Agenda item

Agenda item

22/02969/FUL: Littlemore House, 33 Armstrong Road and Plot 18 Oxford Science Park, Oxford OX4 4FY

Site Address:

Littlemore House, 33 Armstrong Road, And Plot 18 Oxford Science Park , Sanders Road, Oxford

Proposal:

Partial demolition of and alterations to Littlemore House. Erection of 1no. research and development building (Use Class E) at Littlemore House with ancillary accommodation, clinic, educational floorspace and restaurant and erection of 1 no. research and development building (Use Class E) and 1no. building to accommodate servicing plant and bicycle parking facilities at plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park. Erection of an elevated walkway, linking Littlemore House and plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park, new access arrangements, parking, landscaping, engineering and ground modelling works

Reason at Committee:

The proposal is a major development

Recommendation:

The Oxford City Planning Committee is recommended to:

1.         Approve the application for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 12 of this report and grant planning permission; and subject to:

·       the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under section106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers to secure the planning obligations set out in the recommended heads of terms which are set out in this report; and

2.         Agree to delegate authority to the Head of Planning Services to:

·       finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary;

·       respond to comments made by the Environment Agency, resolve any concerns or objections and finalise any recommended conditions;

·       finalise the recommended legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers as set out in this report, including refining, adding to, amending and/or deleting the obligations detailed in the heads of terms set out in this report (including to dovetail with and where appropriate, reinforce the final conditions and informatives to be attached to the planning permission) as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary; and

·       complete the section 106 legal agreement referred to above and issue the planning permission.

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered an application (22/02969/FUL) for partial demolition of and alterations to Littlemore House; erection of 1 no. research and development building (Use Class E) at Littlemore House with ancillary accommodation, clinic, educational floorspace and restaurant; erection of 1 no. research and development building (Use Class E) and 1 no. building to accommodate servicing plant and bicycle parking facilities at plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park; erection of an elevated walkway linking Littlemore House and plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park; and new access arrangements, parking, landscaping, engineering and ground modelling works at Littlemore House, 33 Armstrong Road and plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park.

The Planning Officer gave a presentation and highlighted the following:

·       The application site comprised two connecting parcels of land (Littlemore House and plot 18 of the Oxford Science Park) which were largely separated by woodland, a tributary of Littlemore Brook, and the Newman Place residential development.  A timber-clad elevated walkway was proposed to link the two buildings.

 

·       The proposal involved the partial demolition of Littlemore House (a non-designated heritage asset) and erection of a new building in quadrangle form connecting to the remaining Littlemore House building.  In addition to offices and laboratories, the building at Littlemore House would provide ancillary uses including a publicly accessible restaurant; accommodation for patients and visitors; a clinic; and educational floor space.  A new raised building at plot 18 would also provide laboratories.

 

·       The proposal included an extension of the existing footpath in order to link Armstrong Road to the Science Park and the future Cowley Branch Line station.  Access to the footpath would be available to the public 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

 

·       An ancillary building located beneath the publicly accessible footpath would provide a sub-station, CCTV equipment, waste store, cycle parking and shower facilities.  A plant room would be located below ground.

 

·       208 parking bays were proposed to be provided across both sites.  This would equate to provision for 35% of staff, and was considered acceptable by the Highways Authority.  Sufficient cycle parking would also be provided across both sites.

 

·       Solar panels would be mounted on the rooftop of Littlemore House, the elevated walkway and the building at plot 18.  Air-source heat pumps were proposed for heating and cooling of the building, and ground-source heat pumps would provide hot and chilled water.  The scheme would achieve a 41% reduction in carbon emissions at Littlemore House, and a 55% reduction at plot 18 when set against Part L of the 2021 Building Regulations.

 

·       The submitted drainage strategy proposed the use of blue rooves, permeable paving, extensive landscape features and an attenuation tank.  The Lead Local Flood Authority had expressed no objections to the proposed drainage strategy.

 

·       The route of the elevated walkway would avoid the root protection areas of the principal woodland trees, and the position of the plot 18 building allowed for the retention of most of the important boundary canopy cover.  A courtyard garden at Littlemore House would provide an interesting landscape, with spaces designed for all intended uses.  Additionally, a garden with water feature underneath the plot 18 building provided an interesting response to the on-site flooding constraints;

 

·       It was predicted that the proposed planting would result in a 13% increase in canopy cover after 25 years, compared to a no-development scenario.  This was in excess of the local policy requirement for no net loss.  The scheme would result in a biodiversity net gain of 15.5% in habitat units and 27% in hedgerow units.  This was in excess of the currently required 5%, and also the 10% which will be required under national legislation from November 2023.

