40
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Mitigation Commitments Summary 7.10.10 A 'mitigation by design' approach has been taken during the course of the masterplanning process, with landscape and visual matters taken into account as an integral part of the design of the proposed development. Landscape design has been informed by key local guidance documents, which identify opportunities for landscape enhancements and improvement. As described in Section 7.5. The Proposed Development, the scheme is led by its landscape proposals and promotes the concept of a 'woodland village'. The vast majority of surrounding woodland is retained; buildings have been arranged to maximise tree retention; and its layout largely follows the footprint of the existing built development. This creates a series multi- functional external spaces of different scale that respond to the present characteristics of the Site and integrates the proposed development with the mature landscape setting. The new buildings have also been sensitively designed to minimal visual intrusion and impact. 7.10.11 This 'mitigation by design' approach assumes that all mitigation measures are embedded into the proposed development as described in Chapter 3 of this ES, and therefore an have been considered as part of the assessment of effects in Section 7.6 of this chapter. 7.10.12 Additional mitigation measures that should be adopted, beyond those inherent within the design, include:
Adoption of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) Implementation of a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) 7.10.13 A CEMP will play an important in ensuring considerate construction activity and that the identified woodland, trees and other landscape / habitat features are protected during the construction phase. A LEMP is important to ensure the identified landscape / habitat features are appropriately managed, in particular in ensuring the long-term health and robustness of perimeter woodland which provides an important screen.
7.11 References
The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Landscape Institute with the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013. An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment, Natural England, 2014. Special Report – The State of Environmental Impact Assessment Practice in the UK, Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2011. Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 06/19 Visual Representation of development proposals. Landscape Institute Technical Note 06/17 – Townscape Character Assessment Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 02/2019 Residential Visual amenity assessment. European Landscape Convention, 2000. Oxford Core Strategy 2026, Oxford City Council, adopted 14 March 2011. Oxford Local Plan 2036, Oxford City Council, adopted 8 June 2020. The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1: Strategic sites and Policies, Vale of White Horse District Council, adopted December 2016. The Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2, Vale of White Horse District Council, adopted in October 2019. Headington Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2032, Headington Neighbourhood Forum, made July 2017, National Character Area Profiles, Natural England, 2013. Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study, Oxfordshire County Council, Natural England
7-41
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
and The Earth Trust, 2004. Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting, prepared by Land Use Consultants on behalf of Oxford City Council, 2002. Vale of White Horse Landscape Character Assessment, prepared by Hankinson Duckett Associates on behalf Vale of White Horse District Council, September 2017 Landscape Character Assessment for the Local Plan 2033, prepared by Lepus Consulting on behalf of South Oxfordshire District Council, November 2017 Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995) Oxfordshire Historic Landscape Characterisation Project, Oxfordshire County Council, 2017. Assessment of the Oxford View Cones, Oxford City Council, Oxford Preservation Trust and Historic England, 2015 Headington Hill Conservation Area Appraisal, Oxford City Council, 2012.
7-42
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
8 Noise
8.1 Introduction
This chapter, prepared by Arup, assesses the potential effects relating to noise and vibration, both during the construction phase and the occupational phase of the student residential development. Potential sources of noise during each of the phases of the development have been considered and, where the scoping exercise identified the possibility of noise effects, the potential impacts of noise have been considered. This assessment has been carried out on the basis of information that is currently available. In some instances, full details of some potential noise-generating activities are not known, therefore it has been necessary to make some assumptions. Where this has been necessary, these assumptions have been detailed.
8.2 Assessment methodology
Scope The scope for the Noise Impact Assessment was set out in the scoping report (EIA Scoping Report, prepared by Savills and dated 21/10/2020). The scoped items are given in Table 8.1. Scoped items for the EIA assessment Impact / Assessment Scoped In / Out? Reason Suitability of site for residential Scoped out Site already occupied by residential development (not required for development. New building EIA, but is a planning envelope design not likely to be of consideration) lower acoustic performance than existing. Noise from construction plant and Scoped in Potential for short term, temporary equipment noise impacts during construction. Vibration from construction plant Scoped out Significant levels of off-site vibration and equipment due to construction are considered unlikely. Noise from construction traffic Scoped in Potential for short term, temporary noise impacts due to construction traffic. Vibration from construction traffic Scoped out Levels of vibration due to construction traffic are likely to be minimal. Noise from operational phase Scoped in Potential for long term noise plant and equipment impacts from building services plant and equipment. Vibration from operational phase Scoped out No perceptible off-site vibration plant and equipment expected from operational plant and equipment. Noise and vibration from Scoped out No significant changes in operational traffic operational road traffic expected due to the proposed development.
On the basis of the conclusions of the scoping report, only those items that were considered to be scoped in (indicated by the non-shaded rows in Table 8.1 above) will be considered in detail in this assessment. No further consideration items that were scoped out is provided.
8-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Legislation and policy This section describes in outline the key documents that have been referred to in carrying out the noise assessment. National Planning Policy Framework The National Planning Policy Framework1 (NPPF) is a key part of the Government’s planning system, which aims to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth. Its core principle is to advocate a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which in literal terms means that if the adverse impacts of a development are outweighed by the benefits, when assessed as a whole, then the development should be approved. Local policy should reflect this principle and therefore the Local Authority has a key role in determining within its Local Plan and noise policies what is “acceptable risk” in terms of noise pollution within its area. The NPPF must be considered in conjunction with local development plans to inform planning decisions. In reference to noise, it states (paragraph 180) that planning policies and decisions should aim to:
Avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development; and Mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development. Planning Practice Guidance – Noise The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) for noise2 draws on the principles of the Noise Policy Statement for England3 (NPSE) in particular the concepts of NOEL, LOAEL and SOAEL as described below:
Significant observed adverse effect level (SOAEL): This is the level of noise exposure above which significant adverse effects on health and quality of life occur. Lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL): this is the level of noise exposure above which adverse effects on health and quality of life can be detected. No observed effect level (NOEL): this is the level of noise exposure below which no effect at all on health or quality of life can be detected. Further detail on the practical impacts of noise at the various effect levels is given in the Planning Practice Guidance and is reproduced in Table 8.2 below. Noise exposure hierarchy Perception Examples of Outcomes Effect Level Action No Observed Effect Level Not No effect No Observed No specific noticeable Effect measures required No Observed Adverse Effect Level Noticeable Noise can be heard, but does not cause any No Observed No specific and not change in behaviour or attitude. Can slightly Adverse Effect measures intrusive affect the acoustic character of the area but required not such that there is a perceived change in
1 National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, published March 2012, updated June 2019 2 Planning Practice Guidance, www.gov.uk/guidance/noise--2, Department for Communities and Local Government, published March 2014, updated July 2019 3 Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) – Defra, March 2010
8-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
the quality of life. Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level Noticeable Noise can be heard and causes small Observed Mitigate and and intrusive changes in behaviour and/or attitude, e.g. Adverse Effect reduce to a turning up volume of television; speaking minimum more loudly; where there is no alternative ventilation, having to close windows for some of the time because of the noise. Potential for some reported sleep disturbance. Affects the acoustic character of the area such that there is a perceived change in the quality of life. Significant Observed Adverse Effect Level Noticeable The noise causes a material change in Significant Avoid and behaviour and/or attitude, e.g. avoiding Observed disruptive certain activities during periods of intrusion; Adverse Effect where there is no alternative ventilation, having to keep windows closed most of the time because of the noise. Potential for sleep disturbance resulting in difficulty in getting to sleep, premature awakening and difficulty in getting back to sleep. Quality of life diminished due to change in acoustic character of the area. Noticeable Extensive and regular changes in behaviour Unacceptable Prevent and very and/or an inability to mitigate effect of noise Adverse Effect disruptive leading to psychological stress or physiological effects, e.g. regular sleep deprivation/awakening; loss of appetite, significant, medically definable harm, e.g. auditory and non-auditory
Local planning policy Oxford City Council (OCC) refers to noise in section 4 of their Local Plan 2036. Policy RE8 Noise and Vibration of the Local Plan provides a high-level summary of the Council’s approach to assessing developments. A summary of the policy is as follows:
Planning permission will only be granted for development proposals which manage noise to safeguard or improve amenity, health, and quality of life; Planning permission will not be granted for development that will generate unacceptable noise and vibration impacts; Planning permission will not be granted for development sensitive to noise in locations which experience high levels of noise, unless it can be demonstrated, through a noise assessment, that appropriate attenuation measures will be provided to ensure an acceptable level of amenity for end users and to prevent harm to the continued operation of existing uses; Conditions will be used to secure such mitigation measures and operational commitments; Measures to mitigate the impacts of noise and vibration associated with demolition and construction will be secured by legal agreement through Construction Management Plans (Refer to Policy M2).
8-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Standards and guidance British Standard BS 5228 BS 5228-1: 2009+A1:2014 - Noise4 provides practical guidance on the control of noise from construction sites. The legislative background to noise control is described and recommendations are given regarding procedures for creating effective liaison between developers, site operators and local authorities. Methods for predicting and measuring noise are presented and guidance is given concerning the measurement of noise. Annex E of BS 5228 introduces the ‘ABC’ assessment method, which defines the threshold of likely significant effects at residential receivers. These thresholds are summarised in Table 8.3below. Threshold of potential significant effect at dwellings according to the ABC method in BS5228-1
Assessment category and threshold value Threshold values in decibels (dB), LAeq period Category Category Category C A B Weekday Daytime (07:00-19:00) 65 70 75 Saturdays (07:00-13:00) Night-time (23:00-07:00) 45 50 55 Weekday Evenings (19:00-23:00) Saturdays (13:00-23:00) 55 60 65 Sundays (07:00-23:00) Category A: threshold value to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to the nearest 5dB) are less than these values Category B: threshold value to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to the nearest 5dB) are the same as Category A values Category C: threshold value to use when ambient noise levels (rounded to the nearest 5dB) are higher than the Category A values
Calculation of Road Traffic Noise The road traffic noise generated by new or altered roads associated with a proposed development can be calculated using the methodology set out in Calculation of Road Traffic Noise, 19885 (CRTN). The noise levels generated by the road are based on the volume, average speed, road surface type and composition of the traffic. The resulting noise levels can then be calculated taking into account the propagation distance, intervening screening and other effects. Based on the predicted noise levels, the magnitude of road traffic noise impacts can be assessed with reference to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges An approach to assessing noise impacts from construction traffic is described in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges6 (DMRB). The DMRB approach to assessing noise impact is to compare the road traffic noise levels including construction traffic against the baseline road traffic noise levels. The DMRB provides the guidance for determining the magnitude of noise impacts from these changes in noise level given in Table 8.4.
4 British Standard BS 5228, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites – Part 1: Noise, 2009 (incorporating 2014 amendments) 5 Calculation of Road Traffic Noise, Department of Transport Welsh Office (HMSO), 1988 6 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, LA111, Revision 2, The Highways Agency, May 2020
8-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
DMRB guidance for classification of magnitude of noise impacts at receptors due to construction traffic Magnitude of Impact Increase in CRTN Basic Noise Level of closest public road used for construction traffic (dB) Major Greater than or equal to 5.0 Moderate Greater than or equal to 3.0 and less than 5.0 Minor Greater than or equal to 1.0 and less than 3.0 Negligible Less than 1.0
British Standard BS 4142 BS 4142: 20147 provides a methodology for rating and assessing the likely impacts of sound of an industrial or commercial nature on residential receptors. The methodology is based on comparing the underlying background noise level at a receptor location (measured as an LA90) with the level of noise from the source being assessed, including penalties for characteristics such as tonality and impulsivity (known as the rating level and measured as an LAeq). The following advice is provided for determining the significance of impacts:
Typically, the greater the difference between the background noise level and the rating level, the greater the magnitude of the impact; A difference of +10 dB or more between the rating level and the background noise level is likely to be an indication of a significant adverse impact, depending on the context; A difference of around +5dB between the rating level and the background noise level is likely to be an indication of an adverse impact, depending on the context; The lower the rating level is relative to the measured background noise level, the less likely it is that the source being assessed will have an adverse or a significant adverse impact.
Consultation Initial discussions were undertaken with the Environmental Health Department at Oxford City Council (OCC) in June 2017. The approach to the noise monitoring assessment was discussed, and the approach to undertaking the noise measurements confirmed. The assessment presented in the Chapter is based on the initial discussions with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO), the relevant policy and guidance and the response to the scoping report. Specific criteria have not been confirmed by the EHO.
Assumptions and limitations The noise assessment is based on measurements of the ambient noise climate that were carried out at the site in 2017 for a previous similar application. Often, new noise data would be gathered after such a time period. This has not been possible due to Covid restrictions and unrepresentative activity in and around site. However, since there have not been any changes in the local area that would be expected to meaningfully alter the ambient noise levels in the area, it is not anticipated that using previous data will adversely affect the outcome of the assessment presented in this Chapter. This is discussed in more detail in Section 8.3. In addition, it has been necessary to make some assumptions regarding the type, amount and noise characteristics of plant and equipment that will be required during the construction phase. The precise plant and equipment requirements will be determined by the appointed contractor
7 British Standard BS 4142, Methods for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound, BSI, 2014+A1:2019
8-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
prior to construction commences, however this information is not currently available. The plant and equipment assumptions on which the construction noise assessment has been based are set out in Table 8.15, which can be found at page 18 of this chapter (Appendix 8.1). With regard to the construction noise assessment, it is also assumed for the purposes of this assessment that the current dwellings in Phase 2 will be occupied during Phase 1 construction and Phase 1 of the development will be occupied prior to the completion of Phase 2.
8.3 Baseline conditions
A baseline survey was undertaken at the proposed development site. The measurements taken included unattended logger measurements over a period of approximately 6 days (from Wednesday 5 to Wednesday 12 July 2017), supplemented by attended measurements to provide an overview of the variation in noise levels across the site. The noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 8.1 below.
Noise monitoring locations across the existing site
Whilst this survey is approximately 4 years old, there have not been any changes in the local area that would be expected to significantly affect baseline noise levels. In addition, gathering updated representative noise data has not been possible due to the impact of Covid 19, both with regard to restrictions of movement and health and safety considerations and also due to the fact that Covid restrictions mean that current noise levels are unlikely to be representative of typical noise levels within the site. It is therefore considered that the baseline noise measurements that are available for the site are likely to result in a more robust assessment than an assessment based on noise measurements taken during Covid restrictions.
Attended measurement results The results of the attended measurements are summarised in Table 8.5. The average noise levels across each time period are presented, with the range shown in brackets.
8-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of attended noise measurements Location Time period Noise levels (dB)
LAeq LAmax LA90 1 Day 30mins 45 (56-71) 38 (40-49) (37-39) Night 15mins 34 (37-58) 31 (31-35) (29-32) 2 Day 30mins 41 (50-64) 35 (37-44) (34-37) Night 15mins 33 (39-48) 28 (32-33) (27-29) 3 Day 30mins 46 (56-66) 41 (44-49) (40-42) Night 15mins 36 (53-54) 31 4 Day 30mins 51 (62-74) 42 (48-56) (39-45) Night 15mins 34 (42-52) 28 (33-35) (27-30) 5 Day 30mins 42 (52-67) 38 (40-44) (37-41) Night 15mins 35 (44-48) 33 (34-35) (32-33) Notes:
Average LAeq levels presented are the logarithmic average across all measurements in the time period. Average LA90 levels are the arithmetic average of all measurements in the time period.
The noise levels were influenced by various sources, however there was no significant dominant source of noise during either the day or night measurement period. Distant road traffic noise was apparent at the site however this did not have a significant influence on the noise climate on the site. General observations made during the day noted that the noise was formed from general site activity such as pedestrians, existing site plant, activity within buildings breaking out (talking and low level music), and a small contribution from activities in gardens backing onto the site. Position 4 was influenced by vehicle movements in the car-park, however this was not observed to be a significant influence on the overall noise level. During the night, noise levels were influenced by minor site activity such as passing pedestrians, vehicle movements (Position 4) and activity within buildings breaking out (talking and low level music) from a small number of the dwellings on the site.
The LAmax for both the day and night consisted of sporadic and inconsistent events such as people passing the measurement position, doors slamming and from wildlife (during the night measurements).
Summary of noise logger measurement (unattended)
The measured background (LA90,T) and ambient (LAeq,T) noise levels, summarised for each 5- minute period across the measurement duration are presented as a time history in Figure 8.2. The measured noise levels at the logger location are summarised in Table 8.6below. Note that the average LAeq levels reported in Table 8.6below equate to the 16 hour average (for daytime) or 8 hour average (for night-time) as appropriate.
8-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of unattended noise measurements Noise levels (dB) Date Time period LAeq LAmax LA90
Day (07:00 – 23:00) - - - 04/07/2017 to 05/07/2017 43 33 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (35 – 79) (28 – 55) (26 – 40) 43 34 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (42 – 75) 05/07/2017 (33 – 54) (30 – 49) to 39 30 06/07/2017 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (32 – 78) (26 – 51) (25 – 38)
47 35 06/07/2017 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (43 – 79) (34 – 62) (31 – 41) to 07/07/2017 40 31 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (35 – 82) (29 – 52) (26 – 39)
48 37 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (45 – 79) 07/07/2017 (36 – 61) (31 – 54) to 08/07/2017 36 29 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (29 – 73) (25 – 47) (24 – 36)
46 36 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (42 – 83) 08/07/2017 (33 – 60) (31 – 45) to 09/07/2017 35 28 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (31 – 66) (26 – 43) (24 – 34)
48 36 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (43 – 80) 09/07/2017 (36 – 58) (31 – 48) to 10/07/2017 40 29 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (31 – 74) (26 – 53) (24 – 35)
52 37 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (45 – 81) 10/07/2017 (35 – 70) (31 – 64) to 11/07/2017 38 31 Night (23:00 – 07:00) (34 – 63) (28 – 49) (27 – 41)
48 39 Day (07:00 – 23:00) (49 – 78) (40 – 56) (36 – 49) 11/07/2017 Night (23:00 – 07:00) - - -
Notes:
Average LAeq levels presented are the logarithmic average across all measurements in the time period. Average LA90 levels are the arithmetic average of all measurements in the time period.
A further analysis of the measured background noise levels has been undertaken (as recommended in BS4142: 2014) to determine the representative background noise levels for different times of day. These representative background noise levels are summarised in Table 8.7 for position 2.
8-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of representative background noise levels at position 2 Time Measured representative background noise level, LA90, T, dB Day (07:00-19:00) 35 Evening (19:00-23:00) 37* Night (23:00-07:00) 29 *the increase in evening noise levels above daytime may be due to student activity on the site
Noise sensitive receptors The nearest noise sensitive receptors to the proposed development site have been identified and are indicated in Figure 8.2 below. These include existing residential properties within the wider Oxford Brookes University site (shown as John Garne Way West and John Garne Way South), as well as residential properties outside of the Oxford Brookes site (Pullens Lane, Pullens Field and Feilden Grove). All of the properties are residential and therefore can be considered high sensitivity in EIA terms.
Residential receptors identified for the proposed development
8.4 Significance criteria
During construction and operation of the proposed development, noise and vibration impacts could occur. Reference methodologies for assessing the various types of noise that are potentially significant have been described above (Legislation and policy). This section sets out how the available policy and guidance has been interpreted in developing significance criteria for the Clive Booth Student Village project.
8-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Construction At this stage, a detailed construction programme and methodology has not been developed. The construction noise assessment is therefore based on best current assumptions. A quantitative assessment considers the noisiest processes likely to occur within each major phase of the construction, for the element of the development closest to residential receptors. Noise levels have been predicted in accordance with guidance provided in BS 5228. For construction plant, source noise levels have been taken from BS 5228, or from information within Arup’s database of construction site noise levels.
Noise from construction plant and equipment The ‘ABC’ assessment method described in BS 5228-1:2009+A1:2014 has been used to establish the threshold of potential significant effect at residential receptors. The existing ambient noise level at each assessment location has been determined from the baseline noise survey and rounded to the nearest 5dB. Since the measured daytime noise levels at the proposed development are consistently below 55 dB LAeq,T during the daytime and 40 dB LAeq,T during the night, the Category A threshold criteria would apply. The criteria for assessing the magnitude of impacts from construction noise that have therefore been adopted for the assessment of construction noise at the nearest residential receptors to the proposed development are summarised in Table 8.8 below. Summary of criteria adopted for construction noise assessment Period, T Magnitude of impact Negligible Minor Moderate Major Weekday Less than or Greater than 55 Greater than 65 Daytime (07:00- equal to 55 dB and less than or and less than or Greater than 19:00) LAeq, T equal to 65 dB equal to 75 dB 75 dB LAeq,T Saturdays LAeq, T LAeq, T (07:00-13:00) Night-time Less than or Greater than 35 Greater than 45 (23:00-07:00) equal to 35 dB and less than or and less than or Greater than LAeq, T equal to 45 dB equal to 55 dB 55 dB LAeq, T LAeq, T LAeq, T Weekday Less than or Evenings equal to 45 dB Greater than 45 Greater than 55 (19:00-23:00) LAeq, T dB and less dB and less than Greater than Saturdays than or equal to or equal to 65 dB 65 dB LAeq, T (13:00-23:00) 55 dB LAeq, T LAeq, T Sundays (07:00-23:00)
For the purposes of this assessment, moderate and major impacts are considered to lead to a potential significant effect in EIA terms, with negligible and minor impacts considered not significant.
