CUCKOO LANE HILL HALL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT JUNE 2021

worlledge www.worlledgeassociates.com associates HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

CONTENTS

Worlledge Associate

Introduction

Headington Hill Hall Estate

Boundary Walls to Hall Estate

Heritage Significance

Statement of Significance

National and Local Heritage Policies and Guidelines

Proposal

Assessment of Impact

Conclusion

Appendix 1: Entries in the National Heritage List for England for

Appendix 2: Statement of Significance for Headington Hill Hall

Appendix 3: Oxford City Council Local Plan Heritage Policies DH1 and DH3

Contact Information

Raymond Osborne [email protected]

Ruth Mullett [email protected]

Patrick Horrocks [email protected]

Nicholas Worlledge [email protected]

2 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

WORLLEDGE ASSOCIATES

Worlledge Associates is an Oxford-based heritage consultancy, committed to the effective management of the historic environment. Established in 2014 by Nicholas and Alison Worlledge, Nicholas came to private practice with over 35 years’ experience working in heritage management for local authorities. This intimate knowledge and understanding of council processes, and planning policy and practice, helps us to work collaboratively with owners and decision- makers to manage change to the historic environment.

Our team of dedicated researchers and specialists believe in the capacity of the historic environment to contribute to society’s collective economic, social, and cultural well-being. We aim to identify what is significant about places and spaces to support their effective management and sustain their heritage value. We have worked with a wide range of property-owners and developers including universities and colleges, museums and libraries, large country estates, manor house, farmsteads, cottages, town houses and new housing sites.

3 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

The intelligent management of change is a key principle necessary to sustain the historic environment for present and future generations to enjoy. Historic England and successive government agencies have published policy and advice that extend our understanding of the historic environment and develop our competency in making decisions about how to manage it.

Paragraphs 4-10 of Historic England’s Good Practice Advice Note 2 (Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment) explains that applications (for planning permission and listed building consent) have a greater likelihood of success and better decisions will be made when applicants and local planning authorities assess and understand the particular nature of the significance of an asset, the extent of the asset’s fabric to which the significance relates and the level of importance of that significance.

The National Planning Policy Framework provides a very similar message in paragraphs 189 and 190 expecting both applicant and local planning authority to take responsibility for understanding the significance of a heritage asset and the impact of a development proposal, seeking to avoid unacceptable conflict between the asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.

It has never been the intention of government to prevent change or freeze frame local communities and current policy and good practice suggests that change, if managed intelligently would not be harmful.

This Heritage Impact Assessment Report has been prepared, in accordance with the requirements of Heritage Policy DH3 of the Oxford City Local Plan 2016 – 2036, to accompany a development proposal to modify the existing pedestrian access through the stone boundary wall running along the southern side of Cuckoo Lane which marks the northern boundary to Headington Hill Hall, a grade II* listed building lying in the Headington Hill Conservation Area.

It provides a brief chronology of the establishment, expansion and contraction of the Headington Hill Hall Estate and the consequential changes in use. It briefly documents the surviving boundary walls. While none are included in the National Heritage List for England in their own right, they mark and are part of the curtilage of the grade II* Headington Hill Hall and are significant markers in the landscape providing evidence of the wealth and status of the owners and builders of Headington Hill Hall, the Morrell family.

The report includes a summary of the relevant national and local heritage policies and guidelines, a brief description of the proposed works, and an assessment of the impact, or otherwise, on the heritage significance of Headington Hill Hall and its boundary walls.

4 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Extract from the Tithe Award Map showing the boundary of Headington Hill Hall with the boundaries marked by Headington Hill Road to the south, to the west, Cuckoo Lane to the north and Pullen Lane to the east

HEADINGTON HILL HALL ESTATE

While Headington Hill Hall was not a large, landed estate, it was an Extract from the Tithe Award Map showing the boundary of estate of considerable status, and contained the largest private house Headington Hill Hall with the boundaries marked by Headington Hill in Oxford, with 51 rooms in 1858. Road to the south, Marston Road to the west, Cuckoo Lane to the north and Pullen Lane to the east. Research has shown that the estate expanded in the mid-late 19th century and from the second quarter of the 20th century began to The 1876 OS map shows a lodge noted on the 1849 Tithe Award contract as land was transferred into public ownership and use for map and two additional lodges on , lower lodge parkland, or developed as government offices, and higher education at the south-west corner and top lodge to the north-east corner. A uses, resulting in Headington Hill Hall and its immediate grounds further lodge was on Marston Road. The top lodge marked the main becoming, firstly a company HQ (1959-1992) and from 1992 a part of entrance to the estate. Evidence from engravings show that there was Oxford Brooks University. an existing boundary wall along the southern boundary of the estate adjoining which is the raised footpath installed in 1700. It is thought BRIEF CHRONOLOGY likely the walls to Pullen Lane and Cuckoo date from this period of In 1817 the Oxford brewer James Morrell senior bought some grazing expansion. land from the Savage family at the top of the hill, and the original Headington Hill Hall was built by 1824. The 1849 Tithe Award map 1874 and 1875 the estate expanded by the purchase of 13 acres shows the house north of Headington Road surrounded by a garden to the north on Cuckoo Lane, and 66 acres lying to the south and pasture comprised 36 a 2 29p. It was bounded by Headington of Headington Road. In 1877/8 a bridge was constructed from Road to the south, Pullen Lane to the east, Marston Road to the west Headington Hill Hall to the land to the south. In 1878 a substantial and Cuckoo Lane to the north. coach house and stable was constructed in the northeast corner of the estate. An access was created in the wall to allow access to/from Pullen Lane.

5 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

In 1929-30 land was sold to Oxford City Council so it could build In 1992 Oxford Brookes University took over the site and has carried housing. In 1930-31 the Oxford Preservation Society negotiated the out several developments, including the extension and conversion of purchase of 56 acres of land on the south side of Headington Hill for the former coach house and stables, used by Pergamon as offices, a park, now South Park. Following requisition of the Hall and grounds to create the Richard Hamilton Centre. This involved the creation of a for the war, the government erected offices on land to the east pedestrian access on Cuckoo Lane. Further west down Cuckoo Lane fronting Marston Road. Land was also developed for a Territorial Army there is a second access point serving the halls of residences that lie Base. In 1949 that the land formerly occupied by Morrells Nursery, to the north-east. south of Headington Road, was sold and in 1956 became the campus of Oxford College of Technology. SUMMARY Over the period 1849 to 1959 the estate expanded from 36 acres to 1953 Headington Hill Hall and four lodges and 37 acres transferred to 115 acres and then to 17 acres surrounding the house. Much of the Oxford City Council and and South Park created. land has become public parks, with the balance being used by Oxford Between 1959 and 1992 the House and grounds were leased to the Brookes University. The Headington Hill Hall estate has moved from a Pergamon Press. private secluded space designed to exclude people to primarily open space and public uses.

6 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Engraving 1810 showing the raised pavement and wall to what became the Headington Hill Hall Estate

BOUNDARY WALLS Cuckoo Lane is thought to be an ancient lane and marked the boundary of the parishes of St Clements and Headington and at the TO HEADINGTON eastern end where these parishes meet Marston parish. HILL HALL ESTATE There are two boundary date stones, one from the from 17th century (listed grade II see Appendix 1) on Marston Road marking the beginning of the lane running through to Pullen Lane and one dated 1901 in the wall of the former coach house and stables at the eastern end of the lane. It marked the line of the Parliamentary Borough Boundary and ward boundary.

There is also a date stone in the wall fronting Headington Hill Road (listed grade II see Appendix 1) set into the wall during road improvements in 1930, possibly moved then, and in 1771 when the road was re-aligned. Inscribed ‘Here endeth Hedington Hyway W.K. & I.F.’ Headington Hill was paved - 1725.

While the boundaries to Headington Hill Hall are well established the existing boundary walls may date to the expansion of the estate noted on the 1849 Tithe Award Map or the major building program in the late 1850s.

7 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

A wall to the eastern and northern boundary is shown on the 25-inch OS map of 1875 running along Marston Road and along this part of Cuckoo Lane from the lodge on Marston Road to a point north of the house. It remains in place on the 1929 OS map.

The development during WWII and soon after to the western side fronting Marston Road resulted in the loss of the lodge and wall to Marston Road.

The boundary wall has been modified by subsequent development to the west of the house and grounds with the boundary of Headington Hill Park marked by iron fencing instead of the former stone walling which now starts further east along Cuckoo Lane close to the existing access point, which was created to facilitate access between the student accommodation to the north and north-west and the main Extract from 25-inch OS map 1929 before the break-up of the estate showing the Lower Lodge and The Lodge on Headington Hill Road and Marston Lodge to the north-west and the boundary walls campus.

Extract from 1:2500 map showing development to the Marston Road frontage

8 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

View from the south-east looking towards the remaining portion of wall to Cuckoo Lane which starts to the right of the pedestrian access from the student village and the current pedestrian access point in the wall

View along Cuckoo Lane from the junction of the iron fencing to Headington Hill Park and the wall with the current access marked by the sunshine through the opening and the lamp post

9 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

View along Cuckoo Lane from the east back to the current opening

View of the wall fronting Cuckoo Lane adjacent to former coach house and stables

10 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

View of the stone boundary wall junction of Cuckoo Lane and Pullen Lane (which was modified when the ‘new’ stables were built

Stone boundary wall to Pullen Lane marking the eastern edge of the estate grounds

11 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Stone wall to Headington Hill Road marking the southern boundary of the estate

12 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

Having regard to the history of Headington Hill Hall and the surviving walls to Headington Hill Road, Pullen Lane, and Cuckoo Lane their heritage significance can be summarised as follows:

• The surviving stone boundaries walls to Headington Hill Road, Pullen Lane, and Cuckoo Lane are significant in marking three of the boundaries of the Headington Hill Hall estate shown on the c1849 Tithe Award map, prior to its expansion to the north and south later in the 19th century.

• They provide physical evidence of the wealth and social status of the Morrell family who could afford to erect extensive substantial stone boundary walls to define their private property and to emphasis their exclusive use by the family.

• While Headington Hill Hall and grounds are now in public use, the surviving stone walls are a reminder of the privilege and power that created the house and once exclusive grounds, and of the wealth of the Morrell family owners who created them.

• They are an example of the fashion in the 18th and 19th century of wealthy owners who wished to assert their status and dominion over the landscape by the construction of conspicuous boundary walls.

13 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

NATIONAL AND LOCAL HERITAGE POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND ADVICE

Headington Hill Hall is included in the NHLE grade II* and lies within The PPG also seeks to provide a clearer understanding of what the Headington Hill Conservation Area and accordingly is a heritage constitutes ‘public benefit’, as it is the public benefit that flows from asset. The following national and local policies, guidelines and advice a development that can justify harm. In weighing the public benefits are relevant. against potential harm, considerable weight and importance should be given to the desirability to preserve the setting of listed buildings. NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK Conservation principles, policy and practice seek to preserve and Public benefits can flow from a variety of developments and could be enhance the value of heritage assets. With the issuing of the National anything that delivers economic, social, or environmental progress as Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Government has re-affirmed described in the NPPF, paragraph 8. its aim that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and They should be of a nature or scale to be of benefit to the public future generations. 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 In relation to development affecting a designated heritage asset the to be genuine public benefits. It explains that public benefits can NPPF states in paragraphs 193 and 194 that: include heritage benefits, such as:

‘When considering the impact of a proposed development on the • Sustaining or enhancing the significance of a heritage asset and significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should the contribution of its setting; be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of • Reducing or removing risks to a heritage asset; whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. • Securing the optimum viable use for a heritage asset.

Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage HISTORIC ENGLAND ‘CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES’ (2008) asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development Works of alteration, extension, or demolition need not involve any within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification.’ harmful impact and may be necessary to ensure a building has a viable future. Historic England explains its approach to managing THE PLANNING PRACTICE GUIDANCE (PPG) the historic environment and how we experience places stating in in This seeks to provide further advice on assessing the impact of ‘Conservation Principles’ (April 2008) paragraph 88: 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 ‘Very few significant places can be maintained at either public or states: private expense unless they are capable of some beneficial use; nor would it be desirable, even if it were practical, for most places ‘In determining whether works to a listed building (or its setting) that people value to become solely memorials of the past’. constitute substantial harm, an important consideration would be whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its It also points out in paragraph 92: special architectural or historic interest. It is the degree of harm to the asset’s significance rather than the scale of the development ‘Retaining the authenticity of a place is not always achieved by that is to be assessed.’ retaining as much of the existing fabric as is technically possible’.

The NPPF explains in paragraphs 195 and 196 the differences It also comments in paragraph 86: between ‘substantial’ harm and ‘less than substantial’ harm, advising that any harm should be justified by the public benefit of a proposal. ‘Keeping a significant place in use is likely to require continual adaptation and change; but provided such interventions respect In cases where there is less than substantial harm, paragraph 196 the values of the place, they will tend to benefit public (heritage) states: as well as private interests in it. Many places now valued as part of the historic environment exist because of past patronage ‘Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial and private investment, and the work of successive generations harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm often contributes to their significance. Owners and managers should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal of significant places should not be discouraged from adding including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use’. further layers of potential future interest and value, provided that recognised heritage values are not eroded or compromised in the process’.

14 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Further, in relation to new works and alterations in paragraph 138 framework, it is clear that there is a complex assessment decision- states: making process to navigate when considering change within the historic environment. New work or alteration to a significant place should normally be acceptable if: Central to any decision is the recognition that history is not a static thing, and that the significance of our historic environment derives a. there is sufficient information comprehensively to understand from a history of change. the impacts of the proposal on the significance of the place. S66 AND S72 PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS b. the proposal would not materially harm the values of the place, AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990 which, where appropriate, would be reinforced or further revealed. Section 66 of the Act requires local planning authorities to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or c. the proposals aspire to a quality of design and execution which its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest may be valued now and in the future. which it possesses.

In relation to quality of design paragraphs 143 and 144 state: Section 72 of the Act requires that local planning authorities ‘In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation There are no simple rules for achieving quality of design in new area, […] special attention shall be paid to the desirability of work, although a clear and coherent relationship of all the parts preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.’ to the whole, as well as to the setting into which the new work is introduced, is essential. This neither implies nor precludes working There have been several Court of Appeal decisions which have in traditional or new ways but will normally involve respecting the provided interpretations of the requirements of these sections. values established through an assessment of the significance of the place. In the Court of Appeal, Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v East

Quality is enduring, even though taste and fashion may change. Northants District Council, English Heritage and National Trust, The eye appreciates the aesthetic qualities of a place such as [2015] 1 W.L.R. 45, Sullivan L J made clear that to discharge this its scale, composition, silhouette, and proportions, and tells us responsibility means that decision makers must give considerable whether the intervention fits comfortably in its context. Achieving importance and weight to the desirability of preserving the setting of quality always depends on the skill of the designer. The choice listed buildings when carrying out the balancing exercise (of judging of appropriate materials, and the craftsmanship applied to their harm against other planning considerations). use, is particularly crucial to both durability and to maintaining the specific character of places. In Jones v Mordue & Anor [2016] 1 W.L.R. 2682 the Court of Appeal explains how decision makers can ensure this duty can be fulfilled: These conservation principles reflect the advice in NPPF on good that by working through paragraphs 131 -134 of the NPPF, in design. Paragraph 124 states: accordance with their terms a decision maker will have complied with the duty under sections 16, 66(1) and 72. This report follows this The creation of high-quality buildings and places is fundamental to advice to ensure consistency with the duty to preserve or enhance. what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better In the Court of Appeal [Catesby Estates v Steer and SSCLG, 2018] the places in which to live and work and helps make development concept of setting was explored. In paragraph 15 of the judgement acceptable to communities Justice Lindblom rehearses the Planning Inspector’s considerations, commenting that the Inspector found it difficult to disassociate While paragraph 130 advises that: landscape impact from heritage impact. The focus of the judgement is to determine the extent to which visual and historical relationships […] where the design of a development accords with clear between places contribute to define the extent of setting. Three expectations in plan policies, design should not be used by the general conclusions are made: decision-maker as a valid reason to object to development. a) The decision maker needs to understand the setting of a HISTORIC ENGLAND’S ‘GOOD PRACTICE ADVICE NOTES 3: designated heritage asset, even if it cannot be delineated exactly; THE SETTING OF HERITAGE ASSETS’ Paragraph 19, of this practice note, explains that ‘amongst the b) There is no one prescriptive way to define an asset’s setting Government’s planning policies for the historic environment is that - a balanced judgement needs to be made concentrating on the conservation decisions are based on a proportionate assessment of surroundings in which an asset is experienced and keeping in the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected mind that those surroundings may change over time; by a proposal, including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset’. c) The effect of a development on the setting of a heritage asset and whether that effect harms significance. From this summary of the national heritage management policy

15 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

OXFORD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL PLAN HERITAGE POLICIES

At full Council meeting on 8th June 2020 the City Council voted to to guide future development. adopt THE OXFORD LOCAL PLAN 2016 - 2036. The forward states: • High quality design and placemaking DH1 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 • Views and building heights DH2 and shape new developments, so that they respect the past and present of Oxford, while improving its future by supporting our city’s • Designated heritage assets DH3 people and their environment. • Archaeological remains DH4 This new Local Plan will determine the homes, jobs, community facilities and infrastructure for the next twenty years, striking the • Local heritage assets DH5 right balance between the different pressures that Oxford and its people face. It also sets out our priorities as a city. The policies relevant to the proposal to the boundary wall at Headington Hill Hall, a grade II* listed building lying in a Conservation The issues and policies in relation to Oxford’s heritage are contained Area are DH1 and DH3. in Part 6. Enhancing Oxford’s heritage and creating high quality new development. Managing change in a way that respects and draws from Policy DH1 stipulates that planning permission will only be granted Oxford’s heritage is vital for the continued success of the city. for development which shows a high standard of design, and which respects the character and appearance of an area and uses materials The value and benefits of good design and improvements to quality appropriate to the site and surroundings. 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 Policy DH3 requires development to respect and draw inspiration to its surroundings. It may blend in or stand out, but it should not from Oxford’s unique historic environment (above and below ground), detract from existing significant positive characteristics in the area, responding positively to the significance character and distinctiveness and it may add interest and variety. A well-designed scheme will of the heritage asset and locality. meet the needs of all users and will stand the test of time. These policies closely reflect the NPPF and are set out in full in It discusses and addresses the following issues and sets outs policies Appendix 3.

16 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PROPOSAL

The proposal is to re-design the existing modern access point and routes from the halls of residence to provide all ability access across the campus, with footpaths with steps and a gradient path which meets the requirements of the Equality Act 2020. This involves:

• Removing the piers to the current access point for re-use and rebuilding the wall to match the surrounding sections;

• Moving the access point further west by creating a new, slightly wider opening, and re-using the stone piers;

• Removing the current footpath which has flights of steps;

• Install new footpaths one with steps and a second with a gradient to allow all ability access;

• Removal of a portion of wall to the west of the proposed access.

17 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT

Historic England in its Conservation Principles explains its approach to design a welcoming and safe entry point, is part of the site’s to managing the historic environment and how we experience continuing new role. changing places, making the point in paragraph 86 that many places are valued today because of past patronage and private investment The stone boundary wall runs from the junction of Headington Hill and the work of successive generations often contributes to Park along Cuckoo Lane to Pullen Lane to the north-east and along significance. Pullen Lane with walls onto Headington Road. The proposed works will preserve the sense of enclosure that is currently experienced and The government has placed a high priority on sustaining the historic will preserve the evidence to help understanding of the design and environment for present and future generations explaining that function of the historic park boundary wall. It will enhance people’s sustainable development is about change for the better and that the experience of the setting to the Hall and reinforce the modern function historic environment can be better cherished if it is allowed to thrive the Hall and adjoining sites perform as a part of Oxford Brookes rather than wither. University. It will also serve to create an enhanced connection with Headington Hill Park and enhance people’s experience of this historic There is no direct physical impact on Headington Hill Hall or any of route (Cuckoo Lane). the buildings and items included in the NHLE se out in Appendix 1. It will have a physical impact on part of the curtilage boundary wall to There is evidence to show that the historic park and its boundary Headington Hill Hall, which are of heritage significance. walls are not the result of a single designed event but have evolved through the changing history of the place. If it is considered that The proposal to modify part of wall to the south-west reflects the the loss of a section of stone boundary wall would result in some current use of the site and would deliver an improved and meaningful harm, then that harm would be at the bottom end of the scale of less point of access into the Hall grounds. The ‘celebration’ of this new than substantial harm and would be justified by the public benefits point of access would resonate with the historic function and design (including heritage benefits that the proposed development would of entry points around the parkland and enhance people’s experience. deliver). These benefits would include the enhanced experience of The aim is to reduce opportunity for antisocial behaviour, helping to a new and improved point of access into the grounds, the inclusive improve safety and perceptions of safety for students and other users access arrangements, and improved user safety. of Cuckoo Lane has informed the design details. IMPACT ON THE HEADINGTON HILL CONSERVATION AREA The role of Headington Hill Hall has changed from one of exclusion It is considered the proposals are of such a minor nature as to have to inclusion. The proposed adaptation of the boundary wall at its no impact on the character or appearance of the Headington Hill junction with the student village to provide all ability access and Conservation Area.

18 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

CONCLUSION

Headington Hill Hall a grade II* listed building lying within the The proposal is to modify an existing access through the northern Headington Hill Conservation Area established between 1817- boundary wall by its relocation and increased width, and some partial 24 expanded from 36 acres in 1849 to 115 acres by the end of demolition, to improve access and visibility for current users. While the century as an extensive private estate for the Morrell family. It this will result in some physical changes, it is considered the impact marked the boundary of the c1849 estate with stone boundary wall, a on the heritage significance of the boundary wall and setting of demonstration of their wealth and privilege. Headington Hill Hall would be less than substantial, and at a low end of the scale. Beginning in 1929 the estate eventually contracted to 17 acres of gardens and park surrounding the house. Much of the land became As required by the NPPF and Heritage Policy DH3 of the Oxford City public parks, with the balance being used for higher education uses, Local Plan 2016-36, in cases of less than substantial impact, the mow occupied by Oxford Brookes University. proposals must be justified by public benefit. It is considered the proposal removes an opportunity for antisocial behaviour and will Over this period Headington Hill Hall estate moved from being a help to improve safety and perceptions of safety for students and private secluded space designed to exclude people to primarily open other users of Cuckoo Lane. The proposal provides an enhanced space and public uses. Despite this evolution, the surviving stone experience for all users of a new and improved point of access which boundary walls provide evidence and a reminder the once exclusive fully addresses the requirement of The Equality Act 2010. nature and role of the Headington Hill Hall Estate.

19 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX 1: ENTRIES IN THE NATIONAL HERITAGE LIST FOR ENGLAND

HEADINGTON HILL HALL AND ATTACHED FORECOURT WALL shouldered architraves to margin glazed sashes with shaped blind boxes. Dormers similar to front facade. Colonnade continues around Heritage Category: Listed Building returns, breaking forward around canted ground floor bays with Grade: II* margin glazed sashes. Southern section approached by two flights of List Entry Number: 1047044 steps with three urns and two lead statues of Greek putti, one playing Date first listed: 07-Dec-1992 aulos and the other dancing with a bowed scarf. First floor sashes Statutory Address: Headington Campus, Oxford Brookes University, tripartite with pilasters, cornices and shaped blind boxes. Mostly Headington, OX3 0BP tripartite dormers. Attached stone forecourt wall, mostly coursed stone but that flanking entrance piers of roundel balustrading, piers SP 50 NW 24/10004 OXFORD Headington Oxford Brookes University with good cast iron lanterns. Headington Campus Headington Hill Hall and attached forecourt wall Interior: Large, rectangular, two storey, galleried and top-lit hall with (Formerly listed under HEADINGTON HILL, OXFORD) pillars and pilasters supporting depressed arches with keystones and enriched plaster work spandrels. Moulded panelling to ceiling and GV II* Country mansion. Circa 1856-8 by John Thomas for James walls which have round-arched openings and niches. Above arcaded Morrell, a local brewer; built by Joseph Castle. 1872, interior entrance with sidelights, an inset compass; inset clock on left hand extensively remodelled for G.H. Morrell by local architect William wall; opposite entrance, a pilastered statue niche with segmental Wilkinson. pediment containing a high relief cartouche with the goddess Diana flanked by dogs with foliage and flora and surmounted by doves. Pale yellow brick with stone dressings and ashlar central bay to entrance front; ashlar with stone dressings to other facades. Tiled In compartment to right, an imperial staircase, having gilded balusters mansard roof having segmental arched dormers with finials and tall with roundels, leading to gallery with similar balustrading. At landing ashlar chimney stacks. Italianate/Louis XIII style. to first flight, newels have candelabra lamps; lighting stair, a late C20 stained glass window by Nehemia Azaz depicting Samson at the Entrance front has three symmetrical bays. Two storeys, attic and Gates of Gaza. Gallery arcaded to stair; arcading continues as niches cellar. Attached recessed and lower two storey service wing to right or entrances to rooms. Coved, coffered ceiling with rectangular light with projecting end bay having a hipped roof with bracketed eaves having scrolled pendants and geometric patterned glazing. and tall ashlar and brick chimney stacks. Ground floor library and drawing room divided by narrow passage Main block bays defined by chanelled pilasters to each floor and having panelled sliding doors and enriched round- arched entrances. angles and paired to central first floor bay. First floor band. Both rooms and passage with good elaborate plasterwork ceilings. Drawing room chimneypiece carved marble with doves and flora and Central porte-cochere of chanelled stone with round-arched openings overmantle with mirror and giltwork; library chimneypiece carved having keystones; recessed window with margin glazing and small marble with herms and foliage, c1800 and reputedly from Fitzroy roundel at top. Banded pilasters and columns at angles support a Square, London. Doric entablature with parapet having rectangular banded ball finials. Subsidiary entrance at left angle. Architraved sashes, ground floor Dining room has coffered plasterwork ceiling of octagons shouldered, first floor eared and shouldered, all with margin glazing and rectangles and a deep bracketed cornice; carved marble and shaped blind boxes. Entablature with cornice supporting a chimneypiece with dove and flora and mirror overmantle with painted parapet with sections of pierced shaped openings to centre and in wooden frame. Small first floor room with elaborate gilded enrichment front of dormers. to arcading, with acanthus leaf capitals, forming niches, overmantle, windows and entrance. Similarly elaborate gilded enrichment to Rear, garden facade, has Doric colonnade, carrying a parapet with coved cornices and coved portion of ceiling above entrance with pierced, shaped openings, fronting French windows and margin interlocking design. Carved marble chimneypiece with foliage. Other glazed sashes at five-bay ground floor. Colonnade approached by rooms throughout house retain cornices and marble chimneypieces. two flights of stone steps with six urns on James Morrell was a brewer who played a prominent part in the life of dies. First floor bays defined by chanelled pilasters, paired at angles, the city of Oxford. The architect, John Thomas, was better known as with brackets supporting pierced roundel balustrade. Eared and a sculptor; he supervised the carving at the Palace of Westminster.

20 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Heritage Category: Listed Building Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II Grade: II List Entry Number: 1229839 List Entry Number: 1046587 Date first listed: 07-Dec-1992 Date first listed 28-Jun-1972 Statutory Address: HEADINGTON HILL HALL LODGE HOUSE, HEAD- Statutory Address: STONE AT THE JUNCTION OF MARSTON ROAD INGTON HILL AND THE FOOTPATH TO , MARSTON ROAD

OXFORD SP 50 NW HEADINGTON HILL 24/10005 Headington Hill INSCRIBED STONES 1. 1485 Highway stones Stone at the junction Hall Lodge House GV II Lodge house. Mid C19. Probably by John of Marston Road and the footpath to Pullen’s Lane SP 50 NW 24/742 Thomas for James Morrell. Ashlar with stone dressings and 1st floor II 2. Stone, probably Cl7. Inscribed ‘esheding - ton way’ the rest band. Hipped tiled roof with tall ashlar chimney stacks and projecting illegible. This stands on the line of the old City boundary and may in rafters to overhanging eaves. 2 storeys. 3 window symmetrical front. fact be connected with that. This was the pre-1881 boundary of the Italianate style. Central entrance with projecting bracketed hood. city. Narrow 2-light architraved sashes; 1st floor round-arched with pilasters and bracketed sills, single light central window. Left hand Heritage Category: Listed Building return with canted bay window having a penthouse roof to ground Grade: II floor and 2-light sash above. List Entry Number: 1184684 Date first listed: 28-Jun-1972 Heritage Category: Listed Building Statutory Address: STONE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HEADINGTON Grade: II HILL 20 YARDS TO THE EAST OF THE BRIDGE, HEADINGTON HILL List Entry Number: 1116380 Date first listed: 28-Jun-1972 INSCRIBED STONES 1. 1485 Highway stones Stone on the North Statutory Address: BRIDGE OVER HEADINGTON ROAD AT Side of Headington Hill, 20 yards to the East of the bridge SP 50 HEADINGTON HILL HALL, HEADINGTON ROAD NW 24/743 II 2. Stone, set into the wall during road improvements in 1930. It may have been moved then, and in 1771 when the road HEADINGTON ROAD 1. 1485 (North Side) Bridge over Headington was re-aligned. Inscribed ‘Here endeth Hedington Hyway W.K. & I.F.’ Road at Headington Hill Hall SP 50 NW 24/35C II 2. 1872. By W Headington Hill was paved - 1725. (VCH V page 259). Wilkinson. 2 spans. Rusticated stone piers, cast iron walk and railings.

21 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX 2: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR HEADINGTON HILL HALL

EVIDENTIAL • Headington Hill Hall, established circa 1824 and subsequently 2 spans, with rusticated stone piers, cast iron walk and railings, was a expanded in 1856-8, and the 1870s, together with the associated practical response to connecting the two parts of the estate. surviving 19th century buildings and structures, including two lodges, a former dairy, a stable block and bridge, and its AESTHETIC expansive garden and landscape setting provides evidence to help Headington Hill Hall is an architectural and aesthetically significant understand the physical, economic and social considerations that example of a substantial predominantly mid 19th century house in the influenced the form and development of the house and grounds, Italianate / Louis XIII style. Constructed in pale yellow brick with stone illustrating the trend for wealthy Oxford merchants to establish dressings and ashlar central bay to entrance front; ashlar with stone small estates outside the city. dressings to other facades, it displays the architectural characteristics of this style; tiled mansard roof with arched dormers and tall ashlar HISTORICAL chimneys; decorative stone parapets to the roof and colonnade; and It is a significant example of a substantial suburban villa in generous classical detailing to the window surrounds, attached pilasters, and landscaped grounds established in 1824, by James Morrell Senior Doric order to the colonnade. (1773-1855), brewer, with a major expansion in 1856-8, by James Morrell Junior (1810-1863) brewer, to create a house with 58 rooms, As an important example of the work of sculptor and architect John set in a well landscape garden and park setting. During the mid- Thomas (1813-1862), who designed the 1856-8 major expansion and 1870s George Morrell (1845-1906) and his wife Emily Morrell (1854- remodelling of the house in the Italianate/Louis XIII style. Architect 1938) expanded the estate grounds and the construction of a dairy, to Prince Albert, working on Buckingham Palace and Windsor Great stables, and a bridge over Headington Road to connect two parts Park, Headington Hill Hall is one of only two major private house of the estate and undertook major internal alterations to the house. commissions John Thomas undertook, the other being Somerlyton These works illustrate the historical, social, and economic aspects of Hall, Suffolk, (1843-50) also remodelled in an Italianate style. the development by the Morrells, a wealthy family of Oxford Brewers, to created most lavish among the mansions built by Oxford’s 19th The interior, remodelled in 1872 by local architect William Wilkinson, century merchants. (1819-1901) and subsequently altered, restored, and renovated by a succession of owners, nonetheless maintains a wealth of mid-late The 1856-8 extension of Headington Hill Hall, which created a far 19th fabric and architectural detailing integral to the architectural and more imposing mansion in a theatrical Italianate or Louise XIII style, aesthetic significance of Headington Hill Hall. in landscaped gardens and grounds, illustrates the growing wealth of the Morrells and provides evidence of the house’ function as a place The surviving landscaped gardens and park grounds to the west for entertainment, in addition to being a family home. of the house, with a mixture of mature deciduous and exotic trees, associated with the involvement of William Hart Baxter, curator of the The landscaped gardens and grounds, with deciduous and exotic Oxford Botanical Gardens, together with drives, while altered and to plantings together with a walled garden provides significant historical some degree diminished by post 1945 works and buildings, provide a evidence of the interest the owners of Headington Hill Hall had with significant aesthetic setting to the house, reflecting the wealth, status, landscaping and horticulture and illustrates the enormous interest in and architectural quality of the mid-19th century Headington Hill Hall. Victorian England of all aspects of gardening, and the status that a well landscaped garden and park provided to the setting of a house, The surviving Top Lodge, designed by John Thomas (1813- 1862) as and its use for social and local community occasions. part of the 1856-8 works to Headington Hill Hall, while subsequently extended, is an aesthetically significant example of a mid-19th The bridge across Headington Road, designed by William Wilkinson century lodge, designed in a simple Italianate style to complement (1813-1901) and constructed circa 1878, is historically significant as Headington Hill Hall. evidence of the expansion of the estate after the purchase in 1875, of 65 acres of land to the south across Headington Road. The bridge, of The 1878 bridge, of 2 spans, with rusticated stone piers, cast iron walk and decorative railings, is an architectural and aesthetically

22 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

significant example of its type. It’s simple design and high-quality materials and detailing reflect the architectural status of the Headington Hill Hall estate in the last quarter of the 19th century. It adds a visually pleasing component to Headington Road.