 

·       Officers considered that the proposal successfully responded to the scale, articulation and materiality of Littlemore House through the incorporation of chimneys as a visual link between the old and the new, and the breaking up of the massing into smaller blocks which reflected the existing building.  Stepping of the building line added to the perceived variation in roof line experienced at street level.

 

·       Visual permeability with the streetscape was proposed through the use of a glazed atrium along the eastern elevation to allow views of Littlemore House; a glazed staircase to the corner at Armstrong Road; and a glazed main entrance giving views into the courtyard.  These features were considered to contribute positively towards the streetscape.

 

·       It was considered that the proposal would cause less than substantial harm to Littlemore House (a non-designated heritage asset) and the setting of the nearby Littlemore Conservation Area (a designated heritage asset).  As required by the NPPF, great weight had been given to the conservation of the designated heritage asset and a balancing judgement had been undertaken in respect of the non-designated asset in the evaluation of the proposal, but it was considered that the less than substantial harm caused to both assets would be outweighed by the numerous public benefits provided by the scheme, as set out in the report.

 

·       A detailed lighting strategy for the whole scheme would be conditioned, in order to ensure protection of the amenity of neighbours.

 

·       Due to resourcing issues, comments had not yet been received from the Environment Agency in relation to flood risk. Their response was due by 30 May, and any comments received would be resolved by officers.

 

·       Officers considered that the proposal responded appropriately to the site context and the Local Plan allocation for the Oxford Science Park, and that it accorded with the overall aims and objectives of the NPPF and policies within the Oxford Local Plan for the reasons set out in the report.  It was therefore recommended for approval, subject to the conditions and planning obligations set out in the report and the resolution of any comments made by the Environment Agency.

Lisa Flashner (President and Chief Operating Officer of the Ellison Institute) and Guy Wakefield (agent) spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee asked questions about the details of the application, which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included, but were not limited to:

·       A Community Employment Plan would form part of the S106 legal agreement, which would provide accountability for achievement of local employment projections.  The Planning Lawyer clarified that a requirement for periodic reporting could also be included, to enable monitoring.

 

·       The publicly accessible footpath would be lit for surveillance: this would need to be balanced against the need to protect wildlife through the woodland area.  The site was expected to be most occupied between normal working hours of 9am to 5pm (with the restaurant staying open later): however, security would also be provided on site at all times.

 

·       The principle of Littlemore House as an employment site had been established through successive planning permissions.  The site was allocated for employment in the previous Local Plan but had not been promoted by the landowner for inclusion within the current Local Plan.

 

·       The clear and significant public benefits in terms of provision of jobs, biodiversity, carbon benefits, architectural design, and connectivity were considered by members of the committee to outweigh the less than substantial harm to Littlemore House and the setting of the conservation area, in addition to enhancing Oxford as an area of prime scientific research.

 

·       The proposal would involve the loss of an avenue of lime trees along the Armstrong Road entrance to Littlemore House.  The trees were not protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

 

·       The pre-application work and design review process had refined the proposal in a collaborative way which had resulted in a scheme which was considered to be of a modern, exciting design with well thought out buildings.

 

On being proposed, seconded and put to the vote, the Committee agreed with the officer’s recommendation to approve the application for the reasons set out in the report and subject to the conditions and planning obligations set out in the report and the resolution of any comments made by the Environment Agency.

The Oxford City Planning Committee resolved to:

1.        approve the application for the reasons given in the report and subject to the required planning conditions set out in section 12 of the report and grant planning permission; and subject to:

·         the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers to secure the planning obligations set out in the recommended heads of terms which were set out in the report; and

2.        delegate authority to the Head of Planning Services to:

·         finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report including such refinements, amendments, additions and/or deletions as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary;

·         respond to comments made by the Environment Agency, resolve any concerns or objections and finalise any recommended conditions;

·         finalise the recommended legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other enabling powers as set out in this report, including refining, adding to, amending and/or deleting the obligations detailed in the heads of terms set out in the report (including to dovetail with and where appropriate, reinforce the final conditions and informatives to be attached to the planning permission) as the Head of Planning Services considers reasonably necessary; and

·         complete the section 106 legal agreement referred to above and issue the planning permission.

Supporting documents: