Oxford Strategic Growth Options...Oxford Strategic Growth Options High Level Review of Opportunities Pro-forma Analysis October 2014 Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Previous Work 5 3

Oxford Strategic Growth Options

High Level Review of Opportunities

Pro-forma Analysis

October 2014

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Previous Work 5

3. Context for a Green Belt Review 7

4. Exceptional Circumstances to warrant a Green Belt Review 14

5. Review of Areas for Growth 18

6. Pro-forma Analysis 20

7. Summary and Conclusions 38

Appendix 1: Strategic Landscape, Heritage, and Visual Impact Appraisal

Appendix 2: Community Infrastructure Plans 1 - 6

Appendix 3: Transport Overview and Assessment of Site Options

Appendix 4: Constraints Atlas

Contact

Graeme Warriner [email protected] Client

Oxford City Council LPA reference

October 2014

1

1. Introduction

1.1 Oxford is an international city, which is successful, vibrant, and a national economic asset. It is at the centre of the world-class knowledge economy of Oxford and Oxfordshire, with one of the most important concentrations of high-value businesses in Europe. However, a severe lack of housing availability, choice and affordability is creating a deepening housing crisis in Oxford, which is significantly undermining its future.

1.2 Oxford has overtaken London as the least affordable city to live in across the UK. Oxford average house prices are over 11 times the gross annual earnings in the City.1 This means there is already severe pressures on the City’s housing stock. 6.2% of households in Oxford are classed as overcrowded, compared with an Oxfordshire average of 3.3%2. The affordability crisis has meant that more households in Oxford now rent their homes rather than own them. Oxford has been identified as the most unaffordable location outside of London for private renting: median rents for two bedroom homes account for 55% of local median full-time earnings.3

1.3 Oxford’s population is growing and increased by 10% over the last decade. It is predicted that the population will continue to grow rapidly. The City has a population profile which is young, diverse and attracted by the opportunities the city offers. The young population means that Oxford continues to experience a strong demand for family housing.

Table 1.1: Population growth in Oxford, 1801-2021

1.4 Leading businesses report severe difficulty in the recruitment and the retention of staff at all levels, because of a lack of housing choice and affordability.4 Also, a recent report5 reveals how our universities are being held back in the global competition for the best

1 Annual Lloyds Bank Affordable Cities Review (23rd March 2014) 2 Census 2011 (www.ons.gov.uk) 3 Shelter Private Rent Watch, Analysis of local rent levels and affordability (Shelter, 2011) 4 Withy King Business Barometer (www.withyking.co.uk) 5 The Oxford Innovation Engine: Realising the Growth Potential (SQW, October 2013)

2

research talent, due to the lack of affordable homes and lack of land for expanding business/research. Outcomes in our public services, such as health and education, are compromised through the lack of available affordable housing for key staff.

1.5 The recently published Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment, or ‘SHMA’6 showed that there is a need for between 24,000 and 32,000 new homes in Oxford alone, to meet existing and future housing needs. There would need to be 988 affordable homes built per year (nearly 20,000 in total) to meet the needs of those who cannot afford to pay open market rents or purchase prices.

1.6 Across Oxfordshire, the SHMA identified a need for between 93,560 and 106,560 homes to be built in Oxfordshire in the period 2011-2031 (between 4,678 and 5,328 per year). This includes the unmet Oxford need, as well as the need arising within the other Oxfordshire districts making up the Oxford and Oxfordshire Housing Market Area. However only around 3,000 homes per year are proposed by adopted or emerging Local Plans for the five Oxfordshire districts. This means a shortfall of between 36% and 44% against the assessed housing needs for the county.

1.7 In order to ensure informed decisions are made in relation to accommodating housing needs, Oxford City Council has embarked on a programme to objectively consider the various growth options in and around the City. The Council has published a ‘Route Map’ which sets out the process and strategy the Council is following in seeking to address these issues. This includes the consideration of development opportunities around Oxford, including areas within the Green Belt.

A balanced growth solution

1.8 The City Council is working hard to deliver more housing within Oxford’s boundaries. The City is already leading the delivery of over 1,500 new homes over the next 5 years on land it owns through innovative partnerships with developers.

1.9 However both Oxford’s administrative boundary, and the boundary of the Oxford Green Belt, are drawn very tightly around the City’s urban area. Very little suitable land remains within the City’s boundaries for further housing development beyond that already planned for. Subject to independent confirmation of the City’s lack of capacity to accommodate all of the homes necessary, the Oxfordshire local authorities have agreed to work together to address Oxford’s unmet housing need. However questions remain as to where this additional development will be located, and whether it will happen fast enough to address the urgent and damaging housing problems.

1.10 Options to meet the unmet need are currently being considered by the Oxfordshire Spatial Planning and Infrastructure Partnership (SPIP). These include further growth around the ‘County Towns’, or a new settlement outside the Green Belt. Whilst these options may help deliver much needed housing and growth across Oxfordshire, they are unlikely to address Oxford’s needs, in terms of sustainability, a balanced population, and the economic role of Oxford at the heart of Oxfordshire’s economy.

6 Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (GL Hearn, March 2014)

3

1.11 The City Council believes that the time has come to review the Oxford Green Belt boundary, to allow a re-assessment which properly reflects the purpose of the Green Belt and the need for housing and growth. Urban extensions would be well linked to existing employment and services, using Oxford’s highly-developed public transport and cycling networks.

1.12 The City Council is supported in this view. The Oxford Strategic Partnership’s Economic Growth Strategy published early 2013, based on independent research by consultants Shared Intelligence, identified the urgent need to enable housing and employment growth through urban extensions. The report Oxfordshire Innovation Engine: Realising the Growth Potential reported that Oxford has to grow to fulfil its role within the high tech economy, including housing and employment development to the north and south of the existing urban area with necessary Green Belt adjustments. Furthermore, a panel of independent Planning Inspectors had already accepted the proposal for an urban extension for the south of the city at Grenoble Road, within the current Green Belt, concluding that the necessary ‘exceptional circumstances’ had been demonstrated.

Study Objectives

1.13 The aim of this report is to provide a high level assessment of potential development locations around Oxford and revisit whether there are exceptional circumstances to support the release of land from the Green Belt.

1.14 It draws on previous analysis already undertaken including the ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt – Informal Assessment’ (May 2014), which identified the following six areas of the Green Belt which merit further consideration for possible release for development.

• Yarnton • North of Oxford/South of Kidlington • Wick Farm • Wheatley • South of Grenoble Road • North of Abingdon

1.15 These locations were identified following analysis of environmental constraints around

Oxford as well as the Green Belt function. They are considered the areas least affected by flood risk, or other environmental constraints.

1.16 In taking this work forward, this report considers the strength and weaknesses of these identified areas in the context of other matters such as:

• highway and infrastructure capacity; • heritage impacts; • landscape value and visual impact; • and socio-economic factors including proximity to jobs and public transport.

1.17 The assessment work is appended to this Report and the outputs of this analysis is

summarised for each location in Section 6.

4

1.18 Accordingly, the report is structured as follows:

• Section 2 briefly summaries the previous technical work which has been undertaken to date;

• Section 3 considers the context for an Oxford Green Belt review, as part of a balanced growth approach;

• Section 4 considers the ‘exceptional circumstances’ case for a Green Belt review;

• Section 5 provides an introduction to the six areas which have been identified for further consideration;

• Section 6 considers the strengths and weaknesses of the six areas; and

• Section 7 sets out our summary and conclusions.

1.19 This study does not seek to reach a final decision on the right approach to delivering new development. This will require inter alia a more comprehensive assessment of the suitability of various approaches and agreement through the Oxfordshire Growth Board. However, the work is intended to inform the Growth Board process and assist in identifying the most appropriate locations for growth.

1.20 In accordance with the ‘Route Plan’ document, this work will lead into a high level sustainability appraisal of potential growth locations and inform decisions on whether to investigate further the appropriateness and capacity of specific locations to accommodate growth.

5

2. Previous Work

2.1 This document draws on existing work, most notably the ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt – Informal Assessment’ (May 2014) prepared by Oxford City Council.

2.2 This assessment comprised an initial scoping exercise to investigate whether there is any potential to meet housing need for Oxford in urban extensions. It reviewed the opportunities for growth around Oxford by considering the appropriateness of areas based on environmental constraints and their Green Belt function.

2.3 The study found that many areas around Oxford were significantly constrained by environmental and flood risk issues. Most notably the areas to the west of the city, including Port Meadow, comprise a Special Area of Conservation (SAC); Sites of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Registered Park and Gardens, meaning that they should not be considered as a location for large scale development. Moreover, most of the western side of the city is in a high risk flood area.

2.4 A Constraints Atlas is attached at Appendix 4 and provides an overview of the constraints affecting development around Oxford. It can be seen how this has informed the conclusions of ‘the Informal Assessment’ in identifying the following six areas for further assessment.

• Yarnton • North of Oxford/South of Kidlington • Wick Farm • Wheatley • South of Grenoble Road • North of Abingdon

6

Table 2.1: Areas of Search Identified

2.5 The assessment identified these locations for further consideration. It did not conclude that development in any of these locations would necessarily be appropriate ahead of further investigation, or could take place without compromising the Green Belt function. It concluded that while development would inevitably compromise to a degree the purpose of the Green Belt (to prevent urban encroachment), it could be in these locations with less compromise to the overall function of the Green Belt than the alternatives looked at. In particular, it was considered that development in these areas could be planned in a way that would allow the Green Belt to still function to prevent the coalescence of settlements and to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns.

7

3. Context for a Green Belt Review

3.1 The City Council is working hard to deliver more housing within Oxford’s boundaries. However, very little suitable land remains within the City’s boundaries for further housing development beyond that already planned for. Subject to independent confirmation of the City’s lack of capacity to accommodate all of the homes necessary, the Oxfordshire local authorities have agreed to work together to address Oxford’s unmet housing need.

3.2 Options to meet the unmet need include further growth around the ‘County Towns’, or a new settlement outside the Green Belt. Whilst these options may help deliver much needed housing and growth across Oxfordshire, they are unlikely to address Oxford’s needs, in terms of sustainability, a balanced population, and the economic role of Oxford at the heart of Oxfordshire’s economy.

3.3 The City Council believes that a review of the Oxford Green Belt boundary, to allow a re-assessment of the Green Belt function and the need for additional housing and growth, should be advanced as part of a wider balanced strategy of growth.

Sustainable Merits of Urban Extensions

3.4 Much consideration has been given to the sustainability merits of an urban extension to Oxford. In March 2014, Oxford Civic Society published ‘Oxford Futures: A call to action on the development of Central Oxfordshire’ which followed the Oxford Futures debates held in 2013.

3.5 Amongst the outputs of this work was an identified need to reach consensus on the scale of growth needed and where it should go. There was broad acceptance of four principles that should underpin growth, including the need to develop in the right place and reduce car use. Given the key role of transport in sustainable development, the best pattern of growth was considered to be north-south along the main transport corridor as illustrated in Figure 3.1.

8

Figure 3.1 Oxford Futures (2014) - Achieving smarter growth in Central Oxfordshire, Oxford

Civic Society.

3.6 Similarly, URBED’s winning entry to Lord Wolfson’s economic prize advocates the merits of an urban extension over new standalone settlements. A fictional town called Uxcester is used to show how this would work, and for illustrative purposes, this is applied in detail to Oxford. The rationale behind the model (illustrated in Figure 3.2) relates fundamentally to the availability of infrastructure and facilities which are already present in cities and which can contribute towards supporting new communities from day one.

3.7 In contrast, a free standing settlement would take decades to develop a similar offering. In short, it is argued that ‘rather than nibbling into the fields that surround the city and all its satellite villages, we should take a good confident bite out of the green belt to create sustainable urban extensions that can support a tram service and a range of facilities’. It is also contended that by focussing on a small number of large developments, it would arouse less opposition than spreading new homes to the edge of every town and village.

9

Figure 3.2. Rudlin D., Falk N et al. (August 2014), Uxcester garden city- Second Stage

Submission for the 2014 Wolfsson Economics Prize, Urbed.

Sustainable Transport Solutions

3.8 As acknowledged in the Oxford Futures and Urbed work, the need to minimise the need to travel and encourage the adoption of sustainable modes of transport have been consistent threads in national and local transport policy for several years.

3.9 The NPPF outlines twelve core principles that should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking, one of which is the need to: “actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.”

3.10 This broad approach is reflected in the emerging Oxfordshire County Council Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4), which contains objectives that include:

10

• Minimise the need to travel

• Influence the location of development to maximise the use and value of existing and planned strategic transport investment

Existing travel patterns

3.11 LTP4 is also responding to the existing constraints across Oxfordshire’s transport network and the challenges associated with delivering up to 80,000 jobs and 100,000 houses in the county by 2031, with supporting literature making reference to:

• Existing pressures on the network requiring larger and more radical solutions

• The need to work closely with public and private sector bodies to influence land use planning and facilitate improved transport connections

3.12 Specific reference is made to the housing/jobs imbalance across the county, with 35% of the county’s jobs located in Oxford where a limited and unaffordable supply of housing results in longer journeys and less sustainable commuting patterns, with almost half the jobs based in Oxford held by people living outside the city.

3.13 Analysis of the latest Census data provides a useful illustration of the existing movement patterns across the Oxfordshire district councils (see Table 3.1). It shows that:

• A significant proportion (73%) of Oxford City residents work (are contained) within the City

• The neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs have considerably lower levels of containment ranging between 54.7% (SODC) and 65.2% (Cherwell)

Table 3.1: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Percentage of Trips to work to each District by

Residents from each District

To/From: Oxford

City Cherwell

South

Oxfordshire

Vale of

White

Horse

West

Oxfordshire Other Main ‘Other’ Places

Oxford City 77.2% 3.1% 3.6% 5.1% 1.8% 9.2%

Cherwell 12.7% 65.2% 1.5% 2.1% 3.0% 15.5% 3.0% South Northants; 2.1% Aylesbury Vale

South Oxfordshire

10.4% 1.4% 54.7% 8.8% 0.7% 24.0%

3.6% Reading; 3.2% Wycombe; 2.2% Aylesbury Vale; 1.8% West Berks; 1.5% Wokingham

Vale of White Horse

16.9% 2.2% 6.2% 59.7% 2.9% 12.1% 2.1% Swindon; 1.7% West Berks

West Oxfordshire

13.2% 5.8% 1.5% 5.4% 64.7% 9.4% 1.2% Cotswold

3.14 Furthermore, Oxford city residents are significantly less reliant on the car for journeys to work (34% driver plus 3.2% passenger) relative to neighbouring Oxfordshire districts

11

(circa 63% driver plus 5.6% passenger averages) (2011 Census) (see Table 3.2). Oxford city residents use of bus (16%) and walking / cycling (35%) are significantly higher than the neighbouring Oxfordshire districts (4.5% and 15% average respectively) (2011 Census). Overall, well over half of journeys to work made by Oxford residents are made by travel modes other than the private car, whereas the reverse is true in the other districts.

Table 3.2: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Mode Share of All Resident Journeys to Work

District Car

Driver

Car

Passenger Train Bus Cycle Walk

Work from

Home/Other

Oxford City 34.0% 3.2% 2.5% 16.3% 17.6% 18.2% 8.2%

Cherwell 63.2% 5.4% 2.9% 4.9% 3.5% 12.0% 8.1%

South

Oxfordshire 62.7% 3.9% 4.9% 3.1% 3.7% 11.0% 10.7%

Vale of White

Horse 62.9% 4.2% 2.3% 5.8% 6.4% 9.3% 9.1%

West

Oxfordshire 65.2% 4.6% 1.9% 4.3% 4.1% 10.2% 9.7%

3.15 In summary, Oxford City residents adopt significantly more sustainable travel patterns that their counterparts in the adjoining Oxfordshire districts, suggesting that development in and around the city will provide more sustainable transport patterns than development elsewhere.

3.16 From Table 3.3 it can be seen that 54% of Oxford employees also live in Oxford compared with 37% of Oxford employees who live in the neighbouring districts. It also shows that journeys to work from outside Oxford are significantly more reliant on the car than employees living in Oxford. Further growth away from Oxford to address the Oxford housing need is likely to exacerbate this reliance on the car.

Table 3.3: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Origins of Journeys to Work for Oxford

Employees and Car Dependency

District (residence of Oxford employees) % Living in District Car Driver Mode Share

2001 2011

Oxford City 54% 28% 24%

Cherwell 10% 65% 62%

South Oxfordshire 8% 72% 72%

Vale of White Horse 11% 65% 62%

West Oxfordshire 8% 70% 70%

Other 9% - -

12

Transport Improvements

3.17 The Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) (Oxfordshire LEP, 2014) explores many of the challenges facing the area and sets out to drive accelerated economic growth supported by accelerated housing delivery and better integrated transport.

3.18 Whilst there are many strengths to the existing ‘connections’ across Oxfordshire (including: strategic location on UK road and rail networks, highest level of bus usage outside of London, newest bus fleet in the country, exemplar partnership working with public transport operators), the SEP identifies a number of significant challenges to be overcome:

• Slow / indirect international connections

• Key arterial routes at capacity resulting in significant congestion and delays

• Limited connectivity across Oxfordshire, with poorly connected and dispersed development across the county

3.19 An extensive package of proposals is identified within the SEP with a focus on improved connectivity through and across the Knowledge Spine (Bicester – Oxford – Science Vale). A summary of the extensive measures proposed is included in the Transport Overview at Appendix 3 together with an assessment of likely funding issues.

3.20 The proposals identified can be broadly split into the following categories:

• Strategic Rail: investment in rail infrastructure that will provide improved journey time, reliability and capacity through the Knowledge Spine

• Strategic Highway: investment in strategic highway infrastructure to address existing bottle necks / pinch points in the network

• Local Sustainable Transport: investment in local public transport interchange, bus priority and/or pedestrian and cycle infrastructure

• Local Highway: investment in local highway infrastructure to address existing bottle necks / pinch points in the network, often with associated benefits for pedestrians, cyclists and bus movements

3.21 A review of the current Transport Schemes and related funding context confirms the continued challenge securing the necessary funds for strategic infrastructure improvements necessary to support the scale of growth planned for Oxfordshire over the next 20+ years. Notwithstanding, Oxford is particularly well placed to capitalise on the strategic infrastructure improvements, particularly the Chiltern Evergreen 3 and East-West rail proposals, the new Oxford Parkway station at Water Eaton and proposed redevelopment of Oxford rail station.

3.22 Against this background, Oxford provides the opportunity to deliver strategic housing development in accordance with primary transport policy objectives; in a location that has proven and improving trend toward sustainable travel choices thanks to a comprehensive and established network of local bus, walking and cycling routes; and in close proximity to a sustainable transport network benefitting from significant inward

13

investment in the rail network in a period of continued funding uncertainty. There is therefore a strong argument to suggest that Urban Extensions to Oxford should be considered as one of the most sustainable ways to accommodate the housing and employment needs of Oxford.

14

4. Exceptional Circumstances to warrant a Green Belt Review

4.1 The designation of an Oxford Green Belt was formally proposed in in 1958, but not approved until 1975. Its main purpose was to preserve the special character of Oxford.

4.2 The ‘Character Assessment of Oxford in its Landscape Setting’ (Landuse Consultants, 2002) identifies that Oxford sits in a bowl surrounded by largely undeveloped green treed hills that can be viewed from the City Centre. It is considered that this treed landscape maintains the historic setting of Oxford and development in these areas (as identified in the topographic analysis and visual setting of Oxford maps in the 2002 assessment) would have a negative effect on the setting of Oxford.

4.3 The Oxford Green Belt designation protects both the green treed hills and river flood plains that provide a landscape setting and special character to Oxford City Centre. Some areas of Green Belt also complement the identified view cones that provide views from the surrounding treed hills onto the University colleges (Matthew Arnold’s dreaming spires).

4.4 The Green Belt land within Oxford City’s boundary consists predominantly of green wedges through which watercourses, including the Thames (Isis) and Cherwell flow.

4.5 National planning policy is clear in providing the scope for review of the Green Belt boundary through the plan-making process. For the review to result in any changes to the Green Belt boundary, it is necessary to demonstrate exceptional circumstances in accordance with paragraph 82 of the NPPF.

4.6 Demonstrating exceptional circumstances requires the presentation of a set of factors that come together to override the normal presumption that Green Belt boundaries should endure. There is no formal definition or standard set of assessment criteria – it is for the local planning authority (or other statutory decision-makers) to determine whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify removing land from the Green Belt.

4.7 Whether there are exceptional circumstances in Oxford has been previously considered by successive Government Inspectors, having acknowledged that the City’s housing needs cannot be met within Oxford’s administrative boundaries because of the lack of suitable development land. The Panel appointed to review the South East Plan specifically dealt with the case for a Green Belt Review around Oxford, (paras 22.58-22.76 of the 2007 Panel Report) and concluded ‘that there are exceptional

circumstances to justify a Green Belt review’.

4.8 The Panel did not come to this conclusion lightly. It considered the importance of the Green Belt and also whether the concept of a new settlement close to Oxford could relieve pressure for growth on the City. However, having regard to the following factors, it concluded that there were exceptional circumstances to justify a Green Belt review and that an urban extension would provide a more sustainable solution than a new settlement, particularly on travel patterns (given that homes and jobs are already

15

supported well by a well-developed network of public transport, cycling and pedestrian routes which removes the need for car based commuting).

• A regional imperative for a higher sub-regional housing level, in addition to the following ‘Oxford-specific’ indicators of need:

- significant potential within national important science, technology and education sectors;

- significant excess of jobs already over working population;

- staff recruitment and retention problems reported by key businesses and public services;

- housing affordability ratios in excess of the regional average;

- some of the highest house prices in the region;

- a large backlog of housing need;

- worsening traffic congestion.

• Limits to the extent that significantly more development could be accommodated within the urban fabric, without damaging the special character of the City and putting pressure on green spaces.

• The implications for sustainable development including the effects on car travel of channelling development beyond the outer Green Belt boundary. In this respect, the Panel were not convinced that a major new settlement outside the Green Belt could be sufficiently self-contained as to outweigh the advantages for sustainable travel of an extension to an urban hub.

4.9 On the basis of the evidence presented to the Examination, the Panel recommended a selective review of the Green Belt to the South of Oxford. This was subsequently challenged at the High Court, although the South East Plan was formally revoked before this reached a conclusion. Subsequently, the issues surrounding Oxford’s housing shortfall have not been addressed and the factors which were considered by the Panel to demonstrate ‘exceptional circumstances’ therefore still apply. Furthermore, in failing to address the housing shortage, the significant demand (and associated effects) have heightened over time.

4.10 In revisiting the Panel’s conclusions, it is considered that the following exceptional circumstances add further weight to the case for a new Green Belt review:

(i) Poor housing affordability in Oxford and imperative to meet backlog of

housing needs. Oxford is currently the least affordable city outside London whereby in March 2014 the average house price of £340,864 is 11 times the average local salary7. This affordability problem has been exacerbated by the limited capacity of the City to accommodate housing growth within its tightly drawn administrative boundary. The Oxford Innovation Engine report identifies the shortage of available housing as constraining the economic potential of the City as it leads to many employees being priced out of the market, leading to

7 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/oxford-the-least-affordable-city-in-the-uk-where-houses-cost-11-times-local-salaries-9180930.html

16

staff recruitment and retention issues. A new Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (April 2014) identifies a need for significantly more new housing in Oxford and across the County. Oxford City needs to accommodate circa 28,000 homes between 2011 and 2031. Yet the latest review of the available sites within the City (Oxford’s Housing Land Availability and Unmet Needs Assessment (Draft), October 2014) shows that up to 10,000 homes can be accommodated during this period. A sustainable urban extension to Oxford would help to deliver significant new housing close to Oxford where the need and demand are most prevalent and where it will have the most effect in addressing the issues highlighted.

(ii) The regional imperative to deliver economic growth. Oxford City Council and surrounding Oxfordshire authorities, the County Council, Oxford University and Oxford Brookes University are signed up partners to the Oxford and Oxfordshire City Deal which is committed to accelerating innovation-led economic growth by maximising opportunities to deliver new innovation and incubation centres. Despite a wealth of academic and knowledge based business assets in the area, Oxford has underperformed when compared with other internationally renowned areas such as Cambridge. For example, the recently-published Oxford Innovation Engine report by SQW (October 2013) indicated that if Oxford had grown at the same rate as Cambridge between 1997 and 2011, an additional £500m would have been generated in the local economy. The success of the Oxford economy is of national importance and the commitments in City Deal and the subsequent Oxfordshire LEP Strategic Economic Plan are crucial to this success. Addressing housing shortage, increasing supply and affordability to ensure new business are able to maintain a sufficient and productive workforce is key to delivering this strategy.

(iii) Sustainable Patterns of Growth and addressing worsening traffic

congestion. Planning policies in Oxfordshire have historically sought to disperse growth away from Oxford to the other county towns (including Bicester, Didcot and Wantage) in order to protect the historic setting and character of Oxford. Oxford, however, remains the service centre for the wider economy and, as identified in the Oxford Innovation Engine report, has the fastest growing workforce and it is the main centre of research and spin-outs in the county. As a result, commuting pressures on the road network are increasing and the Oxford Innovation Engine report found that the at-capacity road network was constraining the Oxford economy. Furthermore, the 2011 Census Method of Travel to Work data identifies significantly lower levels of car usage in Oxford City (37%) compared to the average across other Oxfordshire Districts (68%), and is the only Authority to have experienced a reduction in car usage since 2001. An urban extension to Oxford, where sustainable modes of travel are already more prevalent, would therefore provide the most sustainable solution.

4.11 It is clear that the lack of opportunity for housing and employment growth is now undermining the City and the wider economy to a significant degree. Unless the need for new homes in Oxford is addressed, the issues highlighted above will be further exacerbated (as has been the case to date).

17

4.12 In this context, it is concluded that there are exceptional circumstances to support a review of the Green Belt boundaries around Oxford. Only through a Green Belt review would the City be able to ensure a significant increase in housing supply to support economic growth, which will meaningfully address latent and future demand in a sustainable manner.

18

5. Review of Areas for Growth

5.1 Having established that there are exceptional circumstances to warrant a review of Green Belt boundaries, we now turn to considering the various opportunities for expansion of Oxford.

5.2 As highlighted in Section 2, this document draws on the City Council’s ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt – Informal Assessment’ (May 2014); which reviewed the opportunities for growth around Oxford and identified six areas for further assessment. In this section, we provide a brief overview of these areas and the initial conclusions reached by the Council in terms of the role of the Green Belt in these locations.

Yarnton

5.3 Yarnton is a village with a population of c.2,500 which is located to the south west of Kidlington, within the administrative boundary of Cherwell District Council. The area identified for assessment comprises land to the east, south and west of Yarnton.

5.4 The City Council’s assessment identified no significant intrinsic constraints to development in this area other than the Green Belt designation. The most important function of the Green Belt in this location is to prevent the coalescence of Kidlington and Yarnton and Yarnton and Worton. The assessment identified a potential opportunity for development mainly in some small parts of the area of search that are less sensitive, in particular immediately to the east of Yarnton.

North of Oxford/South of Kidlington

5.5 Kidlington is a large village with a population in excess of 17,000, which lies approximately five miles to the north of Oxford city centre, within the administrative boundary of Cherwell District Council. The area identified for assessment comprises land to the south of Kidlington (north of the A34) and north of Oxford (south of the A34).

5.6 The City Council’s assessment identified no significant intrinsic constraints to development in this area other than the Green Belt designation. The sensitivity of Green Belt in this area relates to the importance of the openness to maintaining gaps between Oxford and Kidlington and preventing coalescence. However, coalescence could be prevented by focusing development only in one of the two areas. The A34 dual carriageway and railway line ensure that a strong boundary would be in place, giving a clear definition between the edge of any urban extension and the remaining open Green Belt beyond.

Wick Farm

5.7 Located to the north of the Northern Bypass, the area identified for assessment comprises land to the north of the Bayswater Brook and the Barton AAP area. The area falls within South Oxfordshire District’s administrative boundary.

19

5.8 The strongest Green Belt function in this area is its contribution to the open countryside character and green backdrop to Oxford that forms such an important part of the city’s historic setting. However, there may be potential for development to be delivered on the lower slopes without significant harm to this function and which would be well connected to Oxford and employment areas in Headington.

Wheatley

5.9 Wheatley is a large village located within South Oxfordshire, approximately eight miles to the east of Oxford. The main settlement is situated to the south of the A40, part of which falls within the Wheatley conservation area. Oxford Brookes University occupies a campus to the north of the A40 and beyond this is the smaller settlement of Holton. The area identified for assessment comprises land to the north, east and south of Wheatley.

5.10 The rise of land around Wheatley means that development in the area would be quite visible and the Council’s assessment identified potential harm to the setting of the conservation area. There are also SSSIs and an area of ancient woodland which could also be affected by development. Whilst the area feels removed from Oxford, the assessment identified potential for reasonably good connectivity, particularly to eastern parts of the City.

South of Grenoble Road

5.11 Grenoble Road provides the southern boundary to the City. The area identified for assessment lies to the south and east of the road, which falls within the administrative boundary of South Oxfordshire District.

5.12 The Green Belt in this area almost entirely comprises open countryside, with some exceptions such as the electricity sub-station. The most sensitive role of the Green Belt in this location is its role in maintaining visual separation between Oxford, Toot Baldon and Marsh Baldon and Oxford and Garsington. However, the Council’s assessment identified potential for development to come forward whilst maintaining an obvious visual separation between the settlements. The assessment also identified potential for very good connectivity with the centre of Oxford and major areas of employment.

North of Abingdon

5.13 Abingdon is a market town located approximately eight miles to the south of Oxford, and it is one of the principal settlements within the Vale of White Horse District. The area identified for assessment comprises land to the south of the A34 and east of the A4183.

5.14 The Council’s assessment identified that a degree of urban encroachment has already occurred in the area which has reduced the Green Belt function. The most significant impact of open countryside in the area is the maintenance of a clear visual gap between settlements which could be maintained with carefully sited development. The assessment also identified potential for very good connectivity with the centre of Oxford and major areas of employment.

20

6. Pro-forma Analysis

6.1 This Section provides a high level analysis of the identified areas of search.

6.2 In identifying the areas of search, the ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt – Informal Assessment’ (May 2014) has already assessed the areas in the context of Green Belt function and environmental designations. This section goes further to consider; heritage, landscape character and visual amenity, proximity to jobs, services and facilities, and transport matters. It draws on the broader assessments and data appended to this Report.

6.3 This analysis does not present a formal assessment of options in accordance with SEA Regulations. It is intended that a more comprehensive assessment of the suitability of various approaches will be undertaken and agreed through the Growth Board. An independently proposed high-level Sustainability Appraisal has also been prepared.

6.4 This analysis has been prepared as a high level consideration of strengths and weaknesses of the areas of search, to inform the Growth Board process and provide a steer to which opportunities are likely to provide the best prospects for growth and which should be considered in further detail.

21

Area Yarnton

Map

Green Belt Value

The most important function of the Green Belt in this location is to prevent the coalescence of Kidlington and Yarnton and Yarnton and Worton. The area comprises a significant amount of land and there is considered some potential for development in certain parts which are less sensitive, in particular immediately to the east of Yarnton, without prejudicing the function of the Green Belt in this respect.

East of A44 West of A44

Heritage Medium sensitivity.

There are a small number of listed buildings and the agricultural land forms an element of setting which makes a positive contribution to their significance. Development will remove remaining elements of agricultural context and give rise to potential loss of heritage significance. There is considered more scope for development to the north of Sandy Lane. However, care will need to be taken to sustain the significance of the Begbroke Conservation Area (and associated group of listed buildings).

High to medium sensitivity.

To the west, the historic landscape pattern has been significantly eroded and the 20th century expansion of Yarnton means that the listed buildings located on the western edge are comparatively able to accommodate a more significant degree of change whilst sustaining their significance.

The southern part of the Green Belt segment makes an important contribution to a large number of listed buildings, including the important Yarnton Manor/Church of St Bartholomew group such that development in this area is likely to result in major harm to their particular heritage significance.

22

Area Yarnton

Landscape Character

Medium to low sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character have been identified as having a minor landscape value and a moderate to low susceptibility to change.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the hedgerows will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Medium sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and having a ranging landscape value and a moderate susceptibility to change.

Developing on the northern area of the segment should be avoided due to its visibility and contribution to the ‘special character of Oxford’.

Visual Impact Low sensitivity.

The visibility of this segment is predominately contained by the vegetation associated with the field boundaries. The segment plays a low value within views and has a medium to low susceptibility to change.

The railway line and the Oxford Canal, along with their associated vegetation, create a visual boundary between Yarnton and Kidlington. Any development within the segment would need to retain the hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual effect.


The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to short and medium distant views to the southern portion of the segment. Long distant views can be gained to the northern portion and it is considered that this ridgeline contributes to the ‘special character of Oxford’.

Any development within the segment would need to retain the hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual effect.

Socio Economic

As illustrated on Plan 1, there is limited community infrastructure in Yarnton itself. However, the area falls within the catchment of Kidlington which provides a good level of developed community infrastructure including a range of community facilities, schools, medical facilities and retail provision. The area is also located close to potential employment generators, including Begbroke Science Park and the Northern Gateway at Peartree to the south.

Transport Proximity to key services: The area offers good proximity to employment opportunities at Begbroke Science Park but scores less well in terms of its proximity to other key services and ranks equal 5th (out of 7) relative to the other areas of search.

Connections: The area offers good connections by public transport to the city centre, rail access and employment opportunities but ranks 7th (out of 7) overall in terms of the frequency of services (six per hour).

Accessibility: The area ranks equal 6th in terms of its combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services.

Infrastructure: The area will benefit from improvements to the Wolvercote roundabout and the planned new Oxford Parkway railway station at Water Eaton.

23

Area Yarnton

Land Ownership

The University of Oxford own an area of around 125ha, including and around their Begbroke site, and are the main land owner in the Yarnton/Kidlington gap.

Conclusions The analysis above suggests land to the east of Yarnton offers greater potential for

development than land to the west of Yarnton. To the east, there is sufficient land to accommodate development whilst still maintaining the important Green Belt function in terms of preventing the coalescence of settlements. Land to the east is also less sensitive in terms of heritage, landscape character and visual impact terms.

At present, Yarnton offers limited infrastructure in terms of community facilities and key services. New development would therefore need to look to Kidlington to fulfil these needs. The area does however, offer good access to employment opportunities at Begbroke Science Park and future employment uses at Northern Gateway. In transport terms, Yarnton scores least well against the assessment criteria compared to the other areas. This is largely due to the distance to Oxford and its reliance on Kidlington to access key local facilities.

24

Area North of Oxford/South of Kidlington

Plan

Green Belt Value

The most important function of the Green Belt in this location is to prevent the coalescence of Oxford and Kidlington. However, given the scale of the area, development focussed in one or two parts could be achieved without prejudicing the Green Belt function in this respect. The dual carriageway and railway line provide a strong boundary, giving a clear definition between the edge of any new development and the remaining open Green Belt beyond.

South of Kidlington East of A4165 West of A4165

Heritage Medium to Low

sensitivity.

The Green Belt segment forms part of the setting of a number of listed buildings, although this has been affected by the process of 20th century change and alteration.

In the case of Stratfield Farm an element of agricultural use remains, which makes some contribution to heritage significance. This is, however, set within a varied context consisting of significant roads and sports pitches.

High sensitivity.

This segment is located to the west of a range of listed buildings (including two Grade II*). Any development in this area is likely to erode the contribution made by setting to the significance of these listed buildings, including the approach through agricultural land, thus causing harm to the significance of these buildings. There may be scope for limited extension to the north of Cutteslowe in a manner which would sustain the significance of these heritage assets.

Low to medium

sensitivity.

The majority of this segment does not contribute positively to the significance of any heritage asset. A small portion at the southwest corner, however, contributes positively to the significance of the Wolvercote with Godstow Conservation Area. The development of this part of the segment is likely to have a localised and very minor adverse impact on the significance of the conservation area.

25


Landscape Character

Medium to Low

sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as having a minor landscape value and a moderate to low susceptibility to change.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the dense hedgerows and mature field trees will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Medium sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and having a moderate landscape value.


Low sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a minor landscape value and a low susceptibility to change.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the dense woodland shelter belts associated with the road network will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Visual Impact Low sensitivity.

The visibility of this segment is predominately contained by the vegetation associated with the field boundaries. The vegetation associated with Stratfield Brake and the A34 creates a visual boundary between Kidlington and the north of Oxford. Any development within the segment would need to retain this vegetation in order to reduce its visual effect.


The visibility of this segment is reasonably contained by the vegetation associated with the settlement and roads. Open views are possible to the agricultural fields to the east due to the area being located within a flood plain and being intensely arable farmed.

Any development within the segment would need to retain and enhance the hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual effect.

Low sensitivity.

The visibility of this segment is predominately contained by the vegetation associated with the transport corridors. The vegetation associated with Stratfield Brake and the A34 creates a visual boundary between Kidlington and the north of Oxford.


Socio Economic

Plan 2 illustrates the extent of existing community infrastructure located in the nearby surrounding areas. The area is located between the established built up areas of Kidlington and Summertown which provide a good level of developed community infrastructure. These areas provide a range of community facilities, including schools, medical facilities and retail provision. The area is located within close proximity to sites with future employment potential, including Northern Gateway at Peartree, the expansion of Begbroke Science Park, Kidlington Business Park and Jordan Hill Business Park, while nearby Kidlington and London Oxford Airport may create further future employment opportunities.

26


Transport Proximity to key services: Both areas (i.e. North of Oxford and South of Kidlington) score well in terms of their proximity to key services, although South of Kidlington performs marginally better and ranks 1st ahead of North of Oxford which ranks 2nd (out of 7).

Connections: Both areas offer good connections by public transport to the city centre, rail access and employment opportunities. In terms of the frequency of services, the North of Oxford performs marginally better (with 41 services per hour) and ranks 1st ahead of South of Kidlington in 2nd place (with 19 services per hour).

Accessibility: Both areas score well in terms of their combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services, ranking equal 2nd.

Infrastructure: Both areas will benefit from improvements to the Cutteslowe roundabout and the planned new Oxford Parkway railway station at Water Eaton.

Land Ownership

Land at St Frideswide’s Farm is owned by Christ Church and covers a large part of the north of Oxford area. Other major landowners in the area include Merton College, Exeter College and Oxford County Council.

Conclusions The analysis above suggests there is potential to accommodate development in one or two parts without prejudicing the Green Belt function in terms of preventing the coalescence of Oxford and Kidlington. However, development would need to be carefully sited to respect the heritage assets, particularly to the east of the A4165 and south of Kidlington. Both areas benefit from their proximity to established built up areas at Kidlington and Summertown which provide a range of community facilities. The areas also offer good access to existing and future employment opportunities and in transport terms, the areas scored highest against the assessment criteria.

27

Area Wick Farm

Plan

Green Belt Value

The strongest Green Belt function in this area is the contribution of the open countryside character of the higher ground to the green backdrop to Oxford that forms such an important part of its historic setting. Development could be delivered on the lower slopes without significant harm to this function.

Heritage High sensitivity

This part of the Green Belt comprises agricultural land, which forms part of the setting of a number of listed buildings.

The land to the west of Bayswater Road forms part of the historic agricultural setting of Wick Farm and contributes strongly to its significance as a working historic farm. As the continued operation of the listed building as a farm contributes to its heritage significance a reduction in this land, which threatens its financial viability is likely to give rise to a loss of heritage significance.

The land to the east of Bayswater Road makes less of a contribution although further work is needed to determine the archaeological potential associated with the probable location of the medieval settlement of Stowford and the water management system associated with Bayswater Mill. This part of the Green Belt forms a minor part of elevated views from the Stanton St John Conservation Area to the northeast. Given the separation distances and interposing topography and landscaping it forms a comparatively minor element of the conservation area’s wider rural setting.

Landscape Character


The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a minor landscape value and a moderate to low susceptibility to change.


28

Area Wick Farm

Visual Impact Medium sensitivity.

The visibility of the segment increases to the north due to the topography rising. Views to and from the lower southern area are contained by the existing boundary vegetation and built form of the northern edge of Barton.


Socio Economic Plan 3 illustrates the extent of existing community infrastructure located in the nearby surrounding areas. The proximity of Wick Farm to the established district centre of Headington provides a range of community facilities, including retail, schools and medical facilities. The wider Headington area also provides a range of employment opportunities linked to the area’s hospitals and Oxford Brookes University in particular, while Headington is also well-connected to the city centre, where significant job creation is expected.

Transport Proximity to key services: The area offers good proximity to the Headington area and to retail and leisure facilities. However, it scores less well in terms of its proximity to the nearest secondary school and supermarket. The area currently ranks joint 5th (out of 7) overall.

Connections: The area offers good connections by public transport to the city centre and employment opportunities but ranks 5th (out of 7) overall in terms of the frequency of services (11 per hour).

Accessibility: The area ranks joint 6th in terms of its combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services.

Infrastructure: The area will benefit from the Headington transport improvements.

Land Ownership The area largely falls within the ownership of Christ Church. The Oxford Preservation Trust own a small part of this land, but this is not considered large enough to affect overall deliverability.

Conclusions The prospects for development in this area are constrained by the sensitivity of the Green Belt function on the higher slopes. The area is also subject to heritage constraints, particularly on land to the west of the Bayswater Road. Further work would be required in order to establish whether parts of the area could accommodate some carefully sited development. .

The area does offer good proximity to key local services and community infrastructure in the Headington area and employment opportunities linked to the area’s hospitals and Oxford Brookes University; and in highways terms, it achieved a mid-range score against the assessment criteria.

29

Area Wheatley

Plan

Green Belt Value

The Green Belt function in this area is most sensitive in terms of maintaining a gap between Holton and Wheatley and Wheatley and Littleworth. The open character of the area, particularly to the west, is likely to form part of the landscape setting for the Wheatley conservation area, although there is not currently a conservation area appraisal which identifies key features of setting.

North of London Road South of Wheatley

Heritage High sensitivity.

The Green Belt makes a strong positive contribution to the significance of a range of heritage assets, including those considered to be of exceptional interest in terms of their evidential, aesthetic and historical values. It is unlikely that development could be accommodated without resulting in a significant loss of significance, with the potential to result in substantial harm.

Medium sensitivity.

To the west of Station Road the Green Belt has a strong visual and historic relationship with the Wheatley conservation area. Development in this location is unlikely to sustain the significance of the conservation area and Wheatley Manor.

To the east of Station Road/Ladder Hill to the south of Kelham Hall Drive/Beech Road/Elm Close and to the west of Castle Hill Farm is an area of legible historic farmland with evidence of ridge and furrow. Whilst separated from the conservation area, it forms an experiential part of its setting and illustrates the former historic connections to a working agricultural context. It is considered to contribute positively to its setting.

The wedge of land to the north of London Road and to the north of the former railway line is considered to make less of a contribution to the significance of the conservation area.

30

Area Wheatley

Landscape Character


The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate value and a high to moderate susceptibility to change.

The segment contributes to the setting of Wheatley, but does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the hedgerows will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Medium sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and a moderate value.

The segment contributes to the setting of Wheatley, but not to the ‘special character of Oxford’.


The visibility of this segment is predominately contained by the vegetation associated with the field boundaries and properties. The segment plays a moderate value within views and has a medium susceptibility to change. Any development within the segment would need to retain the hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual effect.


The visibility of the segment increases to the north due to the topography rising. The upper slope of the segment provides a wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Wheatley.

Views to and from the lower southern area are contained by the existing boundary vegetation and built form of the northern edge of Wheatley.

Socio Economic

Plan 4 illustrates the extent of existing community infrastructure located in the nearby surrounding areas. While there is some community infrastructure in Wheatley – including a primary and secondary school – the area has largely developed in line with its local centre status, and as such the existing community infrastructure reflects this. In terms of employment, the nearest opportunities are located towards south Oxford, including Oxford Business Park, Harrow Road Industrial Estate and the future expansion by BMW.

Transport Proximity to key services: Wheatley scores well in terms of its proximity to retail facilities including a supermarket, and the nearest secondary school. The area scores less well in terms of proximity to significant employment opportunities. The area ranks 3rd (out of 7) overall.

Connections: The area offers good connections by public transport to the city centre, rail access and employment opportunities but ranks 6th (out of 7) overall in terms of the frequency of services (11 per hour).

Accessibility: The area ranks 4th in terms of its combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services.

Infrastructure: The area will benefit from the Headington transport improvements.

31

Area Wheatley

Land Ownership

Land ownership is yet to be established.

Conclusions The prospects for development in this area are constrained by the open character of the Green Belt and its likely contribution to the setting of the Wheatley conservation area and designated heritage assets. The analysis also indicates medium to high sensitivity in terms of landscape character and visual impact.

In terms of community infrastructure, this is relatively limited and reflects its local centre status. Access to employment opportunities is also more limited and in transport terms, while the area achieves a mid-range score against the assessment criteria, it has relatively poor access to the major facilities in the city centre.

32

Area South of Grenoble Road

Plan

Green Belt Value

The open setting of the Green Belt in this location is not vital to maintaining the special characteristics of Oxford’s setting. The Green Belt in this area has an important role in maintaining visual separation between Oxford and Toot Baldon and Oxford and Marsh Baldon. Given the scale of land, there are prospects to accommodate a significant amount of development whilst ensuring the Green Belt maintains its function. The small ridge and tree belt around Nineveh Farm have the potential to be used as part of a carefully considered development to help maintain the sense of visual separation between settlements.

South of Grenoble Road Northeast of Grenoble Road

Heritage Medium sensitivity.

The Green Belt is located within the setting of a large number of designated heritage assets.

Any additional development would, however, be located in an area of landscape that includes significant 20th century residential development, electricity pylons and other structures and as such its contribution to the significance of these heritage assets has been diminished.

The nature of the particular significance of the Garsington Manor House and the layout/disposition of its Gardens means that this Green Belt segment does not make a significant material contribution to its heritage significance.

Low sensitivity.

There are no designated heritage assets within the vicinity of this Green Belt segment. The interposing built form to the north and west and 20th century development to the north of Garsington meaning that it makes no contribution to the significance of any heritage asset.

33


Landscape Character

Low sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and having a minor landscape value.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the copses and wood areas will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Low sensitivity.

The landscape elements and character of the segment have been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and having a minor landscape value.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as the copses and wood areas will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.


The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to the surrounding landscape, due to the low lying nature of the landform. The segment contains a network of public rights of way that cross through it that are popular with the surrounding residents.

Medium sensitivity.

The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to the surrounding ridgelines, to the east and south, and built form, to the north and west. Local open views are possible across the low lying countryside, but the value of these views is reduced by the dominance of the adjacent ‘Mini’ Plant.

Socio Economic

Plan 5 illustrates the extent of existing community infrastructure located in the nearby surrounding areas. As illustrated on Plan 5, South of Grenoble Road is located close to the established and well-served settlements of Littlemore and Blackbird Leys, and as such benefits from numerous community facilities within these areas. The area is served by several schools, healthcare facilities, and is located close to areas of future employment growth. This includes Oxford Business park, Oxford Science Park and Harrow Road Industrial Estate, as well as future expansion by BMW.

Transport Proximity to key services: The area scores reasonably well in terms of its proximity to employment opportunities and retail facilities. The area scores less well in terms of proximity to the nearest secondary school. The area ranks 4th (out of 7) overall.

Connections: The area offers good connections by public transport to the city centre, rail access and employment opportunities and ranks 3rd (out of 7) overall in terms of the frequency of services (20 per hour).

Accessibility: The area ranks joint 2nd in terms of its combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services.

Infrastructure: The area will benefit from the Hinksey Hill interchange and the proposed re-opening of the Cowley Line (yet to be confirmed).

34


Land Ownership

The area to the south of Grenoble Road falls within the following ownerships:

• Magdalen College; • Thames Water; • Oxford City Council; and • National Grid.

Conclusions There is potential to accommodate a significant amount of development in the area whilst ensuring the Green Belt maintains its function. There is some sensitivity relating to the setting of heritage assets, particularly on land to the south of Grenoble Road, although to some extent this has already been diminished by existing development. There is also some sensitivity in terms of visual impact, although again these have also been somewhat diminished by existing development. The area offers access to a good range of local facilities and community infrastructure and scores well against the assessment criteria in transport terms. The area falls within four different landownerships but we understand there is a common agreement over the future potential of the area which suggests that a comprehensive approach to development would be forthcoming.

35

Area North of Abingdon

Plan

Green Belt Value

The degree of urban encroachment that already exists in this area has already reduced the Green Belt function. The most significant impact of open countryside in this area is the maintenance of a clear visual gap between settlements.

East of A4183 West of A4183

Heritage High to medium sensitivity.

Whilst this part of the Green Belt does not contain any designated heritage assets the remnants of the designed landscape, and the wider rural context in which it is experienced, form an integral and significant element of the setting of Radley Hall. The change associated with any residential development in this location could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the significance of Radley Hall in particular, and the group of which it forms a part.

There is unlikely to be any substantial effect on the significance of the particular significance of Peach Croft Farm Barn given the separation distances and its location within a significantly expanded farm complex.

Low sensitivity.

There are no designated heritage assets within the vicinity of this Green Belt segment. It would be advisable to have regard to the relative siting of the north eastern part of this segment, where it adjoins the Oxford Road, given its proximity to the wider designed landscape associated with Radley Hall.

36


Landscape Character


The field boundaries contain a number of intact hedgerows and copses that reflect the identified character of the various landscape character areas. These should be retained and enhanced as part of any emerging proposal.

The upper northern areas located on the minor ridgeline that extends from Boars Hill, which has been identified as helping to provide the wooded backdrop to Oxford. The segment has an avenue entrance to Radley Park, which contains a number of mature trees. This area should not be developed and care should be taken to ensure that any development within the segment, if proposed, does not break the ridgeline.

Medium sensitivity.

The field boundaries contain a number of intact hedgerows and copses that reflect the identified character of the various landscape character areas. These should be retained and enhanced as part of any emerging proposal.

The upper north eastern area has been identified as helping to provide the wooded backdrop to Abingdon, but it has already has built form on. The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’.

Visual Impact High to medium sensitivity.

The visibility of the segment increases to the north due to the topography rising. The upper slope of the segment provides a wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Abingdon.

Views to and from the lower southern area are contained by the existing boundary vegetation and built form of the northern edge of Abingdon.

Medium sensitivity.

The visibility of the segment increases to the north due to the topography rising. The upper slope of the segment provides a wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Abingdon.

Views to and from the lower southern area are contained by the existing boundary vegetation and built form of the northern edge of Abingdon.

Socio Economic Plan 6 illustrates the extent of existing community infrastructure located in the nearby surrounding areas. The proximity of the area to Abingdon provides a range of community facilities, including a number of schools, retail facilities and healthcare practices. The area is connected to key strategic employment sites in southern Oxford – particularly in Littlemore and Cowley – by the A34 and A423, and Abingdon is well connected with Oxford city centre where significant job creation is expected across various sites.

37


Transport Proximity to key services: North of Abingdon ranks 7th (out of 7) overall in terms of its proximity to key services. This is however to some extent skewed by its distance from the city centre and Headington area against which it scores poorly relative to other areas assessed.

Connections: The area offers good connections by public transport to the city centre, rail access and the Eastern Arc employment area and ranks 4th out of 7) overall in terms of the frequency of services (13 per hour).

Accessibility: The area ranks joint 6th in terms of its combined walk/cycle accessibility to key local services.

Infrastructure: The area will benefit from the Hinksey Hill interchange.

Land Ownership Some of this area of search is part of Radley College grounds, including a golf

course linked to the school and park land.

Conclusions The analysis above suggests land to the west of the A4183 offers greater potential for development than land to the east which is more constrained in heritage, landscape and visual impact terms. The proximity to Abingdon provides a range of community facilities and access to key services. The area offers good connectivity to Oxford and key employment sites to the south of the City; although in transport terms it scores low overall against the assessment criteria.

38

7. Summary and Conclusions

Yarnton

7.1 Yarnton is a village with a population of c.2,500. It offers limited infrastructure in terms of community facilities or key services and any new development would need to look to Kidlington and Oxford to fulfil these needs.

7.2 While the analysis suggests that land to the east of Yarnton is relatively less sensitive in terms of heritage, landscape character and visual amenity, it is questionable whether this presents the best location for growth given its relatively poor accessibility.

7.3 The area is well located to benefit from employment growth at Northern Gateway and Begbroke Science Park so should not be discounted at this stage, but it is likely that more sustainable locations to the north of Oxford exist.

North of Oxford/South of Kidlington

7.4 The North of Oxford presents the best location in terms of proximity to services and facilities and jobs. It will also benefit from improved accessibility associated with the development of a new Parkway Station, and be close to new employment opportunities at Northern Gateway and Begbroke Science Park.

7.5 The key constraint to development is the need to protect the Green Belt function in maintaining open gaps between Oxford and Kidlington and preventing coalescence. However, it is considered that by focusing development only in one of the two areas, this could be achieved. Furthermore, the A34 dual carriageway and railway line ensure that a strong boundary would be in place, giving a clear boundary between the edge of any urban extension and the remaining open Green Belt beyond.

7.6 Any development would need to be carefully sited to respect the heritage assets, particularly to the east of the A4165 and south of Kidlington.

7.7 This area should be considered further for development as it is has the capacity to provide housing and employment opportunities in a very sustainable location, without adversely affecting the historic setting of Oxford.

Wick Farm

7.8 Located to the north of the Northern Bypass, the area contributes to the open countryside character and green backdrop to Oxford that forms such an important part of the city’s historic setting.

7.9 There may be potential for development to be delivered on the lower slopes without significant harm to this function. However it is questionable whether the size of development that could be achieved without adversely affecting the environmental value of the area, would be sufficient to allow for a critical mass that could support its own services and facilities.

39

7.10 Further work would be required in order to establish whether parts of the area could accommodate some carefully sited development, and as the area does offers good proximity to key local services and community infrastructure in the Headington area and employment opportunities linked to the area’s hospitals and Oxford Brookes University, it is recommended that this area should not be discarded until this further work has been undertaken.

Wheatley

7.11 Wheatley is a large village located within South Oxfordshire, approximately eight miles to the east of Oxford city centre. The rise of land around Wheatley means that development in the area would be quite visible and the Council’s initial assessment identified potential harm to the setting of the conservation area.

7.12 This assessment also considers that the prospects for development in this area are constrained by the open character of the Green Belt and its likely contribution to the setting of the Wheatley conservation area and designated heritage assets.

7.13 While the areas offers relatively good access to jobs and local services, its distance from the city centre of Oxford and employment opportunities along the north-south A34 axis, is likely to mean greater pressures for commuting than from other locations.

South of Grenoble Road

7.14 Grenoble Road provides the southern boundary to the City. There is potential to accommodate a significant amount of development in the area to the south, whilst ensuring the Green Belt maintains its function. There is some sensitivity in terms of visual impact and heritage. However it is considered that these issues can be mitigated through appropriate design solutions.

7.15 The area provides the best opportunity to deliver the critical mass of development capable of meeting the needs of Oxford over time and in a comprehensive way that can provide important new services and facilities in a sustainable manner.

7.16 The area is being promoted for development and is therefore considered a deliverable solution in a relatively short timeframe.

North of Abingdon

7.17 Abingdon is a market town located approximately eight miles to the south of Oxford city centre. It is one of the principal settlements within the Vale of White Horse District.

7.18 The analysis suggests land to the west of the A4183 has relatively few constraints and offers good potential for development. It is noted that Vale of White Horse District Council has also identified part of this area as a potential strategic development site, and it may be taken forward within its emerging Local Plan.

7.19 The land to the east of the A4183 is more constrained in heritage, landscape and visual impact terms. However, the area offers good connectivity to Oxford and key employment sites to the south of the City and it is considered that further assessment of

40

this area should be considered to ascertain whether the environmental constraints could be mitigated as part of any development proposals.

Overall Conclusions

7.20 A sustainability appraisal of the areas of search is being undertaken to provide further critique of the merits of each location. Subject to the results of this work, it is considered that the following actions should follow:

• North of Oxford/South Kidlington and Grenoble Road should be considered in further detail to understand more thoroughly any design constraints in these locations and the likely development capacity of proposals, to inform the assessment of spatial options for growth being undertaken by the Oxfordshire Growth Board.

• Further review of environmental constraints at North Abingdon (east of A4183) and Wick Farm should be undertaken to ascertain whether these locations could support development in a sensitive and sustainable manner.

• While this assessment does not discount Yarnton and Wheatley as potential urban extension opportunities, it is considered that further work should not be advanced in these locations at this time, but subject to understanding the development capacity of the other sites.

41

Appendix 1: Strategic Landscape, Heritage, and Visual Impact Appraisal

Strategic Heritage, Landscape and

Visual Impact Appraisal

August 2014

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Approach to Assessment 3

3. Green Belt Segment 1a. Yarnton (East of the A44) 12

4. Green Belt Segment 1b: Yarnton (West of the A44) 17

5. Green Belt Segment 2: South of Kidlington 23

6. Green Belt Segment 3a: North of Oxford (East of the A4165) 27

7. Green Belt Segment 3b: North of Oxford (West of the A4165) 32

8. Green Belt Segment 4: Wick/Bayswater Farm 38

9. Green Belt Segment 5a: Wheatley (North of the London Road) 44

10. Green Belt Segment 5b: Wheatley (South of the London Road) 50

11. Green Belt Segment 6a: South of Grenoble Road 55

12. Green Belt Segment 6b: Northeast of Grenoble Road 61

13. Green Belt Segment 7a: North of Abingdon (East of the A4183) 65

14. Green Belt Segment 7b: North of Abingdon (West of the A4183) 70

Appendix 1: Existing Landscape Character Assessment 74

Client

Oxford City Council

August 2014

1

1. Introduction

Context

1.1 The City Council has undertaken a Preliminary Green Belt Review in response to the

significant level of housing need that exists in Oxfordshire, and particularly in Oxford.

The Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), published in April

2014, concluded that 100,000 new homes were needed in Oxfordshire by 2031, which

includes making good some of the shortfall of housing delivery in parts of Oxfordshire

from recent years. As part of the overall total some 24,000 – 32,000 new homes are

required in Oxford City.

Initial Work

1.2 Oxford City Council have prepared a report1 as an initial scoping exercise to investigate

whether there is any potential to meet housing need for Oxford in urban extension(s). It

is noted that this report was an initial scoping assessment of potential areas to inform

on-going work to guide the identification and consideration of site(s) suitable for an

urban extension(s) in the Green Belt. As part of the assessment process a number of

‘primary constraints’ were identified. For the purposes of this assessment the most

relevant constraints are:

• Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (landscape and visual impact);

• Scheduled Monument (heritage)

• Ancient Woodland (landscape and visual impact)

• Registered Park and Garden of Special Historic Interest (heritage, landscape and

visual impact)

1.3 Whilst conservation areas were not specifically identified as a ‘primary constraint’ there

was some consideration of the effects of development on this type of heritage assets in

a number of instances within the initial report.

1.4 The Council’s work has identified areas/segments of the Green Belt that merit further

consideration for possible release to facilitate the delivery of urban extension(s):

• North of Oxford/South of Kidlington

• Yarnton

• Wick/Bayswater Farm

• Wheatley

• South of Grenoble Road

• North of Abingdon

1 Oxford City Council. ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt’ (May

2014)

2

Objectives of Strategic Heritage, Landscape and Visual Impact

Appraisal

1.5 This report provides a strategic, high level appraisal of the heritage, landscape and

visual impact implications associated with the potential development of these segments

as an extension of the work already undertaken by the City Council.

1.6 As part of this assessment the contribution of the Green Belt segments to the special

character of Oxford is also considered. The ‘Character Assessment of Oxford in its

Landscape Setting’ identifies that Oxford sits in a bowl surrounded by largely

undeveloped green treed hills (located in the designated Green Belt) that can be viewed

from the city centre. It is considered that this treed landscape maintains the historic

setting of Oxford and development in these areas (as identified in the topographic

analysis and visual setting of Oxford maps in the 2002 assessment) would have a

negative effect on the setting of Oxford.

1.7 The centre of Oxford is located on a shallow river terrace central ridge which extends

from the north in between the floodplains of the River Thames (Isis) and River Cherwell.

The River Thames (Isis) is located to the west and south of the city centre and the River

Cherwell is located to the east and south. These river’s flood plains provide ‘green

lungs’ into the city centre.

1.8 The Oxford Green Belt designation protects both the green treed hills and river flood

plains that provide a landscape setting and special character to Oxford City Centre. It

also protects the identified view cones that provide views from the surrounding treed

hills onto the University colleges (Matthew Arnold’s dreaming spires). The Green Belt

land within Oxford City’s boundary consists predominantly of green wedges through

which watercourses, including the Thames (Isis) and Cherwell flow.

3

2. Approach to Assessment

2.1 In this Section, we set out the approach to undertaking the high level, strategic heritage,

landscape and visual impact appraisal of the previously identified Green Belt segments.

2.2 The three subject areas of ‘heritage’, ‘landscape’ and ‘visual impact’ have been

considered together as part of this appraisal in light of the similarity in the type of

receptors in this instance, and the interconnected nature of the potential effects arising

from the Proposed Development. They do, however, have standalone methodologies

and have been assessed accordingly.

Areas for Appraisal

2.3 It has been noted that Oxford City Council have identified six Green Belt segments for

further consideration. These have been re-ordered and sub-divided as necessary to aid

with the preparation of the strategic heritage, landscape and visual impact appraisal.

This approach has been informed by the sites identified in the earlier technical study

prepared by Oxford City Council2. Table 2.1 illustrates the approach to site

nomenclature utilised in this report:

Table 2.1: Green Belt Segments

Oxford City Council

Segments

Segments for purposes of

Strategic Heritage,

Landscape and Visual

Impact Appraisal

Site References from

Oxford City Council

‘Investigation into the

potential to accommodate

urban extensions in

Oxford’s Green Belt’ (May

2014)

1. Yarnton 1a. Yarnton (East of the

A44)

018 & 019

1. Yarnton 1b. Yarnton (West of the

A44)

020 & 021

2. North of Oxford/South of

Kidlington

2. South of Kidlington 016 & 017


Kidlington

3a. North of Oxford (East of

the A4165)

014


Kidlington

3b. North of Oxford (West

of the A4165)

015 & 022

3. Wick/Bayswater Farm 4. Wick/Bayswater Farm 008 & 009

4. Wheatley 5a. Wheatley (North of the

London Road)

037 & 038

2 Oxford City Council. ‘Investigation into the potential to accommodate urban extensions in Oxford’s Green Belt’ (May

2014)

4

Oxford City Council

Segments

Segments for purposes of

Strategic Heritage,

Landscape and Visual

Impact Appraisal

Site References from

Oxford City Council

‘Investigation into the

potential to accommodate

urban extensions in

Oxford’s Green Belt’ (May

2014)

4. Wheatley 5b. Wheatley (South of the

London Road)

039 & 040

5. South of Grenoble Road 6a. South of Grenoble Road 001

5. South of Grenoble Road 6b. Northeast of Grenoble

Road

002

6. North of Abingdon 7a. North of Abingdon (East

of the A4183)

032

6. North of Abingdon 7b. North of Abingdon

(West of the A4183)

030

2.4 In undertaking this appraisal the strategic, high level heritage, landscape and visual

impact implications will be considered for each of the identified Green Belt segments.

Heritage Assets

Heritage Assets Considered

2.5 As part of Oxford City Council’s earlier work, the potential high level implications of

Green Belt release (and associated development) upon the significance of a range of

designated heritage assets (identified as ‘primary constraints’) has already been

considered3. It is noted, however, that these heritage related ‘primary constraints’ did

not include statutorily listed buildings or conservation areas.

2.6 Accordingly, this strategic high level heritage appraisal will consider the following

designated heritage assets:

• Statutorily Listed Buildings (identified from the National Heritage List for England)

• Conservation Areas (identified from Oxford City, Vale of White Horse, Cherwell

and South Oxfordshire District Council’s website)

• Registered Parks or Gardens of Special Historic Interest (identified from the

National Heritage List for England)

• Scheduled Monuments (insofar as they relate to built heritage assets i.e. moats

connected to listed buildings) (identified from the National Heritage List for

England)

3 Annex 2, National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

5

2.7 This high level appraisal will identify the contribution made by the Green Belt segments

to the significance of the heritage assets and those instances where any development is

likely to result in a direct effect on the significance of heritage assets and/or indirect

effect on significance through development in their setting4.

2.8 It should be noted that this appraisal does not consider matters relating to

archaeological heritage, except to note that generally such matters are likely to be

relevant to a number of Green Belt segments. It is likely that further work to consider

the archaeological potential of the Green Belt segments will be required.

2.9 The National Planning Policy Framework (hereafter referred to as ‘the Framework’) also

confirms5 that in addition to designated heritage assets i.e. those designated under

relevant legislation there may also be assets of heritage value identified by the Local

Planning Authority as non-designated heritage assets. As this report relates to a high

level, strategic appraisal of heritage matters it is not considered necessary to consider

any such heritage assets at this stage, therefore the Oxfordshire Historic Environmental

Record has not been referenced.

Heritage Assets in Plan-Making

2.10 Paragraph 126 of the Framework emphasises the importance of Local Authorities

having a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic

environment as part of their Local Plan. Accordingly, Local Authorities should take

account of:

• the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets

and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;

• the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits that conservation

of the historic environment can bring;

• the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local

character and distinctiveness; and

• opportunities to draw on the contribution made by the historic environment to the

character of a place

2.11 This overarching objective is reiterated in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) and

notes that Local Authorities should identify specific opportunities within their area for the

conservation and enhancement of heritage assets. This approach could include, for

instance, the delivery of development within their settings that will make a positive

contribution to, or better reveal the significance, of the heritage asset. It also stresses

the importance of the need to consider the relationship and impact of other policies on

the delivery of strategy for conservation.

2.12 English Heritage has recently issued a consultation draft on the historic environment in

local plans6. This draft document notes the importance of having a robust evidence



6 English Heritage, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 1: The Historic Environment in Local

Plans (Consultation Draft 11 July 2014)

6

base to inform a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic

environment.

2.13 Paragraph 10 of this draft document notes that the preparation of the positive strategy

for conservation can potentially engage all aspects of planning and is not a stand-alone

exercise. At paragraph 14 the draft guidance notes that the Local Plan needs to assess

whether or not it should identify any areas where certain types of development might

need to be limited or would be inappropriate due to the impact that they might have

upon the historic environment. At paragraph 16, the draft guidance suggests that the

best way of ensuring that the selection of sites to be put forward for development which

supports the delivery of the conservation strategy within the Local Plan is to avoid the

selection of sites in the setting of significant heritage assets; to ensure that the form of

development responds to and reflects its local character; or ensuring that heritage at risk

is supported with site allocations that will induce sustainable development. Lastly, it is

noted at paragraph 18 of the draft guidance that conservation of the historic

environment may require cross-boundary planning for instance where major changes

are proposed to Green Belt, which effect the conservation of the setting and character of

historic towns.

Strategic Heritage Appraisal Methodology

2.14 In considering the potential implications arising from development of the identified Green

Belt segments it is necessary to consider the requirements of the statutory duties of the

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. These are summarised

in this Section for ease of reference.

2.15 With regard to applications for planning permission which may affect the significance of

a statutory listed building, the Act outlines in Section 66 that in considering whether to

grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting the

decision maker shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building, its

setting and/or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it

possesses.

2.16 Section 72 of the Act states that in the exercise of planning powers within a

conservation area, the decision maker is required to pay special attention to the

desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. Thus

the statutory provision is satisfied if the development does one thing or the other, and

there will be cases where proposals will both preserve and enhance a conservation

area. The meaning of preservation in this context is taken to be the avoidance of harm.

Character relates to physical characteristics but also to more general qualities such as

uses or activity within an area. Appearance relates to the visible physical qualities of the

area.

2.17 The Framework defines the setting of a heritage asset 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 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.”

7

2.18 However, the setting of a listed building is not a heritage asset. Its importance lies in the

contribution it makes, if any, to the significance of the heritage asset

2.19 Recent case law7 has confirmed that Parliament’s intention in enacting section 66(1)

was that decision-makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the

desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings, where “preserve” means to “to do

no harm” (after South Lakeland). The findings of this judgement apply to the statutory

duty at section 72(1) of the Act with regard to conservation areas. This duty must be

borne in mind when considering any harm that may accrue and the balancing of such

harm against public benefits as required by national planning policy.

2.20 It is noted that there is no statutory duty to have special regard to the desirability of

preserving the significance and/or setting of a Registered Park and Garden of Special

Historic Interest. As a designated heritage asset paragraph 132 of the Framework notes

that ‘great weight’ should be given to the asset’s conservation and that the more

important the asset, the greater the weight should be.

2.21 The relevant local policy framework is generally consistent with the statutory duties

outlined in the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and national

policy contained in the Framework. As such it is not necessary to consider each of the

Green Belt segments against this local planning policy framework for the purposes of

this strategic, high level appraisal.

2.22 Accordingly, the following approach is adopted for each Green Belt segment that has

been identified:

• Identify the relevant designated heritage assets within the Green Belt segment

and/or those who’s setting could be affected by potential the development of this

segment;

• A brief summary of significance on the basis of documentary sources;

• Identification of the level of potential heritage sensitivity of the Green Belt

segment to development is identified as:

• High (red): where the release of the Green Belt segment for development

has the potential to result in substantial harm to the significance of

designated heritage assets;

• Medium (yellow): where the release of the Green Belt segment has the

potential to give rise to less than substantial harm to the significance of

designated heritage assets; and

• Low (green): where the release of the Green Belt segment has the potential

to give rise to have a negligible/no effect on the significance of designated

heritage assets.

7 Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Limited and (1) East Northamptonshire District Council (2) English Heritage (3) National

Trust (4) The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Governments, Case No: C1/2013/0843, 18th February 2014

8

2.23 As far as possible the appraisal process utilises the terminology contained with the

Framework8 and other related policy

9, guidance

10 and best practice

11 to ensure a robust

framework for appraisal.

Landscape character area appraisal

2.24 Considering the character of areas is identified within the Framework’s paragraph 17 as

one of the twelve Core Planning Principles. Paragraph 64 confirms that permission

should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunity to

improve the character and quality of an area and paragraph 113 states that Local

Planning Authorities should set criteria based policies against which development

proposals on or affecting landscape areas will be judged.

2.25 The need for establishing the character of a place is further supported within the

national Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). In paragraph 003, the design guidance

category supports the need to evaluate and understand the defining characteristics of

an area in order to identify appropriate design opportunities and policies. The

Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland (2002) and the

Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition (2013) provides

good practice guidance for recognising the elements that give a place its unique

character.

Landscape character area appraisal methodology

2.26 The Green Belt segments fall within existing Landscape Character Assessments at a

national, county and local district level. A summary of these various Landscape

Character Assessments and the relevant character areas the segments can be found at

the end of this report and include references to:

• National Joint Character Areas

• Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study

• South Oxfordshire Landscape Character Appraisal

• Cherwell District Council Landscape Character Appraisal

• A Character Assessment of Oxford in its Setting

2.27 For each segment the landscape elements, features and aesthetic and perceptual

factors which contribute to the landscape character of the area will be identified. The

condition attached to the segment’s landscape character area will then be established

along with its associated value. The descriptions of these landscape components are

set out in Table 2.2. Consideration will then be given to whether the segment’s

landscape elements reflect and contribute to the characteristics of the recognised areas.

8 Paragraphs 131, 132, 133 and 134

9 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF

10 English Heritage. The Setting of Heritage Assets (2011) and DCLG. Planning Practice Guidance (2014)

11 English Heritage, Conservation Principles (2008)

9

Table 2.2 – Baseline landscape component descriptions

Landscape Component Description

Landscape Element The individual elements that are the key characteristics

contributing to the distinctive character of the landscape

Landscape Character The distinct and recognisable pattern of elements made

up from landscape components that create a sense of

place. It is a reflection of the landform, land use, built

form and human activity

Landscape Condition Equivalent to quality, this is the physical state of the

landscape its intactness, and the state of repair of the

features and elements that together make up its

character

Landscape Value The importance of a character area based on national,

regional or local designations; and, where there are no

designations, judgements are based on criteria that can

establish value

Assessing landscape character area’s sensitivity

2.28 In order to identify the sensitivity of the segment’s landscape character its ‘susceptibility

to change’ and identified ‘value’ will be considered. The latter is defined in Table 2.3.

and the susceptibility of the landscape character area to change is defined within the

GLVIA as

“the ability of the landscape receptor (whether it be the overall character or

quality/condition of a particular landscape type or area, or an individual element and/or

feature, or a particular aesthetic and perceptual aspect) 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” (Para. 5.40 Ref

8:5).

2.29 Judgement on susceptibility of change for the appraisal will range between high,

medium and low and will be linked back to the evidence gathered previously.

2.30 The matrix shown in Table 2.3 demonstrates broadly how landscape character

sensitivity is determined through combining the landscape character areas ‘susceptibility

to change’ with its identified landscape ‘value’. It is important to note that this is a

quantitative approach, which the GLVIA strives to avoid, so will be linked back to

evidence gathered.

Table 2.3: Sensitivity of the segments landscape character

Susceptibility

to change /

Value

Exceptional Major Moderate Minor Poor

10

High High High/

Medium

Medium Medium Medium /Low

Medium High/

Medium

Medium Medium Medium /Low Low

Low Medium Medium Medium /Low Low Low

Visual appraisal

2.31 The Framework states in paragraph 61 that although visual appearance and the

architecture of individual buildings are very important factors, securing high quality and

inclusive design goes beyond aesthetic considerations. Therefore, it identifies that

planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and

places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic

environment.

2.32 In paragraph 003 of the design guidance category of the PPG it states that views into

and out of larger sites should be carefully considered from the start of the design

process. The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition

(2013) provides good practice guidance for undertaking visual appraisal.

Visual appraisal methodology

2.33 The visibility of each of the Green Belt segments will be established through a desktop

analysis of the surrounding area and by confirming the localised screening effect of the

landform, vegetation and built form on site. The following components will be identified:

• any viewpoints that are located within or cross the segment, which are related to

a planning designation and/or mentioned in tourist guidebooks and/or referenced

in art and literature;

• the broad area in which the segment may be visible;

• the different groups of people and their activities who may experience the views

of the segment; and

• the areas where views can or are likely to be possible to the segment and the

extent and proportion of these views.

2.34 These factors are interrelated, but for the purpose of this high level appraisal are dealt

with in this order.

Assessing visual sensitivity

2.35 In order to identify the visual sensitivity of each segment, as with the landscape

character areas, their ‘susceptibility to change’ and ‘value’ are established. But unlike

the landscape character area appraisal the former will be considered after establishing

the previous components and will range from high, moderate to low and be influenced

by the viewer’s activity and focus onto views of the segment. Value will also range from

high, moderate to low and be based on the significance attached to the views

experienced.

11

2.36 The matrix shown in Table 2.4 demonstrates broadly how visual sensitivity is

determined through combining the segment’s visual ‘susceptibility to change’ with its

identified visual ‘value’. Again, it is important to note that this is a quantitative approach,

which the GLVIA strives to avoid, so will be linked back to evidence gathered.

Table 2.4: Sensitivity of the segments visibility

Susceptibility to

change / Value

High Moderate Low

High High High/ Medium Medium

Medium High/ Medium Medium Medium /Low

Low Medium Medium/ Low Low

12

3. Green Belt Segment 1a. Yarnton (East of the A44)

Introduction

3.1 This segment is located to the north and east of Yarnton. Rowell Brook provides a

boundary to the north, the railway line to the east and the built development of Yarnton

to the southwest. There has been significant development at Begbroke Hill Farmhouse,

which is now part of the University of Oxford. A garden centre, pub and sports ground

(with associated pavilion) are located within the segment.

Heritage

Asset Summary of Significance

Heritage Assets

• The Grapes

Inn (Grade II)

• Rose

Cottage and

Attached

Cottage

(Grade II)

• Tudor

Cottage

(Grade II)

• Begbroke Hill

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

These listed buildings are 17th century in origin

and generally remodelled and extended in the

18th and 19

th centuries. They are good

examples of vernacular architecture built of high

quality local stone.

The setting of these listed buildings has been

significantly changed by 20th century

development.

In the case of Begbroke Hill Farmhouse it has

been incorporated into a campus associated

with the University of Oxford, entailing

significant built development within its grounds.

The other listed buildings are located in close

proximity to the busy and widened A44

Woodstock Road, the expanded settlement of

Yarnton, 19th century railway lines and some

limited industrial development.

These aspects of setting detract from the

heritage significance of these listed buildings.

The listed buildings are, however, set within a

wider rural, agricultural context to the north,

which includes altered elements of the historic

landscape (including field boundaries and road

network), which contribute positively to their

significance as remnants of their original historic

context.

Commentary This Green Belt segment consists of agricultural land to the

northeast of the expanded settlement of Yarnton. There are a

small number of listed buildings within (or adjoining) the segment

and the agricultural land forms an element of setting which makes

13

a positive contribution to their significance.

Given the significant degree of change to the setting of these listed

buildings (outlined earlier) it is considered to make a comparatively

lesser contribution to their significance. However, any

development of this segment will remove the remaining elements of

the listed buildings’ agricultural context, including elements of the

historic landscape framework, which has the potential to give rise

to a loss of heritage significance.

There is more scope for development to the north of Sandy Lane,

given the extent of change to historic field patterns and 20th century

development; however, care will need to be taken to sustain the

significance of the Begbroke Conservation Area (and associated

group of listed buildings focussed on St. Phillip’s Priory) located to

the northwest of the segment.

Heritage

sensitivity

Medium

Landscape character appraisal

Landscape Character Appraisal

Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately arable agricultural fields. The segment

also includes the Begbroke Science Park, allotments, a

garden centre, sports ground (with associated pavilion),

disused sewage plant and residential properties

associated with the eastern edge of Yarnton village. The

A44 is a physical barrier for these properties to the

historic centre of the village, which is located to the

southwest.

2. The area is flat and rises gradually to the north although

this is not noticeable within the segment. The

topography ranges between 60 metres and 70 metres,

due to it falling within the flood plain associated with the

River Thames and River Cherwell.

3. A series of drainage ditches are located on the field

boundaries and drain southwards into the River

Thames.

4. The vegetation is associated with field boundaries and

varies in quality with unmanaged hedgerows and

mature field trees to the south and sparse hedgerows

associated with arable fields to the north.

14

5. Built form ranges in scale from single storey residential

properties to four storey buildings associated with the

Science Park. A railway line runs across the segment

from the north to the south at grade. Electricity pylons

cross the southern section of the segment.

6. Three footpaths (reference 124/8, 420/3 & 420/4)

crosses the segment between Yarnton and Kidlington.

One of the routes follows the abandoned Yarnton Lane.

Sandy Lane crosses the segment and provides access

between the two settlements. The segment is bound by

the A44 and noise can be heard within the segment.

The Oxford Greenbelt Way National Trail follows the

Oxford Canal to the east of the segment.

Landscape character area

(a) National

(b) County

(c) District

(d) OCC’s Landscape

Character Areas

(a) 108 Upper Thames Clay Vales

(b) 1. Alluvial Lowlands, 8. Lowland Village Farmlands &

19. Wooded Estatelands

(c) Lower Cherwell Floodplain

(d) 2A. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis),

3E. Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport &

4A. Wooded Clay Hills – Cassington / Bladon Ridge

Contribute to the

characteristics of the

identified landscape

character areas

(a) The landscape elements within the segment contribute

to the 108 Upper Thames Clay Vales character area.

(b) The landscape elements within the segment contribute

to the 1. Alluvial Lowlands and 8. Lowland Village

Farmlands character area, but have little contribution to

the 19. Wooded Estatelands character area.

(c) The landscape elements within the segment contribute

to the Lower Cherwell Floodplain character area.

(d) The landscape elements make little contribution to the

identified the 2A. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains –

Thames (Isis) and 4A. Wooded Clay Hills – Cassington

/ Bladon Ridge character areas, but do contribute to the

3E. Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport

character area.

Landscape condition Moderate to low condition, due to the segment’s landscape

components being relatively intact and in average repair. The

hedgerows are of varying condition.

Landscape value Minor value, due to the landscape contributing to the

15

recognised landscape character areas but the area not being

covered by a landscape designation.

Landscape susceptibility

to change

It is considered that the segment has a moderate to low

susceptibility to change without affecting the maintenance of

the baseline situation and the achievement of existing

landscape planning policies and strategies, provided that any

development accommodated features such as hedgerows and

field trees.

Summary The landscape elements and character of the segment have

been identified as having a minor landscape value and a

moderate to low susceptibility to change.

The segment does not contribute to the ‘special character of

Oxford’. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as

the hedgerows will be retained as part of any emerging

proposals.

Landscape sensitivity Medium to low

Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal

Viewpoints identified in

planning designation and/

or tourist guidebooks

and/or art and literature

No viewpoints identified in planning designation and/or tourist

guidebooks and/or art and literature are located within or cross

the segment.

Zone of theoretical

visibility (from within the

segment)

Due to the flat nature of the topography and the dense

vegetation associated with the field boundaries to the south,

views out of the segment are limited to entrances and gaps in

the hedgerows within the immediate area. To the north views

are open to the A44 and surrounding landscape due to the

lack of hedgerow.

Visual receptors The key visual receptors include:

• Properties associated with north east Yarnton

• Begbroke Science Park

• Footpaths (reference 124/8, 420/3 & 420/4)

• Sandy Lane

• A44 (Woodstock Road)

• Railway Line

Views are not possible from the Oxford Greenbelt Way

16

National Trail and Oxford Canal

Visibility from identified

receptors (from outside

the segment)

The majority of views into the segment are prevented by, the

dense vegetation associated with the surrounding areas field

boundaries. It is assumed that views can be gained from

Sandy Road through gaps in the hedgerows and glimpsed to

partial views can be gained into the northwest corner of the

segment from the A44.

Value of the views It is considered that the segment has a low value within views

from the surrounding area.

Visual susceptibility to

change

To the north, the segment has a medium to low susceptibility

to change and to the south a low susceptibility. It is considered

that areas of the segment would be tolerant to change,

particularly to the west of the railway line.

Summary The visibility of this segment is predominately contained by the

vegetation associated with the field boundaries. The segment

plays a low value within views and has a medium to low

susceptibility to change.

The railway line and the Oxford Canal, along with their

associated vegetation, create a visual boundary between

Yarnton and Kidlington. Any development within the segment

would need to retain the hedgerow planting in order to reduce

its visual effect.

Visual sensitivity Low

17

4. Green Belt Segment 1b: Yarnton (West of the A44)

Introduction

4.1 This Green Belt segment contains areas of open land to the west of the expanded

settlement of Yarnton (bounded by the strong tree line of Frogwelldown Lane to the

south and west and in Begbroke Wood to the north and the built up area of Yarnton to

the east) and smaller parcels of agricultural land to the south of Yarnton (bounded by

the railway line to the south and east, Yarnton to the north and Cassington Road to the

west). It contains Yarnton Manor House and adjoins the historic core of Yarnton.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Home Close

(Grade II)

• Parish Clerk’s

Home (Grade

II)

• Hill

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

• Byways

(Grade II)

• Barn approx.

14m west of

Merton Garth

(Grade II)

• Merton Garth

(Grade II)

• Paternoster

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

• Exeter

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

• Jackson’s

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

• Outbuilding

approx. 10m

northwest of

Six Bells

• Barn and

attached

bakehouse

approx. 5m

These listed buildings form the historic core of

the settlement of Yarnton. They are, for the

most part, examples of traditional vernacular

architecture with the exception of Byways,

which is an Arts & Crafts house by leading

architect of that movement, CR Ashbee

(utilising traditional materials and building

techniques).

Whilst the setting of these listed buildings has

been altered by the 20th century expansion of

Yarnton they retain a setting, which is largely

rural character with gaps between buildings

providing views out towards open countryside,

including the Green Belt segment. The historic

field pattern to the west of Yarnton has been

more significantly altered to create large arable

fields, whilst that to the south remains intact to a

larger degree.

18

south of

Paternoster

Farmhouse

• Windmill

Farmhouse

and attached

outbuilding

(Grade II)

• Six Bells

(Grade II)

• Yarnton

Manor and

associated

structures

(Grade II* and

II)

• Yarnton

Manor

Gardens

(Grade II

Registered

Park and

Garden of

Special

Historic

Interest)

• Church of St

Bartholomew

and

associated

structures

(Grade I, II*

and II)

• Mead

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

Yarnton Manor is an impressive Jacobean

country house (with earlier medieval origins)

that was largely demolished in the mid-17th

century. The house was carefully restored and

extended in 1897 by Thomas Garner for RF

Franklin (head of the building firm which carried

out much of his building work). The building

has an impressive 17th century interior, altered

by Garner in the late 19th century. The property

has significant architectural and historic interest

derived from its age and associations with the

Spencer family. It is now in use as a college. It

forms a cohesive group with a range of ancillary

buildings and is set within gardens/grounds

reinstated by Garner around the remains of an

early 17th century layout. There is a strong

relationship between house and grounds.

The Church of St. Bartholomew has 12th century

origins but appears to have been rebuilt in the

mid/late 13th century and is an imposing

example of Cotswolds ecclesiastical

architecture set within a historic churchyard with

a range of high quality monuments. It forms

part of a cohesive group with Yarnton Manor

(providing an indication of the manor’s earlier

origins) and is suggestive of a shift in settlement

focus.

Mead Farmhouse is a typical example of high

quality Oxfordshire vernacular architecture

within a complementary farm complex. It is now

in residential use.

It has been noted earlier that the historic field

pattern in the surrounding landscape to the

south of Yarnton survives with a high degree of

integrity. Whilst there has been a limited

amount of incremental 20th century

development in Church Lane, it remains a rural

19

lane with views between gaps in hedgerows

and between buildings. It also provides a

degree of separation between the high status

nucleus of Yarnton Manor/Church of St.

Bartholomew and the potentially later settlement

to the north. This aspect of the segment is also

a tangible link to the settlement’s historic

agricultural origins. Setting is considered to

make an important contribution to the heritage

significance of these heritage assets.

Commentary The Green Belt segment is located to the west and south of the

expanded settlement of Yarnton. To the west, the historic

landscape pattern has been significantly eroded and the 20th

century expansion of Yarnton means that the listed buildings

located on the western edge are comparatively able to

accommodate a more significant degree of change whilst

sustaining their significance.

The southern part of the Green Belt segment makes an important

contribution to a large number of listed buildings, including the

important Yarnton Manor/Church of St Bartholomew group such

that development in this area is likely to result in major harm to

their particular heritage significance.

Heritage

sensitivity

High to medium



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately arable and pasture fields with some

residential properties and Oxford Industrial Park.

2. The segment is located on the southeast slopes of a

minor ridgeline that extends from Bladon Heath. The

topography slopes from 100 metres to the northwest

down to 60 metres in the southeast.


boundaries and drain down towards the River Thames.

4. Vegetation is associated with field boundaries, but these

are gappy in areas due to the intense arable farming.

To the northwest of the segment is Begbroke Wood.

5. Built form is associated with the western edge of

20

Yarnton and Little Blenheim, along with the Mead Farm

and Manor House (to the south) and the property on top

of Spring Hill. An electricity pylon cross the segment to

the south and links with the sub-station at and Oxford

Industrial Park. A railway line runs to the south and

east of the area.

6. A series of footpaths and bridleways (reference 124/2,

420/5 to 420/10, 420/16, 420/21) are located within the

segment include the Shakespeare’s Way National Trail

(reference 420/15 and 420/7). The segment contains

Cassington Road and Church Lane is bound by Rutten

Lane and the A44. Noise from the latter can be heard

within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas


(b) 8. Lowland Village Farmlands

(c) Lower Cherwell Floodplain

(d) 2A. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis) &

3E. Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport

Contribute to the



character areas

(a) The landscape elements within the southern section of

the segment contribute to the 108 Upper Thames Clay

Vales character area.

(b) The landscape elements within the southern section of

the segment contribute to the 8. Lowland Village

Farmlands character area.

(c) The landscape elements within the southern section of

the segment contribute to the Lower Cherwell

Floodplain character area.

(d) The landscape elements within the southern section of

the segment contribute to the 2A. Rivers and Pastoral

Floodplains – Thames (Isis) character area, but the

segment does not contribute to the 3E. Settled and

Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport character area.


components being relatively intact and in average

repair/quality. The hedgerows are of better quality to the

south of segment compared to the north.

Landscape value The southern landscape elements contribute to the recognised

landscape character areas and the segment is not covered by

21

a landscape designation. It is considered that the segment

has a moderate value, due to the raised nature of the northern

segment contributing to the wooded backdrop to Oxford City

Centre and due to it containing a number of designated

heritage assets.


to change

It is considered that the southern area of the segment has a

moderate susceptibility to change and that it could

accommodate development provided features such as

hedgerows and field trees were retained and integrated into

any proposals and the setting of the designated heritage

assets where considered. The northern area has a higher to



been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and

having a ranging landscape value and a moderate


Developing on the northern area of the segment should be

avoided due to its visibility and contribution to the ‘special

character of Oxford’.

Landscape sensitivity Medium

Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Due to the raised nature of the northern area of the segment,

views out are extensive and include glimpsed views to villages

to the east and west. It is also possible to see the spires,

towers and domes of Oxford City Centre from the highest

point, at the junction of two public rights of way (reference

420/14 and 420/15)


• Properties associated with west Yarnton and Little

Blenheim

• Mead Farm and Manor House

• Footpaths and bridleways (reference 124/2, 420/5 to

420/10, 420/16, 420/21)

22

• Shakespeare’s Way National Trail (reference420/15

and 420/7

• Cassington Road and Church Lane

• Rutten Lane and the A44



the segment)

Short and medium distant views can be gained into the

segment from the surrounding area, and long distant views

can be gained to the northern raised area of the segment from

the wider area. The latter is read in conjunction with the

surrounding treed hills.

Value of the views It is considered that the segment has a moderate value within

views from the surrounding area. The northern part of the

segment contributes to the setting and wooded hills of Oxford.


change

The segment has a high to medium susceptibility to change

due to the raised nature of the northern portion. It is

considered that the segment would be tolerant of some

change within the southern portion.

Summary The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to short

and medium distant views to the southern portion of the

segment. Long distant views can be gained to the northern

portion and it is considered that this ridgeline contributes to the

‘special character of Oxford’.

Any development within the segment would need to retain the

hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual effect.

Visual sensitivity High to medium

23

5. Green Belt Segment 2: South of Kidlington

Introduction

5.1 This Green Belt segment is located to the built up area of Garden City and Kidlington. It

has a varied character consisting of large open fields divided by small hedgerows in the

land between Bicester Road and the A34 and a more varied character to the south of

Garden City consisting of large sports pitches and a large field. Significant transport

infrastructure and the built up areas provide clear boundaries to the segment.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Oxford Canal

Conservation

Area

• Stratfield

Farm (Grade

II)

• Kings Arms

PH (Grade II)

The Oxford Canal Conservation Area is

focussed on the waterway and associated

infrastructure. It runs through a range of

contexts and is largely enclosed by trees and

other vegetation. It is now utilised for recreation

and movement of narrowboats for leisure

purposes. The enclosed character of the

conservation area is such that setting makes a

relatively limited contribution to its heritage

significance.

Stratfield Farm is a typical example of modest

Oxfordshire vernacular buildings dating from the

late 17th century. The setting of the listed

building has been altered through the

construction of road infrastructure, Garden City

and formation of large sports pitches although it

maintains some sort of agricultural context.

The Kings Arm PH is a typical example of local

vernacular architecture. It has been

incorporated into the 20th century residential

expansion of Kidlington. It is no longer part of a

small group of rural buildings, although limited

views towards open land in the Green Belt

segment provide an indication of its historic

setting. Setting in this instance is considered to

make a relatively limited contribution to its

heritage significance.

Commentary The Green Belt segment forms part of the setting of a number of

listed buildings. The setting of these listed building has been

24

changed through the process of 20th century change and alteration.

In the case of Stratfield Farm, an element of agricultural use

remains, which makes some contribution to heritage significance.

This is, however, set within a varied context consisting of significant

roads and sports pitches.

Heritage

sensitivity

Medium to Low


Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately pasture agricultural fields, with some

fields left to fallow. The segment also includes the

Stratfield Brake Sports Ground.

2. The area within the segment is relatively flat, between

60 and 70 metres in height, and rises around the A4260

and A4165 roundabout.


boundaries and a number of large ponds are located

adjacent to the Oxford Canal to the west of the segment

4. Dense field boundaries and associated mature field

trees fall within the segment and to the south of the

segment is the woodland associated with Stratfield

Brake

5. Built form is associated with Stratfield Farm and the

sport pitches and the linear settlement of Gosford along

Water Eaton Lane. Electricity pylons run to the south of

the segment.

6. One footpath (reference 229/4) crosses the eastern

boundary of the segment and the Oxford Greenbelt Way

National Trail (reference 265/33) follows the Oxford

Canal, beyond the segments western boundary. The

segment contains the A4165, A4260 and Bicester Road.

Noise from these roads can be heard within the

segment.

.Landscape character area

(a) National

(b) County


(b) 17. Vale Farmland

25

(c) District


Character Areas

(c) Lower Cherwell Floodplain & Otmoor Lowlands

(d) 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap

Contribute to the



character areas




to the 17. Vale Farmland character area.


to both the Lower Cherwell Floodplain and Otmoor

Lowlands character areas.

(d) The landscape elements within the segment contribute

to the 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap character

area.

Landscape condition Moderate condition, due to the segment’s landscape


repair/quality.





to change

Moderate to low, due to the segment accommodating the

development without affecting the maintenance of the baseline

situation and the achievement of existing landscape planning

policies and strategies.


been identified as having a minor landscape value and a




the dense hedgerows and mature field trees will be retained

as part of any emerging proposals.


Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal






26

and/or art and literature the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Due to the flat nature of the topography and the dense

vegetation associated with the field boundaries views out of

the segment are limited to entrances and gaps in the

hedgerows within the immediate area. The A44165 is located

on a raised embankment so views are possible into the north

eastern fields.


• Properties to the south of Kidlington and Gosford

• Footpath (reference 229/4)

• Oxford Greenbelt Way National Trail (reference

265/33) and the Oxford Canal

• A4165, A4260 and Bicester Road



the segment)

The majority of views into the segment are prevented by the

dense vegetation associated with the surrounding field

boundaries and woodland. It is assumed that views can be

gained through gaps in the hedgerows of A4165, A4260 and

Bicester Road, but these views will be fleeting.


within the surrounding area.


change

To the northeast, the segment has a medium to low

susceptibility to change whilst the southern part is of a low

susceptibility. It is considered that areas of the segment would

be tolerant to change, particularly to the south.


vegetation associated with the field boundaries. The

vegetation associated with Stratfield Brake and the A34

creates a visual boundary between Kidlington and the north of

Oxford. Any development within the segment would need to

retain this vegetation in order to reduce its visual effect.


27

6. Green Belt Segment 3a: North of Oxford (East of the A4165)

Introduction

6.1 This is a large Green Belt segment located to the east of the A4165. It is predominantly

agricultural in character with a complex pattern of large fields

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Water Eaton

Manor group

(Grade II*

and Grade II)

• Middle Farm

(Grade II)

• St

Friedeswide

Farmhouse

(Grade II*)

and

associated

wall (Grade

II)

Water Eaton Manor is a highly significant

manorial complex dating from the late 16th

century and expanded during the 17th – 19

th

centuries. Its interior contains a range of

historic details and finishes. It was altered and

restored by TG Jackson and by GF Bodley in

1905, when he rented the property. The

property derives intrinsic historic interest from

its fabric as well as its associations with

individuals of note. It forms an impressive

group with the chapel and subsidiary buildings.

Middle Farm is an early/mid-18th century

building of a vernacular character that

historically formed part of the Water Eaton

Estate (most likely erected as a result of estate

improvements).

St. Friedeswide Farmhouse is a vernacular

building of 16th century date, possibly altered

during the course of the 17th century and

extended in the 20th century. The interior of the

property remains largely intact with elements

such as the cross-passage legible. It

incorporates details similar to those used at

Water Eaton Manor suggesting some historic

connection.

The listed buildings are set within a

predominantly rural and agricultural context.

The field pattern is complex, albeit seemingly

altered from its historic origins; however, it

maintains a distinction between the listed

buildings and built development of Cutteslowe

to the southeast, the A34 to the north and

Oxford Road to the west. This context also

provides a connection to their historic origins

within a managed rural landscape.

28

Commentary This Green Belt segment is located to the west of a range of listed

buildings, including two listed at Grade II*. It has been noted that

the Green Belt segment contributes positively to the significance of

these heritage assets. Any development in this area is likely to

erode the contribution made by setting to the significance of these

listed buildings, including the approach through agricultural land,

thus causing harm to the significance of these buildings. There

may be scope for limited extension to the north of Cutteslowe in a

manner which would sustain the significance of these heritage

assets.

Heritage

sensitivity

High



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement


also includes the Water Eaton Park and Ride.

2. The topography within the segment slopes gradually

from the west down to the east from 75 metres to 60

metres.


boundaries and drain into the River Cherwell, which is

located to the east of the segment.

4. The vegetation is associated with field boundaries and

varies in quality with unmanaged hedgerows and

mature field trees to the west and sparse hedgerows

associated with arable fields to the south.

5. Built form is associated with the Water Eaton Park and

Ride and a number of farmsteads and Cutteslowe Park.

Electricity pylons cross the segment from the west to

the southeast.

6. A series of footpaths and bridleways (reference 229/1,

229/4 to 229/9, and 320/54) are located within the

segment. The Oxford Greenbelt Way National Trail

(reference 229/5 and 229/17) runs adjacent to the

segment’s eastern boundary. The segment does not

contain any roads, but its western boundary is defined

29

by the A4165 and its south by the A40. Noise from the

latter can be heard within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas


(b) 1. Alluvial Lowlands & 17. Vale Farmland


(d) 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap & 2B. Rivers

and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell

Contribute to the



character areas




to both the 1. Alluvial Lowlands (to the east) and 17.

Vale Farmland (to the west) character areas.


to both the Lower Cherwell Floodplain (to the north and

east) and Otmoor Lowlands character areas (to the

south and west).


to both the 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap and

2B. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell

character area.


components being relatively intact and in average repair. The

hedgerows are of varying condition.

Landscape value Moderate value, due to the landscape contributing to the

recognised landscape character areas and to the number of

designated heritage assets located within the segment.


to change


susceptibility to change and that it could accommodate

development provided features such as hedgerows and field

trees were retained and integrated into any proposals.



having a moderate landscape value.




proposals.

30


Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Views out of the segment are open to the agricultural fields to

the east and the highway network to the north and south, but

are contained to the west by the vegetation associated with

the A4165 and the suburb of Cutteslowe on the edge of

Oxford.


• Properties to the northeast of Cutteslowe

• Footpath and bridleways (reference 229/1, 229/4

to 229/9, and 320/54

• Oxford Greenbelt Way National Trail (229/5 and

229/17))

• Water Eaton Park and Ride

• Middle Farm, Water Eaton Manor, St Frideswide

Farm and Cutteslowe Park

• A4165, A34 and A40.



the segment)

Glimpsed views can be gained into the segment from the A34,

from the north and partial from the agricultural fields to the

east. The remaining views are prevented by the dense

vegetation associated with the surrounding boundaries to the

south and west.

Value of the views It is considered that the segment has a medium to low value

within views within the surrounding area.


change

To the east the segment has a medium susceptibility to

change and to the west a medium to low susceptibility. It is

considered that areas of the segment would be tolerant to

change, particularly to the southwest around Cutteslowe.

Summary The visibility of this segment is reasonably contained by the

vegetation associated with the settlement and roads. Open

views are possible to the agricultural fields to the east due to

31

the area being located within a flood plain and being intensely

arable farmed.

Any development within the segment would need to retain and

enhance the hedgerow planting in order to reduce its visual

effect.

Visual sensitivity Medium to low

32

7. Green Belt Segment 3b: North of Oxford (West of the A4165)

Introduction

7.1 This is a heavily divided Green Belt segment consists of land associated with North

Oxford Golf Club and land parcels divided by transport infrastructure, including the

Oxford Canal, A34 and railway lines.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Wolvercote

and Godstow

Conservation

Area

The majority of the Wolvercote and Godstow

Conservation Area is located to the west of the

railway line. However, a small part is located to

the north and includes a small area of historic

settlement, Goose and Wolvercote Greens and

pasture (including part which is included in the

Green Belt segment).

Wolvercote with Godstow Conservation Area

comprises three distinct areas, all of which have

their own character.

The predominant character of the conservation

area is one of green spaces interspersed with

traditional vernacular buildings creating a rural

character to the settlements.

That part of the conservation area within and in

close proximity to the Green Belt segment

consists of Upper Wolvercote and Wolvercote

Common.

The character of this part of the conservation

area is that of a rural village with a range of

vernacular properties overlooking Wolvercote

Green. Existing mature trees and soft

landscaping, including areas of open space

such as Goose Green, contributes positively to

the character of this part of the conservation

area. The conservation area appraisal notes

that elevated views from the canal bridge which

provides visual links to the riparian environment

of the canal and a number of attractive rural

views, interrupted by the noise and activity of

vehicular traffic.

The character of this part of the conservation

area is, however, not consistent with the

33

presence of later, non-descript development

fronting Godstow Road of a different scale and

materiality. These later elements, generally, do

not make a positive contribution to the character

and appearance of the conservation area.

To the south of the railway and canal is Lower

Wolvercote, which developed along Godstow

Road, constrained by the presence of the

floodplain. As noted in the conservation area

appraisal this part of the conservation area is

visually and physically separated from Upper

Wolvercote, and the Northern Gateway, by the

railway line and canal.

The conservation area, generally, enjoys an

attractive setting created by the areas of

extensive open space to the south and east,

most notably Port Meadow, however the setting

does include significant transport infrastructure

to the west and suburban north Oxford.

This part of the Green Belt segment forms part

of the former rural context to the conservation

area. It is maintained as an area of pasture and

unmanaged scrubland situated between

significant transport infrastructure, including

substantial elevated sections of road. This part

of the Green Belt segment has an enclosed

character due to this transport infrastructure,

development on Godstow Road and the heavily

landscaped bridleway which runs broadly north-

south (although this landscape thins to the north

and will vary in density throughout the year).

The underlying field pattern has been

significantly eroded during the course of the 20th

century, which has eroded its intrinsic historic

landscape value.

By virtue of its open character as pasture this

part of the segment makes a positive, albeit

limited, contribution to the significance of the

Wolvercote with Godstow Conservation Area.

Such a contribution is derived from its open

character but has been significantly diminished

through late 20th century changes to the

underlying landscape structure and

development. Accordingly, any such

contribution is of a magnitude less than that,

associated with the open land of Port Meadow,

which is fundamental to the significance of the

conservation area.

34

Commentary The majority of this Green Belt segment does not contribute

positively to the significance of any heritage asset. A small portion

at the southwest corner, however, contributes positively to the

significance of the Wolvercote with Godstow Conservation Area.

The development of this part of the segment is likely to have a

localised and very minor adverse impact on the significance of the

conservation area by virtue of a change in the character of the land

and an erosion of the existing (modern) pastoral character. Any

such minor adverse effect will be both direct, through the

development of previously undeveloped land within a conservation

area, where green spaces are an intrinsic element of its character

and appearance, and indirect via a change in setting.

Given the strongly contained character of this part of the Green

Belt segment and limited contribution to the conservation area any

harm would have to be very low.

Heritage

sensitivity

Low to medium



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately agricultural fields framed by a series of

transport interchanges. The segment also includes the

North Oxford Golf Course.

2. The topography within this segment is undulating

between 75 metres and 60 metres. The A34 set within

a cutting and the A4165 and A4260 are raised.


boundaries and there are a number of water retention

basins associated with the road network.

4. The area includes swathes of woodland planting

associated with the road network and the golf course.

5. Built form is associated with Peartree Interchange and

Park and Ride and Frieze Farm. A railway line also

crosses the area to the east and the main line out of

Oxford to the north defines the segments western

boundary.

6. Public rights of way within the segment include the

35

Oxford Canal Walk National Trail (reference 229/11 and

229/16) and a footpath (reference 229/10). The

segment contains A34, A44, and A4260 and is bound

by the A4165 to the east and A40 to the west. Noise

from these roads can be heard within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas

(a) Upper Thames Clay Vales

(b) 17. Vale Farmland


(d) 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap & 2A. Rivers

and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis)

Contribute to the



character areas




to the 17. Vale Farmland (to the west) character area.


to the Lower Cherwell Floodplain and Otmoor Lowlands

character areas.


to the 2B. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell

character area, but not the 1C. Lowland Clay Vales –

Gosford Gap character area.



repair/quality.





to change

Low, due to the segment accommodating the development

without affecting the maintenance of the baseline situation and

the achievement of existing landscape planning policies and

strategies.


been identified as being in a minor landscape value and a low




the dense woodland shelter belts associated with the road

36

network will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Landscape sensitivity Low

Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Views out of the segment are contained to short distance

views due to the intervening vegetation. The raised areas of

A4165 and A4260 provide glimpsed kinetic views out to the

immediate agricultural fields


• Properties located to the north of Oxford.

• Frieze Farm

• North Oxford Golf Course

• Peartree Interchange and Park and Ride

• Oxford Canal Walk National Trail (reference

229/11 and 229/16)

• Footpath (reference 229/10).

• A34, A44, A4260, A4165 and A40.

• Railway line



the segment)


dense vegetation associated with the surrounding transport

corridors. It is assumed that kinetic glimpsed views can be

gained through gaps in this vegetation, but these views will be

fleeting.




change

The segment has a medium to low susceptibility to change

and it is considered that areas of the segment would be

tolerant to change.


37

vegetation associated with the transport corridors. The

vegetation associated with Stratfield Brake and the A34

creates a visual boundary between Kidlington and the north of

Oxford.




38

8. Green Belt Segment 4: Wick/Bayswater Farm

Introduction

8.1 This Green Belt segment is bounded to the south by the Bayswater Brook and contains

a number of historic farm complexes, fields of a variety of sizes defined by hedgerows,

caravan sites and the Oxford Crematorium and Gardens of Remembrance.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Wick

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

• Wick

Farmhouse,

Well House

(Grade II*)

• Wick

Farmhouse,

eastern pair

of gate piers

and wall,

approx. 60m

to the south

(Grade II)

• Wick

Farmhouse,

western pair

of gate piers

and wall,

approx. 60m

to the south

(Grade II)

• Wick

Farmhouse,

barn approx.

400m to

north

• Stowford

Farmhouse

(Grade II)

The Wick Farmhouse group is an attractive

example of a vernacular farm complex built of

local materials and dating from the 18th century

onwards. Most likely a dairy farm with origins in

the 13th century (if not earlier) it is also of

historic interest as the site of a historic

farmstead.

Of particular architectural interest is the well

house, of late 17th century and early 18

th

century date. It is constructed in an ornate

Baroque style and is reflective of the need for

large amounts of water in operating a dairy farm

but also the status of the farm/owner at this

period.

Wick Farm seemingly remains in agricultural

use, which enhances its historic value, and its

location within a rural context contributes to the

significance of the listed buildings.

The presence of a caravan site in close

proximity to the listed buildings and the historic

entry point to the farm together with significant

20th century residential development to the

south has eroded this agricultural context to a

limited extent and detract from the significance

of the listed buildings.

Stowford Farmhouse dates from the early-mid

17th century and was subsequently extended in

the 19th century. It is a good example of

vernacular architecture and derives historic

39

• Bayswater

Mill (Grade

II)

interest from its age. There is evidential

potential associated with the Site as the

probable site of the medieval settlement of

Stowford. The change to residential use and

formation of associated domestic grounds has

eroded its connection to the wider agricultural

context; however, it remains a tangible link to its

historic origins and therefore contributes

positively to its significance. The nearby

residential development has eroded the

agricultural context and does not contribute

positively to its significance.

Bayswater Mill is an 18th century watermill (now

in domestic use) constructed of local limestone

with an old clay tile roof. Despite its conversion

to a residential use (and later additions) it

retains its historic industrial character and is of

significance as an example of an industrial

archaeology and the on-going development of

this technology/building typology. Its setting

has been compromised by the siting of a mobile

home park on the historic lane leading to the

mill and presence of 20th century residential

development to the south. However, its

proximity and siting relating to the Bayswater

Brook is an integral element of its historic

interest as a mill. There may be evidence of

associated water management in the local area,

which could contribute to the significance of the

listed building.

Commentary This Green Belt segment comprises agricultural land, which forms

part of the setting of a number of listed buildings.

The land to the west of Bayswater Road forms part of the historic

agricultural setting of Wick Farm and contributes strongly to its

significance as a working historic farm. As the continued operation

of the listed building as a farm contributes to its heritage

significance if a reduction in this land threatens its financial viability,

is likely to give rise to a loss of heritage significance.

The land to the east of Bayswater Road makes less of a

contribution to the particular significance of the identified heritage

assets although further work is needed to determine the

archaeological potential associated with the probable location of

the medieval settlement of Stowford and the water management

system associated with Bayswater Mill. This part of the segment

forms a minor part of elevated views from the Stanton St John

40

Conservation Area to the northeast. Given the separation

distances and interposing topography and landscaping it forms a

comparatively minor element of the conservation area’s wider rural

setting.

Heritage

sensitivity

High



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement


also includes Oxford Crematorium, an allotment, Wick

Farm and caravan park, Barton Sport Pitches and the

ribbon development associated with Bayswater Road.

2. The segment is located on the slopes of shallow valley,

which follows the Bayswater Brook, which runs east to

west. At its highest point the topography is 110 metres,

to the northeast, and it drops to around 65 metres within

the centre of the segment before rising to 85 metres

along the southern boundary. The land rises up further

to the south towards Headington and the John Radcliffe

Hospital.


boundaries and drain into the Bayswater Brook, which

in turn drains into the River Cherwell.

4. Vegetation is predominantly associated with the field

boundaries and contains a number of mature field trees.

To the north is a small copse and tree belt associated

with Wick Farm and to the far north is Wick and Sidlings

Copse.

5. The settlement of Barton is located to the southeast of

the segment and built form ranges from one to two

storeys in height. A number of electricity pylons cross

the segment.

6. A number of footpaths and bridleways (reference 123/7,

123/11, 123/14, 123/19, 201/10, 201/11, 320/57, 320/72

and 363/17) crosses the segment. The segment does

not contain any roads, but is bound by the A40 (which

runs at grade) to the north and the residential streets of

Barton to the east. Noise from the A40 can be heard

41

within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas

(a) 109 Midvale Ridge

(b) 19. Wooded Estatelands

(c) 1. Oxford Heights

(d) 2B. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell & 6C.

Enclosing Limestone Hills – East Oxford Heights

Contribute to the



character areas


to the 109 Midvale Ridge character area.


to the 19. Wooded Estatelands character area.

(c) The landscape elements within the northern area of the

segment contribute to the 1. Oxford Heights character

area.


to both the 2B. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains –

Cherwell and 6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills – East

Oxford Heights character areas.


components being intact and in average repair. The

hedgerows are of good condition.

Landscape value Moderate to minor value, due to the landscape contributing to

the recognised landscape character areas and the number of

designated heritage assets located within the segment.


to change


susceptibility to change and that it could accommodate

development provided features such as hedgerows and field

trees were retained and integrated into any proposals.


been identified as being in a minor landscape value and a





proposals.


42

Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Within the lower southern area of the segment views are

contained by the topography. As the land rises to the northern

area views are possible to the surrounding landscape to the

south and east. The views to the north and west are broadly

contained due to the topography and vegetation associated

with the field boundaries. Glimpsed views to the north of the

segment are possible along Bayswater Road.


• Properties associated with Barton and the north of

Headington

• Wick Farm and caravan park

• Barton Sport Pitches

• Footpaths and bridleways (reference 123/7, 123/11,

123/14, 123/19, 201/10, 201/11, 320/57, 320/72 and

363/17)

• Oxford Crematorium

• Barton allotment

• Bayswater Road

• A40



the segment)

Open, short distance views can be gained from the adjacent

properties, roads and public rights of way into the segment. It

is assumed views from the properties to the north of Barton

are contained due to the dense boundary planting associated

with fields, the views becomes open again to the south on the

northern slopes of Headington.

Glimpsed to no views can be gained in the long distance from

the north and south due to the existing vegetation. Open

views can be gained in the medium to long distance from the

west onto the eastern area of segment due to its raised

nature.

43

Value of the views It is assumed that people use the footpaths to gain views of

the local Oxfordshire countryside, although the southern and

western areas of the segment provides local views. It is also

assumed that upper section of the segment is visible from the

northern residential area of Headington.

It is considered that the segment has a medium value within

views within the surrounding area.


change

The segment has a medium susceptibility to change due to the

nature and activities of the visual receptors and the visibility

consisting of partial to glimpsed views of the surrounding

countryside. It is considered that in general the northern area

of the segment would not be tolerant to change, but the lower

southern area would be.

Summary The visibility of the segment increases to the north due to the

topography rising. Views to and from the lower southern area

are contained by the existing boundary vegetation and built

form of the northern edge of Barton.



Visual sensitivity Medium

44

9. Green Belt Segment 5a: Wheatley (North of the London Road)

Introduction

9.1 This Green Belt segment can be considered as two parts. The first part is located to the

northwest of Wheatley and consists of open farmland to the south of Shotover House,

west of the A40. The second part consists of land to the north of Wheatley and consists

of open farmland and the grounds associated with the Wheatley Community Education

Centre and Oxford Brookes University Campus.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Shotover

Park Group

(Grade I,

II*and II)

• Shotover

Park (Grade I

Registered

Park and

Garden of

Special

Historic

Interest)

Shotover Park house dates from 1715-20,

almost certainly to designs by William

Townsend. It is located at the centre of

Shotover Park, a complex and layered historic

landscape with its origins as part of the

medieval Royal Forest of Shotover. The house

and park form the core of a group of heritage

assets which are regarded as an outstanding

example of a polite, designed landscape which

is integrated with the house and includes a

range of structures which were designed to

complement the aesthetic and functional

aspects of the landscape, including a number

by William Kent.

The group also includes Home Farm, which

whilst not within the registered landscape forms

an integral element of the 19th century estate

and as a complete example of a model farm is

reflective of the growing interest in improved

agriculture.

The setting of the group is largely rural in

character, reflecting its historic separation and

sense of isolation and contrasts strongly with

the designed/managed character of the

registered park. The presence of Manor Farm

indicates the shifts in attitudes to agriculture and

its importance to the estate. This aspect of

setting contributes positively to the significance

of the heritage assets. The A40 has truncated

the designed landscape and the noise and

activity associated with it intrudes on its

aesthetic qualities. Accordingly, it is not

45

• Wheatley

Conservation

Area

• Holton Park

(Numerous

Grade II and

2no.

Scheduled

Monuments)

• St.

Bartholomew

’s Church

(Grade I)

considered to contribute positively to the

significance of these heritage assets.

The Wheatley Conservation Area is an

attractive example of a Cotswold village located

at the bottom of a valley. It forms a picturesque

group of vernacular buildings arranged around

the historic street pattern. The Howe, the slope

to the south of Wheatley, contains allotments

and the marks of clay, ochre and iron workings.

On all sides, the way out of Wheatley involves a

steep climb. The elevated context affords views

of the conservation area in the valley bottom.

The historic settlement has been significantly

expanded during the course of the 20th century

with this later building stock being of no heritage

interest. Together with the A40 to the north, this

housing has eroded the sense of the settlement

being located within a rural context (although

this rural setting remains more apparent at the

western edge of the conservation area) and

does not contribute positively to the significance

of the conservation area.

Beyond the settlement boundary appears to be

areas of historic ridge and furrow; extensive to

the south and east but more limited to the

northwest.

Holton Park is a historic estate set within a

medieval enclosure, likely a deer park. It

contains evidence of at least four phases of high

status occupation with two clearly legible

medieval moat sites and the remains of another

potential moated site near St. Bartholomew’s

Church. The area around the church is the likely

site of the original settlement of Holton, which

was relocated during the enclosure of the deer

park. The church is of late 12th century origins,

with successive medieval origins and despite

restoration in 1844, retains relatively complete

medieval fabric. The existing Holton Park house

and group is largely late 18th and early 19

th

century in date and are a cohesive group of

structures reflecting changing architectural

tastes from classical to Gothic (the house being

a mix of the two). The estate as a whole is of

significant historic and evidential interest as a

46

layered, historic landscape and whilst this has

been eroded through the construction of the

A40, Wheatley Community Education Centre

and Oxford Brookes University Campus the

significant structural historic and landscape

elements remain legible.

The largely rural setting of Holton Park

contributes positively to the significance of the

assets by virtue of the contrast between the

medieval enclosure and relocated settlement, its

working agricultural context, the landscape

associated with the manorial complex and as

remnants of the wider managed landscape of

which it formed a part.

Commentary The Green Belt segment makes a strong positive contribution to

the significance of a wide range of heritage assets, including those

considered to be of exceptional interest in terms of their evidential,

aesthetic and historical values. Given the length of

occupation/management of this landscape archaeological

assessment is also advisable.

It is unlikely that development could be accommodated within this

Green Belt segment without resulting in a significant loss of

significance, with the potential to result in substantial harm for the

purposes of the NPPF.