COMMUNAL Headington Hill Hall, as one of the largest and most lavish private houses built in the 19th century in the vicinity of Oxford, instils 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; firstly, as wealthy private residence; as a hospital in WWII and post 1945; as a headquarters for a publishing company and now as part of the Oxford Brooks University.

From 1959-91 Headington Hill Hall and grounds was the headquarters of Pergamon Press, with its owner, and his family restoring and living in the house and developing parts of the grounds for the publishing business. For a period of just over 30 years Headington Hall was recognised in the local community as the house of a wealthy, famous, if somewhat controversial, businessman and MP. Leased from Oxford City it was dubbed the “best council house in the country” while locals called it “Maxwell House”. Arguably, following the death of Robert Maxwell, and revelations of the enormous fraud, Headington Hill Hall, with its lavishly restored interior represented the excessive of a failed business empire.

From 1993 onwards, Headington Hill Hall and parts of its grounds have been leased to Oxford Brookes University and is now recognised in the local community as playing an important role in the provision of tertiary education to the local, national, and international community. The institutional use of the site is reflected in the conversion of the exiting modern (Pergamon Press) buildings into university department uses and student support facilities. The relationship between buildings, the use of external spaces (including parking) and how people move through the spaces evidences this educational use.

The 1993 change in split use - part house part business into a single use unifies the Hall and its grounds (albeit in a changed context) and evidences the site’s changed identity.

23 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX 3: OXFORD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL PLAN HERITAGE POLICIES

POLICY DH1: HIGH QUALITY DESIGN AND PLACEMAKING Planning permission will only be granted for development of high- have been informed by an understanding of the significance of the quality design that creates or enhances local distinctiveness. heritage asset and that harm to its significance has been avoided or minimised; and All developments other than changes of use without external alterations and householder applications will be expected to be c) that, in cases where development would result in harm to the supported by a constraints and opportunities plan and supporting significance of a heritage asset, including its setting, the extent of text and/or visuals to explain their design rationale in a design harm has been properly and accurately assessed and understood, statement proportionate to the proposal (which could be part of a that it is justified, and that measures are incorporated into the Design and Access Statement or a Planning Statement), which should proposal, where appropriate, that mitigate, reduce or compensate for cover the relevant checklist points set out in Appendix 6.1. the harm;

Planning permission will only be granted where proposals are Where the setting of an asset is affected by a proposed development, designed to meet the key design objectives and principles for the heritage assessment should include a description of the extent to delivering high quality development as set out in Appendix 6. 1. which the setting contributes to the significance of the asset, as well as an assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the POLICY DH3: DESIGNATED HERITAGE ASSETS setting and its contribution to significance.

Planning permission or listed building consent will be granted for Substantial harm to or loss of Grade II listed buildings, or Grade development that respects and draws inspiration from Oxford’s II registered parks or gardens, should be exceptional. Substantial unique historic environment (above and below ground), responding harm to or loss of assets of the highest significance, notably positively to the significance character and distinctiveness of the scheduled monuments, Grade I and II* listed buildings, Grade I and II* heritage asset and locality. registered parks and gardens, should be wholly exceptional. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or loss of the For all planning decisions for planning permission or listed building significance of a designated heritage asset, planning permission or consent affecting the significance of designated heritage assets, listed building consent will only be granted if: great weight will be given to the conservation of that asset and to the setting of the asset where it contributes to that significance or i. the harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that appreciation of that significance). outweigh the harm or loss; or all of the following apply:

An application for planning permission for development which would ii. the nature of the asset prevents all reasonable uses of the sites; or may affect the significance of any designated heritage asset, either and directly or by being within its setting, should be accompanied by a heritage assessment that includes a description of the asset and its iii. no viable use of the asset itself can be found in the medium term significance and an assessment of the impact of the development (through appropriate marketing) that will enable its conservation; and proposed on the asset’s significance. As part of this process full regard should be given to the detailed character assessments and iv. conservation by grant funding or similar is not possible; and other relevant information set out any relevant conservation area appraisal and management plan. v. the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use; The submitted heritage assessment must include information sufficient to demonstrate: vi. a plan for recording and advancing understanding of the significance of any heritage assets to be lost, including making this a) an understanding of the significance of the heritage asset, evidence publicly available, is agreed with the City Council. including recognition of its contribution to the quality of life of current and future generations and the wider social, cultural, economic and Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm environmental benefits they may bring; and to a designated heritage asset, this harm must be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. Clear and extensive justification b) that the development of the proposal and its design process for this harm should be set out in full in the heritage assessment.

24