Noise from construction traffic As with construction noise, prescribed prediction methodologies have been used to predict the likely noise exposures based on forecast construction traffic data. Changes in traffic noise have been forecast using the formulae within the Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN). The potential change in road traffic noise level is predicted considering the overall traffic flow change arising as a consequence of the proposed development and any change in the
8-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
percentage of heavy vehicles in the flow. In order to determine the magnitude of noise impacts arising from construction traffic, reference has been made to the construction traffic criteria in the DMRB (see Table 8.3). These are reproduced for convenience in Table 8.9 below. Summary of criteria adopted for assessment of construction traffic Magnitude of Increase in CRTN Basic Noise Level of closest public road used for Impact construction traffic (dB) Major Greater than or equal to 5.0 Moderate Greater than or equal to 3.0 and less than 5.0 Minor Greater than or equal to 1.0 and less than 3.0 Negligible Less than 1.0
As for the construction noise assessment, impacts of moderate or major magnitude are considered a potential significant effect in EIA terms, with negligible and minor impacts considered not significant.
Noise from operational phase plant and equipment Based on the guidance set out in BS 4142, the criteria in Table 8.10 have been adopted for use in assessing the magnitude of noise impacts from building services plant and equipment serving the proposed development and affecting existing nearby residential receptors. Summary of criteria adopted for assessment of operational plant and equipment Magnitude of Impact Rating level minus background noise level Negligible Less than or equal to -5 dB Minor Greater than -5 dB and less than or equal to +5dB Moderate Greater than +5 dB and less than or equal to +10 dB Major Greater than +10 dB
As for the other noise assessment categories, moderate or major impacts are considered significant in EIA terms, with negligible and minor impacts considered not significant in EIA terms. At this early stage of the project, sufficient details of the building services design to allow prediction of noise levels can be carried out are not available. The approach taken has therefore been to propose target criteria which, when achieved, should not result in a significant effect at noise sensitive receptors. Compliance with such levels can be ensured by planning condition. This approach is commonly adopted in environmental assessment at such an early stage of a project. The procedure described above applies to existing residential properties in the vicinity of the proposed development site. It will also be necessary to control noise levels from fixed plant and equipment to avoid disturbance to residents of the proposed student residential flats. In order to minimise the potential for disturbance from fixed plant and equipment within the proposed site affecting the proposed new student flats, the design will target a rating level from fixed plant and equipment no greater than 40 dB(A) at the nearest façade of the proposed new student flats and night and 45 dB(A) during the day. Assuming an open window providing a reduction of noise levels of 10 to 15 dB, this would equate to an internal noise level of 25 to 30 dB(A) during night-time. This is within the BS 8233 criteria for appropriate noise levels in bedrooms during the night.
8-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
8.5 Predicted effects
Construction plant and equipment Calculations of predicted noise levels that could be experienced at nearby existing residential properties during construction have been carried out using the methodology outlined in BS 5228, Part 1. In order to carry out these calculations, it is necessary to make some assumptions regarding the type and quantity of plant and equipment that will be used during the various phases of construction, as well as the likely use pattern of this equipment. Precise details of the required construction plant and equipment and the likely usage patterns will not be known until a contractor is appointed, however for the purposes of this assessment the assumptions detailed in Error! Reference source not found. have been made. In addition, it has been assumed that construction will only take place during daytime hours (08:00 to 18:00 on weekdays and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays). These assumptions will need to be reviewed by the contractor prior to construction commencing to ensure that any differences from these assumptions are accounted for in the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP, see Mitigation section below). The nearest existing residential properties have been identified as shown in Figure 8.2 as follows:
Existing residential properties on Pullens Field to the north east of the development site, approximately 25m from the nearest construction activities, approximately 40m from typical construction locations; Existing residential properties off Pullens Lane to the east of the development site, approximately 30m from the nearest construction activities, approximately 70m from typical construction locations; Existing residential properties on Feilden Grove to the north of the development site, approximately 65m from the nearest construction activities, approximately 120m from typical construction locations; Existing retained student residential dwellings off John Garne Way to the west of the development site, approximately 15m from the nearest construction activities, approximately 50m from typical construction activities; Existing retained student residential dwellings within the site boundary, off John Garne Way at the south of the development site, approximately 10m from the nearest construction activities, approximately 50m from typical construction activities. Existing student dwellings within the proposed Phase 2 site, approximately 30m from the nearest Phase 1 construction activities, approximated 100m from the typical Phase 1 construction activities. Proposed Phase 1 development, approximately 16m from the nearest Phase 2 construction activities, approximated 40m from the typical Phase 2 construction activities. The predicted construction noise levels at the identified residential receptors, without the effects of any additional noise mitigation measures, are as set out in Table 8.11.
8-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of predicted typical construction noise levels
Construction Typical receptor noise level (LAeq, T) Phase Pullens Pullens Feilden John John Phase 2 Phase 1 Field Lane Grove Garne Garne Dwellings Dwellings Way Way (For Phase 1 (For Phase 2 only) only) (West) (South) Demolition 76 70 64 73 73 66 76 Enabling 72 66 61 70 70 63 72 Works Construction 75 69 63 73 73 65 75 Post completion 63 57 51 60 60 53 63 activities
Comparison of the predicted construction noise levels in 0 with the construction noise significance criteria given in Table 8.8 indicates that, without mitigation, construction noise levels could result in moderate to major temporary adverse noise impacts. This would constitute significant noise effects in EIA terms at the existing residential receptors on the student dwellings along John Garne Way, Pullens Field and Pullens Lane, as well as at the Phase 1 dwellings during the construction of Phase 2. As such, mitigation will be required in order to reduce construction noise effects (described in the mitigation section below).
Construction Traffic The Traffic and Transport assessment has identified that construction traffic will access the proposed development site along either Headington Road, to the south of the site, or via Marston Road, to the west of the proposed development site. The following traffic data has been provided for the year of construction (2024) in the Traffic and Transport Chapter. Summary of Annual Average Weekday Traffic (from Transport assessment) Headington Road Marston Road 2024 Baseline 2024 with 2024 Baseline 2024 with Construction Construction Light Vehicles 9847 9884 11983 12020 HGVs 812 868 165 221 Total AAWT 10660 10752 12148 12240 HGV % 7.6% 8.1% 1.4% 1.8% Speeds (mph) 23 23 26 26
On the basis of the above data, calculations of the expected change in road traffic noise levels during construction have been carried out. The results of these calculations are summarised below. Summary of predicted Basic Noise Levels with and without construction traffic Road Link 2024 Baseline 2024 with Construction Change Headington 67.2 dB LA10, 18 hour 67.4 dB LA10, 18 hour 0.2 dB Road Marston 66.1 dB LA10, 18 hour 0.3 dB 65.8 dB LA10, 18 hour Road
8-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Operational Plant and Equipment The main items of building services plant that are likely to be required as part of this project include the proposed air source heat pumps. These will be located at first floor level in plant compounds on the roof of the proposed new building in the centre north of the site (see Figure 8.3 below). Full details of the precise make and model of air source heat pump and the design on the plant compounds is not yet available. However, windows of residential units that are part of the proposed development overlook the plant compounds at a distance of approximately 10 m. Noise levels at these windows will need to be controlled such that internal noise levels within the proposed student residences are acceptable and this will result in noise levels at existing residential properties in the vicinity of the site also being controlled. As such, the impacts of noise from the plant required to service the proposed development are expected to result in negligible to minor adverse impacts at existing residential properties. This would be considered not significant in EIA terms.
Proposed locations of air source heat pumps
8.6 Mitigation
Construction The assessment of potential construction noise impacts demonstrates that mitigation will be required in order to control noise levels at nearby noise sensitive receptors during construction. Since the precise details of the plant and equipment required during construction will not be known until a contractor is appointed, the most effective way of controlling construction noise will be via the use of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). This will need to be produced by the contractor and will need to set out the specific measures that will be taken to reduce noise impacts during each of the construction phases. As well as the typical good practice recommendations of BS 8233 (e.g. using quieter plant where possible, siting noisy plant away from noise sensitive receptors where possible, ensuring all noise reduction measures such as mufflers, enclosures and attenuators are fitted etc.), the CEMP should include the following additional measures as a minimum:
8-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
2.5 m high solid site hoardings around the construction site perimeter to provide screening from ground level construction noise to nearby residences. A management programme to inform the residents of the nearest noise sensitive properties of when the noisiest activities are likely to take place and, where possible, arranging these activities for periods that are least likely to cause disturbance e.g. student vacations. Demonstration of how the construction programme across the various blocks is planned in order to minimise disruption due to noise.
Operation Significant effects are not expected due to operation of building services plant and equipment, therefore no specific mitigation measures are required beyond the design of building services systems to achieve acceptable noise levels within the proposed student residences.
8.7 Residual effects
Construction Whilst the proposed mitigation relating to construction noise would be expected to minimise the impacts of noise, both in terms of noise level and duration, there will be elements of construction works for which it will not be possible to significantly reduce noise levels using the mitigation measures described. An example of this is the demolition of the upper floors of the existing buildings, which will necessarily be carried out at a height which is above the top of any site hoardings. In addition, the existing properties on John Garne Way contain student flats at first and second floor level, therefore for these properties in particular, screening from site hoardings will offer limited benefit. Consequently, whilst the mitigation measures proposed would be expected to reduce noise impacts during construction, during the noisiest periods there would still be expected to be moderate to major, temporary, adverse residual impacts during construction. This would constitute a significant effect in EIA terms.
Operation There are no specific noise mitigation measures that are propose for the operational phase of the development, there residual impacts from operational noise remain as negligible to minor adverse impacts. These impacts would be considered not significant in EIA terms.
8.8 Implications of Climate Change
Climate change is unlikely to affect the outcome of the noise assessment. The air source heat pumps (which are a design measure aimed at minimising the carbon impact of the development) are only designed to provide heating and hot water and do not provide cooling. There is no cooling plant included in the design of the proposed development, with cooling of the proposed residential units accomplished by means of openable windows.
8.9 Cumulative effects
There is potential for cumulative impacts to occur if the construction of the proposed development occurs at the same time as the replacement Helena Kennedy building, which is approximately 200 m to the south of the Clive Booth Student Village, adjacent to Headington Road. If the construction periods for the two developments overlap, it is very unlikely that
8-15
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
cumulative impacts will be any higher than those described in the construction noise section of this chapter. This is due to the distance between the site of the replacement academic building and the Clive Booth Student Village, the intervening topography and the fact that the receptors of interest to this assessment are significantly closer to the proposed development. In addition, there are no noise sensitive receptors between the two developments. For similar reasons, there are not anticipated to be any cumulative noise impacts associated with the combined operation of the replacement academic building and the Clive Booth Student Village. Consequently, there are not expected to be any significant cumulative noise effects during either the construction or operation of the proposed development in combination with the construction / operation of the replacement academic building.
8.10 Summary
This chapter has set out the assessment of potential significant effects due to noise during both the construction and operation of the proposed development, as well as potential cumulative effects that might arise due to the combined construction / operation of the proposed development with the yet-to-be-completed replacement academic building. The assessment has identified that significant noise effects are not likely during operation of the proposed development, in relation to construction traffic or cumulatively during construction / operation of the proposed replacement academic building. Likely significant noise effects have been identified in relation to construction at the noise sensitive receptors closest to the proposed development. These effects will be temporary and short term, only occurring during the construction phase of the development. Noise impacts during construction will be controlled via the use of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), which the contractor will produce once full details of the plant and equipment required during construction are available. As part of this CEMP, 2.5 m site hoardings will be provided around the site perimeter and a management programme should be put in place to, where possible, arrange for the noisiest activities to be carried out during the least sensitive times. A summary of the assessment is set out in Table 8.14 below.
8.11 References
1. National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, published March 2012, updated June 2019 2. Planning Practice Guidance, www.gov.uk/guidance/noise--2, Department for Communities and Local Government, published March 2014, updated July 2019 3. Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) – Defra, March 2010 4. British Standard BS 5228, Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites – Part 1: Noise, 2009 (incorporating 2014 amendments) 5. Calculation of Road Traffic Noise, Department of Transport Welsh Office (HMSO), 1988 6. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, LA111, Revision 2, The Highways Agency, May 2020 7. British Standard BS 4142, Methods for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound, BSI, 2014+A1:2019
8-16
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of effects Receptor Sensitivity of Nature of potential Proposed mitigation Residual effect Significant / Receptor impact not significant Residential receptors High Temporary noise None Negligible Not significant near to construction impacts due to traffic routes construction traffic Residential receptors High Temporary adverse Contractor to produce a Construction Moderate to major Significant on John Garne Way, short-term noise Environmental Management Plan to Pullens Field, Pullens impacts include consideration of minimising noise Lane, Feilden Grove impacts. Must include the provision of 2.5 and the Phase 1 m high site hoardings around the site properties during the perimeter and management of noisiest construction of Phase construction activities to take place during 2 least sensitive times. Residential receptors High Long term noise None Negligible to minor Not significant on John Garne Way, impacts from Pullens Field, Pullens buildings services Lane and Feilden plant and equipment Grove Residential receptors High Cumulative noise None Negligible Not significant on John Garne Way, from construction / Pullens Field, Pullens operation of the Lane and Feilden proposed scheme Grove with construction / operation of the Helena Kennedy building
8-17
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
8-18
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9 Transport and Access
9.1 Introduction
9.1.1 This chapter of the ES, prepared by Key Transport Consultants Ltd. (KTC), reports on the significance of traffic and transport related environmental effects associated with the proposed Clive Booth Student Village (CBSV) development for Oxford Brookes University. It provides a description of the baseline conditions and an assessment of the likely effects of the project, both during construction and once the project is completed. 9.1.2 This transport chapter of the ES also describes the policy context, the assessment methodology and the baseline conditions for the proposed development before assessing the scale and scope of any key environmental impacts in relation to the environmental categories outlined in the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic (2003).
Transport and the Development Proposal 9.1.3 The proposed CBSV development involves the partial demolition of existing student accommodation and Nursery, and its replacement with new accommodation (an additional 573 rooms), an expanded Nursery operation and other ancillary facilities. In transport terms, the development is proposed to be largely car-free and includes significant cycle parking provision, reduced on-site OBU staff parking and improved pedestrian access routes. 9.1.4 Data used in the assessment has been drawn from the Transport Assessment (TA) and Oxford Brookes Interim Travel Plan (ITP) 2016-18 which forms an Appendix to the TA.
9.1.5 The TA sets out transport issues relating to the project in detail, provides an assessment of the traffic impacts and identifies the necessary interventions to mitigate the anticipated transport effects. It also describes measures to improve accessibility and safety for all modes of travel. 9.1.6 The ITP describes measures which encourage both students and staff to adopt non-car modes of travel, such as the Parking Policies at Oxford Brookes University (OBU) sites and the award winning BROOKESbus services. OBU is working on a new Travel Plan which will be in place before the proposed development is occupied.
Study Area 9.1.7 The proposed study area for the purposes of this ES chapter extends from the Oxford Ring Road at Barton in the east, along the A420 London Road/Headington Road to the junction with the B4150 Marston Road in the west, and the length of Marston Road between Headington Road and John Garne Way in the north. A plan of the study area is provided in Figure 9.1 9.1.8 This proposed study area includes two specific primary highway links and the connecting junction which together comprise the main construction access route and provide suitable locations for the collection of traffic flow and speed data.
9.2 Planning Policy Review
9.2.1 The ES has been undertaken with reference to relevant policy guidance on traffic, and also to the TA provided with the planning application. The TA associated with this development scheme sets out the full policy context in relation to the traffic impact of the proposed development scheme, with the following documents relating specifically to the production of this ES transport chapter:
9-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Guidelines on the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic, Guidance Notes No. 1 published in 1993 by the Institute of Environmental Management (IEM), now known as the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA); The Department for Transport (DfT) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB). 9.2.2 Below is a summary of relevant national and local transport policies specific to this development which need to be considered as part of any assessment. National Planning Policy Framework 9.2.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government in February 2019. Section 9 of NPPF is titled Promoting Sustainable Transport and comprises ten paragraphs that specifically address transport issues for plan making and development. 9.2.4 The first paragraph of Section 9, numbered paragraph 102, sets out the main transport objectives of the NPPF. It states: 'Transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of plan-making and development proposals, so that: a) the potential impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed; b) opportunities from existing or proposed transport infrastructure, and changing transport technology and usage, are realised – for example in relation to the scale, location or density of development that can be accommodated; c) opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use are identified and pursued; d) the environmental impacts of traffic and transport infrastructure can be identified, assessed and taken into account – including appropriate opportunities for avoiding and mitigating any adverse effects, and for net environmental gains; and e) patterns of movement, streets, parking and other transport considerations are integral to the design of schemes, and contribute to making high quality places. ' 9.2.5 Paragraph 103 states: 'The planning system should actively manage patterns of growth in support of these objectives. Significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes. This can help to reduce congestion and emissions, and improve air quality and public health. However, opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural areas, and this should be taken into account in both plan-making and decision-making.'
9.2.6 Paragraphs 104 to 107 provide the transport framework for planning policies, so they provide a context to plan making but are not directly relevant to development proposals. 9.2.7 Paragraphs 108 to 111 are presented under a sub-heading of ’Considering development proposals’, so they are specifically relevant to development. Paragraph 108 states that: ‘In assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, or specific applications for development, it should be ensured that: a) appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be – or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location; b) safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users; and c) any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.’
9-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.2.8 Paragraph 109 continues: ‘Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.’ This paragraph has been amended from the equivalent paragraph in the previous version of NPPF to make clear that the standard of test for refusal of an application on highway safety grounds is unacceptability, whereas the ground for refusal on residual cumulative highway impacts on the road network is severe.
9.2.9 Paragraph 110 states: ‘Within this context, applications for development should: give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with neighbouring areas; and second – so far as possible – to facilitating access to high quality public transport, with layouts that maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use; address the needs of people with disabilities and reduced mobility in relation to all modes of transport; create places that are safe, secure and attractive – which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, avoid unnecessary street clutter, and respond to local character and design standards; allow for the efficient delivery of goods, and access by service and emergency vehicles; and be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations.
9.2.10 Paragraph 111 sets out the requirements for transport documentation to be submitted in support of a planning application and reads: ‘All developments that will generate significant amounts of movement should be required to provide a travel plan, and the application should be supported by a transport statement or transport assessment so that the likely impacts of the proposal can be assessed’.
9.2.11 Transport is addressed sporadically in other sections of NPPF. Of particular note amongst these, paragraph 127 recognises the importance of the transport network in achieving well- designed places. 9.2.12 In the Glossary at Annex 2, the definition of ‘Sustainable transport modes’ is: ‘Any efficient, safe and accessible means of transport with overall low impact on the environment, including walking and cycling, low and ultra-low emission vehicles, car sharing and public transport.’ The terms Transport assessment, Transport statement and Travel plan are also defined in Annex 2. Local Transport Plan 9.2.13 Connecting Oxfordshire, the Local Transport Plan 2015–2031 (updated in 2016), sets out Oxfordshire County Council’s (OCoC) policy and strategy for developing the transport system in Oxfordshire up to 2031. 9.2.14 OCoC’s approach to influencing developments is stated under Policy 34 which states that the Council will require the layout and design of new developments to proactively encourage walking and cycling, especially for local trips, and allow developments to be served by frequent, reliable and efficient public transport. The Oxford Transport Strategy 9.2.15 The Oxford Transport Strategy (OTS) sets out ideas for Oxford’s Transport system in the short,
9-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
medium and long term. The ideas address how to make Oxford a better place to live, work and visit whilst allowing for increasing numbers of people to access it in the future. 9.2.16 The plan focuses on three areas: the City Centre; North Oxford; and, the Eastern Arc encompassing Headington and Cowley. The CBSV development site and the Headington Campus are both located between the Eastern Arc and the City Centre zone. Despite this, both sites are likely to benefit from improvements to the transport system given that local bus routes all pass through at least one of these zones. Oxford City Council Local Plan (2036) 9.2.17 The Oxford Local Plan 2036 was adopted on 8th June 2020. The Local Plan includes policies regarding the development of the Clive booth Student Village with regard to the provision of university and non-university accommodation (Policy H9) and development at CBSV (Policy SP17). Regarding transport it is noted in Policy SP17 that: ‘The development will be expected to minimise car parking spaces on site, and there should be no increase. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate how the development mitigates against traffic impacts and maximises access by alternative means of transport. Pedestrian and cycle access should be enhanced across the whole site, following desire lines from the Gipsy Lane campus and between different parts of the site.’
9.2.18 Policies M3 Motor Vehicle Parking, M4 Provision of electric charging points (ECP) and M5 Cycle Parking are referenced under the Policies for the Monitoring Framework and are linked to the Core Strategy policies CS13 and CS14. Policy M3 notes that: ‘In Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) or employer-linked housing areas (where occupants do not have an operational need for a car) where development is located within a 400m walk to frequent (15minute) public transport services and within 800m walk to a local supermarket or equivalent facilities (measured from the mid-point of the proposed development) planning permission will only be granted for residential development* that is car-free. In all other locations, planning permission will only be granted where the relevant maximum standards set out in Appendix 7 .3 are complied with’.
9.2.19 It is also noted that provision for disabled parking and car clubs must also be provided as per the standards listed in Appendix 7.3. For student accommodation the standard listed is: ‘0 spaces per resident room. Operational parking and disabled parking to be considered on a case by case basis in accordance with Policy H8.’
9.2.20 Policy H8 states a number of clauses regarding planning granting planning permission for student accommodation including the following pertaining to parking. ‘the development complies with parking standards that allow only operational and disabled parking, and the developer undertakes and provides a mechanism to prevent residents from parking their cars anywhere on the site, (unless a disabled vehicle is required), which the developer shall thereafter monitor and enforce;’
9.2.21 Regarding disabled parking it is noted that ‘provision will be considered on a case by case basis.’ 9.2.22 Regarding the provision of electric charging points the following is noted: Where additional parking is to be provided in accordance with Policy M3, planning permission will only be granted for new residential developments if: a) provision is made for electric charging points for each residential unit with an allocated parking space; and b) non-allocated spaces are provided with at least 25% (with a minimum of 2) having
9-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
electric charging points installed. Planning permission will only be granted for non-residential development that includes parking spaces if a minimum of 25% of the spaces are provided with electric charging points.
9.2.23 Cycle parking is also addressed and noted the following: ‘Planning permission will only be granted for development that complies with or exceeds the minimum bicycle parking provision as set out in Appendix 7.3. Provision of bicycle parking lower than the minimum standards set out in Appendix 7.3 may be acceptable for new student accommodation that is located close to the institution where most of its occupants will be studying and/or where it is adequately demonstrated through a transport assessment that there is existing unused cycle capacity available, in appropriate locations and of an appropriate design standard on site, to accommodate the increased number of bedrooms. Bicycle parking should be, well designed and well-located, convenient, secure, covered (where possible enclosed) and provide level, unobstructed external access to the street. Bicycle parking should be designed to accommodate an appropriate amount of parking for the needs of disabled people, bicycle trailers and cargo bicycles, as well as facilities for electric charging infrastructure. For new non-residential development, the City Council will seek the provision of showers and changing facilities in accordance with the thresholds and minimum standards set out in Appendix 7.3. Where opportunities to do so arise in relation to development, consideration should be given for the provision of space for storage of dockless bicycles.’
9.2.24 The cycle parking standard listed for student accommodation is: At least 4 spaces for every 4 study bedrooms unless site specific evidence indicates otherwise in accordance with Policy M5’
9.3 Assessment Guidance
Introduction 9.3.1 To inform and develop a suitable methodology to assess the environmental impacts of traffic as a result of the proposed development, key guidance and other relevant professional opinions are obtained from the following primary sources:
Formal assessment literature contained within the ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’, as published by the Institute of Environmental (Management and) Assessment (IEMA) in 2003; and, Consultation exercises, including with relevant local highways, safety and planning authorities, key transport providers, supermarkets and building contractors to provide background information to support a robust assessment.
IEMA Guidance 9.3.2 The IEMA's ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic' includes a general and widely-used methodology to help systematically, consistently and comprehensively assess the magnitude, effect and significance of off-site environmental impacts, resulting from changes in traffic conditions associated with new developments, on transport networks. 9.3.3 To aid presentation within this ES chapter, these have been divided into three sections: the location of traffic impacts; the timing and scope of likely changes in traffic conditions; and environmental impacts, which considers the type of impact generated as a result of the development proposal.
9-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Location of Impacts 9.3.4 To limit the scale of the assessment and formulate an appropriate study area, encompassing key environmental 'receptors' where highway users (the 'affected parties') are most likely to be sensitive to changes in traffic conditions, the IEMA suggests that the following two broad rules are used to identify highway links for inclusion:
Where traffic flows (or HGVs) are likely to increase by more than 30%; or Where traffic flows in more sensitive areas increase by at least 10%, or where specific identified environmental impacts may occur. 9.3.5 Although only general guidance, it allows specific off-site locations (roads, junctions, routes etc.) to be filtered, and effects broadly quantified, to allow focus on important receptors. Timing and Scope 9.3.6 Once the locations where possible environmental impacts may occur has been defined, the IEMA notes that assessors should then consider:
The timing of any assessment so that it includes the 'worst case' peak impacts in relation to possible variations across the time of day, month and year, and to account for any seasonal fluctuations which may bias the assessment; Project phasing, such as construction and operational phases, and the different impacts they may generate at different times; and The likely duration of impacts, as this can influence the severity on receptors;
Type of Impact 9.3.7 Through extensive research, the IEMA have compiled a comprehensive checklist of potential environmental effects resulting from changes in traffic conditions. These should be considered in any environmental assessment, when relevant. Key criteria are outlined below with consideration of their scope and recommended assessment methods:
Severance 9.3.8 Severance is the perceived division that can occur within a residential area if it becomes separated by a major traffic artery, and is used to describe the factors that separate people from other people and places. For example, severance may be affected as a result of an increase in traffic that could affect the difficulty in crossing a road. It can also relate to quite minor traffic flows if they impede pedestrian access. 9.3.9 The effects of severance can be applied to motorists, pedestrians or residents. However, there are no predictive formulae which give simple relationships between traffic factors and levels of severance. Despite this, the IEMA guidelines state that marginal changes in traffic flow are unlikely to create or remove severance. 9.3.10 The IEMA guidelines considers that, in general, changes in traffic flows of 30%, 60% and 90% are regarded as producing ‘slight’, ‘moderate’ and ‘substantial’ changes in severance respectively. However, any assessment of severance should also take into account local factors which influence the severity of severance including road width, traffic speeds, the availability of crossing facilities, and the demand for crossing movements.
Driver Delay 9.3.11 Delays for non-development traffic can occur when a proposed development increases traffic flows on highway links or at junctions within the vicinity of the site and its access points.
9-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.3.12 Values for driver delay can be determined through the use of traditional junction modelling software (ARCADY, PICADY, LinSig etc.) by comparing the delays experienced in both the current and post development scenarios. In addition, driver delay may also increase due an increased number of pedestrian crossing movements on local roads or cycle movements on the network, although this can be difficult to quantify so qualitative assessments are permitted.
Pedestrian Delay 9.3.13 Changes in the volume, composition or speed of traffic may affect the ability of people to cross roads, and therefore increases in traffic levels are likely to lead to greater increases in delay. 9.3.14 Pedestrian delays are dependent upon a range of influences including the general level of pedestrian and vehicular activity at each location, and general physical conditions of the crossing location including visibility, levels of pedestrian activity, whether any crossing facilities are present and their types. 9.3.15 Given the range of local factors and conditions which can influence pedestrian delay, the IEMA guidelines do not recommend that thresholds be used as a means to establish the significance of pedestrian delay, but recommend that reasoned professional judgements be made instead as to where pedestrian delays may occur and the magnitude of these impacts.
Pedestrian Amenity 9.3.16 Pedestrian amenity is broadly defined as the relative pleasantness of a journey, and is considered to be affected by traffic flow, traffic composition and footway width/separation from traffic. 9.3.17 This definition also includes aspects of pedestrian fear and intimidation and can be considered as part of a much broader category which encompasses the effects of exposure to noise and air pollution, and the inter-relationship between pedestrian movements and traffic. 9.3.18 The IEMA guidelines note that changes in pedestrian amenity may be considered significant where the traffic flow is halved or doubled, with the former leading to a beneficial effect and the latter an adverse effect.
Fear and Intimidation 9.3.19 The scale of fear and intimidation experienced by pedestrians is considered by the IEMA as dependent on the volume of traffic, its speed and HGV composition, and its proximity to people or the lack of protection caused by such factors as narrow footway widths. 9.3.20 The IEMA guidelines note that special consideration should be given to areas where there are likely to be particular problems, such as high-speed sections of road, locations of turning points and accesses. Consideration should also be given to areas frequented by school children, the elderly and other vulnerable groups. 9.3.21 Whilst this impact has been recognised as an important environmental impact for a number of years, no commonly agreed thresholds based on robust empirical research for estimating levels of danger or fear and intimidation in relation to known traffic volumes, traffic class/type mix, and the physical conditions of the pedestrian facilities have been defined. Despite this, the guidance below in Table 9.1 provides a useful tool for providing a first approximation of the levels of pedestrian fear and intimidation which should be considered in conjunction with other factors e.g. proximity to traffic, footway widths etc.
9-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
IEMA Fear and Intimidation Thresholds for Assessment Degree of Average Traffic Average HGV Flow Average Vehicle Hazard Flow (18-Hour) (18-Hour) Speeds (mph) Vehicles Per Hour
Extreme 1,800+ 3,000+ 20+
Great 1,200 - 1,800 2,000 - 3,000 15 - 20
Moderate 600 - 1,200 1,000 - 2,000 10 - 15
Accidents and Safety 9.3.22 Where a development is expected to produce a significant change in the character of the traffic on the local road network, as a result of increased HGV movements for example, the IEMA guidelines state the implications of local circumstances or factors which may elevate or lessen risks of accidents should be assessed. 9.3.23 As such, professional judgement should be used to determine the implications of changes in traffic flow on specific local circumstances, such as at known junction conflicts where supporting data indicates, and this would affect the potential significance of accident risk.
Hazardous Loads 9.3.24 In some cases, developments may involve the transportation of dangerous or hazardous loads. These need to be identified, managed and quantified to ensure that there is no significant safety impacts on users of the local highway network.
Consultation Exercises Background Research 9.3.25 To inform the proposed assessment methodology and provide background data, a series of consultations was undertaken with a range of organisations. This cumulated in the production of an ES Scoping Note for consideration by OCoC in advance of this ES. 9.3.26 Consultations undertaken for this and the previous planning application, and additional information obtained includes the following:
The Building Control Liaison Officer and Fire Safety Inspector for Oxfordshire County Council was contacted to identify the appropriate dimensions of modern Fire Appliances operated by the Oxfordshire Fire Service. This information was used in the vehicle tracking exercises undertaken as part of the TA to ensure that the various routes through the site are capable of providing access for emergency vehicles; BROOKESbus was contacted to obtain information relating to current bus capacities at stops within the vicinity of the proposed development site, and the possible options for expanding capacity in key locations should the need arise as a result of additional bus vehicles potentially becoming available once the Wheatley Campus closes; Three major supermarkets were contacted for details of their delivery booking procedures to allow an estimate of the possible number of supermarket deliveries which could require access to the site at any one time; Informal discussions with various members of Oxford City and Oxfordshire County Council were undertaken to confirm the latest policy requirements, construction traffic routes, survey locations, available survey data, proposed highway improvements as well as for obtaining Personal Injury Accident data
9-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Various representatives of Oxford Brookes University were also contacted for specific information relating to the ES including the Interim Travel Plan, cycle parking, current ‘arrivals’ parking arrangements, day-to-day parking arrangements and capacity, site occupancies and dates, land ownership information and site boundaries, staffing numbers and various other information; and, A building contractor provided details of construction traffic movements throughout the expected construction period, which has been used to identify the peak in construction activity for assessment within the ES and proposed phasing arrangements. ES Scoping with the Local Highways Authority 9.3.27 An ES Scoping Note was prepared and submitted to Oxford City Council (OCiC) in October 2020. 9.3.28 The Scoping Opinion dated 13th January 2021 concluded that Transport should be assessed in the ES. Details of the proposed scope and ES assessment method is therefore provided in Table 9.2 overleaf. Summary of Proposed EIA Methodology for All Transport Impacts
IEMA Included in IEMA Assessment Notes Criteria this ES? Requirements
30% / 60% / 90% Included in Construction movements may have an increases in traffic Severance Transport impact on severance on key links produce slight / moderate Chapter where pedestrian flows are high / substantial impacts Originally Normally using Nil increase in operational traffic and Scoped Out Driver conventional junction construction movements will be but Now Delay capacity software and minimal, so only a qualitative Included for professional judgement assessment is required Robustness Professional judgement Included in Construction movements may have an Pedestrian on impacts and Transport impact on pedestrian delay on key Delay consideration of existing Chapter links where pedestrian flows are high crossing facilities Included in Traffic / HGV component Construction movements may have an Pedestrian Transport halved or doubled causes impact on pedestrian amenity on key Amenity Chapter significant impacts links where pedestrian flows are high Included in 18-hour Traffic increase Construction movements may have an Fear and Transport (+600) / HGV flow (1000) impact on fear and intimidation on key Intimidation Chapter causes moderate impacts links where pedestrian flows are high Review of local accident Included in Construction movements may have an Accidents records and/or Transport impact on accidents and safety on key and Safety comparison with national Chapter links where pedestrian flows are high statistics Originally Quantity, type and routes No hazardous loads are expected to Hazardous Scoped Out used must be specified be required, so no further assessment Loads but Now and analysed required Addressed Included in Not required in the Noise Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Transport Chapter Chapter
9-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Included in Not required in the Vibration Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Transport Chapter Chapter Included in Visual Not required in the Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Impact Transport Chapter Chapter Included in Air Not required in the Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Pollution Transport Chapter Chapter Included in Dust and Not required in the Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Dirt Transport Chapter Chapter Included in Ecological Not required in the Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Effects Transport Chapter Chapter Conservat- Included in Not required in the ion and Separate ES Covered in separate chapter Transport Chapter Heritage Chapter
Response to the ES Scoping 9.3.29 A detailed scoping response was received from OCiC in January 2021 confirming that an ES Transport chapter is required. 9.3.30 For robustness, the ES Transport section also incorporates scoping comments received for the previous 2018 ES on this site, noting that there are a number of potential impacts relating to construction traffic which are based on the IEMA criteria, shown in Table 9.2 above. It should be noted that IEMA Criteria for both Hazardous Loads and Driver Delay were originally excluded from the ES. For both of these categories, only insignificant operational impacts are expected as the development does not expect to produce any hazardous loads and the levels and timings of daily construction traffic movements was expected to generate relatively low impacts. 9.3.31 Although the post-development operational impacts are agreed to be minimal, the scoping response indicated that for a robust assessment, Driver Delay relating to construction traffic only should be included within the ES, as increased HGV traffic associated with construction traffic movements may have a detrimental impact on drivers. OCoC also considered that Hazardous Loads should also be addressed within the assessment as the construction method was not yet expected to be at a level of detail sufficient to scope this out. 9.3.32 Considering this, Driver Delay has therefore been included in this ES assessment. However, as no formal junction assessments are proposed as part of the TA/ES, the assessment of Driver Delay within this ES chapter will generally be of a qualitative nature, although some quantification of traffic flow data, where available, has been undertaken. 9.3.33 For the assessment of Hazardous Loads, it is considered a very low risk that the development scheme will involve the movement of any hazardous loads other than the possible transportation of fuel during construction and occasionally low-levels of cleaning products during the operational phase. As such, no further assessment is considered necessary. 9.3.34 Although related to the TA, the previous TA Scoping Response from OCoC for the 2018 planning application also provided some useful additional information and comments, some of which have been used to inform the development of this ES chapter, including key areas where mitigation measures may be required. A summary table outlining the main points raised in relation to this ES are presented below.
9-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of TA Scoping Response Issues Related to the ES Proposal Oxford County Council Scoping Response
Construction traffic routes for Generally acceptable subject to confirmation with HGVs will be confined to Marston OCoC’s Network Management Team with full details Road and Headington provided as part of a Construction Traffic Management Road/London Road Plan which will form a condition to any approval
The development is predominantly As the development is ‘car-free’ the greatest traffic car-free and as such operational impacts are likely to be observed during construction traffic impacts are likely to be and start/end of term arrivals departures, both of which minimal and therefore do not will need to be detailed within the reports require a formal assessment.
Delivery traffic is already on the As the site is likely to include catering services, local highway network and is operational deliveries to the site are likely to be of a unlikely to generate any additional smaller scale than for off-site HMOs trips
9.4 Assessment Methodology
Predicting Effects 9.4.1 The methodology adopted in this Transport section of the ES provides a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of the project on users of all modes of transport. Although the formal IEMA guidance only addresses the impacts of highway traffic, general assessments of the impacts on walking, cycling, and public transport are also included to ensure a robust assessment. The approach adopted for the traffic and transport assessment has been based on the IEMA screening criteria as set out previously. 9.4.2 Where possible the magnitude of each impact has been considered against the criteria within the IEMA guidelines. The significance of each potentially significant effect has also been considered and an assessment has been made as to whether the project would result in adverse or beneficial effects. It should be noted that the IEMA guidelines state that:
‘…for many effects there are no simple rules or formulae which define the thresholds of significance and there is, therefore, a need for interpretation and judgement on the part of the assessor, backed-up by data or quantified information wherever possible. Such judgements will include the assessment of the numbers of people experiencing a change in environmental impact as well as the assessment of the damage to various natural resources.’
Location of Impacts and Sensitivity 9.4.3 The IEMA provided broad guidelines on locations that should be included in any assessment and how the magnitude of changes affect sensitive sites and receptors. For the purposes of this assessment, routes in the vicinity of the project site where there are residential properties fronting the carriageway are considered most likely to be sensitive. As such, the following 'affected parties' have been considered in this ES:
Users of the local highway network, particularly pedestrians and cyclists; and Nearby residents. 9.4.4 Background baseline traffic data is therefore obtained at two key locations: Headington Road; and Marston Road and is presented in Section 9.5 of this ES. These form the primary construction routes previously agreed with OCoC Highways, with their relative sensitivity to
9-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
changing traffic conditions considered below.
Headington Road is considered to be of High sensitivity given the wide range of retail and commercial uses fronting onto the road and the high number of side roads, high vulnerable user movements, plus providing the access routes to various schools. Marston Road has limited uses along its frontage between the site access and Headington Road, good quality footways and segregated (on-street) cycle lanes and is therefore considered to be of Medium sensitivity. Where these two highway links converge to the south of the site access, the signalised junction is noted to include good quality pedestrian crossing and cycle facilities. Although the junction is expected to easily be able to accommodate traffic volumes and all vehicle types associated with the development (especially as construction movements will be relatively low and mainly off-peak) and the comprehensive pedestrian facilities limit the extent of any impact, the acute turning movement required for any HGV movements warrants consideration for possible safety issues for cyclist. In view of this, it is therefore considered as being a receptor of Low sensitivity.
Timing and Scope 9.4.5 In line with the ES Scoping response, the assessment periods examine the peak impacts in two key development phases, each producing very different types of impacts:
Construction Phase Car and van movements associated with construction site personnel and Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) movements to the development site associated with the delivery of plant and materials and the removal of waste during the construction phase;
Operational Phase Although no significant change in operational traffic volumes associated with the proposed development are expected, an assessment is provided where possible for robustness. 9.4.6 To reduce any seasonal bias, traffic surveys were programmed for a neutral month (November 2017), away from school holidays, so to provide an adequate and robust representation of the current baseline traffic conditions. The current Covid-19 pandemic has prevented more recent traffic flows that would be considered representative of normal traffic conditions. 9.4.7 Traffic data is subsequently growthed (using TEMPro) to suitable assessment years which coincide with the expected peak traffic situations at key phases in the development. Expected traffic movements can then be applied so the magnitude of impacts can be quantified.
Assessment Criteria 9.4.8 The criteria used to determine the magnitude of impact and significance of effect for each of the traffic-related environmental effects take into account the advice given in the IEMA guidelines. 9.4.9 As outlined in Section 9.3, the traffic related environmental effects on receptors considered in this assessment are: severance, driver delay, pedestrian delay, pedestrian amenity, fear and intimidation; and highway safety. 9.4.10 A significance level attributed to each effect has been determined and assessed based on the magnitude of change due to the proposed development and the sensitivity of the affected receptor / receiving environment to change. The magnitude of change and the sensitivity of the affected receptor / receiving environment are both assessed on a scale of high, medium, low and negligible as described below in Table 9.4.
9-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.4.11 The magnitude of impact, based on the change that the proposed development would have upon the resource/receptor (whether averse of beneficial), is considered within the range of high, medium, low and negligible. Consideration is given to scale, duration of impact/effect (e.g. for construction, short-term for 1-2 years, medium-term for 3-5 years, long-term for 5 years and greater, and permanent, dependent upon project timeframes) and extent of proposed development. Magnitude of Impact Magnitude Description High Where the development could be expected to have a very significant effect (either positive or negative) on users of the local highway network Medium Where the development could be expected to have a noticeable effect (either positive or negative) on users of the local highway network; Low Where the development could be expected to result in a small, barely noticeable effect (either positive or negative) on users of the local highway network; Negligible Where no discernible effect is expected as a result of the development on users of the local highway network.
9.4.12 The predicted level of effect is based upon the consideration of magnitude of impact and sensitivity of the resource/receptor to inform a professional judgement of how important each effect is. These can be cross referenced in the table below to indicate its significance. Significance Matrix of the Level of Identified Effect Receptor Magnitude of Impact Sensitivity High Medium Low Negligible High Major Major Moderate Negligible Medium Major Moderate Minor Negligible Low Moderate Minor Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
9.4.13 This assessment states the level of effect that is considered to be significant in terms of the EIA, based on evidence and professional judgement, so that the assessment can state whether each effect considered is either significant, or not significant. 9.4.14 The likely significance of effects reflects judgements as to the importance or sensitivity of the affected receptor(s) and the nature and magnitude of the predicted changes. For the purposes of this assessment, major and moderate effects are considered to be significant, whilst minor and negligible effects are not considered to be significant. The aim of the assessment process is to avoid, reduce or offset any identified significant effects, to the point where they can be regarded as not significant.
Assumptions and Limitations 9.4.15 Although the IEMA guidelines provide a sound basis for the assessment of changes in vehicular traffic associated with developments, the guidance is limited in places. In many cases professional judgements are required which may be subjective in nature. Where possible, evidence is provided to support the adopted conclusions. Although it is accepted that this assessment may be limited for the above reasons, it is unlikely that this would introduce a significant bias than would affect the overall robustness of the study. 9.4.16 It is assumed that traffic movements generated by the expanded Nursery operation will be more than offset by reduced on-site parking for OBU. Full justification for this, with supporting data, is provided in the TA.
9-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.4.17 A Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) will be produced by the appointed Contractor to minimise the environmental impacts outlined in this ES on the residents during the construction stage. It should be noted that the population of CBSV will be significantly reduced during construction which should help to offset the level of exposure to occupants and potential safety issues. 9.4.18 There is also no formal method to quantify the effects of increases in non-motorised traffic movements on highway operation given the complexity of routes, crossing points and travel modes. To address this, this ES has included a qualitative review of local transport conditions within the study area but does not take into account potential external factors such as the effects of increased pedestrian and cycle movements on motorised traffic movements. 9.4.19 This ES concentrates on peak construction and operational vehicle movements only as a worst- case scenario. This does not fully account for daily or hourly fluctuations in movements, such as lecture times which may generate short peaks of student trips. However, it is expected that these would follow current patterns and would only result in marginal short-term impacts which would be difficult to quantify or assess, and are likely to be only of a minor significance.
9.5 Baseline Conditions
Current Baseline 9.5.1 This section describes the existing environment against which the impacts of the development have been assessed. This includes background traffic and accident data and a qualitative review of the local transport network at the key receptor locations regardless of their sensitivity. Baseline Traffic Flows 9.5.2 To provide baseline traffic data to inform the development of this ES and the accompanying TA for CBSV, automated traffic counters (ATCs), which record traffic volumes, vehicle classifications and vehicles speeds, were installed at two locations for a 7-day period between Friday 24th November and Thursday 30th November 2017. The ATC installations were located as follows:
A420 Headington Road / London Road (Site 5); and, Marston Road (Site 6). 9.5.3 No new traffic surveys were undertaken due to Covid-19 restrictions and the possible impact on traffic volumes. 9.5.4 The results of the ATC traffic counts are provided below for each site. ATC Survey Summary Results for Headington Road Site 5 Westbound Eastbound Two-Way
24-Hour Vehicle Flows (5-day average) 5,252 4,250 9,502 AM Peak Hour Flows (5-day average) 378 349 727 PM Peak Hour Flows (5-day average) 481 256 733 Average Speeds 23 mph 24 mph 24 mph 85th Percentile Speeds 29 mph 29 mph 29 mph
9-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
ATC Survey Summary Results for Marston Road Site 6 Southbound Northbound Two-Way
24-Hour Vehicle Flows (5-day average) 5,794 5,034 10,828 AM Peak Hour Flows (5-day average) 436 413 849 PM Peak Hour Flows (5-day average) 526 330 856 Average Speeds 27 mph 26 mph 27 mph 85th Percentile Speeds 33 mph 31 mph 32 mph
Existing Highways Network 9.5.5 This section summarises the roads which are expected to be impacted by the CBSV development in terms of increased traffic movements associated with the construction processes only. A full commentary on the local highway network is provided in the TA. 9.5.6 To access the site, construction traffic, especially HGV movements, will travel mainly along a single route from the A4142 Eastern Bypass/A40 Northern Bypass (also known as the Oxford Ring Road), located to the east of the site, approximately 3.6km from the entrance to the development site on John Garne Way. This route is defined as follows:
Exit the A40/A4142 Ring Road at the Barton roundabout and turn onto the A420 London Road heading west; Continue west through Headington for 2.9km to the signalised junction with the B4150 Marston Road; Turn sharp right onto B4150 Marston Road and continue north for 700m; Turn right into John Garne Way and continue for around 250m into the CBSV site.
9.5.7 The route outlined above has been discussed and approved by the Highway Authority, during the scoping exercise for the 2018 planning application, as the preferred route for all construction traffic accessing the site, subject to confirmation of the construction dates with the County Council’s Network Management Team. 9.5.8 For completeness, a number of alternative construction routes were considered. As the site is located to the east of Oxford city centre, any routes which would increase traffic movements through the city centre were immediately discounted, as were routes with narrow carriageways or routes through residential areas. 9.5.9 The primary alternative considered consists of a shorter (2.2km) route from the north using the B4150 to exit the A40 Northern Bypass near to Oxford City Football Club’s ground and then travel south onto Marston Road. However, this would route construction traffic through largely residential areas with narrower carriageway widths than the alternative via the A420 London Road/Headington Road. 9.5.10 In view of the above, all HGV movements to and from the site would be confined to the A420 London Road/Headington Road to B4150 Marston Road route, with HGV movements being managed by a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) which is expected to form part of
9-15
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
a conditional approval to any subsequent planning permission. 9.5.11 It is noted that there may be some occasional instances of light vehicles associated with construction worker movements (such as light goods vehicles, workers vans etc.) that do not use the above route to access the site. However, as these light vehicle movements represent only a small proportion of the overall construction traffic, would be intermittent and occasional, generally travel outside of the main highway peak hours, and relate to smaller vehicles only, the impacts of this on the operation of the highway network are considered to be negligible. Public Transport 9.5.12 The closest bus stops to the CBSV site are located on Marston Road within 125m of the junction of John Garne Way which provide access to bus services 13, U5, X13 and U1. These two bus stops on Marston Road have limited facilities for passengers with both stops offering a marker post, a bus stop flag with service numbers provided, and some paper-based timetable information only. The northbound stop also has electronic Real Time bus information located within a narrow waiting area. The southbound bus stop has a shelter and seating. 9.5.13 Alternative bus stops are located on Headington Road at a distance of around 700-800m from the centre of the site, with the westbound stop being slightly closer to the site. These stops provide access to bus services 8, 9, 275, NU1, U1, U5, X13, N8, NU5, S5 Gold, 280, UX1 and X8. The Headington Road bus stops each include seating, large shelters, a bus stop flag and pole, paper based timetable information, electronic Real Time bus information, and extra wide carriageways to allow vehicles to pass stationary buses. 9.5.14 In addition, other bus services can also be accessed from the stops on Gipsy Lane which include a bus stop flag and timetable information only in both directions and are around 1,100m from the CBSV site. The Gipsy Lane bus stops provide access to bus services 700, U4, U5, NU5 and S7. Walking 9.5.15 The site is located around 2.1km, or a 25-30 minute walk, from the city centre and around 880m, or an 8-10 minute walk, from the Gipsy Lane/Headington Campus if walked/cycled via Pullens Lane or Cuckoo Lane (Figure 9.2). 9.5.16 A review of the quality of footway provision within the vicinity of the site notes that, possibly due to the urban nature of the area, nearly all of the local roads have excellent footway provisions along both sides of the carriageway. On Headington Road/London Road, these generally include appropriate tactile paving and dropped kerbs at all junctions to aid crossing movements for disabled users. However, on Marston Road, most junctions include dropped kerbs but the provision of tactile paving is lacking except at formal controlled crossing points such as at the signalised junction of Marston Road and Headington Road. 9.5.17 Both Marston Road and Headington Road/London Road include sections of extra wide footways and crossing points, probably in order to accommodate the high levels of pedestrian movements in these areas associated with the University. This also ensures that any obstructions such as lamp posts, trees and bollards etc, have a minimal impact on pedestrian movement. The footways are generally well maintained and reasonably flat which is well suited to encourage walking trips. 9.5.18 To aid pedestrian crossing movements near to the site, there are a number of formal controlled crossing points, especially on Headington Road near to the Gipsy Lane Campus and to the north of the site on Marston Road.
9-16
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.5.19 There are also a number of public footpath routes within the vicinity of the site including Cuckoo Lane and Pullens Lane. All of the local roads also provide footway connections to the wider area and provide good connections between CBSV and Headington Road. 9.5.20 Notwithstanding this, some deficiencies in the local pedestrian route network have been identified and are being addressed as part of this planning application. These include the provision of a pedestrian island on Marston Road to enhance crossing in the vicinity of Cuckoo Lane where the eastern footway on Marston Road currently ends, and enhanced footpath connections to the neighbouring OBU Headington Hill Hall site, which are included in a separate but associated planning application (see 9.7.13 below).
Cycling 9.5.21 There are three primary cycle routes in the area which form part of the National Cycle Network (NCN). These are generally located on traffic-free routes or quiet roads where possible and often link through adjacent towns and cities to improve inter-urban connectivity. Within Oxford, the three NCN routes are:
NCN Route 57, when complete, is planned to extend from Crickdale in Wiltshire in the west to Welwyn Garden City in the east. Within Oxford, the route runs north-west from Horspath Road onto Barracks Lane. From here, a lightly trafficked route to Headington is available via Bartlemas Close, Warneford Lane and Gypsy Lane or alternatively cyclists can continue on the NCN route via the B480 Cowley Road for trips to the city centre. NCN Route 51 is a 336km cycle route connects to the other NCN routes on Broad Street in Oxford city centre before heading north out of the city connecting to Bicester, Milton Keynes, Cambridge, Bury St. Edmunds and Ipswich. NCN Route 5 is a 598km cycle route which runs from Reading to Holyhead via settlements including Oxford, Stratford-upon-Avon, Birmingham, Stoke-on-Trent, Chester and Bangor. It is north-south aligned as it passes through Oxford and runs parallel and between the A34 to the west and the A4074/A4144 to the east. 9.5.22 There are also a small number of other local cycle routes which do not form part of the NCN but provide a useful resource for cyclists within Oxford. The main local route runs south from Gipsy Lane before passing along Old Road, The Slade and Hollow Way before joining with NCN57 at Barracks Lane. 9.5.23 OCoC is investigating a scheme for upgrading Cuckoo Lane to provide a shared use path and the CBSV proposals have been designed so as not to compromise this scheme.
Accidents 9.5.24 Details of the number of accidents recorded on the roads within the vicinity of Oxford Brookes’ Headington Campus including the A420 London Road/Headington Road and the B4150 Marston Road have been obtained from OCoC for the period January 1st 2017 to October 31st 2020. The information is based on STATS19 Police Accident Reports and refers to three categories of accidents: fatal, serious and slight. 9.5.25 A plan showing the location of all of the recorded personal injury accidents (PIA) within the accident study area is provided in the TA Technical Annex 9 with summary details of each PIA. A comprehensive accident analysis has been undertaken as part of the TA. 9.5.26 This shows that there was a total of 67 PIAs recorded within the 46-month assessment period outlined above of which there were no fatal incidents, whilst 13 involved serious injuries and 54 resulted in slight injuries only. In terms of total casualties, there were 84 persons reported injured
9-17
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
of which 16 people received serious injuries and 68 slight injuries. 9.5.27 A review of the levels of vulnerable road user involvement within the identified PIAs noted that of the 84 casualties, 9 (11%) were powered two-wheelers, 33 (39%) were cyclists and 13 (15%) were pedestrians. 9.5.28 In view of the detailed PIA analysis in the TA, it is observed that the primary cause of a majority of the PIAs is driver/rider error. A review of the timings of accidents does not identify any specific correlation although a majority of accidents occur in or around the peak hours when the traffic is at its busiest. 9.5.29 As expected, the most common types of accidents within the clusters often related to the junction type being assessed with a number of accidents occurring in congested conditions when a vehicle turning through gaps in queued traffic collides with a cyclists or pedestrian, especially along the A420 London Road and Headington Road. A notable number of accidents have also occurred when turning vehicles do so across the path of cyclists, whether they are using facilities on the carriageway or shared pedestrian/ cycle path facilities.
9.6 Assessment of Future Conditions (Post-Development)
9.6.1 This section provides details of the expected future traffic conditions at the peak of construction and after completion. Using the IEMA guidance, traffic flow impacts are assessed against key criteria and the effect on the operation of the network for all travel modes is considered.
Traffic Flows Expected Peak Construction Traffic Flows 9.6.2 Construction works are proposed to be undertaken as a phased approach between September 2021 and August 2025 (approx. 47 months). 9.6.3 Advice on expected construction traffic movements and volumes at the CBSV site has been provided by a building contractor. A peak of construction activity is expected around January 2024 when 1,200 construction vehicles are expected to visit the site over the course of a month (i.e. 2,400 two-way vehicle movements). 9.6.4 Of these 60% are expected to be HGVs with the remaining 40% being related to workers movements, predominantly using LGVs (i.e. Light Goods Vehicles) with a majority of workers vehicles expected to move at the start and end of the working day outside of the delivery times by the HGVs and the traditional highway peak hours. 9.6.5 When this is averaged over a 26-day working month (assuming a six-day working week), this equates to around 28 HGVs visiting the site per day, or around 56 two-way HGV movements. Assuming an 8-hour working day (which avoids the highway peaks), there would be an average of 7 two-way HGV movements (3.5 HGV’s) per hour associated with the site during the peak of construction activities. 9.6.6 As outlined above, access for construction traffic will be mitigated by restricting HGV access during the morning and evening peak periods, as part of a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP). The CTMP would prescribe the full range measures to be implemented to manage the impact of construction traffic on local residents and users of the local road network, including routing agreements to ensure that traffic accesses and egresses the site via appropriate routes. This is expected to be conditioned and agreed in advance with OCoC Highways prior to commencement of work on the site.
9-18
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.6.7 The expected changes in total traffic and HGV flows during the peak construction period (i.e. January 2024) are shown overleaf in Table 9.8. The table includes red shading for periods where traffic/HGV flows have increased by more than 30%, with this only occurring on Marston Road where the increase in HGV flows exceeds this percentage due to the significantly lower number of base HGV movements.
Change in Traffic Flows as a Result of Construction Works (Two-Way Peak)
Expected Operational Traffic Flows 9.6.8 In terms of operational traffic flows, the proposed CBSV development is not expected to generate any significant additional operational traffic movements above what currently exists on the network for a number of reasons. 9.6.9 Firstly, student's resident at CBSV are banned from bringing their vehicles to Oxford as part of their tenancy agreements and as such, no resident student vehicles would be expected to visit the site. Misuse of the CBSV parking arrangements is policed by staff working on-site who are encouraged to report any parked vehicles without permits. Students who fail to meet the standards set may forfeit their tenancy. 9.6.10 Secondly, the site will retain 28 formal, marked parking bays including 7 disabled spaces which represents a significant (66%) reduction on current provision of around 83 which should further reduce any operational traffic impacts. This represents a general trend related to development proposals for Oxford Brookes sites with a general reduction in parking proposed across the city. 9.6.11 In terms of a potential increase in delivery vehicles visiting the site due to increased student numbers, there may be a minor localised increase on John Garne Way and an even lower proportional impact on Marston Road (due to higher baseline traffic flows). This is due to students who may have been previously residing within other areas of Oxford and previously had their shopping delivered, would be expected to continue with these deliveries once the CBSV site is operational. As such, any delivery vehicles would have already been on the local highway network at the delivery time selected.
9-19
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.6.12 In fact, the compression of students onto a site such as CBSV may actually help to reduce the number of delivery vehicles on the road network at any one time. Most supermarkets indicate when booking if there is a delivery vehicle already scheduled within the immediate residential area, with deliveries to adjacent addresses being automatically combined onto a single vehicle if appropriate (subject to the selection of compatible delivery times by the customer). 9.6.13 It should be noted that the Nursery located on-site is set to expand from 54 children to a maximum of 75 per session as part of this proposal. Although this may result in a slight increase in vehicle movements, as detailed within the TA, any impact is likely to be more than offset by the significant reduction in on-site parking. As such, no adverse impacts are expected. 9.6.14 The greatest operational traffic impacts are expected to be observed over a single weekend every September, at the start of the new academic year. This ‘Arrivals’ weekend is the period when a majority of the CBSV students would move into their accommodation. As this is likely to involve many cars accessing the site over a short period, an updated ‘Arrivals’ parking strategy has been devised which includes the provision of an adequate number of parking spaces across the site which are a mixture of formally marked bays, temporary informal verge parking, and informal on-street parking. 9.6.15 This strategy expands on the previously successful ‘Arrivals’ parking strategy which included the use of 83 parking spaces and has been utilised at term start times on the current CBSV site in recent years. Details are provided overleaf. 9.6.16 As noted above, the University already operates an 'Arrivals' booking system whereby students moving in are each allocated a single hour slot where they are permitted to bring a car on-site and park (often within a temporary/informal parking bay). To reduce any congestion on the access routes, a circulatory system is activated within the narrow sections of the site which not only reduces vehicle conflicts on John Garne Way but also retains good access to the site for emergency vehicles. 9.6.17 The proposed ‘Arrivals’ parking arrangements for the expanded site is presented in the TA. No similar impacts are expected to be observed during ‘Departures' at the end of term as students tend to move out over a much longer period once their exams/work is finished. However, to also control vehicular access to the site for ‘Departures’, students must apply for a permit to bring a car to the site at the end of term, with the University only issuing a small number at any one time and then only for a limited period. 9.6.18 Despite the notable but temporary traffic increases experienced over a single weekend every year to account for student arrivals, and the less prominent and more spread out student departures, the general day-to-day operational traffic impacts of the proposed development are expected to be minimal. Any significant increases in traffic on the local highway network post- development is expected to be directly linked to natural traffic growth and not to the CBSV proposals.
9-20
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Surveyed (2017) and Expected Operational (2025) Traffic Flows
Construction Effects 9.6.19 This section of the ES examines the impacts of construction works and construction vehicle movements on the local highway network, public transport services and accessibility, and walking and cycling practices. It also assesses the proposed scheme in terms of the IEMA criteria outlined in Section 9.3 namely severance, driver delay, pedestrian delay, pedestrian amenity, fear and intimidation, and accidents and safety. Construction Traffic Impacts on the Highway Network 9.6.20 There will be an increase in both light vehicle and HGV traffic visiting the site during the construction period, compared to the baseline position. These movements will be principally involved with the delivery of plant and materials, and the removal of construction waste. In addition, site personnel and site visitors will generate car and van movements as they arrive and depart from the site. 9.6.21 As Table 9.8 of this ES illustrates, the actual impacts of construction traffic on the operation of the local highway network are expected to be minor. The confinement of HGVs to a single, well- used route from the Oxford Bypass via London Road, Headington Road and Marston Road will limit the scope of any impacts. 9.6.22 The very minor increase in HGV traffic of around 55 vehicle movements per day (or 7 movements per hour) during the peak of construction is unlikely to generate any notable impact and any additional vehicle movements associated with construction worker trips will be more than offset by the reduced on-site parking and number of resident students. 9.6.23 Furthermore, although construction impacts on the highway network will extend for the full 47- month construction programme, albeit at varying degrees of effect, any impacts would only be of a temporary nature, with this assessment providing a 'worst-case scenario'. Construction Traffic Impacts on Public Transport 9.6.24 The nearest bus stops to the CBSV site are located on Marston Road and are positioned either side of the barrier controlled emergency access route to the CBSV site running to the south of
9-21
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
the Post-Graduate building. Although no public transport services require direct access to the CBSV site, the Marston Road southbound bus stop is currently located around 80m to the south of John Garne Way, which is likely to be used for construction access. 9.6.25 There may also be a slight increase in patronage associated with site workers travelling to and from the site given local restrictions on parking. These additional movements are expected to be minimal as most site workers would be expected to bring tools to the site which is difficult on public transport, and often car share. 9.6.26 In addition, during construction works, the actual number of students residing on the CBSV site will be significantly reduced by around 50% due to the removal of residential buildings which will significantly lessen the use of the bus stop during construction works. 9.6.27 As such, the impacts on construction on public transport are generally limited to a single location at the bus stop on Marston Road which subsequent mitigation will address as part of Section 9.7 of this ES chapter. Construction Traffic Impacts on Walking and Cycling 9.6.28 Within the site, demolition and construction works may require certain routes through the CBSV site to be temporarily closed to through access for cycles and pedestrians. Where required, safe diversion routes will be provided and signed and the contractor will ensure that at least one direct, safe and appropriate pedestrian/cycle route between CBSV and Headington will be open at any one time. 9.6.29 In terms of impacts on walking and cycling on the wider highway network, as a majority of construction HGV traffic would be limited to a single route, any impacts are expected to be of limited scope, intermittent and generally negligible. 9.6.30 Traffic flow data presented in Table 9.8 indicates that Marston Road would experience a 33- 35% increase in HGV traffic during the peak construction period, with one additional HGV expected in one direction or the other every 8 to 9 minutes on average. The relatively low base level of HGV movements on Marston Road explains the higher percentage increase calculated. 9.6.31 On Marston Road, there are currently no formal pedestrian or cycle crossings located to the south of the main CBSV access at John Garne Way, although there is a Pelican Crossing approximately 30m to the north of this junction. 9.6.32 There have been a number of cycle accidents at the Marston Road signalised junction with the A420. Construction of the proposed development would increase the number of HGVs turning left from Marston Road onto Headington Road. Despite the presence of an Advance Cycle Stop Line, given the lack of a footway and/or refuge space near to the junction, cyclists should be specifically discouraged from passing on the near side of HGVs at this location, which is addressed in the mitigation section of this ES chapter. Construction Traffic Impacts on Severance 9.6.33 In terms of the proposed developments impact on severance, Table 9.8 shows that total traffic flows and HGV flows show low percentage increases on Headington Road and London Road as a result of construction of between 6.8% and 7.1% thus resulting in a negligible impact on severance at these locations. 9.6.34 However, due to relatively low baseline HGV flows on Marston Road, the overall daily HGV flows are set to increase by between 33.3% and 34.3% at the peak of construction in January 2024 for 18-hour and 24-hour periods respectively. At this level, the impacts on severance are considered adverse and slight.
9-22
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.6.35 It should be noted that the peak construction period in January 2024, with 1,200 monthly construction vehicles accessing the site (equating to 720 monthly, or 55 daily two-way HGV movements), only occurs for a single month out of the entire 47-month construction period. The month with the next highest construction traffic flow peak is estimated as 950 total vehicles in a single month, or 44 two-way HGV movements per working day. When this is applied to the baseline flows outlined in Table 9.6, the percentage increase in HGVs on Marston Road falls below 30% and therefore any residual impact on severance is negligible for all but a single month of the construction programme when it is considered to be minor adverse. 9.6.36 Regardless of the percentage increases for HGVs, the actual peak increase in HGV flows only equates to a single additional HGV movement in one direction or the other, on average, every 7 minutes outside of the traditional highway peaks. In view of this combined with the presence of an existing controlled crossing facility within 100m of the site access, it is unlikely that the proposed construction of the CBSV would have anything but a minor adverse impact on severance. Despite this low impact, extra mitigation measures are outlined in Section 9.7. Construction Traffic Impacts on Driver Delay 9.6.37 Although originally scoped out of the ES assessment (see Table 9.2) but subsequently reintroduced to provide a robust assessment, it is noted that there may be some very minor increase in delays for drivers, primarily observed at the start and end of the working day when construction workers turn up to or leave the site. However, a significant majority of these movements are expected to occur outside of the traditional highway peak hours, and as such, any impact on driver delay as a result of construction worker arrivals and departures is likely to be negligible. 9.6.38 In terms of the impact of additional HGV traffic, at its peak, construction would only generate a single HGV movement on the network every 7 minutes on average, or one movement each way on average every 14 minutes. 9.6.39 In view of this, the effect on driver delay during construction is likely to have a temporary and negligible adverse effect which will not be significant. It is unlikely to result in any material change for most drivers using the construction access route via London Road, Headington Road and Marston Road. Construction Traffic Impacts on Pedestrian Delay 9.6.40 Controlled crossings on Marston Road, London Road and Headington Road as well as various other crossing facilities located across Oxford, are well connected to the local footway network and offer users a range of routes to access local facilities (Figure 9.3). As each of these crossings is signal controlled, any additional delays to pedestrians are likely to be negligible. 9.6.41 Although a pedestrian crossing island on Marston Road is proposed in the vicinity of the western end of Cuckoo Lane, this might not be in place during the early construction stages of the development and a proposed mitigation measure is set out in Section 9.7. 9.6.42 Given that each of the roads on the construction route has controlled pedestrian crossings in reasonably convenient locations, it is expected that the effect of construction works on pedestrian delay would be minor adverse, and temporary. Construction Traffic Impacts on Pedestrian Amenity 9.6.43 As the proposed CBSV development is set well back from the adopted highways and footpath network, the external impacts of the construction proposals on pedestrian amenity are likely to be negligible. IEMA guidelines suggest that, for an impact to be significant, the traffic or lorry component is halved or doubled. In all locations on the local highway and footway networks
9-23
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
outside of the site boundary (excluding John Garne Way), any traffic or HGV flow increases are well below the 200% threshold, and as such, the impacts are considered negligible. 9.6.44 However, it is likely that impacts on pedestrian amenity are likely to be more significant within the site or on-site access roads, especially when construction work occurs on or adjacent to pedestrian and cycle routes between CBSV and Headington, Pullens Lane and/or Headington Hill Hall to the south. 9.6.45 It is noted that pedestrian amenity on John Garne Way will experience a significant increase in HGV traffic movements as the site construction access/egress route. As such, the impact on pedestrian amenity on John Garne Way is expected to be significant, moderate adverse and temporary. 9.6.46 Although data relating to the construction compound locations and internal routes through the CBSV site are not yet available, this will be detailed within the Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for the site which is likely to form part of any conditional approval. 9.6.47 Mitigation measures to address any significant impacts on pedestrian amenity are outlined from Section 9.7 of this ES Chapter. Construction Traffic Impacts on Fear and Intimidation 9.6.48 The level of fear and intimidation experienced by pedestrians is generally determined by the traffic flow and composition and by the degree of pedestrian amenity and protection. The IEMA guidance suggests the use of some thresholds for determining the impact of works on fear and intimidation. 9.6.49 As the data provided in Table 9.8 shows, the highest average traffic flows per hour across an 18-hour day during peak construction would be on Marston Road with 660 vehicle movements (i.e. 11,874/18) compared to 569 for Headington/London Road (10,246/18). This places the scheme on the cusp between a minor and moderate effect. However, when HGV traffic is assessed separately, as per the IEMA guidance, no link has over 1,000 daily HGV movements and so is considered minor adverse at worst and temporary. Furthermore, the two links do not change effect category as a consequence of the proposed scheme and hence the net impact overall is considered negligible, especially on Headington Road. Construction Traffic Impacts on Accidents and Safety 9.6.50 It is noted that construction works will result in a temporary increase in daily traffic flows on London Road, Headington Road and Marston Road, and on the site access roads. Generally an increase in traffic can result in a proportional increase in accidents along the route. However, conversely, increased traffic levels can also contribute to lower vehicle speeds which tends to have a corresponding effect on the severity of injury accidents reported. 9.6.51 As Table 9.8 illustrates, given the relatively low level of HGV movements (i.e. around 55 per day at the peak of construction) compared to the baseline flows of over 10,000 vehicles, it is unlikely that the temporary addition of this level of vehicles would result in any notable increase in accidents across the network. 9.6.52 A review of the accident data provided in full within the TA noted that although the A420/B4150 signal junction receptor reported a relatively small number of accidents, there is a concern in relation to the high proportion of injuries to vulnerable road users. The presence of a nearside cycle lane on the Marston Road approach has the potential to generate a conflict with HGV construction vehicles travelling from the site. 9.6.53 A review of the vehicle speed data shows that both roads have average speeds below the
9-24
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
posted speed limit which indicates congestion on the roads for parts of the day. Although no breakdown of actual vehicle speeds at different times of day is provided in the survey data, it was observed during site visits that parts of the construction access route, especially past Headington shopping area and the Headington Campus site, are congested with slow moving traffic for significant parts of the day. 9.6.54 The Transport Research Laboratory identified that, in most cases, a 1 mph reduction in vehicle speeds could result in a corresponding 5% reduction in the number of accidents (TRL Report 421: The effects of driver speeds on the frequency of accidents, 2000). 9.6.55 In view of the low level of construction vehicle movements compared to the baseline traffic, and its temporary nature, it is expected that the construction works would generally have a negligible impact on accidents and safety, although for robustness, the signal junction receptor should be considered as a minor adverse impact without mitigation. 9.6.56 Construction traffic is also unlikely to cause any notable reduction in vehicle speeds along the access route given that individual HGVs could be spaced at 7 minute intervals on average and confined to off-peak movements. Other workers' vehicles may generate some additional trips but these will be offset by the reduced on-site parking and student residents during works. 9.6.57 As such, any construction traffic impact related to accidents and safety is considered temporary, and minor adverse at a single location. Construction Traffic Impacts on Hazardous Loads 9.6.58 There is a possibility that the construction works may require the occasional delivery of small amounts of diesel for site vehicles. However, given the expected negligible level of hazardous load movements, any impacts would be negligible.
Operational Effects Operational Traffic Impacts on the Highway Network 9.6.59 As the CBSV proposals are designed to be largely car-free, with student being prevented from bringing their cars to site (excluding arrivals weekend and for moving-out), the primary operational traffic impacts would be mostly related to the collection of refuse/recycling, the parking of staff cars within the on-site parking areas, the occasional taxi or pick up/drop off by other vehicle, food and mail-order deliveries, and access for emergency vehicles which should only be a rare event. 9.6.60 Traffic generated by the expansion of the on-site Nursery is likely to be more than offset by the reduced parking provided within the site. 9.6.61 In view of the above, there will be no identifiable increase in day-to-day traffic movements accessing the CBSV site. In fact, there may actually be an overall reduction as, the lower parking capacity provided on-site offsets any effects generated by an increase in the size of the nursery, and therefore would reduce the number of vehicles accessing CBSV. 9.6.62 It is noted, as discussed previously, there may be a slight localised increase in delivery vehicles on John Garne Way and possibly on Marston Road to a lesser extent but these are expected to be intermittent. Most supermarkets have an automated system to combine deliveries onto a single vehicle if they are located in close proximity and have compatible delivery times which may actually reduce the level of delivery vehicles on the local road network within Oxford at any one time. 9.6.63 Despite the limited operational impacts expected, as illustrated in Table 9.9, for robustness, this
9-25
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
section of the ES outlines any potential impacts of the operation of the CBSV proposals and considers the significance and magnitude of impacts. 9.6.64 As Table 9.9 contained within this ES illustrates, any increases in day-to-day traffic flows over the base scenario is related to background traffic growth only. There may be some minor, intermittent, localised increases in delivery vehicle movements although these are expected to be relatively minor and likely to already be on the highway network. The CBSV development offers the opportunity to condense higher levels of students onto a single site, thus potentially allowing for combined deliveries using a single vehicle and shorter overall delivery trips. 9.6.65 As discussed previously, the most notable operational traffic impacts will only be observed over a single weekend every September when a majority of the students will arrive at the site by car with their possessions. Without significant mitigation measures designed to manage the ‘arrivals’ weekend, when around 114 cars are expected to enter, park, unload and leave the site every hour, totalling in excess of 3,600 individual two-way vehicle movements over a single weekend, it is likely that the impacts of the arrivals weekend would potentially be moderate adverse. To address this, details of the mitigation proposed for this single annual weekend are outlined from Section 9.7 of this ES transport chapter. 9.6.66 Despite this regular annual event, the direct day-to-day operational impacts of the proposed development on the local highway network is probably negligible and permanent. Operational Traffic Impacts on Public Transport 9.6.67 Due to the almost-nil day-to-day operational impact of the CBSV proposals on traffic, no observable impacts on public transport are foreseen. There may be some very minor detriment to service reliability from the Marston Road stops if a significant number of the new students require bus travel at the same time. However, given the relatively low number currently boarding at the Marston Road stops and the residual capacity on these services, as advised by BROOKESbus, any impact is likely to be minimal and can be managed through minor alterations to the timetable, in the unlikely event that a significant delay is experienced. Operational Traffic Impacts on Walking and Cycling 9.6.68 Although the proposed development results in an increase in the number of students living on the CBSV site, it is considered that the proposed increase is unlikely to generate any significant detriment on walking and cycling within the area. Most footpaths appear to have ample capacity and width to accommodate the increase and significant cycle parking is included in the development proposals. 9.6.69 In view of this, the operational impact of the proposals on walking and cycling is expected to be negligible although additional mitigation may provide some further benefit. Operational Traffic Impacts on Severance 9.6.70 As the operational development would not increase traffic flows or HGV movements, with additional Nursery traffic being offset by reduced on-site parking, there is expected to be a negligible impact in relation to severance. Operational Traffic Impacts on Driver Delay 9.6.71 In terms of driver delays, the operational development is unlikely to result in a notable increase in traffic which would generate a delay for drivers. There may be some minor adverse impacts due to increased student numbers being compressed into a smaller area of Oxford which may result in increased calling of controlled crossing facilities, such as a key crossing site adjacent to the Headington Campus, which may generate some very minor additional delay for drivers.
9-26
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.6.72 In view of the above, it is considered that there is likely to be a negligible and permanent effect on driver delay as a result of the operation of the CBSV proposals. Operational Traffic Impacts on Pedestrian Delay 9.6.73 Due to the almost-nil traffic impacts associated with the operation of the CBSV proposals, the operational impacts on pedestrian delay are expected to be negligible and insignificant. Operational Traffic Impacts on Pedestrian Amenity 9.6.74 Amenity specifically refers to the pleasantness of a pedestrian’s journey, which is unlikely to change significantly outside of the site due to a nil traffic impact of the CBSV proposals. However, there would be some ‘pleasantness’ benefits observed within the site due to the creation of new facilities and improvements to the connections from the site to Cuckoo Lane and Headington Hill Hall, and the proposed pedestrian crossing island on Marston Road. 9.6.75 In view of this, the operational impacts of the scheme on pedestrian amenity are expected to be minor, beneficial and permanent. Operational Traffic Impacts on Fear and Intimidation 9.6.76 Despite the recorded vehicle average speeds being below the speed limit, they are relatively high (Tables 9.6 and 9.7) in terms of the IEMA guidelines but, due to the almost-nil traffic impacts associated with the operation of the CBSV proposals, the fear and intimidation impact is expected to be negligible and insignificant. 9.6.77 Any increases in pedestrian and cycle movements are expected to be easily accommodated using the existing facilities which include wide footways in busy locations (i.e. Headington), verges to segregate traffic (i.e. part of Marston Road), and various traffic-free or low-traffic routes (e.g. Pullens Lane, Cuckoo Lane). Operational Traffic Impacts on Accidents and Safety 9.6.78 Due to the almost-nil operational traffic impact associated with the CBSV proposals, the impacts on accidents and safety are expected to be negligible and insignificant. Operational Traffic Impacts on Hazardous Loads 9.6.79 As outlined previously, no hazardous Loads, other than minor deliveries of cleaning products (which are likely to occur already), are expected in relation to the operation of the development. Any impacts are therefore considered negligible.
Summary of Environmental Effects 9.6.80 A summary of the environmental effects detailed above, their location and the sensitivity of the receptors for both of the development phases is provided in Table 9.10 below, with details of mitigation measures to address these issues outlined overleaf.
9-27
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Summary of effects
9.7 Mitigation
9.7.1 It is apparent from the ES assessment that a range of additional mitigation measures would be required to manage and limit the overall impacts of the proposed development on the wider area to a satisfactory level. 9.7.2 The proposed mitigation measures, their delivery method, and their necessity are summarised below for both the construction and operational phases of the development:
Construction Phase Mitigation 9.7.3 During the construction phase, additional mitigation is required to ensure that construction traffic can access the site safely, and that the risk at key potential conflict points can be managed appropriately. Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) 9.7.4 The effects of construction traffic will be examined and managed by a CTMP which can be conditioned for implementation during the active construction phases of the proposed development in order to minimise the risk of potential environmental impacts and to mitigate against the potential impacts associated with construction vehicles. 9.7.5 The CTMP will include a range of measures to address any impacts identified within this ES chapter. This includes defining construction vehicle access routes from the Oxford bypass which must be confirmed with OCoC Highways prior to use. In addition, the CTMP should also outline the proposed hours/days of construction, which in this case should extend for around 8 hours (i.e. outside of the peak period) and should include works being undertaken six days a week. Management of Cycle Safety at Marston Road/Headington Road Traffic Signals 9.7.6 As there has been an issue of cycle accidents at the Marston Road / Headington Road signal junction, additional measures should be implemented to manage cycle traffic at this location during construction. 9.7.7 Although most of the cycle incidents do not relate to HGV movements, the narrow geometry of the approach to the junction and the presence of a wall tight to the kerbside limits the scope for
9-28
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
improvements and the opportunities for cyclists to take avoiding action if they come into conflict with an HGV. The junction currently includes a cycle lane along the nearside kerb and an Advance Cycle Stop Line at the signals to allow bicycles to bypass the queues. 9.7.8 However, there is a legitimate concern that increased HGV movements through this junction, especially for left-turn movements from Marston Road to Headington Road, may result in an increase in the number of accidents involving bicycles. 9.7.9 To combat this concern, it is suggested that the on-street cycle lane be temporarily removed during construction to deter cyclists from passing large lorries on the near side which are turning left onto Headington Road, although the majority of cycles actually turn right from Marston Road and head towards the centre of Oxford. 9.7.10 In addition, HGV drivers should be made aware of this potential issue as part of their risk assessment so that they can look out for cycles on their inside while at this junction. Additional signage could also be provided which could consist of roadside signs, to inform cycles on the approach of the dangers of passing construction vehicles on the near side, plus vehicle mounted signs located on the rear nearside of all HGV delivery vehicles. Managing Pedestrian Conflicts on Marston Road and Access Routes 9.7.11 The assessment undertaken in this ES chapter identified a number of important impacts related to pedestrian and cycle movements which need to be mitigated. In particular, measures include:
Temporally close/move southbound bus stop on Marston Road to avoid conflicts with probable HGV access routes during construction (an alternative is available 100m to the south) to improve visibility; Provide suitable crossing facilities or crossing points on John Garne Way and other footpath/access routes located within the site to reduce any conflict with construction vehicles and provide safe routes to circulate; Consider the inter-visibility between pedestrians on the Marston Road footway and any potential site access junction; and, Pedestrian and cycle access routes to/from/across the site will be kept open where possible. However, due to the nature and location of works, some construction activities are likely to require the temporary closure of certain access routes. When this occurs, suitably appropriate diversion routes will be opened, signed and monitored, with a minimum of at least one route to Headington Road being open at any one time.
Operational Phase Mitigation 9.7.12 As additional operational traffic movements are likely to be minimal, except at peak arrival times at the start of term, no significant impacts are expected. Students are already prevented from bringing cars on-site through the use of existing parking restrictions and strict conditions of tenancy which will continue post-development. Despite this, the following mitigation is proposed. Enhanced Pedestrian Facilities 9.7.13 The development will generate a significant increase in pedestrian movements with over 573 additional bed spaces on the site. There is a separate but related planning application to provide an enhanced pedestrian route to the Headington Hill Hall campus. This scheme has been designed to tie-in with an improvement to Cuckoo Lane being planned by OCoC. 9.7.14 Furthermore, to manage the increases in pedestrian movements and provide safe access routes, a new pedestrian crossing island is proposed on Marston Road to the south of the site access in the vicinity of the western end of Cuckoo Lane.
9-29
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Expansion of the ‘Arrivals’ System 9.7.15 To manage the unique operational traffic impacts which occur on a single weekend at the start of September term when student residents move into their accommodation, an expansion of the University’s current ‘arrivals’ booking system will be used. 9.7.16 Full details of this system are provided within the TA. In summary, each student can book a one-hour slot when they are permitted to bring a car on-site and park appropriately to unload their possessions. This system ensures that the site does not become overcrowded or gridlocked and that all emergency vehicle access routes remain open. It also provides details of the entry and exit routes from the site, and coloured zoning so that students have an area to park in rather than a specific parking spot which should help to reduce delays. Travel Plan Updated 9.7.17 The University currently has an Interim Travel Plan 2016-2018 and is actively working on an updated version. This will also monitor cycle parking usage within the CBSV site to identify if the capacity and locations provided are adequate for their resident’s needs. This is provided in the TA.
9.8 Residual effects
9.8.1 With the application of the mitigation measures outlined in Section 9.7 above, adverse effects associated with the development will be managed and reduced to an acceptable level such that any potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed development can be satisfactorily accommodated with minimal adverse residual impacts. 9.8.2 The following assessment takes into account the receptor’s importance/sensitivity and the degree of change affecting it. Where relevant, residual effects are identified as either significant or not significant, in accordance with the ES methodology.
Construction Phase 9.8.3 The residual effects of construction traffic are expected to be relatively low or negligible, and temporary in nature, whilst the actual levels of additional construction vehicles are not considered to be excessive. 9.8.4 Measures to reduce the impacts of construction traffic would be outlined in detail in a CTMP once a Contractor has been appointed. This is expected to form a condition linked to any subsequent planning approval.
Operational Phase 9.8.5 In terms of operational impacts, this assessment has identified that, due to the almost nil vehicular impacts and following inherent and additional mitigation, there is expected to be no adverse residual effects, with the enlarged nursery traffic being more than offset by the reduced parking on the CBSV site. 9.8.6 Some minor benefits may be realised, related to pedestrian amenity, once connections between CBSV and the wider area are improved. These include improved crossing facilities on Marston Road and access improvements to the Headington Hill Hall link into the scheme. 9.8.7 A summary of the effects of the proposed development considered in the construction and operation phases is set out in Table 9.10. The summary table shows a mix of beneficial and adverse effects. The beneficial effects include improvements to pedestrian amenity. 9.8.8 The adverse effects include low and negligible effects in the construction and operational
9-30
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
phases. No residual effects of major or moderate significance are forecast. Therefore, no additional mitigation measures are considered necessary to mitigate the adverse effects predicted to a lower level.
9.9 Implications of Climate Change
9.9.1 To provide a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed development, this section of the ES summarises the potential implications of the development in relation to climate change and summarises the inherent aspects of the scheme which are designed to limit its impact. Sustainability 9.9.2 The proposal to increase the number of resident students on the CBSV site is aimed at reducing the number of students residing in private rented accommodation across Oxford and concentrating them onto a specific site which is highly sustainably located. 9.9.3 Most of the students residing at the CBSV are expected to study at OBU facilities within a short distance of the site. An extensive array of local facilities are conveniently located within a walkable distance. Traffic Generation 9.9.4 In terms of the traffic impacts of the development, the site is proposed to be largely car-free, with a significant reduction in on-site parking for OBU staff. Although the provision of an expanded Nursery at CBSV is likely to result in a slight increase in traffic movements associated with this use, this will be more than offset by the reduction in on-site parking. 9.9.5 Where on-site parking has been provided, 25% of the spaces will include active charging facilities for electric vehicles. 9.9.6 The concentration of students onto a single site will also offer an increased opportunity for combined supermarket deliveries to be made, thus potentially reducing the distance travelled by delivery vehicles on the local road network. Sustainable Travel 9.9.7 To encourage the use of sustainable travel modes, improvements will be made to the existing pedestrian connections between the CBSV site and the wider area including links to Cuckoo Lane and Headington Hill Hall in the south to provide a highly permeable and convenient to undertake walking and/or cycle trips. 9.9.8 To encourage cycle travel, on-site high quality, covered and secure cycle parking will be provided for residents, with additional cycle provision for visitors, staff and the Nursery. Facilities for electric bike charging and areas for dockless bike parking are incorporated into the design. 9.9.9 The CBSV site is well positioned to take advantage of high frequency bus routes which pass the site on Marston Road and on nearby Headington Road. These provide affordable, regular and frequent public transport connections for residents of the site to various other local services and OBU facilities. Residents at CBSV are entitled to inclusive travel, i.e. no charge, on BROOKESbus, this encouraging use of public transport for longer distance travel.
9-31
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.10 Cumulative Effects
9.10.1 In terms of potential cumulative impacts, it is noted that surveyed traffic flows have been factored up using TEMPro which accounts for planned development in the area. Notwithstanding this, OBU has planning consent for a new building at Headington Hill Hall to replace the Helena Kennedy building. The development programme for this building is not yet confirmed and it is unclear whether it would coincide with the construction programme for CBSV. 9.10.2 The Headington Hill Hall replacement building will result in the loss of some existing staff parking and therefore is likely to result in a reduction in operational traffic to the site. Furthermore, whilst the construction stage will generate HGV trips, these would relate to London Road and Headington Road as the site access would be off Headington Road, assuming similar construction traffic routing as CBSV. 9.10.3 A worst-case scenario would involve the peak construction traffic for the Headington Hill Hall replacement building coinciding with the peak CBSV construction flows. Construction traffic flows for the replacement building are not available but, although a smaller site than CBSV, for the purposes of this assessment it has been assumed that a similar peak construction traffic flow would occur, ie 7 HGV movements per hour. 9.10.4 Although there are already significant traffic volumes using London Road and Headington Road, the cumulative addition of construction vehicles associated with CBSV and a replacement building at Headington Hill Hall is unlikely to cause any significant detrimental impact. The change in peak HGV flows during construction would increase to 13.6% but this is still significantly below the 30% assessment threshold outlined in the IEMA guidelines. 9.10.5 Despite the limited impact expected, the CTMP will include measures to incorporate the possible cumulative effects of any nearby development by OBU. This will include identification of conflicting construction works, assessments of the potential cumulative impacts of construction traffic, and measures to mitigate the magnitude of impacts, such as programming HGV delivery times so they do not conflict to cause a significant impact on the highway network and its users.
9.11 Summary
9.11.1 This chapter of the ES provides a structured and robust assessment of the transport-related environmental impacts associated with the proposed development at CBSV using formal guidance on the impacts of traffic, provided by the IEMA, supported by a general qualitative assessment of the impacts on other sustainable travel modes. 9.11.2 The assessment focuses on the impacts associated with construction works (i.e. temporary short-term effects) as these are expected to generate the principal traffic impacts associated with the development proposals. 9.11.3 This ES chapter determines the sensitivity of the receiving transport environment and quantifies the expected level of impacts at key locations. Where appropriate, risks have been assessed and mitigation measures outlined, with full mitigation details to be provided within a CTMP which is likely to form a condition of any subsequent planning permission. 9.11.4 In terms of operational impacts, it is expected that residual traffic impacts are likely to be minimal due to restrictions on students bringing vehicles to halls, or even beneficial due a reduction in on-site parking. This is considered adequate to offset any additional traffic movements generated by the expansion to the on-site nursery, with a full assessment provided within the TA.
9-32
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9.11.5 As such, the proposed scheme, despite increases in the on-site population, is expected to have a negligible to positive impact on traffic movements. It is considered that there may be a localised increase in delivery movements to and from the CBSV site on John Garne Way, but nearly all of these would have already been on the local highway network travelling to other residential accommodation within Oxford prior to the relocation of students to CBSV. 9.11.6 A summary of the transport-related environmental impact assessment, the significance of any impact, the associated mitigation and any residual effects are set out in Table 9.11. Summary of effects Link and Sensitivity Magnitude of Proposed mitigation Residual Significant / Receptor of Receptor potential impact effect not significant
Construction phase Headington High Negligible Construction Traffic Negligible Not Significant Road Management Plan (CTMP) to include Marston Medium Low Adverse & safety measures at the Minor Not Significant Road Temporary constriction access, Signal Low Low Adverse & within the site and on Minor Not Significant Junction Temporary the approaches to the signal junction.
Notify Highways of start date
Operational phase Headington High Negligible Student start-of-term Negligible Not Significant Road arrivals booking Marston Medium Negligible system; Negligible Not Significant Road Improvements to the pedestrian network including a new pedestrian crossing island on Marston Road and upgraded pedestrian route to Headington Hill Hall;
OBU Travel Plan updated Signal Low Negligible None Negligible Not Significant Junction
9-33
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
9-34
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
10 Air quality
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 This chapter describes the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development on air quality. It outlines the methodology, the baseline conditions and any likely significant air quality effects associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Development. Mitigation measures that would be implemented to reduce the effect of the Proposed Development on air quality are also described, where relevant.
Scope of the assessment 10.1.2 The EIA scoping opinion was received on 13th January 2021(Ref 10.1, see ES Appendix 4.1), and an air quality assessment has been requested to accompany the planning application for the Proposed Development. In summary, the assessment of the impacts of construction traffic has been included in the assessment. Construction dust impacts has been assessed in accordance with Institute of Air Quality Management’s (IAQM) Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and Construction (Ref 10.2), suitable mitigation measures have been recommended to ensure significant effects related to construction dust are not likely. Emissions associated with the proposed combustion plant (gas boilers) during the operational phase of the Proposed Development have been considered in this assessment. 10.1.3 The assessment of the impacts of operational traffic has been scoped out. Changes in traffic during the operation of the Proposed Development would not exceed the criteria detailed in the IAQM and Environmental Protect UK’s (EPUK) Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality guidance (Ref 10.3). An exposure assessment associated with the traffic emissions in the opening year has been undertaken.
10.2 Assessment methodology
10.2.1 This section outlines the methodology for assessing the likely significant effects on air quality from the construction and operation of the Proposed Development. Technical details can be found in Appendix 10.1 to Appendix 10.6.
Legislation, policy and guidance 10.2.2 Full details of relevant legislation, policy and guidance are provided in Appendix 10.1. The applicable legislation, policy and guidance is summarised below:
Environment Act 1995 (Ref 10.4) The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (Ref 10.5) Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Ref 10.4) National Planning Policy Framework (Ref 10.7) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) (Ref 10.8) Oxford Local Plan 2036 (Ref 10.13) Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) Policy and Technical Guidance (Ref 10.9, 10.10) Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and Construction (Ref 10.2) Guidance on Land-Use Planning & Development Control (Ref 10.3) Oxford City Council – Air Quality Planning Application Guidance (Ref 10.11) A Guide to the Assessment of Air Quality Impacts on Designated Nature Conservation Sites (Ref 10.12)
10-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Consultation 10.2.3 In addition to the scoping report, consultation has been undertaken with the environmental health officer at Oxford City Council (OCC) to agree the assessment methodology for this air quality assessment on 18th March 2021. Further information is provided in Appendix 10.2.
Baseline Methodology 10.2.4 Existing or baseline ambient air quality refers to the concentration of relevant substances that are already present in the environment. These are present from various sources, such as industrial processes, commercial and domestic activities, traffic and natural sources.
A desk-based review of a number of data sources has been undertaken to determine baseline conditions of air quality in this assessment. Information sources that have informed the baseline are as follows: The Environment Agency (EA) website (Ref 10.14); The Defra Local Air Quality Management website (Ref 10.15); Local authority review and assessment reports and local air quality monitoring data (Ref 10.16); and The UK Air Information Resource website (Ref 10.17). 10.2.5 A review of local air quality monitoring data for recent years and local background pollutant concentrations has also been carried out. Local air quality conditions and the main sources of air pollution are outlined in Appendix 10.4.
Assessment extent 10.2.6 The baseline study area considered existing industrial processes located within 1km of the Proposed Development, identified by using the Environment Agency’s (EA) website (Ref 10.14). This was used to inform the major pollution sources in the vicinity of the Proposed Development. Further, review of monitoring operated by OCC was undertaken, covering locations which are approximately 1km away from the Proposed Development. The monitoring data were used to inform the pollutant levels near the Proposed Development. 10.2.7 The study area for the construction traffic assessment was determined using the EPUK/IAQM land-use guidance screening criteria (Ref 10.3). 10.2.8 The Proposed Development is within an air quality management area (AQMA), as such the EPUK/IAQM criteria for sites located within AQMA were used to screen changes to traffic flows. The screening criteria are as follows:
A change of Light Duty Vehicle (LDV) flows of more than 100 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) movements; and A change of Heavy-Duty Vehicle (HDV) flows of more than 25 AADT movements. 10.2.9 Meeting either of these criteria indicates that detailed dispersion modelling of the road traffic emissions is necessary. Roads which exceeded the criteria and where relevant, surrounding roads within 200m have been included to create the study area. 10.2.10 The determination of the study area for the operational phase followed the same method as the construction traffic assessment. Locations of existing receptors in the vicinity of the proposed combustion plant were also reviewed and included in the assessment, as they would be sufficient to represent the worst-case locations. The nearest ecological designated sites have been reviewed, up to 10km away from the Proposed Development.
10-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Sensitive receptors 10.2.11 A desk-top study was undertaken to identify the human and ecological sensitive receptors at and around the Proposed Development. Receptors were chosen at locations where they are likely to experience the greatest potential effect from the construction and/or operation of the Proposed Development. 10.2.12 As a result, 34 existing, 73 new and 8 ecological receptors have been included in the assessment. A full list of the receptors used in the construction and operational phases is provided in Appendix 10.4. The ecological receptors are only relevant to the operational phase assessment.
Construction assessment Construction dust 10.2.13 The Proposed Development will include demolition, construction, earthworks and trackout. The IAQM dust guidance (Ref 10.2) has been used to assess the impacts from dust on local sensitive receptors. Full details of the construction dust assessment methodology presented in Appendix 10.5. Construction traffic 10.2.14 The construction traffic was screened against the criteria set out in paragraph 10.2.8 and a detailed assessment of construction traffic has been undertaken. The methodology for the assessment of construction traffic effects is given in Appendix 10.5 including how significance within the assessment was determined. 10.2.15 A detailed construction traffic assessment was carried out using dispersion modelling. The assessment scenarios are summarised as follows:
2019 baseline used for model verification; future do-minimum (DM) (2024 future baseline traffic data); and future do-something (DS) (2024 future baseline traffic data and construction vehicles generated by the Proposed Development). 10.2.16 The assessment year 2024 represents the peak construction year of the Proposed Development. Model verification 10.2.17 Model verification involves the comparison of modelled pollutant concentrations with measured concentrations at the same points to assess the performance of the model and determine an adjustment factor, if one is required. Defra’s LAQM.TG(16) guidance (Ref 10.10) provides advice on model verification, which is summarised in Appendix 10.5. 10.2.18 Local authority air quality monitoring locations London Rd/ BHF (DT15), Headley Way/ London Rd LP2 (DT16) and 49 London Road/ Latimer/ Sandfield Rd (DT17) have been used in the verification process for oxides of nitrogen (NOx). The results of the verification are presented in Appendix 10.5.
10.2.19 In the absence of relevant local monitoring of fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) on the
modelled network, the modelled concentrations of these pollutants have been adjusted by the same factor as for road NOx. This is line with the Defra’s LAQM.TG(16) guidance (Ref 10.10).
10-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Operational assessment Operational traffic 10.2.20 The operational traffic was screened against the criteria set out in paragraph 10.2.8 and the additional traffic generated by the Proposed Development during the operational would not exceed the criteria. However, an exposure assessment has been undertaken for the opening year, the future existing traffic in 2025 was modelled using an advanced dispersion model. The predicted concentrations were used to inform the total predicted concentration for the selected receptors during the operational phase. The methodology for the assessment is given in Appendix 10.6. Proposed boilers 10.2.21 Two gas-fired boilers are included as part of the Proposed Development during the operational phase. The EPUK/IAQM land-use guidance (Ref 10.3) states that where a combustion plant NOx emission rate is less than 5mg/s it is unlikely to give rise to impacts. The proposed boilers exceed this criterion and are therefore a detailed modelling assessment has been carried out. The methodology for the assessment of operational effects is given in Appendix 10.6, including how the significance of effects in the assessment was determined.
Significance criteria Human receptors 10.2.22 The significance criteria used in this assessment has followed the EPUK/IAQM land-use guidance (Ref 10.3) which provides an approach to determining the air quality impacts resulting from a development and the overall significance of local air quality effects arising from a development, they are presented in Table 10.1 and Table 10.2 Further information is provided in Appendix 10.5 and Appendix 10.6. Impact descriptors for long-term objectives Annual average % Change in concentrations relative to annual mean concentrations at objectives receptor in the 1 2-5 6-10 >10 assessment year 75% or less of Negligible Negligible Slight Moderate objective 76-94% of objective Negligible Slight Moderate Moderate 95-102% of objective Slight Moderate Moderate Substantial 103-109% of Moderate Moderate Substantial Substantial objective 110% of more of Moderate Substantial Substantial Substantial objective Note: changes in pollutant concentrations of less than 0% i.e. <0.5% would be described as negligible
10-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Impact descriptors for short term objectives Change in short- term concentrations Magnitude of change Impact descriptor at receptor in the assessment year <10% of objective Imperceptible Negligible 10-20% of objective Small Slight 20-50% of objective Medium Moderate >50% of objective Large Substantial
Ecological receptors 10.2.23 The Environment Agency (EA’s) Air Emissions Risk Assessment (Ref 10.19) provides the screening criteria to determine significance of emissions associated with industrial premises. They have been adopted in this assessment, as follows:
The short-term process contribution (PC) is less than 1% of the long-term environmental standard for protected conservation area; The short-term PC is greater than 1% but the PEC is less than 70% of the long-term environmental standards. 10.2.24 Emissions that meet the above criteria are deemed to be insignificant.
Assumption and Limitations
Assumptions 10.2.25 The following assumptions have been made in this ES:
The impacts of Part A and Part B processes are represented in the Defra background concentrations that were used in the assessment. The traffic data have been provided by the project transport consultant and it has assumed that that data are correct. The proposed boiler data have been provided by the project mechanical engineer, it has been assumed they are correct and representative to operational conditions of the Proposed Development.
Limitations 10.2.26 Air quality dispersion modelling has inherent limitations and areas of uncertainty, which are listed below:
Traffic data used in the model; Traffic emissions data; Simplifications in model algorithms and empirical relationships that are used to simulate complex physical and chemical processes in the atmosphere; Background concentrations; and Meteorological data. 10.2.27 In order to verify that the assessment is robust despite the above limitations, model verification for the road traffic modelling is undertaken. Details of the model verification are provided in Appendix 10.5.
10-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
10.3 Baseline conditions
Sources of air pollution Industrial processes 10.3.1 Industrial air pollution sources are regulated through a system of operating permits or authorisations, requiring stringent emission limits to be met, and ensuring that any releases to the environment are minimised or rendered harmless. Regulated (or prescribed) industrial processes are classified as Part A or Part B processes and are regulated through the Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) system (Ref 10.18). The larger, more polluting processes are regulated by the EA, and the smaller less polluting ones by the local authorities. Local authorities focus on regulation for emissions to air, whereas the EA regulates emissions to air, water and land. 10.3.2 There are no Part A processes with releases to air listed on the EA website (Ref 10.14) that are relevant to this assessment and/ or within the baseline study area (1km away from the Proposed Development). 10.3.3 Any impact of emissions from other Part A or Part B processes further away from the Proposed Development are assumed to be represented in the Defra background concentrations used, and therefore have been taken into account in the assessment. Road 10.3.4 The main source of pollutant emissions for the area is likely to be road traffic emissions. The nearest major connection roads to the Proposed Development are Marston Road and Headington Road, they are to the main source of road vehicle source of emissions.
Local air quality Air Quality Management Area 10.3.5 A review of the Defra website (Ref 10.15) showed that Oxford City Council (OCC) declared the whole city as an AQMA in 2010 due to exceedances of the health based objectives for annual
mean nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The extent of the AQMA is presented in Appendix 10.3. Local monitoring data 10.3.6 OCC undertakes both automatic and passive monitoring as reported in the OCC’s 2019 Air
Quality Annual Status Report (Ref 10.16). There are nine diffusion tube sites for NO2 within 1km of the Proposed Development, but the closest automatic monitor is approximately 1.3km to the south east (just outside of the baseline study area. The monitored concentrations at these sites are discussed in the following sections and the details of these sites are presented in Appendix 10.3.
Automatic monitoring
10.3.7 Full details of the automatic monitoring locations and data (NO2 and PM10) are summarised in Appendix 10.3. 10.3.8 The closest automatic monitor is Oxford High Street (CM2), a roadside location. Monitored 3 annual mean NO2 concentrations exceeded the air quality objective of 40µg/m in 2015 and 2016 at CM2, with a maximum concentration of 47μg/m3 recorded in 2016. Monitored concentrations were below the objective between 2017 and 2019.
10.3.9 The NO2 hourly mean objective was met in all years between 2015 and 2019.
10.3.10 For PM10 concentrations, there were no exceedances of the PM10 annual mean or 24-hour
10-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
objectives at CM2 in the last five years.
Diffusion tube monitoring
10.3.11 Full details of the NO2 diffusion monitoring locations and data are summarised in Appendix 10.3. 10.3.12 All the diffusion tubes within 1km of the Proposed Development are roadside locations.