Heritage

sensitivity

High



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately irregular agricultural fields used for both

pasture and arable. The segment also includes the

village of Holton, Wheatley Park schools and Oxford

Brookes University

2. The segment is located on the northern slopes of a

valley and the landform ranges from 100 metres to the

northwest to 70 metres to the southeast.


boundaries along with field ponds, the former drains into

47

the River Thame.

4. Vegetation is associated with field boundaries and

properties

5. The segment includes a range of built form ranging from

a stable block to a residential high-rise tower associated

with Oxford Brooks University. Electricity pylons cross

the segment to the east.

6. Footpaths and bridleways within the segment include

(reference 251/1, 251/2, 251/4, 251/5 and 251/8 to 10).

The segment contains a loop road that connects Holton

with Wheatley and is bound by the A40. Noise from the



(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas


(b) 12. Rolling Farmlands


(d) 6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills – East Oxford Heights

Contribute to the



character areas




to the 12. Rolling Farmlands character area.


to the Oxford Heights character area.


to the 6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills – East Oxford

Heights character area.


components being intact and in average repair/quality.

Landscape value The landscape elements contribute to the recognised



has a moderate value, due to the number of designated

heritage assets located within the segment.


to change

It is considered that the segment has a high to moderate

susceptibility to change and would tolerate limited change

48


been identified as being in a moderate value and a high to

moderate susceptibility to change.

The segment contributes to the setting of Wheatley, but does

not contribute to the ‘special character of Oxford’. It is

assumed that the landscape elements such as the hedgerows

will be retained as part of any emerging proposals.

Landscape sensitivity High to medium

Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Views out of the segment are limited to local views due to the

intervening vegetation associated with the surrounding field

boundaries and properties gardens along with the undulating

landform. Gaps in the vegetation frame views of the

undulating countryside of Oxfordshire.


• Properties associated with the village of Holton

and Wheatley

• Surrounding farmsteads

• Wheatley Park schools and Oxford Brookes

University

• Footpaths and bridleways (reference 251/1,

251/2, 251/4, 251/5 and 251/8 to 10).

• A40



the segment)


intervening vegetation, but the roofs of Holton and the tower

associated with Oxford Brookes University can be seen from

the southern raised area of Wheatley.

Value of the views It is considered that the segment has a moderate value within


Visual susceptibility to The segment has a medium susceptibility to change due to the


49

change consisting of glimpsed views of the surrounding countryside. It

is considered that in general the northern area of the segment

would not be tolerant to change, but the lower southern area

adjacent to the A40 would be.


vegetation associated with the field boundaries and properties.

The segment plays a moderate value within views and has a

medium susceptibility to change. Any development within the

segment would need to retain the hedgerow planting in order

to reduce its visual effect.


50

10. Green Belt Segment 5b: Wheatley (South of the London Road)

Introduction

10.1 This Green Belt segment is located to the south and east of the expanded settlement of

Wheatley. It stretches in an arc from the A40 in the east to Littleworth Road/Windmill

Lane in the west. It consists, principally, of open agricultural land with areas of smaller

enclosures and the London Road industrial estate.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Wheatley

Conservation

Area

(including the

listed

buildings

contained

within it)

• Wheatley

Manor House

(Grade II*)

The Wheatley Conservation Area is an

attractive example of a Cotswold village located

at the bottom of a valley. It forms a picturesque

group of vernacular buildings arranged around

the historic street pattern. The Howe, the slope

to the south of Wheatley, contains allotments

and the marks of clay, ochre and iron workings.

On all sides, the way out of Wheatley involves a

steep climb. The elevated context affords views

of the conservation area in the valley bottom.

The historic settlement has been significantly

expanded during the course of the 20th century,

with this later building stock being of no heritage

interest. Together with the A40 to the north, this

housing has eroded the sense of the settlement

being located within a rural context (although

this rural setting remains more apparent at the

western edge of the conservation area) and

does not contribute positively to the significance

of the conservation area.

Beyond the settlement boundary appears to be

areas of historic ridge and furrow; extensive to

the south and east but more limited to the

northwest.

Wheatley Manor is a high quality example of a

late 16th century manor house (on, or in close

proximity to the site of the medieval manor) that

was altered and extended in the 17th century. It

is an example of a high status, late medieval

manor and illustrates the transition from an

established medieval building tradition to a

Stuart/early modern one. It is of historic interest

51

through its fabric as well as architectural interest

as a high quality example of this building type.

The manor house is a core element of the

historic function of Wheatley and is an integral

element of the settlement. Whilst 20th century

development has encroached on the grounds of

the manor it remains largely seperate, set

behind boundary walls and within mature

landscaped grounds. The field patterns to the

south of the listed building are largely historic in

character with some evidence of ridge and

furrow ploughing (demonstrating the historic

relationship between settlement and wider

context), historic hedgerows as well as the line

of the dismantled railway. This aspect of setting

is considered to contribute positively to the

significance of the listed building.

Commentary The Green Belt segment is largely outside the boundary of the

Wheatley Conservation Area; however, a small section located to

the south of Wheatley Manor is located within it.

That part of the segment located to the west of Station Road is

considered to have a strong visual and historic relationship with the

conservation area and is reflective of the close historic link between

the settlement and associated agricultural land prior to its 20th

century expansion. Development in this location is unlikely to

sustain the significance of the conservation area and Wheatley

Manor.

To the east of Station Road/Ladder Hill to the south of Kelham Hall

Drive/Beech Road/Elm Close and to the west of Castle Hill Farm is

an area of legible historic farmland (evidenced by historic

hedgerows and alignments) with evidence of ridge and furrow.

Evidence of ridge and furrow and pre-19th century fields (evidenced

by the alignment of the former railway) remains, although in a more

fragmented condition. Whilst separated from the conservation area

by 20th residential development it forms an experiential part of its

setting and illustrates the former historic connections to a working

agricultural context. It is considered to contribute positively to its

setting.

The wedge of land to the north of London Road and to the north of

the former railway line is considered to make less of a contribution

to the significance of the conservation area. The historic landscape

framework has been eroded through more extensive 20th century

development and the proximity of the A40. The capacity of the

grade II listed Wheatley Bridge will require assessment as part of

the consideration of the appropriateness of this land for

development.

52

Heritage

sensitivity

Medium



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement


also includes a number of farmsteads and the southern

residential area of Wheatley.

2. The segment is located on the southern slopes of a

valley and the landform ranges from 130 metres to the

southwest to 70 metres to the northeast.


boundaries and drain into the River Thame.

4. Vegetation is associated with field boundaries and

Coombe Wood.

5. The segment includes predominately detached two

storey residential buildings. Electricity pylons cross the

segment from the southwest to the east.

6. Footpaths and bridleways within the segment include

(reference 251/11, 256/2, 256/5, 256/6, and 407/1 to

407/8)

7. The segment contains Ladder Hill and Windmill Lane

and is bound to the north by the A40. Noise from the



(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas




(d) 7A. High Plains – Shotover Plain

Contribute to the






53

character areas to the 12. Rolling Farmlands character area.


to the Oxford Heights character area.


to the 7A. High Plains – Shotover Plain.


components being intact and in average repair/quality.

Landscape value The landscape elements contribute to the recognised



has a moderate to low value.


to change

It is considered that the segment has a moderate susceptibility

to change and would tolerate some change provided that the

landscape elements that contribute to the various character

areas are retained.


been identified as being in a moderate to low condition and a

moderate value.

The segment contributes to the setting of Wheatley, but not to

the ‘special character of Oxford’.


Visual appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

The segment is located on a minor ridgeline that wraps around

the southern area of Wheatley and contributes to the village’s

setting. Views from the top of this ridgeline to the south of the

segment, near Castle Hill Farm, provide extensive long

distance views out to Oxfordshire’s countryside. To the north

of the segment, within the lower landform, views are contained

to glimpsed local views by the surrounding field vegetation.


• Properties associated with Wheatley and

54

Littleworth

• Various farmsteads

• Footpaths and bridleways (reference 251/11,

256/2, 256/5, 256/6, and 407/1 to 407/8)

• Ladder Hill and Windmill Lane

• A40



the segment)

Open views can be gained in the medium to long distance

from the south and east of the segment.

Value of the views It is assumed that people use the footpaths and bridleways to

gain views of the local Oxfordshire countryside. It is also

assumed that upper section of the segment is visible from the

residential area of Wheatley.

The upper segment provides a wooded ridgeline that frames

the south of the village. It is therefore considered that the

segment has a medium value within views within the

surrounding area.


change


due to the nature and activities of the visual receptors and the

visibility consisting of partial or open views. It is considered

that in general the segment would not be tolerant to change,

although the lower southern area could be tolerant of some.


rising topography. The upper slope of the segment provides a

wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Wheatley.

Views to and from the lower southern area are contained by

the existing boundary vegetation and built form of the northern

edge of Wheatley.


55

11. Green Belt Segment 6a: South of Grenoble Road

Introduction

11.1 This segment is located to the south of Blackbird Leys and is bounded to the north by

Grenoble Road, to the east by the B480, to the west by the A4074 and to the south by

fields. It contains mainly open fields, with few features. The area contains sewage

works, a caravan park, Sandfordbrake Electricity sub-station and Sandfordbrake Farm.

Shakespeare’s Way (National Trail referenced 335/13 & 335/11) is located in the

northern part of the segment.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• Toot Baldon

Conservation

Area

• The Manor

House (Grade

II*)

• Court House

(Grade II)

• The Manor

House

Garden Wall

to the North

(Grade II)

• The Manor

House

Northern Pair

of Gate Piers

approx. 2m to

the East

(Grade II)

• The Manor

House

Southern Pair

of Gate Piers

approx. 2m to

the East

(Grade II)

• The Manor

House

Granary

approx. 30m

to the West

The Toot Baldon Conservation Area is a

quintessential Cotswolds hamlet, set on a ridge

overlooking the river valley in which Oxford is

located. It forms a picturesque group of

vernacular buildings arranged around the

historic street pattern and accessed via sinuous,

narrow country lanes. The settlement is located

with an agricultural context, albeit one which

includes substantial 20th century elements

including electricity pylons, residential and

industrial development associated with Oxford’s

expansion.

The building stock within the conservation area

is principally vernacular and rural in character.

The conservation area’s elevated position

provides wide views of the surrounding

countryside with a number of buildings

seemingly orientated to take advantage of this

prospect, including The Manor House. This

landscape setting reinforces the rural origins of

the settlement and contributes positively to its

significance.

56

(Grade II)

• The Crown

Public House

(Grade II)

• Garsington

Conservation

Area, which

includes a

range of

grade II listed

buildings; and

• Garsington

Manor House

(Grade II*)

• Garsington

Manor (Grade

II)

The Garsington Conservation Area is focussed

on the historic core of the settlement, which was

expanded significantly during the course of the

20th century, to the north and south. The historic

street pattern survives and the varied building

stock, including vernacular buildings and later

18th and 19

th century additions result in a varied

character. The conservation area’s elevated

position provides views westwards, northwards

and eastwards across falling ground across a

largely rural context, albeit one which includes

substantial 20th century additions including

electricity pylons, residential and industrial

development associated with Oxford’s

expansion. This landscape setting reinforces the

rural origins of the settlement and contributes

positively to its significance.

Of particular note are Garsington Manor and its

gardens. Garsington Manor has its origins in the

16th and 17

th century (and is a high quality

example of emerging polite architecture in the

area) whilst the early 20th century gardens,

developed by Philip and Lady Ottoline, in an

Italianate style, form a remarkable part of its

setting. The register entry notes that there are

long, possibly designed, panoramic views to the

south to the Witteham Clumps on the Sinodun

Hills and to the Berkshire Downs beyond.

Commentary This Green Belt segment is located within the setting of a large

number of designated heritage assets. Whilst the segment is

located some distance from these assets any development will

introduce additional built form (with associated activity) into a

largely rural context, which generally makes a positive contribution

to the significance of these heritage assets.

Any additional development would, however, be located in an area

of landscape that includes significant 20th century residential

development, electricity pylons and other structures and as such its

contribution to the significance of these heritage assets has been

diminished.

The nature of the particular significance of the Garsington Manor

House and the layout/disposition of its Gardens means that this

57

Green Belt segment does not make a significant material

contribution to its heritage significance.

Heritage

sensitivity

Medium



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement


also includes a caravan park, a sewage works and

Sandford Brake electricity substation. The latter is set

within an area of woodland.

2. Relatively flat with the landform undulating between 60

metres to 70 metres. The segment is located in the low

lands of the River Thames.


boundaries and drain northwards to Littlemore Brook

and into the River Thames.

4. Vegetation is of varied quality and ranges between

gappy hedgerows to wooded drainage ditches. Bushy

Copse is located to the south of the segment and

Sandford Brake Wood to the east.

5. Within the segment, built form is associated with

Sandfordbrake Farm and a caravan park, along with the

infrastructure associated with the sewage works and

electricity substation. A number of electricity pylons

cross the segment.


National Trail of Shakespeare’s Way (reference 335/13

& 335/11) and a number of footpaths and bridleways

(reference 335/13, 335/12, 223/27, 223/26 and 223/39).

The segment is bound by Watlington Road to the east,

the A4075 to the west and Grenoble Road to the north.

Noise from the A4075 can be heard within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County


(b) 1. Alluvial Lowlands

58

(c) District


Character Areas

(c) 2. Nuneham Courtney Ridge

(d) 5B. Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys & 8A.

Clay Vales – Sandford Vale

Contribute to the



character areas



(b) The landscape elements contribute to the 1. Alluvial

Lowlands.

(c) The landscape elements contribute to the 12. Nuneham

Courtney Ridge.


identified 5B. Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys

& 8A. Clay Vales – Sandford Vale.

Landscape condition Moderate to low condition, due to the area being relatively

intact, but is in poor repair/quality

Landscape value Minor value, due to the landscape contributing to the identified

landscape character areas


to change

Low, due to the segment accommodating the development



strategies.



having a minor landscape value.



the copses and wood areas will be retained as part of any

emerging proposals.


Visual Appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Views out of the segment are contained to the north and west

by the built from associated with the southern edge of Oxford

(Littlemore and Blackbird Leys) and the vegetation associated

59

with the A4074. Long distance views are contained to the east

and south by the raised topography associated with the

settlements of Garsington and Toot Baldon.


• Sandfordbrake Farm

• Caravan park associated with Kiln Close

• New Farm

• Great Leys Farm

• Settlements of Garsington and Toot Baldon

• National Trail - Shakespeare’s Way (reference 335/13

& 335/11)

• Footpaths and bridleways (reference 335/13, 335/12,

223/27, 223/26 and 223/39).

• Watlington Road

• Grenoble Road

• A4075



the segment)


properties, roads and public rights of way into the segment. It

is assumed views from the properties to the north of the

segment and along the A4075 are prevented due to the dense

boundary planting associated with the roads that bound the

segment.

Views can be gained into the segment from the settlements of

Garsington and Toot Baldon due to the raised topography that

they are situated on.

Value of the views Due to the landscape character and location of the segment it

is assumed that local people typically use the National Trail,

bridleways and footpath for recreation. The segment has been

identified as contributing to the landscape setting of the

Garsington and Toot Baldon Conservation Areas. It is

considered that the segment has a moderate value within



change



being contained by the low lying landform. It is considered

that the segment would be tolerant to change.

Summary The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to the

surrounding landscape, due to the low lying nature of the

60

landform. The segment contains a network of public rights of

way that cross through it that are popular with the surrounding

residents.


61

12. Green Belt Segment 6b: Northeast of Grenoble Road

Introduction

12.1 This segment is bordered on two of its three sides by built development, with Unipart to

the north and Blackbird Leys to the west. Northfield Brook forms the remaining border.

The segment contains farmland and associated structures.

Heritage


Heritage Assets

• No

designated

heritage

assets

N/A

Commentary There are no designated heritage assets within the vicinity of this

Green Belt segment. The interposing built form to the north and

west and 20th century development to the north of Garsington

meaning that it makes does not contribute to the significance of any

heritage asset.

Heritage

sensitivity

Low



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately arable agricultural fields, with small

paddocks associated with Guydens Farm and Northfield

Farm. The segment is overshadowed by the Mini Plant,

which is located to the north of the segment.

2. Relatively flat with the landform undulating between 65

metres to 75 metres. The segment is located at the

bottom of a horseshoe shaped ridgeline that Horspath

and Garsington are located on.

3. Northfield Brooks runs from the east to the south and a

series of drainage ditches drain into the brook and into

the River Thames.

4. Vegetation is of poor quality due to the areas intensive

62

arable farming.

5. Within the segment, built form is associated with

Guydens Farm and Northfield Farm. A number of

electricity pylons cross the segment.

6. A section of a footpath (reference 223/25) is located to

the south of the segment and Oxford Road crosses

through the segment. The segment is bound by

Watlington Road to the west and Transport Way to the

south.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas


(b) 1. Alluvial Lowlands

(c) 2. Nuneham Courtney Ridge

(d) 5B. Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys & 8A.

Clay Vales – Sandford Vale

Contribute to the



character areas



(b) The landscape elements contribute to the 1. Alluvial

Lowlands.

(c) The landscape elements contribute to the 12. Nuneham

Courtney Ridge.


identified 5B. Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys

& 8A. Clay Vales – Sandford Vale.

Landscape condition Low condition, due to the area being relatively intact, but is in

poor repair/quality

Landscape value Minor value, due to the landscape contributing to the identified

landscape character areas


to change

Low, due to the segment accommodating any development



strategies.



having a minor landscape value.



63

the copses and wood areas will be retained as part of any

emerging proposals.


Visual Appraisal

Visual Appraisal





Viewpoint of the 2002 ‘A Character Assessment of Oxford in

its Setting’ crosses through the segment from Garsington into

the centre of Oxford.

No further viewpoints are identified in planning designation

and/or tourist guidebooks and/or art and literature are located

within or cross the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)

Views out of the segment are contained to the north and west

by the built from associated with the Mini Plant and the

southern edge of Oxford (Blackbird Leys). Long distance

views are contained to the east and south by the raised

topography associated with the settlements of Horspath and

Garsington.


• Guydens Farm and Northfield Farm

• Mini Plant employment area.

• Settlements of Horspath and Garsington.

• Footpath (reference 223/25)

• Oxford Road, Watlington Road and Transport Way



the segment)

Open views can be gained from the adjacent properties, roads

and public rights of way into the segment. It is assumed views

from the properties to the west of the segment are prevented

due to the dense boundary planting associated with

Watlington Road.

Views can be gained into the segment from the settlements of

Horspath and Garsington due to the raised topography that

they are situated on.

Value of the views Due to the landscape character and location of the segment it

is assumed that people typically pass through the area rather

than linger to enjoy the views. It is considered that the

segment has a moderate to low value within views within the

surrounding area.

Visual susceptibility to The segment has a medium to low susceptibility to change

64

change due to the nature and activities of the visual receptors and the

visibility being contained by the low lying landform. It is

considered that the view from the identified viewpoint would

not be significantly affected by any proposed development

within the segment due to the raised nature of where the

viewpoint orientates from and looks too. The segment has

been identified as being tolerant to change.

Summary The visibility of this segment is relatively contained to the

surrounding ridgelines, to the east and south, and built form, to

the north and west. Local open views are possible across the

low lying countryside, but the value of these views is reduced

by the dominance of the adjacent ‘Mini’ Plant.


65

13. Green Belt Segment 7a: North of Abingdon (East of the A4183)

Introduction

13.1 This segment is bounded to the north by the A34 and a heavily treed footpath, to the

west by the A4183, to the south by the built up area of Abingdon and extends eastwards

towards Peach Croft Farm. The segment consists, principally of agricultural land and

earlier designed landscape features associated with Radley Hall.

Heritage

• Asset Summary of Significance

Heritage Assets

• Radley Hall

(Grade II*)

• The Chapel

(Grade II*)

• Memorial

Arch (Grade

II)

• Cloister and

Upper

Dormitory,

Octagon and

Schoolroom

(Grade II)

• Racquets

Court (Grade

II)

• Dining Hall

and Cloister

Walks

(Grade II)

• The Cottage

(Grade II)

• Peach Croft

Farm Barn

(Grade II)

Radley Hall has its origins as an early 18th

century country house (1721-27) constructed to

designs by William Townsend and Bartholomew

Peisley (who had both worked for Vanbrugh and

were involved in the construction of many

Oxford colleges). It has an excellently

preserved interior. It was converted to St

Peter’s College in 1847 and forms the core of

the 19th century campus, with associated

buildings designed by Sir T.G. Jackson,

remnants of the earlier estate and more recent

college buildings. Whilst its setting has been

altered by the construction of a golf course and

the expansion of the college campus the earlier

designed landscape remains largely legible.

The wider context remains broadly agricultural,

providing a connection to its origins as a country

house.

In this regard Peach Croft Farm barn, a mid-late

18th century example of the local, vernacular

building tradition, forms part of this rural context

although it now forms part of a significantly

expanded farm complex of no heritage

significance.

Commentary The Green Belt segment is located to the west and northwest of

these heritage assets and includes the westernmost section of the

historic avenue leading from Oxford Road to Radley Hall. The

release of this segment of Green Belt for development is likely to

impact upon the wider designed landscape of Radley Hall (shown

on the 1875 Ordnance Survey Map), as well as impacting on the

appreciation of this landscape element within its wider rural

66

context.

Whilst this segment of the Green Belt does not contain any

designated heritage assets the remnants of the designed

landscape, and the wider rural context in which it is experienced,

form an integral and significant element of the setting of Radley

Hall. The change associated with any residential development in

this location could have a potentially significant adverse effect on

the significance of Radley Hall in particular, and the group of which

it forms a part.

There is unlikely to be any substantial effect on the significance of

the particular significance of Peach Croft Farm Barn given the

separation distances and its location within a significantly

expanded farm complex.

Heritage

sensitivity

High to medium



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately arable agricultural fields, with small

paddocks associated with the avenue entrance to

Radley College and pasture fields with Peach Croft

Farm.

2. Broadly sloping from 85 metres to the northwest, down

to 60 metres in the south east. The segment is located

on the southern slopes of a minor ridgeline that extends

from Boars Hill.


boundaries and drain southwards through Abingdon and

into the River Thames.

4. Vegetation is located along the field boundaries and

drainage ditches. In places this vegetation widens and

becomes shelter belts or strips of woodland. There are

two small copses located within the segment. To the

north, on the ridgeline, there is a double avenue of trees

that denotes a historical entrance to Radley College

through Radley Park (located to the east of the

segment’s boundary).

5. There are two detached residential properties located to

the north west corner of the segment

6. Public rights of way include the National Trail of the

Oxford Greenbelt Way (reference 326/4) and footpath

67

(reference 326/5). The segment is bound by Oxford

Road (A4183) to the west and Twelve Acre Drive to the

south.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas

(a) 108 Upper Thames Clay Vales & 109 Midvale Ridge

(b) 12. Rolling Farmlands & 19. Wooded Estatelands

(c) n/a

(d) 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights

Contribute to the


identified Landscape

Character Areas


to the 109 Midvale Ridge character area, but not the

108 Upper Thames Clay Vales character area.

(b) The landscape elements contribute to the 19. Wooded

Estatelands character area more than the 12. Rolling

Farmlands character area, but the identified key

characteristics can both be found within the segment.

(c) n/a


to the identified 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills –

Hinksey Heights character area

Landscape condition High to moderate condition, due to the area being relatively

intact and is in average repair/quality

Landscape value Major to moderate value, due to the landscape falling within

the Vale of the White Horse District Council designation ‘NE7-

North Vale Coralline Ridge’ and relating to the historic

designed landscape of Radley Park and Radley College

complex.


to change

Medium, due to the segment being able to accommodate

limited development in its lower southern area without undue

consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation

and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and

strategies. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as

the treed field boundaries and entrance avenue would be

retained as part of any proposals.