Exceedances of the NO2 annual mean objective were recorded at St Clements (DT55) and St Clements 2 (DT77) roadside sites, between 2015 and 2019 for DT55 and 2019 for DT77. It is
understood these two locations are NO2 hotspots and historically experience high NO2
concentrations, therefore high NO2 concentrations are expected. 10.3.13 Headley Way/ London Road LP2 (DT16) is the closest monitoring location to the Proposed Development, 560m to the east of the Proposed Development. Monitored concentrations in the
last five years were all below the annual mean NO2 objective. 10.3.14 The diffusion tubes nearby are considered to be not representative to the Proposed Development, as they are in different urban settings. The concentrations at the proposed development site is anticipated to be lower due to being further away from the main roads in the area. Background concentrations
10.3.15 The Defra website (Ref 10.15) includes estimated background concentrations for NO2, NOx,
PM10 and PM2.5 for each 1km by 1km Ordnance Survey (OS) grid square. The estimated Defra background concentrations for the relevant OS grid squares used in the assessment are below 3 3 the air quality objectives for annual mean NO2, PM10 (40µg/m ) and for PM2.5 (25µg/m ). Full dataset is presented in Appendix 10.3. 10.3.16 The OCC’s urban background monitoring locations are more than 2km away from the Proposed Development, monitoring data from those locations are not considered to be representative. Defra’s estimated background concentrations have been used in the assessment.
10.4 Potential effects
Construction effects
Construction dust 10.4.1 The effects of demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout activities on local air quality, are considered below. 10.4.2 Sensitive human receptors have been considered in the construction dust assessment, they are defined as residential properties/ schools/ hospitals/ places of work that are likely to experience a change in pollutant concentrations and/or dust nuisance due to the construction of the Proposed Development. Further information for sensitive receptors is provided in Appendix 10.4. 10.4.3 Ecological impacts associated with construction activities are not required to be considered further, as there are no ecological receptors within 50m of the Proposed Development or the construction haul route up to 500m from the site entrance or exit of the Proposed Development.
Dust emission magnitude 10.4.4 Following the methodology outlined in Appendix 10.5, each dust-generating activity has been assigned a dust emission magnitude as shown in Table 10.3.
10-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Dust emission magnitude for construction activities Dust Activity emission Reasoning magnitude Total building volume >50,000m3 Demolition Large Demolition activities 10-20m above ground level Potentially dusty materials Total site area approximately 50,000m2 5-10 earth-moving vehicles Assumed moderately dust soil type, such as sand, silt Earthworks Medium and clay Approximately 25,000 – 100,000 tonnes material to be moved Assumed formation of bunds 4-8m in height Total building volume >100,000m3 Construction Large Construction material with potentially dusty material The peak construction HDV is anticipated to be 57 per day based on the traffic provided Trackout Large Assumed unpaved road length to be 50-100m Moderately dusty surface material
Sensitivity of the Area 10.4.5 There are 10 – 100 high sensitivity existing receptors within 20m of the Proposed Development. When Phase 1 of the Proposed Development is completed, the number of high sensitivity receptors will be increased to more than 100 and this has been used to inform the construction dust assessment. The closest residential receptors are the retained blocks A and B within the Clive Booth Student Village. As such the area’s sensitivity has been classified as high for dust soiling according to the IAQM guidance (Ref 10.2). The construction dust buffer is presented in Figure 10.1.
3 10.4.6 The annual mean background PM10 concentration is less than 24µg/m .There are 10 – 100 high sensitivity receptors within 20m of the Proposed Development and more than 100 high sensitivity receptors when Phase 1 of the Proposed Development is completed. As such the sensitivity of the area to human health impacts has been assigned as medium. 10.4.7 The overall sensitivity has been summarised as shown in Table 10.4. Sensitivity of the surrounding area to impacts on dust soiling and human health Sensitivity of the surrounding area for all construction Potential impact activities Dust Soiling High Human Health Medium
10.4.8 Taking into consideration the dust emission magnitude and the sensitivity of the area, the risk of impacts has been derived and presented in Table 10.5. The dust and human health risk both range from medium to high. 10.4.9 With the appropriate best practice mitigation measures (outlined in Appendix 10.9) in place,
10-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
there is likely to be a negligible effect from the dust-generating activities on site. The appropriate mitigation measures will be included in the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Summary dust risk table prior to mitigation Activity Dust risk Human health risk Demolition High High Earthworks Medium Medium Construction High Medium Trackout High Medium
Construction dust buffers
Model verification 10.4.10 Model verification involves the comparison of modelled pollutant concentrations with measured concentrations at the same points to assess the performance of the model and determine an adjustment factor, if one is required. Defra’s LAQM.TG(16) guidance (Ref 10.10) provides advice on model verification, which is summarised in Appendix 10.5. 10.4.11 Air quality monitoring locations DT15, DT16 and DT17 have been used to inform the model verification process, presented in Appendix 10.5. An adjustment factor of 2.4 has been
determined, and it has been used to adjust the predicted concentrations for NO2, PM10 and
PM2.5 in the construction traffic assessment.
Construction traffic
10.4.12 The predicted concentrations (NO2, PM10 and PM2.5) from the assessment of construction traffic
10-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
are presented in Appendix 10.7.
NO2 concentrations
10.4.13 In 2024, annual mean NO2 concentrations predicted at all existing receptors are well below the objective of 40µg/m3 without and with the additional construction vehicles. The maximum annual 3 mean NO2 concentration is 17.4µg/m during the operation of the Proposed Development, predicted at receptor R5 (The Coach House, Headington Road).
3 10.4.14 The largest predicted increase in annual mean NO2 concentration is 0.2µg/m , predicted at
receptor R2 (Flat 3, Bishop Ct, John Garne Way). The impacts on annual mean NO2 concentrations are negligible at all existing receptors.
10.4.15 The predicted annual mean NO2 concentration at all existing receptors are well below the 3 60µg/m , therefore hourly mean NO2 concentrations are likely to exceed the hourly mean objective according to the LAQM.TG(16) guidance (Ref 10.10). Therefore, the impacts of the
Proposed Development on hourly mean NO2 on existing receptors are considered to be negligible.
PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations
3 10.4.16 Predicted PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations are well below the annual mean objectives (40µg/m and 25µg/m3 respectively) at all existing receptors without and with the consideration of the additional construction vehicles.
3 3 10.4.17 The maximum predicted annual mean PM10 concentration is 16.0µg/m and 10.5µg/m for
annual mean PM2.5, both predicted at receptor R5.
10.4.18 The largest predicted increase in annual mean PM10 and PM2.5 concentration is less than 0.1µg/m3, predicted at ground floor receptor R17 (CBSV Retained Block B). Negligible impacts
have been predicted at all existing receptors for annual mean PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations.
Operational effects 10.4.19 In the opening year of 2025, there will be two on-site gas-fired boilers but additional traffic will
not be generated by the Proposed Development, therefore this will give rise to NO2 concentrations only. However, the future traffic in 2025 were modelled and included in the total predicted concentrations, so that all relevant emission sources near the Proposed Development were accounted.
10.4.20 The predicted concentrations (NO2, PM10 and PM2.5) from the assessment for the operational phase are presented in Appendix 10.8.
NO2 concentrations
10.4.21 In 2025, concentrations at all existing receptors are predicted to be well below the annual NO2
air quality objective at all existing receptors. The maximum predicted annual mean NO2 concentration is 16.4µg/m3, predicted at receptor R5.
3 10.4.22 The largest predicted increase in annual mean NO2 concentration is 0.8µg/m , predicted at receptor R16 (ground floor receptor at CBSV Retained Block B). The impacts to annual mean
NO2 concentrations due to the proposed on-site boilers are negligible. 10.4.23 Predicted concentrations at all existing receptors are predicted to be well below the hourly mean
NO2 air quality objective. The impacts of the Proposed Development at all existing receptors are to be negligible.
10.4.24 The annual mean NO2 concentrations at all new receptors are predicted to be below the
10-10
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
objective. The maximum concentration is predicted to be 12.7µg/m3, at receptor N1_6 (sixth floor receptor at building 1).
PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations
10.4.25 In 2025, it is anticipated the operation of the Proposed Development will not give rise to PM10
and PM2.5 concentrations as no additional traffic will generated (explanation provided in 10.4.19). Therefore, only the exposure of the new receptors has been reported for the operation of the Proposed Development.
3 10.4.26 Predicted PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations are well below the annual mean objective of 40µg/m and 25µg/m3 at all new receptors respectively.
3 3 10.4.27 The maximum predicted annual mean PM10 concentration is 14.1µg/m and 9.5 µg/m for annual
mean PM2.5 concentration. Both predicted at receptor N3_0 (ground floor receptor at building 3).
Ecological receptors 10.4.28 The EA’s screening criteria (detailed in 10.2.22) have been used to determine the impact significant at the ecological receptors. 10.4.29 The annual mean NOx concentrations at all identified ecological receptors are predicted to be well below the critical level of 30µg/m3. The highest predicted concentration is 16.3µg/m3 at
Oxford Meadow SAC. The largest predicted increase in annual mean NOx is less than 0.1 µg/m3, this is well below of the EA’s screening criteria and therefore the impacts at the ecological receptors are not significant.
10.5 Mitigation
Construction Phase 10.5.1 The mitigation for the dust generating activities undertaken in the construction phase are presented in Appendix 10.9.
Operational Phase 10.5.2 Mitigation is not required for the operational phase of the Proposed Development. 10.5.3 It is recommended to the future users of the Proposed Development to use public transport, cycling and walking routes where possible. It is also recommended to avoid using single occupancy car trips.
10.6 Residual effects
Construction Phase 10.6.1 The residual effects due to the construction activities following the application of the mitigation measures described in Appendix 10.9 are considered to be not significant.
Operational Phase 10.6.2 The residual effects to air due to the operational phase of the Proposed Development are considered to be not significant.
10.7 Implications of Climate Change
10.7.1 Future climate conditions have been reviewed as part of the assessment, including changes to long-term seasonal averages and extreme weather events as projected by the UK Climate
10-11
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Projections 2018. The following trends of relevance to the assessment have been identified:
An increase in hotter and drier conditions and increased frequency of droughts and heatwaves. These could exacerbate dust generation during construction. However, high-risk mitigation measures are already included in the draft CEMP to limit the generation and dispersion of construction dust. Increased frequency and intensity of heavy rainfall events and flooding could reduce dust and pollutant concentrations due to wet deposition. This would not materially affect the results of the air quality assessment. Increased wind speed could influence dispersion of pollutants during construction and operation. There is considerable uncertainty in projecting wind changes, from wind speed to wind direction, and studies show statistically insignificant variation in wind speed. An increase in hotter and drier conditions could increase concentrations of air pollutants such as ozone and NOx. However, vehicle emissions are predicted to reduce over time and therefore the consequence of this impact is low and it would not materially affect the results of the air quality assessment.
10.8 Cumulative effects
10.8.1 The air quality assessment is inherently cumulative; the traffic data provided by the project transport consultant considers other planned and consented developments. No further cumulative assessment is therefore required in relation to air quality. 10.8.2 The proposed changes to the connecting route between the CBSV site and the Headington Hill Hall campus, including works in the vicinity of Cuckoo Lane, has been considered for the assessment. The improvements would deliver improved accessible pedestrian and bike links between CBSV, the Headington Hill Hall site and the wider Campus, contributing to the sustainable travel options.
10.9 Summary
10.9.1 A qualitative assessment of the potential impacts of construction related dust and emissions on local air quality from the Proposed Development has been carried. The works would result in medium to high risk for dust soiling and heath impact. However, with the appropriate best practice mitigation measures in place, the residual effect from the dust-generating activities on site can be reduced to a negligible level and would therefore be not significant. 10.9.2 A quantitative assessment of the potential impacts associated with the construction vehicles
has been undertaken using dispersion modelling. The changes in NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations due to the traffic generated by the Proposed Development during the construction phase have been predicted. The impacts on local air quality were predicted to be negligible for all pollutants, hence, the effect is considered to be not significant. 10.9.3 Dispersion modelling was also undertaken to assess the potential impacts due to the operation of two gas-fired boilers in the scheme. The operation of the proposed boilers would only give
rise to NO2 concentrations and the resulting impacts were predicted to be negligible and therefore not significant. 10.9.4 The new receptor locations have been predicted to be exposed to concentrations of pollutants which are well below the relevant health based air quality objectives, as such mitigation will not be required.
10-12
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
10.9.5 The nearby ecological receptors have also been assessed and no exceedances or significant impacts were predicted at the assessed ecological receptors. 10.9.6 Based on the above, the air quality impacts of the Proposed Development, summarised in Table 10.6 overleaf, are considered to be not significant. Summary of effects Receptor Sensitivity Potential Proposed Residual Significant / impact mitigation effect not significant Construction phase Existing receptors High Substantial Mitigation measures Negligible Not significant (construction adverse recommended for activities) controlling dust generating activities. They will be included in the CEMP Existing receptors High Negligible None required Negligible Not significant (construction traffic) Operational phase Existing receptors High Negligible None required Negligible Not significant Ecological receptors High Negligible None required Negligible Not significant
10.10 References
Ref 10.1 Oxford City Council Environment Impact Assessment Scoping Opinion 13th January 2021 Ref 10.2 IAQM (2016) Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and Construction (v1.1) Ref 10.3 IAQM and Environmental Protect UK’s (EPUK) (2017) Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (v1.2) Ref 10.4 Environment Act 1995, Chapter 25, Part IV Air Quality Ref 10.5 UK The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 No.490 Ref 10.6 Environmental Protection Act 1990, Chapter 43, Part III Statutory Nuisances and Clean Air Ref 10.7 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2019) National Planning Policy Framework Ref 10.8 Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government (2019) Planning Practice Guidance: Air Quality Ref 10.9 Defra (2016) Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) PG (16) Ref 10.10 Defra (2016) Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) TG (16) Ref 10.11 Oxford City Council – Air Quality Planning Guidance. https://www.oxford.gov.uk/downloads/file/5473/air_quality_planning_application_guidance [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.12 IAQM (2020) A Guide to the Assessment of Air Quality Impacts on Designated Nature Conservation Sites (V1.1) Ref 10.13 Oxford City Council (2020) Oxford Local Plan 2036
10-13
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Ref 10.14 The Environment Agency website, https://environment.data.gov.uk/public- register/view/search-industrial-installations [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.15 The Defra Local Air Quality Management website, https://laqm.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.16 Oxford City Council, 2019. 2019 Air Quality Annual Status Report Ref 10.17 The UK Air Information Resource website, https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.18 Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) system: Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/390 industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Ref 10.19 EA’s air emissions risk assessment website, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air- emissions-risk-assessment-for-your-environmental-permit#environmental-standards-for-air- emissions [Accessed: March 2021] Red 10.20 MAGIC website, https://magic.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.21 Natural England Designated Sites Portal website, https://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/ [Accessed: April 2021] Ref 10.22 Defra EFT, https://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/emissions- factors-toolkit.html [Accessed: March 2021] Ref 10.23 Oxford Brookes University (2019) Redevelopment of the Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement Chapter 2: Air Quality
10-14
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
11 Consideration of other environmental aspects
11.1.1 The EIA Regulations require the ES to present a description of the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development on population, human health, biodiversity, land, soil, water, air, climate, material assets, cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological aspects and landscape. 11.1.2 Through the scoping exercise, topics that were identified as having the potential to give rise to likely significant effects have been assessed in the preceding chapters of this ES. Commentary of the topics that have not been part of a formal assessment in this ES is provided below for completeness. Population 11.1.3 Currently, the accommodation buildings within the area proposed for redevelopment, provide a total of 640 student bedrooms. The demolition of existing accommodation blocks C, F, G, H, J, K, L, M and the ‘Steel House’, will remove 462 rooms. The proposed new buildings would provide 1,035 rooms. Overall this will represent a net gain of 573 student rooms available at CBSV. The provision of an additional student rooms at CBSV will relieve pressure on the housing market, with potential to help address the severe housing shortage in Oxford. 11.1.4 Research suggests that the creation of 3.5 student bedrooms results in the release of 1 house to the rental market, or indeed for sale. Therefore, the intensification of accommodation could result in more accommodation being made available to the wider community. Human health, accident risk and disasters 11.1.5 The potential for effects to human health predominantly arise during the construction phase in relation to noise and air quality/dust related issues. These matters associated with human health are addressed in assessment chapters 8 and 10 for the construction operations and for when the Proposed Development is completed and occupied. 11.1.6 A Geotechnical and Phase II Contamination report by Integral (2021) reports that the findings of intrusive investigation and contamination analyses completed to date do not demonstrate that ground conditions on the Site represent an unacceptable risk to human health. 11.1.7 No significant effects to human health are anticipated. 11.1.8 Schedule 4.(8) of the EIA Regulations requires an ES to provide a ‘description of the expected significant adverse effects of the development on the environment deriving from the vulnerability of the development to risks of major accidents and/or disasters which are relevant to the project concerned.’ 11.1.9 Potential emergency situations are considered by the Thames Valley Local Resilience Forum and published in their community risk register. The register focuses on nine categories of serious risk that are most likely and could result in an emergency. The Proposed Development is not considered specifically vulnerable to five of the identified risks: influenza disease, animal disease, loss of critical infrastructure, industrial accidents and fuel shortages. There are no expected significant effects in relation to these. The other four risks are considered in turn. 11.1.10 RIVER FLOODING – Whilst the Site is in an area that is at a low risk from flooding, a flood risk assessment is required for the proposal as it covers an area of more than 1 hectare. The submitted FRA and drainage strategy demonstrate that the development will not result in flooding on the Site or elsewhere. 11.1.11 SEVERE WEATHER - Specific matters such as wind loading for the building designs will be
11-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
dealt with under the building regulations. 11.1.12 ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION – The land is currently in use for student accommodation. The findings of the intrusive investigation and contamination analyses presented in the Phase II Contamination Report (Integrale, March 2021) do not demonstrate an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. 11.1.13 TRANSPORT ACCIDENTS – An assessment of transport effects, including accident risk and safety, is provided in Chapter 9. The residual effects of construction traffic are expected to be relatively minor or negligible, and temporary in nature, whilst the actual levels of additional construction vehicles is not considered to be excessive. In terms of operational impacts, the assessment (Chapter 9) has identified that, due to the almost nil vehicular impacts and with additional mitigation, no negligible residual effects are expected. 11.1.14 The potential extent of a reservoir breach has been considered with reference to the flood risk information published by the Environment Agency. Water from a breach of the Farmoor Reservoir follows the course of the River Thames and would not affect the application Site. 11.1.15 Oxfordshire Emergency Planning Unit also considers specific sites in Oxfordshire in relation to the potential for radiation incidents at Culham or Harwell Science Centres to affect members of the public. There is very low likelihood (one in one billion years) of an off-site radiation emergency at Culham, and it is expected that decommissioning of the Harwell reactors will be complete by 2025. 11.1.16 Upon completion the potential for accidents or disasters affecting the development and resulting in adverse effects on human health, cultural heritage or the environment is considered to be negligible. Soils and construction waste 11.1.17 The primary measures to mitigate the impacts on soil resources during the site preparation, earthworks and construction activities will be to store and re-use soils in a sustainable manner in accordance with Defra's Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction Sites. This approach will ensure that the quality of soils re-used on-site (and exported off-site if required) is maintained by good soil handling and storage, particularly to avoid compaction and biodegradation of soils that are in storage. 11.1.18 The demolition and construction process for the Proposed Development would generate waste through demolition, groundworks, piling, and construction and fit out. A Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) would be prepared pre-commencement (secured through a planning condition) and the implementation of the SWMP would ensure good site management practice resulting in the minimisation of waste and promoting the reuse and recycling of waste where possible. An estimate of the waste likely to be generated at the construction phase is provided within Chapter 3, and the assessment of construction vehicle movements including the transport of waste over the duration of the construction period is provided in Chapter 9. Climate change 11.1.19 UK Climate Projections 2018 (UKCP18) is the official source of climate projections in the UK. It is funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affair (Defra), the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the Met Office and the Environment Agency. 11.1.20 The UKCP18 Projections highlight that the general trends of climate change in the 21st century show a progressive increase in mean air temperatures during summer and winter, a reduction in the rate of precipitation during the summer months but an increase during the winter months,
11-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
with a slight reduction in average wind speed in the summer and a small increase during the winter. 11.1.21 The potential impact of climate change on the findings of the assessment by each specialist consultant is presented within an additional section of each technical chapter in the ES. Utilising the UKCP18, each chapter has considered how potential climate change may alter the predicted effects for the receptors in the assessment with reference to the highest emissions scenario (RCP8.5, 50th percentile) for future years in the 2080s. Material assets 11.1.22 Material assets can be considered to be ‘built services and infrastructure’ - roads, electricity, telecommunications, gas, water supply infrastructure and sewerage (built infrastructure).