Summary The field boundaries contain a number of intact hedgerows

and copses that reflect the identified character of the various

landscape character areas. These should be retained and

enhanced as part of any emerging proposal.

The upper northern areas located on the minor ridgeline that

68

extends from Boars Hill, which has been identified as helping

to provide the wooded backdrop to Oxford. The segment has

an avenue entrance to Radley Park, which contains a number

of mature trees. This area should not be developed and care

should be taken to ensure that any development within the

segment, if proposed, does not break the ridgeline.

Landscape sensitivity High to medium

Visual Appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)



area views are possible to the south and east to Abingdon and

the landscape beyond. The views to the north and west are

broadly contained due to the topography and vegetation

associated with the field boundaries and avenue entrance to

Radley College. Glimpsed views to the north of the segment

are possible along the National Trail associated with this

avenue.


• The two residential properties located to the northwest

of the segment

• Peach Croft Farm and Sugworth Farm and their

associated buildings

• Properties with Abingdon that have windows orientated

towards the segment

• National Trail of the Oxford Greenbelt Way (reference

326/4)

• Footpath (reference 326/5).

• Oxford Road (A4183) and Twelve Acre Drive



the segment)


properties, roads and public rights of way. Glimpsed views

can be gained from Sugworth Farm to the north of the avenue

entrance to Radley College. Glimpsed to no views can be

gained in the medium to long distance from the north and west

69

due to the field boundaries and copses. Open views can be

gained in the medium to long distance from the south and east

onto the segment.

Value of the views It is assumed that people use the National Trail and footpath

to gain views of the local Oxfordshire countryside. This

section of the trail provides extensive views to the south of

Oxfordshire. It is also assumed that upper section of the

segment is visible from the northern residential area of

Abingdon and the adjacent residential properties.


the north of Abingdon. It is therefore considered that the

segment has the segment has a medium value within views



change


due to the nature and activities of the visual receptors and the

visibility consisting of partial or open views. It is considered

that in general the segment would not be tolerant to change,

although the lower southern area could be tolerant of some.


topography rising. The upper slope of the segment provides a

wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Abingdon.



edge of Abingdon.


70

14. Green Belt Segment 7b: North of Abingdon (West of the A4183)

Introduction

14.1 The curving route of the A34 is located to the north of the segment and the built up area

of Abingdon to the south. The busy A4183 forms the north eastern boundary of the

segment. The segment is varied in character and includes areas of trees, open fields

and built development in the form of the Tilsley Park Leisure Centre and at Lodge Hill.

Heritage

• Asset Summary of Significance

Heritage Assets

• No

designated

heritage

assets

N/A

Commentary There are no designated heritage assets within the vicinity of this

Green Belt segment. It would be advisable to have regard to the

relative siting of the north eastern part of this segment, where it

adjoins the Oxford Road, given its proximity to the wider designed

landscape associated with Radley Hall (as outlined in the

discussion relating to Green Belt Segment 7a).

Heritage

sensitivity

Low



Landscape elements

1. Land use

2. Topography

3. Drainage

4. Vegetation

5. Built form

6. Movement

1. Predominately arable agricultural fields and with small

paddocks located to the north. The segment also

includes Tilsley Park Leisure Centre and White Horse

Contractors engineering compound.

2. Broadly sloping landform from 85 metres to the

northeast, down to 60 metres in the south west. The

segment is located on the southern slopes of a minor

ridgeline that extends from Boars Hill.


boundaries and drain southwards through Abingdon and

71

into the River Thames. Two engineered ponds are

located to the west of Sugnell Copse.

4. Vegetation is located along the field boundaries and the

A34. In places this vegetation widens, particularly along

the drainage ditches, and there are areas of new tree

planting. Sugnell Copse is located to the north of the

segment.

5. Within the segment there are buildings of a large

footprint associated with the Tilsley Park Leisure Centre

and White Horse Contractors and those of a small

footprint, consisting of one to two storey residential

buildings located along a track off Oxford Road.

Electricity pylons cross the segment.


National Trail of the Oxford Greenbelt Way (reference

372/12 & 326/6) and bridleway (reference 372/13). The

B4017 also crosses the southern area of the segment

and there are a number of private access tracks to the

north serving the residential properties and White Horse

Contractors. The segment is bound by Oxford Road

(A4183) to the east, the A34 to the west and

Copenhagen Drive and Dunmore Road to the south.

Noise from A34 can be heard within the segment.


(a) National

(b) County

(c) District


Character Areas

(a) 108 Upper Thames Clay Vales & 109 Midvale Ridge


(c) n/a

(d) 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights

Contribute to the


identified Landscape

Character Areas


to the 109 Midvale Ridge character area, but not the

108 Upper Thames Clay Vales character area.

(b) The landscape elements contribute to the 12. Rolling

Farmlands character area.

(c) n/a

(d) The landscape elements within the upper north eastern

area of the segment contribute to the identified 6B.

Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights character

72

area.

Landscape condition Moderate condition, due to the area being relatively intact and

is in average repair/quality

Landscape value High to moderate value, due to the landscape falling within the

Vale of the White Horse District Council designation ‘NE7-

North Vale Coralline Ridge’.


to change

Medium, due to the segment being able to accommodate

limited development in its lower southern area without undue

consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation

and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and

strategies. It is assumed that the landscape elements such as

the treed field.

Summary The field boundaries contain a number of intact hedgerows

and copses that reflect the identified character of the various

landscape character areas. These should be retained and

enhanced as part of any emerging proposal.

The upper north eastern area has been identified as helping to

provide the wooded backdrop to Abingdon, but it has already

has built form on. The segment does not contribute to the

‘special character of Oxford’.


Visual Appraisal

Visual Appraisal







the segment.

Zone of theoretical


segment)



area views are possible to the surrounding landscape to the

south and west. The views to the north and east are broadly

contained due to the topography and vegetation associated

with the field. Glimpsed views to the north of the segment are

possible along the track off Oxford Road.


• The residential properties located along the track off

Oxford Road

• White Horse Contractors employment area

• Properties with Abingdon that have windows orientated

73

towards the segment

• National Trail of the Oxford Greenbelt Way (reference

372/12 & 326/6)

• Bridleway (reference 372/13)

• A34, Oxford Road (A4183), B4017, Copenhagen Drive

and Dunmore Road



the segment)


properties, roads and public rights of way to the north of the

segment. It is assumed views from the properties to the west

of Abingdon onto the south of the segment are contained due

to the dense boundary planting associated with Dunmore

Road, the views becomes open again to the far south around

the B4017 and Copenhagen Drive.

Glimpsed to no views can be gained in the medium to long

distance from the north and east due to the existing

vegetation. Open views can be gained in the medium to long

distance from the south and west onto the northern area of

segment.

Value of the views It is assumed that people use the National Trail and footpath

to gain views of the local Oxfordshire countryside, although

this section of the trail provides only glimpsed views to the

south of Oxfordshire. It is also assumed that upper section of

the segment is visible from the northern residential area of

Abingdon and the adjacent residential properties.


the north of Abingdon and it is considered that the segment

has a medium to low value within views within the surrounding

area.


change



consisting of partial to glimpsed views of the surrounding

countryside. It is considered that in general the northern area

of the segment would not be tolerant to change, but the lower

southern area would be.


rising topography. The upper slope of the segment provides a

wooded ridgeline that frames the north of Abingdon.



edge of Abingdon.


74

Appendix 1: Existing Landscape Character Assessment

Background

This appendix sets out the various existing landscape character assessment’s resources at a

national, county and local district level. The table below provides a summary of the existing

landscape character assessments and areas the segments are each located within.

Summary Table

Segment National

Joint

Character

Areas

Regional

Character Types

District

Character

areas

OCC’s Landscape Character

Areas

1a. Yarnton

(East of the

A44)

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

1. Alluvial

Lowlands

8. Lowland Village

Farmlands

19. Wooded

Estatelands

Lower Cherwell

Floodplain

2A. Rivers and Pastoral

Floodplains – Thames (Isis)

3E. Settled and Open River

Terraces – Oxford Airport

4A. Wooded Clay Hills –

Cassington / Bladon Ridge

1b. Yarnton

(West of the

A44)

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

8. Lowland Village

Farmlands

Lower Cherwell

Floodplain



3E. Settled and Open River

Terraces – Oxford Airport

2. South

Kidlington

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

17. Vale Farmland Lower Cherwell

Floodplain

Otmoor

Lowlands

1C. Lowland Clay Vales –

Gosford Gap

3a. North of

Oxford (East

of the A4165)

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

1. Alluvial

Lowlands

17. Vale Farmland

Lower Cherwell

Floodplain

Otmoor

Lowlands


Gosford Gap

2B. Rivers and Pastoral

Floodplains – Cherwell

3b. North of

Oxford (West

of the A4165)

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

17. Vale Farmland Lower Cherwell

Floodplain

Otmoor

Lowlands


Gosford Gap



4. Wick/

Bayswater

Farm

Midvale

Ridge

19. Wooded

Estatelands

1. Oxford

Heights

2B. Rivers and Pastoral

Floodplains – Cherwell

6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills –

East Oxford Heights

5a. Wheatley

(North of the

London

Midvale

Ridge

12. Rolling

Farmlands

1. Oxford

Heights

6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills –

East Oxford Heights

75

Road)

5b. Wheatley

(South of the

London

Road)

Midvale

Ridge

12. Rolling

Farmlands

1. Oxford

Heights

7A. High Plains – Shotover

Plain

6a. Grenoble

Road

Midvale

Ridge

1. Alluvial

Lowlands

2. Nuneham

Courtney Ridge

5B. Settled Plateaux –

Cowley/Blackbird Leys

8A. Clay Vales – Sandford Vale

6b. North

east of

Grenoble

Road

Midvale

Ridge

1. Alluvial

Lowlands

2. Nuneham

Courtney Ridge

5B. Settled Plateaux –

Cowley/Blackbird Leys

7a. North of

Abingdon

(East of the

A4183)

Midvale

Ridge

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

12. Rolling

Farmlands

19. Wooded

Estatelands

n/a 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills –

Hinksey Heights

7b. North of

Abingdon

(West of the

A4183)

Midvale

Ridge

Upper

Thames Clay

Vales

12. Rolling

Farmlands

n/a 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills –

Hinksey Heights

National Joint Character Areas

Natural England has identified 159 National Character Areas (NCA), which share similar

landscape characteristics. These areas are identifies as following natural lines in the landscape

rather than administrative boundaries, making them a good decision-making framework for the

natural environment.

Nine of these character areas fall within the county of Oxfordshire and the identified segments

fall within two of them:

• 108 - Upper Thames Clay Vales (Segments 1a, 1b, 2, 3a and 3b)

• 109 - Midvale Ridge (Segments 4, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, 7a and 7b)

108 - Upper Thames Clay Vales

The NCA of the Upper Thames Clay Vales is a broad belt of open, gently undulating lowland

farmland on predominantly Jurassic and Cretaceous clays. The area contains a contrasting

landscape of enclosed pastures of the claylands with wet valleys, mixed farming, hedges,

hedge trees and field trees and more settled open, arable lands. Mature field oaks are common

within this NCA and give a parkland feel in many places. It is identified that the growth of urban

areas, particularly around Oxford, may provide opportunities for creation of significant areas of

accessible natural green-space.

The key characteristics include:

76

• Low-lying clay-based flood plains encircle the Midvale Ridge. Superficial deposits,

including alluvium and gravel terraces, spread over 40 per cent of the area, creating

gently undulating topography. The Upper Jurassic and Cretaceous clays and the wet

valley bottoms give rise to enclosed pasture, contrasting with the more settled, open,

arable lands of the gravel.

• The large river system of the River Thames drains the Vales, their headwaters flowing

off the Cotswolds to the north or emitting from the springline along the Chilterns and

Downs escarpments. Where mineral extraction takes place, pits naturally fill with water,

and limestone gravels from the Cotswolds give rise to marl formation. There are a high

number of nationally important geological sites.

• Woodland cover is low at only about 3 per cent, but hedges, hedgerow trees and field

trees are frequent. Watercourses are often marked by lines of willows and, particularly in

the Aylesbury Vale and Cotswold Water Park, native black poplar.

• Wet ground conditions and heavy clay soils discourage cultivation in many places,

giving rise to livestock farming. Fields are regular and hedged, except near the

Cotswolds, where there can be stone walls. The Vale of White Horse is made distinct by

large arable fields, and there are relict orchards on the Greensand.

• In the river corridors, grazed pasture dominates, with limited areas of historic wetland

habitats including wet woodland, fen, reedbed and flood meadow. There are two areas

of flood meadow designated for their importance at a European level as Special Areas

of Conservation (SAC). There are also rich and extensive ditch systems.

• Gravel extraction has left a legacy of geological exposures, numerous waterbodies and,

at the Cotswold Water Park, a nationally important complex of marl lakes.

• Wetland habitat attracts regionally important numbers of birds including snipe, redshank,

curlew and lapwing and wintering wildfowl such as pochard. Snake’s head fritillary

thrives in the internationally important meadows. The area also supports typical

farmland wildlife such as brown hare, bats, barn owl, tree sparrow and skylark.

• Blenheim Palace World Heritage Site, including its Capability Brown landscape, is the

finest of many examples of historic parkland in this NCA. There are many heritage

features, including nationally important survivals of ridge and furrow, Roman roads,

deserted medieval villages and historic bridges.

• Brick and tile from local clays, timber and thatch are traditional building materials across

the area, combined with limestone near the Cotswolds and occasional clunch and

wichert near the Chilterns.

• Settlement is sparse on flood plains, apart from at river crossings, where there can be

large towns, such as Abingdon. Aylesbury and Bicester are major urban centres, and

the outer suburbs of Oxford and Swindon spread into this NCA. Market towns and

villages are strung along the springlines of the Chilterns and Downs. Major routes

include mainline rail, canals, a network of roads including the M40 and M4 and The

Ridgeway and Thames Path National Trails.

More details on the NCA ‘Upper Thames Clay Vales’ can be found within the National Character

Area profile (website

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/upper_thames_clay_vales.aspx)

109 - -Midvale Ridge

The NCA of the Midvale Ridge is a band of low-lying limestone hills stretching from the Vale of

Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire to Swindon. It is surrounded by the flat lands of the Oxfordshire

clay vales, giving extensive views across the surrounding countryside. It is a predominantly

77

agricultural area with a mixed arable and pastoral farming landscape. The main towns are

Swindon, at the western end, and Oxford, which lies across the centre of the area, but

otherwise the settlement pattern is characterised by small nucleated villages along the top of

the ridge and along the springline.

The key characteristics include:

• Low, irregular wooded limestone ridge giving way to a series of isolated steep-sided

tabular hills in the east which rise from the surrounding clay vales.

• Contrast between the moderately elevated limestone hills and ridges and the

surrounding low-lying clay vales.

• Drained mostly by small springs and streams which run into the Thames, Thame and

Ock.

• Well wooded – a third of the woodland is designated ancient woodland.

• Mixed pastoral and arable landscape with large, geometric fields divided by hedges and

regularly spaced hedgerow trees punctuated by blocks of woodland.

• Fragmented but rare and important semi-natural habitats, including acid grassland,

calcareous fens and flushes, wet woodland and calcareous grass heaths particularly

around Frilford and Cothill.

• Evidence of previous land use such as iron-age and Romano-British settlements and

ridge and furrow through to old quarries still visible in the landscape.

• Locally quarried limestone commonly used as building material for local houses.

• Settlement pattern of nucleated villages on the hill tops and along the springline with low

density of dispersed settlement.

• Recreational opportunities include the Thames Path National Trail.

More details on the NCA ‘Midvale Ridge’ can be found within the National Character Area

profile (website or http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/midvale_ridge.aspx)

County Character Types

Building on Natural England’s NCA Oxfordshire County Council, Natural England and the Earth

Trust produced the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study. This study has identified twenty-

four separate landscape types within the county, which each have a similar pattern of geology,

topography, land use and settlements. The full study can be found here:

http://owls.oxfordshire.gov.uk/wps/wcm/connect/occ/OWLS/Home/Oxfordshire+Landscape+Typ

es/

The identified segments fall within five of them:

• 1. Alluvial Lowlands (Segments 1a, 3a, 6a and 6b)

• 8. Lowland Village Farmlands (Segments 1a and 1b)

• 12 Rolling Farmlands (Segments 5a, 5b and 7a)

• 17 Vale Farmland (Segments 2, 3a and 3b)

• 19 Wooded Estatelands (Segments 1a, 4, 7a and 7b)

1. Alluvial Lowlands

The Alluvial Lowlands is located in lowland areas, associated with alluvium drifts, adjacent to

the main river corridors of the upper and lower Thames, the lower Cherwell and the rivers Ray

and Ock. In summary it includes flat landscapes of lowland river valleys, associated with alluvial

78

soils. It is characterised by a regular pattern of medium-sized hedged fields with permanent

pasture and arable cropping.

Key characteristics include:

• Broad alluvial plains.

• Mixed farming pattern with regular fields with both arable cropping and pasture.

• Densely scattered hedgerow trees of ash and willow.

• Dense willow corridors bordering a large number of ditches.

• Sparsely settled.

8. Lowland Village Farmlands

The Lowland Village Farmlands is the largest part of the landscape type is at the western end of

the Upper Thames Vale and to the south of Witney and Carterton. A large part also falls within

the clay vale area to the north-west and south-west of Didcot. Outliers of the landscape type at

Islip, Merton, Charlton-on-Otmoor, Garsington and Toot Baldon are associated with outcrops of

the Corallian beds over the clay vale. In summary it includes a variable, often large scale

farmed landscape closely associated with village settlements.


• A varied, gently rolling and almost flat topography.

• Medium to large-sized arable and hedged fields.

• Thinly scattered hedgerow trees, which are mostly ash.

• Ash, willow and poplars fringing ditches and streams.

• Prominent village settlements scattered throughout the area.

12. Rolling Farmlands

The Rolling Farmlands landscape type is largely associated with the rolling landscapes of the

Midvale Ridge NCA, extending from Watchfield and Fernham to Appleton and Dry Sandford. It

includes the lower slope of the ridge between Holton and Denton, and, in the Vale of White

Horse, the more undulating areas to the east of Didcot. It also covers the rolling landscape at

the foot of North Wessex Downs.

In summary it includes a landscape with a prominent rolling landform and distant views from

hillsides across the surrounding low-lying vale. It is associated with large open arable fields and

localised blocks of ancient woodland.


• Prominent rolling landform.

• Large, geometric arable fields enclosed by a weak hedgerow pattern.

• Thinly distributed hedgerow trees.

• Locally prominent blocks of ancient woodland.

• Small to medium-sized villages.

17. Vale Farmland

The Vale Farmland is described as being a widely distributed landscape type, which is largely

associated with clay vale landscapes adjacent to river systems. To the south of the county it

borders parts of the rivers Thames, Cherwell, Thame and Ock. To the north, it lies adjacent to

79

the rivers Evenlode and Cherwell. In summary it is a vale landscape defined by regularly

shaped, arable fields enclosed by hawthorn hedges and hedgerow trees. A nucleated

settlement pattern is also a characteristic feature of this landscape type.


• A gently rolling landscape associated with clay soils.

• Medium to large regularly shaped arable fields and more localised smaller grass fields.

• A well-defined hedgerow pattern with characteristic hedgerow trees.

• Occasional ditches and minor streams bordered by crack willows and ash.

• A nucleated pattern of small, compact villages.

19. Wooded Estatelands

The Wooded Estatelands landscape type includes parklands at the eastern end of the

Cotswolds, ranging from the area around Blenheim Park, Steeple Barton, Middleton Park and

as far as Shelswell Park to the north of Bicester. Further south it includes Eynsham Hall Park

and Bladon Heath Wood and also covers the majority of the wooded and parkland areas in the

undulating landscape of the Corallian Ridge. In summary it is characterised by arable farming

and small villages with a strong vernacular character.


• Rolling topography with localised steep slopes.

• Large blocks of ancient woodland and mixed plantations of variable sizes.

• Large parklands and mansion houses.

• A regularly shaped field pattern dominated by arable fields.

• Small villages with strong vernacular character.

District Landscape Character Assessments

The identified segments are located within three district councils, two of which have Landscape

Character Assessments

• Cherwell District Council Landscape Character Appraisal – 1995 (Segments 4, 5a, 5b

6a and 6b)

• South Oxfordshire Landscape Character Appraisal - 1998 (Segments 1a, 1b, 2, 3a and

3b)

The remaining identified segments 7a and 7b are located within Vale of the White Horse which

does not have a current Landscape Character Assessment.

Cherwell District Council Landscape Character Appraisal

This document was produced in order for the district to develop a consistent, coordinated

approach to planning policy, development control, landscape management/conservation,

recreation and tourism. The full study can be found here:

http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/media/pdf/7/n/CDC_Landscape_Assessment_-

_Cobham_Nov_1995_-_lr.pdf

The identified segments fall within the following character areas

80

• Lower Cherwell Floodplain (Segments 1a, 1b, 2, 3a and 3b)

• Otmoor Lowlands (Segments 2, 3a and 3b)

Lower Cherwell Floodplain

The Lower Cherwell Floodplain character area is characterised by fringe landscapes associated

with Kidlington, a garden city development, and with the many major road corridors that

converge at Peartree Hill, between Oxford and Kidlington.


• The area is level and low-lying, with heavy clay soils and substantial local gravel

deposits.

• Arable farming has been facilitated by improvements in drainage in this area and the

large, flat fields are now mostly under cultivation for cereals.

• Fields are surrounded by hedgerows and trees, with a high proportion of willow and

generating elm.

• Influence of the nearby Oxford urban area is substantial and much of the landscape is

dominated by features associated with the urban fringe.

• Pylons and overhead cables radiate outwards from a large electricity substation at

Yarnton, dominating the skyline.

• The area is crossed by transport links, including the mainline rail link.

• Major roads are the most dominant landscape features, with the A40, the A44, the

A4260, and the A34 trunk roads converging at Pear Tree Hill.

• The influence of the road corridors extends over a large area because of the level,

exposed nature of the landform.

Otmoor Lowlands

The Otmoor Lowlands character area is essentially a flat, wet, low lying landscape, but it

displays considerable variation owing to particular landform features and built development. It

stretches northwards to include Bicester’s urban fringes, and to the south includes the edge of

the Oxford Heights.


• The outcrops of the Corallian Beds cause the land to rise up to the Oxford Heights

which lie to the south of Cherwell District. However, within the Otmoor area the Grits

and Coral Rag outcrop, creating distinctive hills isolated from the main ridge of rising

ground.

• The river winds its way across its floodplain, where alluvial deposits overlie the clay.

• Owing to its poor drainage, traditional land cover has consisted of grazed wet meadows,

some of which remain in and around Otmoor, with willow pollards lining streams and

drainage ditches. Much of the grassland is now divided into fields with hedge and ditch

boundaries.

• A substantial part of the land is now in arable cultivation. Fields are large with weak

boundaries, giving rise to an open, exposed landscape.

• Where the land rises up at the southern edge of the area a pattern of smaller fields has

developed on the steeper slopes, while open grazing persists on the higher open

ground.

• Some remnant upland heath characteristics occur, with sheep grazing and bracken and

gorse on the highest slopes.