Roads and access 11.1.23 Chapter 9 considers the mitigation is required to ensure that construction traffic can access the site safely, and that the risk at key potential conflict points can be managed appropriately. No highway improvements are needed, and a CTMP will define the construction vehicle access routes from the Oxford bypass, which will be confirmed with OCoC Highways prior to use. However, left-turning HGV movements from Marston Road to Headington Road have been identified as having the potential to conflict with cycle users. In response to this concern, it is suggested that the on-street cycle lane be temporarily removed during construction to deter cyclists passing on the near side of vehicles that are turning left onto Headington Road. 11.1.24 Other important impacts related to pedestrian and cycle movements during construction include:
Temporally close/move southbound bus stop on Marston Road to avoid conflicts with probable HGV access routes during construction (an alternative is available 100m to the south) to improve visibility; Provide suitable crossing facilities or crossing points on John Garne Way and other footpath/access routes located within the site to reduce any conflict with construction vehicles and provide safe routes to circulate; Consider the inter-visibility between pedestrians on the Marston Road footway and any potential site access junction; and, Pedestrian and cycle access routes to/from/across the site will be kept open where possible. However, due to the nature and location of works, some construction activities are likely to require the temporary closure of certain access routes. When this occurs, suitably appropriate diversion routes will be opened, signed and monitored, with a minimum of at least one route to Headington Road being open at any one time. 11.1.25 The OBSV project is related to a forthcoming planning application to provide an enhanced pedestrian route to the Headington Hill Hall campus. That scheme is being designed to tie-in with an improvement to Cuckoo Lane being planned by OCoC. 11.1.26 Furthermore, to manage the increases in pedestrian movements and provide safe access routes, a new pedestrian crossing island is proposed on Marston Road to the south of the site access in the vicinity of the western end of Cuckoo Lane.
Sewerage 11.1.27 The existing foul drainage network will be reused where possible with replacement drainage to suit the new layout and the increase in the amount of accommodation. A pre-development enquiry to Thames Water confirmed the need to carry out modelling design and reinforcement of their off-site network within the timescale of the construction programme.
11-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
11-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
12 Summary of mitigation, residual and interaction effects
12.1 Introduction
12.1.1 This final Chapter provides a summary of the proposed mitigation and residual effects predicted following their implementation. This Chapter does not provide a summary of the ES. A Non- Technical Summary is provided separately. 12.1.2 The summary of proposed mitigation measures is provided to assist the planning authority formulate conditions and clauses of the legal agreement, to ensure that the measures contained and assessed in this ES are implemented, should planning consent be granted.
12.2 Heritage
12.2.1 Re-development will have no physical impacts on Headington Hill Hall and its landscaped grounds, nor the lodge and bridge within the grounds of the Hall. The increase in the height of a number of the replacement blocks will make the student village visually more prominent from within parts of the grounds of Headington Hill Hall and alter its current setting. It is not considered that this would materially impact on the identified heritage significance of Headington Hill Hall and grounds. 12.2.2 The proposal seeks to increase the provision of student accommodation in a way that will represent an improvement in the quality and character of this part of the Headington Hill Conservation Area. The buildings will affect some views: views that have already been effectively lost as a result of tree growth (creating a verdant character that it is desirable to maintain). 12.2.3 In views out from the city towards Headington Hill and across the city from the western hills, any change in the view would have a minor or negligible impact on the appreciation of the hillside as a green backdrop. 12.2.4 Residual effects for the completed development are set out in the Table below.
Receptor Residual effect Significant? Headington Hill Conservation Area Negligible No Central (City and University) Conservation Area Negligible No John Garne Way Allotments Negligible No
12.3 Biodiversity
12.3.1 After taking into account the design of the proposed development and good practice measures during construction; roosting, foraging/commuting bats are the only ecological feature of the Site for which adverse effect could not be ruled out. The potential effects relate to new lighting in the vicinity of adjacent woodland habitat, and the loss of three bat roosts considered to be of low conservation value. Mitigation is therefore proposed to reduce significant environmental effects on foraging/commuting bats, and compensation is proposed for the loss of roost sites.
Mitigation during construction 12.3.2 Any construction that requires artificial lighting within the active bat season (April to October, inclusive) will be avoided as far as possible. If night working is required, the key areas of bat foraging and commuting habitat identified will be avoided via the use of directional flood lighting. These areas comprise the SLINC woodland in the north of the Site, woodland in the west of the
12-1
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Site, the site boundary habitats including the woodland adjacent to the south Site boundary, and retained mature trees. This will be detailed in the Construction Environmental Management Plan, which will also identify locations for the protection of ecological features and provide details of any avoidance or mitigation measures, including timings, working practices and barriers and signage. 12.3.3 A European Protected Species Mitigation (EPSM) licence for bats from Natural England will be required to enable demolition works affecting the bat roosts to proceed. Details of the timings and working methods will be described in the EPSM.
Compensation at the demolition stage 12.3.4 The installation of up to six 1FF Schwegler bat boxes on retained mature trees will compensate for the loss of roost sites within the buildings at the Site. In addition, the inclusion of tree species in the planting scheme with high biodiversity value (such as oak and willow) which readily develop bat roosting features (such as woodpecker holes, lifted bark, etc.), offer a long-term net gain of bat roosting features within the Site. 12.3.5 The roosting bats within the Site will be addressed in the EPSM as a matter of legal compliance and their favourable conservation status at the Site in relation to the development secured.
Mitigation in the scheme 12.3.6 In the completed development, light spillage onto sensitive habitats including the woodland in the north, west and the southern boundary of the Site will be minimised by following best practice guidance (ILP, 2018) and adopting the following methods:
Use of low level downward directional lighting to retain darkness above. Motion-sensitive timers or user operated timers fitted to lighting near sensitive habitats. Limiting the height of the lighting columns and use of a focused downward pointing beam to minimise light spillage into adjacent areas used by bats (use cowls as necessary). Avoiding the use of blue-white (short wavelength) lights, as these can attract insect prey of bats away from key foraging areas. Use of warm-white (long wavelength, ideally <2700Kelvin) lights is preferred. Increased spacing between light units will reduce the intensity and spread of light, thereby minimising the area illuminated. Use of the lowest lux of lighting possible to meet the design requirements.
Enhancements in the scheme 12.3.7 A total of 21 bat roost boxes will be incorporated into the scheme (equivalent to 1 per 500m2 of building area). These will be provided on/in suitable trees and buildings, on a south-east to south-west elevation at least 4m from ground level. There will be a variety of box types provided. 12.3.8 Residual effects are set out in the Table below, with a temporary significant effect whilst new planting becomes established.
Receptor Residual effect Significant? Construction Bats - roosting None from demolition No Bats - foraging and commuting None from floodlighting No Bats - foraging and commuting Temporary loss of habitat Yes, temporary Completed Development Bats - foraging and commuting Temporary loss of habitat Yes, temporary Bats - foraging and commuting None from increased lighting No
12-2
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
12.4 Landscape and visual effects
12.4.1 A 'mitigation by design' approach has taken landscape and visual matters into account as an integral part of the design of the proposed development. Landscape design has been informed by key local guidance documents, which identify opportunities for landscape enhancements and improvement. Buildings have been arranged to maximise tree retention; and its layout largely follows the footprint of the existing built development to integrate the proposed development with the mature landscape setting - the majority of surrounding woodland is retained in the scheme. The new buildings have also been sensitively designed to minimise visual intrusion and impact. 12.4.2 Additional mitigation measures beyond those inherent within the design, include use of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) so that the identified woodland, trees and other landscape / habitat features are protected during the construction phase, and the implementation of a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) would ensure the landscape / habitat features are appropriately managed, in particular in ensuring the long-term health and robustness of perimeter woodland which provides an important screen. 12.4.3 Residual effects are set out in the Table below. The assessment does not predict any significant adverse residual effects in terms of the landscape resource but found that significant residual effects would be experienced in close proximity to the proposals by one group of residential receptors, users of one footpath and one road.
Townscape Character Area resource Residual effects Significant? Headington Hill TCA (Garden Suburbs TT) Slight, neutral No
Visual receptor groups Marston Road, Cuckoo Lane, Pullens Lane and Moderate-Slight, Adverse No William Street. (Low Magnitude) William Street / Ferry Road to Jack Straw’s Lane and Slight, Neutral No Nicholson Road incl. Milham Ford Nature Park. (Low Magnitude) Visitors to tall buildings within Oxford. Moderate, Adverse No (Low Magnitude)
12.5 Noise and vibration
12.5.1 The assessment of potential construction noise impacts demonstrates that mitigation will be required in order to control noise levels at nearby noise sensitive receptors during construction. This can be achieved through the use of a Construction Environmental Management Plan. This will need to be produced by the appointed contractor to set out the specific measures that will be taken to reduce noise impacts during each of the construction phases. 12.5.2 As well as the typical good practice recommendations of BS 8233 (e.g. using quieter plant where possible, siting noisy plant away from noise sensitive receptors where possible, ensuring all noise reduction measures such as mufflers, enclosures and attenuators are fitted etc.), the CEMP should include the following additional measures as a minimum:
2.5m high solid site hoardings around the construction site perimeter to provide screening from ground level construction noise to nearby residences. A management programme to inform the residents of the nearest noise sensitive properties of when the noisiest activities are likely to take place and, where possible,
12-3
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
arranging these activities for periods that are least likely to cause disturbance e.g. student vacations. Demonstration of how the construction programme across the various blocks is planned in order to minimise disruption due to noise. 12.5.3 Significant effects are not expected due to operation of building services plant and equipment, therefore no specific mitigation measures are required beyond the design of building services systems to achieve acceptable noise levels within the proposed student residences. 12.5.4 It is considered that, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation, noise exposure will not lead to any significant adverse effects on health or quality of life. Significant levels of off-site vibration due to construction, building plant/equipment or traffic are considered unlikely.
Potential Residual Significant? Residential receptor impact effect Receptors near to construction traffic routes Temporary Negligible No Receptors on John Garne Way, Pullens Field, Temporary Moderate Yes Pullens Lane, Feilden Grove and the Phase 1 short-term noise to Major properties during the construction of Phase 2 Receptors on John Garne Way, Pullens Field, Noise from Negligible No Pullens Lane and Feilden Grove building services to minor plant /equipment Receptors on John Garne Way, Pullens Field, Temporary Negligible No Pullens Lane and Feilden Grove cumulative construction
12.6 Transport and access
12.6.1 The assessment has established that a range of additional mitigation measures would be required to manage and limit the effects of the proposed development during construction, and several enhancements have been identified for the completed scheme.
Construction Traffic Management Plan 12.6.2 During the construction phase, it is proposed that the effects of construction vehicles will be managed by a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP). The CTMP will include a range of measures, defining construction vehicle access routes from the Oxford bypass and outline the proposed hours/days of construction, i.e., outside of the peak periods.
Management of Cycle Safety at Marston Road/Headington Road Traffic Signals 12.6.3 This junction includes a cycle lane along the nearside kerb and an Advance Cycle Stop Line at the signals to allow bicycles to bypass the queues. However, there is a concern that increased HGV movements through this junction, especially for left-turn movements from Marston Road to Headington Road, may result in an increase in the risk of accidents involving bicycles. 12.6.4 To address this, it is suggested that the on-street cycle lane be temporarily removed during construction to deter cyclists from passing vehicles on their near side. In addition, HGV drivers should be made aware of this potential issue as part of their risk assessment. Additional signage could also be provided to inform cyclists of the dangers of passing construction vehicles on the near side, plus vehicle mounted signs located on the rear nearside of all HGV delivery vehicles.
Managing Pedestrian Conflicts on Marston Road and Access Routes 12.6.5 Potential impacts related to pedestrian and cycle movements which need to be mitigated include:
12-4
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Temporary close/move southbound bus stop on Marston Road to avoid conflicts with probable HGV access routes during construction (an alternative is available 100m to the south) to improve visibility; Provide suitable crossing facilities or crossing points on John Garne Way and other footpath/access routes located within the site to reduce any conflict with construction vehicles and provide safe routes to circulate; Consider the inter-visibility between pedestrians on the Marston Road footway and any potential site access junction; and, Pedestrian and cycle access routes to/from/across the site will be kept open where possible. However, due to the nature and location of works, some construction activities are likely to require the temporary closure of certain access routes. When this occurs, suitably appropriate diversion routes will be opened, signed and monitored, with a minimum of at least one route to Headington Road being open at any one time.
Enhanced Pedestrian Facilities 12.6.6 Occupation of the development will increase pedestrian movements. There is a separate but related planning application to provide an enhanced pedestrian route to the Headington Hill Hall campus, which has been designed to tie-in with an improvement to Cuckoo Lane being planned by OCoC. 12.6.7 Furthermore, to manage the increases in pedestrian movements and provide safe access routes, a new pedestrian crossing island is proposed on Marston Road to the south of the site access in the vicinity of the western end of Cuckoo Lane.
Expansion of the ‘Arrivals’ System 12.6.8 To manage the unique operational traffic impacts which occur on a single weekend when student residents move into their accommodation, an expansion of the University’s current ‘arrivals’ booking system will be used. This would enable each student to book a one-hour slot when they are permitted to bring a car on-site to unload their possessions. This system provides details of the entry and exit routes from the site, and coloured zoning so that students have an identified area in which to park. This ensures that the site does not become gridlocked and that all emergency vehicle access routes are maintained.
Travel Plan Update 12.6.9 The University is actively working on an updated travel plan. This will also monitor cycle parking use within the CBSV site to identify if the capacity and locations provided are adequate for resident’s needs. 12.6.10 Residual effects following the consideration of mitigation are shown in the table below.
Receptor Residual Effect Significant? Construction Headington Road Negligible No Marston Road Minor No Signal Junction Minor No Completed development Headington Road Negligible No Marston Road Negligible No Signal Junction Negligible No
12-5
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
12.7 Air quality
12.7.1 Emissions to air throughout the construction phase will be controlled via the implementation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan including measures for the management of dust to control activities in proximity to the surrounding receptors. 12.7.2 The assessment has demonstrated that the overall effect on air quality would not be significant; it would not introduce any new exposure into areas of unacceptable air quality, nor would construction vehicles or development-traffic emissions have a significant impact on local air quality. It is not necessary to propose further mitigation measures. 12.7.3 The University Travel Plan update should facilitate the of use public transport, cycling and walking routes where possible. 12.7.4 Residual effects are shown in the table below.
Receptor / potential impact Residual effect Significant? Existing receptors (construction activities) Negligible No Existing receptors (construction traffic) Negligible No Existing receptors (traffic) Negligible No Ecological receptors (traffic) Negligible No
12.8 Interaction of effects on receptors
12.8.1 The potential for effects caused by a combination of impacts from the Proposed Development on a particular receptor, acting together, may cause a more significant impact collectively than individually, or potentially, a combination of beneficial and adverse effects may be experienced at a particular location. For interaction between effects to be possible, there would need to be an identifiable residual effect from one or more environmental aspects after considering the mitigation proposed. 12.8.2 From the limited range of potential effects identified, it is considered that the only likely interaction effect might occur for the residential receptor groups closest to the proposed construction works. Those that are identified in the visual assessment and have line-of-sight with the development site may also experience short-term noise effects associated with demolition or construction. This would be temporary situation that would cease upon completion of the construction activities. 12.8.3 These are aspects that are managed through the implementation of mitigation measures set out in a CEMP. With such measures in place, temporary effects on receptors from these acting together are not predicted to result in an interaction effect that would require any additional measures.
12.9 Conclusion
12.9.1 The assessment has considered how the environment would be affected by the Proposed Development. Whilst mitigation measures are included in the scheme design, or have been identified to minimise adverse environmental effects, residual significant effects are likely to occur in relation to: Bats – there would be a temporary adverse effect on foraging and commuting by bats as a result of reduced availability of habitat until the landscape planting matures. Construction noise – temporary short-term effects for people in the area around John Garne
12-6
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Way, Pullens Field, Pullens Lane, Feilden Grove and occupants of the nearest CBSV buildings during demolition and construction. 12.9.2 The Environmental Statement has been submitted in support of a planning application to Oxford City Council for the proposed redevelopment for part of Clive Booth Student Village. Prior to making a planning decision, the Council will consult with statutory advisors and non-statutory bodies, inviting comments on the proposals. Members of the general public are also welcome to make comments on the application during this time. When the Council is deciding whether to grant planning permission, it can do so in the full knowledge of any significant effects predicted, and take this into account in the decision making process.
12-7
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Mitigation Summary Table Identified receptor Type and purpose of additional mitigation Means by which mitigation To be delivered by Auditable by measure (prevent, reduce, offset, enhance) may be secured (e.g. planning condition / legal agreement) Heritage Operation Headington Hill Hall; Design, materials and landscaping to prevent and Planning condition OBU, Developer / Oxford City Headington Hill CA; reduce effects. Contractor Council (OCC) Central (City and University) CA Biodiversity Tree protection Any retained trees to be physically safeguarded using Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC tree protection fencing and guarding to avoid harm to contractors the trees. Hedgerows and The hedgerow and tree losses within the Site will be Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC Trees replaced with an increased diversity and number of contractors native species of local provenance to enhance these habitats on Site. This will also enhance the Site for birds, bats and small mammals such as hedgehogs. Grassland Areas of amenity grassland removed or damaged Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC during construction will be replaced with enhanced contractors meadow seed mixes and their management included in the LEMP to maximise biodiversity gain. Ground flora and The existing ground flora and grassland within the Site Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC grassland will be enhanced with diverse species mixes and contractors sensitive management for biodiversity. Nectar-rich planting will be incorporated throughout the Development. This will enhance these habitats at the Site and provide a resource for invertebrates, which in turn will provide a food source for birds and bats. Nesting birds Removal of vegetation outside nesting bird season Planning condition. Ecologist, Site OCC (March to September), or check for active nests by a Manager and suitably experienced ecologist if works within this contractors period are unavoidable to prevent impacts to nesting birds and therefore ensuring legal compliance. Birds Provision of 42 bird nesting boxes to enhance the Planning condition. Ecologist, Site Ecologist, nesting provision at the Site for birds. Manager, contractors OCC 12-8
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Identified receptor Type and purpose of additional mitigation Means by which mitigation To be delivered by Auditable by measure (prevent, reduce, offset, enhance) may be secured (e.g. planning condition / legal agreement)
Bats (roosting) Reassessment by ecologist of trees scheduled for Planning condition. Ecologist, Site Ecologist, removal and further survey undertaken where required Manager and OCC before soft felling techniques are used under the contractors supervision of a licenced bat ecologist for any trees with low suitability for roosting bats to prevent impacts to roosting bats. Bats (roosting) Supervised soft-strip of Buildings F, G and J. This will European Protected Species Ecologist, Site Ecologist, prevent the killing and injury of bats. Mitigation (EPSM) licence for Manager and Natural bats from Natural England. contractors England, OCC Planning Condition. Bats (roosting) Installation of up to six 1FF Schwegler bat boxes (or European Protected Species Ecologist, Site Ecologist, similar) to compensate for the loss of roost sites within Mitigation (EPSM) licence for Manager and Natural the buildings at the Site. bats from Natural England. contractors England, OCC Planning Condition. Bats (roosting) Provision of 21 bat roost boxes to enhance the Planning condition. Ecologist, Site Ecologist, roosting provision at the Site for bats. Manager and OCC contractors Bats (foraging and Avoidance of night work, and lighting to be directional Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC commuting) if night working is unavoidable. To prevent impacts to contractors foraging and commuting bats. Bats (foraging and Planting of new trees to offset the loss of trees Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC commuting) removed as a result of the Development. contractors Bats (roosting, Light spillage on to sensitive habitats minimised during Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC foraging and operation of the Development by following best contractors commuting) practice guidance to prevent impacts on roosting, foraging and commuting bats. Invertebrates Provision of 21 bug hotels to enhance the nesting and Planning condition. Ecologist, Site Ecologist, shelter provision at the Site for invertebrates. A Manager and OCC
12-9
Oxford Brookes University Clive Booth Student Village Environmental Statement
Identified receptor Type and purpose of additional mitigation Means by which mitigation To be delivered by Auditable by measure (prevent, reduce, offset, enhance) may be secured (e.g. planning condition / legal agreement) quarter of these will be larger, naturalised habitat piles contractors which will also benefit amphibians, reptiles and small mammals such as hedgehogs. Landscape and visual effects Woodland, trees, Protection of woodland, trees, habitat / landscape Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC habitat / landscape features during the construction phase. (CEMP) contractors features Woodland, trees, Appropriate management to ensure the long-term Planning condition. OBU OCC habitat / landscape health and robustness of on-site features and features perimeter woodland. (LEMP) Noise Residential Reduce noise during construction at the nearest Planning condition. Site Manager and OCC receptors affected residential receptors. Measures specified in contractors CEMP to be agreed. Transport Construction Planning condition Headington Road Prevent / reduce risk of accidents via Construction Developer/Contractor OCoC Marston Road Traffic Management Plan Highways Signal Junction Occupation Improve permeability and reduce the risk of accidents; Planning conditions OBU Headington Road OBU Travel Plan updated; Student start-of-term OCoC Marston Road booking system. Highways Improvements to the pedestrian network including a Planning condition OCoC Highways contribution towards new crossing facilities on through S.106 Marston Road. Air quality Existing and new Prevent and reduce effects of construction activities Mitigation in the CEMP Site Manager and OCC / Client receptors contractors representative
12-10