81

South Oxfordshire Landscape Character Appraisal

This appraisal provides a tool for describing the character of the district’s landscape in order to

recognise how to conserve and enhance them and to help planning for sustainable

development in rural areas. The full study can be found here:

http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/services-and-advice/planning-and-building/planning-

policy/evidence-studies/policy-publications/south

The identified segments fall within the following character areas

• 1. Oxford Heights (Segments 4, 5a and 5b)

• 2. Nuneham Courtney Ridge (Segments 6a and 6b)

Oxford Heights

The Oxford Heights character area is defined by its distinctive landform of hills and ridges,

which rise prominently above the surrounding vales and river valleys. While this complex relief

is a unifying feature of the area, it also creates a landscape of contrasts – from open elevated

hilltops and hillsides to enclosed intimate lowlands, with extensive areas of rolling countryside

in-between. The landscape is also physically and visually fragmented by landform and roads

and is consequently difficult to perceive as a coherent unified area.

In summary three broad variations in landscape character have been identified:

• The low-lying floodplain landscapes for the river valleys and the Otmoor lowlands;

• Distinctive parkland and estate landscapes at Shotover and near Beckley;

• And the distinctive farmed hills and valleys of the Mid-vale Ridge which typify the

majority of the area.


• Rolling landform of hills and valleys;

• Large-scale farmland, mostly in arable cultivation;

• Typical large fields, with rectilinear pattern of field boundaries (predominantly

hedgerows);

• Varying structure hedgerows;

• Open, denuded and exposed character, with prominent skylines and hillsides and high

intervisibility;

• Distinctive elevated and expansive character on ridges and higher ground, with

dominant sky and long views;

• Landscape typically fragmented and intruded upon by roads and built development,

particularly around Wheatley and Oxford fringes, although it retains a predominately

rural character;

• Predominately rural character but some localised intrusion of main roads (including

M40/A40), overhead power lines and built development.

• Intervisibility reduced by landform and landscape structure to create a more enclosed

and intimate landscape, but long views possible from hillsides and higher ground across

lower-lying vales;

Nuneham Courtney Ridge

The Nuneham Courtney Ridge character area is dominated by the extensively wooded parkland

and estate landscapes of Nuneham Courtney, which occupy the core of the area. However,

82

landform is also a unifying element, with the distinctive rolling plateau rising predominately

above the surrounding river valleys.

In summary the main variations in landscape character have been identified as:

• The low-lying floodplain landscapes of the River Thames and Baldon Brook;

• Distinctive parkland and estate landscapes at Nuneham Courtney;

• The instructional complex of The Culham Laboratory;

• And the distinctive rolling hills and valleys which typify the rest of the area.


• Distinctively flat, low-lying farmland (below 65 metres AOD) occupying former

marshland alongside the Baldon Brook on land less prone to flooding and more easily

drained and cultivated;

• Large-scale rectilinear field pattern with distinctive network of drainage ditches;

• Weak landscape structure with few trees, low or gappy hedges, open ditches and

fences;

• Comparative inaccessibility creates a rural and remote character;

• Open, denuded landscape results in high intervisibiltiy.

• Rolling plateau landform;

• Large-scale farmland, mostly in arable cultivation;

• Distinctive elevated and expansive character on ridges and higher ground, with

dominant sky and long views;

• Predominately rural character but some localised intrusion of main roads, overhead

power lines and built development.

• Predominately intensive arable land use but some pockets of permanent pasture occur,

particularly around settlements and on steeper hillsides;

• Predominately rural character;

• Landform and landscape structure create enclosure and reduce intervisiblity.

A Character Assessment of Oxford in its Setting OCC 2002

Oxford City Council’s 2002 document ‘A Character Assessment of Oxford in its Setting’

identified 23 landscape character areas within the setting of the city centre and its setting.

These each had their individual character or ‘sense of place’. The full study can be found here:

http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decP/Policy_Documents_and_Publications_occw.htm

All of the segments identified fall within, or a portion falls, within the following character areas:

• 1C. Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap (Segments 2, 3a and 3b)

• 2A. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis) (Segments 1a, 1b and 3b)

• 2B. Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell (Segments 3a and 4)

• 3E. Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport (Segments 1a and 1b)

• 4A. Wooded Clay Hills – Cassington – Bladon Ridge (Segment 1a)

• 5B. Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys (Segments 6a and 6b)

• 6B. Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights (Segments 7a and 7b)

• 6C. Enclosing Limestone Hills – East Oxford Heights (Segments 4 and 5a)

• 7A. High Plains – Shotover Plain (Segment 5b)

• 8A. Clay Vales – Sandford Vale (Segment 6a)

83

1C Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap

The Lowland Clay Vales – Gosford Gap character area is described as:

Smooth, gently undulating low-lying areas of Oxford Clay which form the footslopes and

vales between areas of high ground. They are characterised by mixed agricultural fields

divided by low, neatly trimmed hedgerows with hedgerow trees. Roads often have wide

verges and are bordered by drains. Church towers in the stone/brick built villages and

farmsteads are prominent landmarks in these flat, open landscapes.

The smooth, open vales that create a dramatic contrast to the areas of high ground, enhancing

the topographical setting of Oxford within a ring of hills.

2A Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis) and 2B Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Cherwell

The Rivers and Pastoral Floodplains – Thames (Isis) character area is described as:

Flat, wide alluvial floodplains of the rivers which flow between the prominent hills. The

tranquil pastoral scene of open meadows with cattle grazing amongst the silhouettes of

mature floodplain trees contrasts with the busy urban scenes which often lie adjacent.

Boathouses, locks and pubs along the river are landmarks. Historic buildings and

ancient groves are features. Allotments and land use such as playing fields and large

scale business/retail parks are often found in the floodplain landscapes.

The flat, open pastoral floodplains and are part of the classic image of Oxford – they have long

been sued for pasture and hay crops. In landscape terms, the simple open green meadows and

expanses and open water provide a dramatic contrast, both in colour and form, to the built core

of Oxford. Open character allows long views over them.

3E Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport

The Settled and Open River Terraces – Oxford Airport character area is described as:

The river terraces (and their proximity to pastures) have been the prime locational factor

for settlement in the Thames Valley from prehistoric times. These domed deposits of

river terrace gravels overlying clay support the historic core of Oxford as well as much

newer built development. The landscape type therefore tends to have a busy, urban

character. Buildings are typically of limestone with red brick detailing. Roads and a

feature of the landscape today. Those river terraces that remain undeveloped typically

support rural, agricultural landscape of medium to large ‘enclosure’ fields with arable

and pasture. They provide a contrast with both the floodplain and adjacent urban areas.

The area provides minor undulations in topography and separates the Thames and Cherwell

floodplains. The river terraces support built development, and form a contrast to the open

floodplains.

4A Wooded Clay Hills – Cassington / Bladon Ridge

The Wooded Clay Hills – Cassington / Bladon Ridge character area is described as:

Prominent, but low, rounded hills which stand out from the low lying clay vales and

alluvial plains to the north of Oxford. The tranquil agricultural landscape is characterised

by a mixture of arable and pasture fields divided by low, neatly clipped hedgerows and

wooded ridges, creating a strong field pattern. Fields of oil seed rape stand out as bright

84

patches in the landscape during summer. On opt of the hills one has a clear sense of

elevation above the surrounding clay vales. Settlement is sparse – stone farmhouses

are scattered over the hillsides, and small stone villages are restricted to the footslopes.

Although relatively low, these hills are prominent as they rise out of the flat clay vales north of

Oxford. Their wooded ridges and strong field patterns provide an important backdrop to the

north of the city where few other landform features are present. Conversely there are views from

these hills to the city.

5B Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys

The Settled Plateaux – Cowley/Blackbird Leys character area is described as:

The Settled Plateaux are low Corallian platforms formed of sand and calcareous

sandstone, incised by narrow valleys, with a steep scarp at their western edge. Reefs of

Corraline limestone or ‘Coral Rag’ overlie the sandstone along the eastern boundary,

forming the transition to the higher Enclosing Limestone Hills. The Coral Rag, which is

quarried from these areas, is typical of the buildings in this landscape type and sandy

soils result in vegetation of gorse and pine. The landscape is unique among the upland

area for its high density of settlement.

The hills provide a strong topographic setting and wooded skyline is important in views from

Oxford. Famous views of Oxford, as drawn by artists e.g. Turner. Conversely there are views

from these hills to the city.

6B Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights and 6C Enclosing Limestone Hills – East Oxford Heights

The Enclosing Limestone Hills – Hinksey Heights character area is described as:

Prominent hills with steep scarp slopes and table topped landform, surrounding Oxford.

The underlying geology is a mixture of Coral Rag, (Upper Corrallin formation), grey

mudstones with limestone nodules (Kimmeridge Clay), and sands and limestone’s of the

Portland Formation. They are characterised by fields of mixed farmland divided by

hedgerows – the strong field patterns are a feature of this landscape type. The hills

typically support large areas of deciduous woodland. Nucleated villages tend to be

situated either at the foot or at the top of the scrap slope and area characterised by the

use of stone as the main building material. Estates are associated with stone walls and

designed parkland is common. Church towers within the scarp top villages, for example

at Elsfield, are prominent landmarks in the landscape. Communication masts are also

prominent on the hills.

These hills provide a strong topographic setting and rural wooded backdrop to Oxford.

Conversely there are views from these hills to the city.

7A High Plains – Shotover Plain

The High Plains – Shotover Plain character area is described as:

This landscape type is distinctive in its flat-topped landform and sandy soil, which caps

the highest hills as at Boar’s Hill and Shotover Hill. The result is isolated areas with red

soils and a healthy character, supporting distinctive vegetation such as pines and stand

out as distinctive skyline features. There’s areas tend to be fairly well settled due to the

85

relativity flat landform on top of these hills. Housing, of all ages, is positioned to take

advantage of the views. Although these hills are relatively well settled, they retail a

peaceful character, remote from the city. Ornamental garden vegetation is the only clue

as to the human influence when seen from a distance.

The enclosing effect of these hills is very important to the setting of Oxford. Clumps of Scots

Pine growing on sandy soils are particularly important features on the ridgelines. Conversely

there are views from these hills to the city.

8A Clay Vales – Sandford Vale

The Clay Vales – Sandford Vale character area is described as:

Smoothly undulating clay vale of large scale arable fields divided by neatly trimmed

hedgerows with hedgerow trees. These values are at a higher altitude that the lowland

clay vales. Tree cover is otherwise extremely low. This is a tranquil working rural

agricultural landscape with sparsely scattered red brick farmsteads and very little public

access. Hedgerow trees stand out as features in this flat, open landscape.

The open agricultural belt emphasises the topography and enclosing effect of the hills beyond

the vale.

Turley

The Charlotte Building

17 Gresse Street

London

W1T 1QL

T 020 7851 4010

42

Appendix 2: Community Infrastructure Plans 1 - 6

43

Appendix 3: Transport Overview and Assessment of Site Options

On behalf of Oxford City Council

Project Ref: 30798 | Rev: 04 | Date: October 2014

Office Address: 10 Queen Square, Bristol, BS1 4NT T: +44 (0)117 928 1560 E: [email protected]

Oxford Growth Strategy Proforma Report Appendix 3:

Transport Overview and Assessment of Site Options

Proforma Report Appendix 3: Transport Overview and Assessment of Site Options Oxford Growth Strategy

J:\30798 Oxford Transport Consultancy Support\Technical\Transport\WP\Reports\Stage 2 Proforma Report\WP\20141002_Oxford Strategic Growth Options_Transport Opportunities & Constraints_ v4 FINAL_ISSUED.docx

ii

Document Control Sheet

Project Name: Oxford Growth Strategy

Project Ref: 30798

Report Title: Proforma Report Appendix 3: Transport Overview and Assessment of Site Options

Doc Ref: 04

Date: October 2014

Name Position Signature Date

Prepared by: Nick Church Senior Associate October 2014

Reviewed/Approved: Tony Russell Partner

October 2014

For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates LLP

Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved

- 29/09/2014 Draft for client team comment NC APR APR

02 02/10/2014 Revised Draft NC APR APR

03 16/10/2014 Final Issue NC APR APR

04 16/10/2014 Revised Final Issue NC APR APR

Peter Brett Associates LLP disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of this report. This report has been prepared with reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the Client and generally in accordance with the appropriate ACE Agreement and taking account of the manpower, resources, investigations and testing devoted to it by agreement with the Client. This report is confidential to the Client and Peter Brett Associates LLP accepts no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report or any part thereof is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk.

© Peter Brett Associates LLP 2014



iii

Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1

2 Transport Context ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Transport Policy Overview ............................................................................................ 4

2.2 Oxfordshire Existing Movement Patterns ...................................................................... 5

2.3 Oxfordshire Transport Infrastructure Schedule ............................................................. 7

2.4 Transport Infrastructure Funding Challenges .............................................................. 10

2.5 The Oxford Opportunity ............................................................................................... 12

3 Stage 2 Framework Transport Assessment ........................................................................... 13

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 13

3.2 Stage 2 Assessment Outcomes .................................................................................. 14

4 Summary and Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 23

Tables

Table 1.1: Framework Transport Assessment Overview ................................................................................................... 1

Table 2.1: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Percentage of Trips to work to each District by Residents from each District . 5

Table 2.2: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Mode Share of All Resident Journeys to Work ............................................... 5

Table 2.3: 2001 Journey to Work Analysis: Mode Share of All Resident Journeys to Work ............................................... 6

Table 2.4: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Origins of Journeys to Work for Oxford Employees and Car Dependency ..... 6

Table 2.5: Oxford City Transport Infrastructure Schedule ................................................................................................ 10

Table 3.1: Stage 2 Framework Transport Assessment Outline Methodology .................................................................. 13

Table 3.2: Proximity to Services: confirmation of key destinations ................................................................................... 16

Table 3.3: Proximity to Key Services: distance comparison ............................................................................................. 16

Table 3.4: Public Transport Connections ......................................................................................................................... 18

Table 3.5: Walk and Cycle Accessibility Comparison ...................................................................................................... 20

Table 3.6: Significance Assessment of Planned Transport Infrastructure Proposals ....................................................... 21

Table 3.7: Local Transport Infrastructure Comparison ..................................................................................................... 21

Table 4.1: Stage 2 Assessment Summary ....................................................................................................................... 24

Annexes

Annex A: Oxfordshire Transport Infrastructure Schedule

Annex B: Public Transport Background Note



iv


J:\30798 Oxford Transport Consultancy Support\Technical\Transport\WP\Reports\Stage 2 Proforma Report\WP\20141002_Oxford Strategic Growth Options_Transport Opportunities & Constraints_ v4 FINAL_ISSUED.docx 1

1 Introduction

1.1.1 Peter Brett Associates LLP (PBA) has been commissioned by Oxford City Council (OCC) to provide transport consultancy advice, supporting a broader study into growth options in and around the City. This transport advice will provide supporting information to OCC and Turley, their appointed planning consultant.

1.1.2 An overview of the emerging broader study is provided within a Route Map document (Investing in Oxford’s future: Deciding on Strategic Growth Options) providing the context for the study and the proposed stages of assessment, broadly summarised as follows:

� Stage 1: Review of existing capacity to accommodate growth;

� Stage 2: Spatial Constraints and Opportunities;

� Stage 3: Sustainability Appraisal;

� Stage 4: Capacity Assessment; and

� Stage 5: Deliverability Assessment.

1.1.3 This report has been prepared to provide a high level transport constraints and opportunities analysis into Stage 2 of the process summarised above. The scope of work to be undertaken by PBA in support of this study is summarised within Table 1.1 .

Table 1.1: Framework Transport Assessment Overview

Oxford Growth Options Stages of Assessment Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5

Transport Context:

Overview of transport policy, existing movement and infrastructure planning context

Sustainability Appraisal:

undertaken by ENVIRON

PBA Framework Transport Assessment:

Preliminary review of all spatial options under consideration, covering:

Refined and more detailed review of remaining options, covering:

Deliverability assessment of preferred option(s), covering:

Threshold Assume all sites provide basic day to day facilities on-site, in the absence of more detailed site constraint mapping.

Informed by refined development assumptions confirming expected provision of on-site facilities.

Proximity Distance assessment to a range of higher order off-site facilities & services.

Distance assessment refined, recognising expected on-site facilities and any revised off-site destinations.

Connections Primary focus on public transport connections, in absence of completed site constraint information.

Broaden scope to assess site specific walk, cycle and highway connections. Refine Stage 2 public transport options.



Oxford Growth Options Stages of Assessment Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5

Accessibility Initial assessment based on journey distance by walking and cycling.

Refined assessment considering journey time across all modes.

Infrastructure Review of planned transport infrastructure improvements.

Review of existing local infrastructure and identification of site specific transport infrastructure requirements.

High level costing and delivery assessment of key infrastructure requirements.

1.1.4 As identified within Table 1.1 , a Framework Transport Assessment approach has been identified based around five key parameters which together combine to provide a high level Transport Assessment framework which can be applied to and used to compare the potential development sites. The framework allows for the detail of assessment to increase progressively from Stage 2 to Stage 5 during which the number of sites under consideration is anticipated to be refined down based upon the outcomes of the wider study. The parameters identified are:

� Threshold : the size of any potential urban extension (number of dwellings) will determine the level of self-containment or internalisation which can be achieved in terms of trip making. It is therefore important to determine the threshold for potential development for an urban extension site which in turn will inform the need for travel trips to higher order facilities.

� Proximity : the proximity (distance) of an urban extension to an existing urban area is important in terms of accessing higher order facilities. This is especially the case where connections can reduce the need to travel and encourage modes such as walking, cycling and public transport.

� Connections : having established the proximity of an urban extension to higher order facilities it is important to assess the provision of transport connections from the site to these facilities. Connections will range from walk/cycle to public transport and car.

� Accessibility : The accessibility or aggregate journey times of trips from a site to a range of facilities enables comparisons to be made between competing sites. Accessibility will primarily be assessed by distance to facilities at Stage 2 with journey time considered in more detail at Stage 4.

� Infrastructure : the provision of transport infrastructure enabling connections to facilities from an urban extension enables trips to be made in an efficient manner. If walk, cycle and public transport infrastructure is available then trips will potentially be of a more sustainable nature and will aid reductions in car commuting and related congestion and emissions together with health benefits associated with more active travel choices. An assessment of existing infrastructure backed by committed improvements will enable any potential shortfalls to be identified.

1.1.5 This Stage 2 assessment takes forward previously completed Green Belt Review work and appraises six potential spatial opportunities for future development to meet the strategic housing needs of the city.



1.1.6 The six areas under consideration for possible release for development are:

� North of Oxford / South of Kidlington (which for the purposes of this report have been considered as two separate land holdings);

� Yarnton;

� Wick Farm;

� Wheatley;

� South of Grenoble Road; and

� North of Abingdon.

1.1.7 The purpose of this report is to provide transport inputs into the wider assessment covering a broader range of technical considerations being coordinated by Turley.

1.1.8 Section 2 of this report provides some context for the study, including an overview of existing national transport policy, a review of existing movement patterns and a summary of the current transport planning and infrastructure delivery programme in Oxford and Oxfordshire.

1.1.9 Section 3 provides more detail in respect of the Transport Assessment Framework summarised in Table 1.1 and presents the ‘Stage 2’ assessment of the spatial options identified.

1.1.10 Section 4 sets out the summary and conclusions of this Stage 2 assessment.



2 Transport Context

2.1 Transport Policy Overview

2.1.1 Minimising the need to travel and encouraging the adoption of sustainable modes of transport have been consistent threads in national and local transport policy for several years.

2.1.2 The National Planning Policy Framework outlines twelve core principles that should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking, one of which is the need to: “actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.”

2.1.3 This broad approach is reflected in the emerging Oxfordshire County Council Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4), recently subject to an early stage of public consultation on draft Goals and Objectives. LTP4, under the banner of ‘Connecting Oxfordshire’ proposes the following four strategic Goals:

� To support economic and housing growth in the county, and encourage inward investment through transport improvement and innovation;

� To facilitate inclusive and sustainable access to jobs and services;

� To manage the impacts of transport on human health and the environment , including reducing carbon emissions; and

� To encourage and facilitate physical activity through travel.

2.1.4 These Goals are supported by a set of eight Objectives expanding on the identified Goals, including:

� Minimise the need to travel; and

� Influence the location of development to maximise the use and value of existing and planned strategic transport investment.

2.1.5 LTP4 is responding to the existing constraints across Oxfordshire’s transport network and the challenges associated with delivering up to 80,000 jobs and 100,000 houses in the county by 2031, with supporting literature making reference to:

� Existing pressures on the network requiring larger and more radical solutions; and

� The need to work closely with public and private sector bodies to influence land use planning and facilitate improved transport connections.

2.1.6 Specific reference is made to the housing/jobs imbalance across the county, with 35% of the county’s jobs located in Oxford where a limited and unaffordable supply of housing results in longer journeys and less sustainable commuting patterns, with over half the jobs based in Oxford held by people living outside the city. It is also noted that 1/6th of Oxfordshire residents work in places outside of Oxfordshire in employment centres such as: London, Reading, Swindon, Milton Keynes and Birmingham.

2.1.7 The LTP4 will continue to be progressed over the coming months and will be subject to a public consultation process in early 2015 in advance of finalisation / adoption in Spring 2015. It is understood that LTP4 will include a revised Oxford Transport Strategy, replacing the current proposals as set out within LTP3. Updates to the Oxford Transport Strategy are likely



to be informed by the emerging strategic planning context following the publication of the SHMA (Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment, March 2014, GL Hearn). Therefore it is anticipated that this report and future stages of work linked to the OCC assessment of Strategic Growth Options will, to some extent, inform the revised Oxford Transport Strategy. At the time of writing and on behalf of OCC, PBA has initiated consultation with Oxfordshire County Council in regard to such matters.

2.2 Oxfordshire Existing Movement Patterns

2.2.1 Analysis of the latest Census data provides a useful illustration of the existing movement patterns across the Oxfordshire district councils.

Table 2.1: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Percentage of Trips to work to each District by Residents from each District

TO: Oxford City Cherwell

South Oxford-shire

Vale of White Horse

West Oxford-shire

Other Main ‘Other’ Places

FROM: Oxford City 77.2% 3.1% 3.6% 5.1% 1.8% 9.2% Cherwell

12.7% 65.2% 1.5% 2.1% 3.0% 15.5%

3.0% South Northants; 2.1% Aylesbury Vale

South Oxfordshire

10.4% 1.4% 54.7% 8.8% 0.7% 24.0%

3.6% Reading; 3.2% Wycombe; 2.2% Aylesbury Vale; 1.8% West Berks; 1.5% Wokingham

Vale of White Horse 16.9% 2.2% 6.2% 59.7% 2.9% 12.1%

2.1% Swindon; 1.7% West Berks

West Oxfordshire 13.2% 5.8% 1.5% 5.4% 64.7% 9.4% 1.2% Cotswold

2.2.2 From Table 2.1 , the following observations are made:

� A significant proportion (73%) of Oxford City residents, work (are contained) within the City; and

� The neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs have considerably lower levels of containment ranging between 55% (SODC) and 65% (Cherwell).


District Car Driver

Car Passenger Train Bus Cycle Walk

Work from Home / Other

Oxford City 34.0% 3.2% 2.5% 16.3% 17.6% 18.2% 8.2% Cherwell 63.2% 5.4% 2.9% 4.9% 3.5% 12.0% 8.1% South Oxfordshire 62.7% 3.9% 4.9% 3.1% 3.7% 11.0% 10.7%

Vale of White Horse 62.9% 4.2% 2.3% 5.8% 6.4% 9.3% 9.1%

West Oxfordshire 65.2% 4.6% 1.9% 4.3% 4.1% 10.2% 9.7%




District Car Driver

Car Passenger Train Bus Cycle Walk

Work from Home / Other

Oxford City 37.7% 4.2% 1.8% 16.3% 14.9% 14.7% 10.4% Cherwell 60.8% 6.6% 1.7% 4.9% 3.9% 10.6% 11.5% South Oxfordshire 61.9% 4.9% 4.3% 2.7% 3.7% 8.8% 13.7%

Vale of White Horse 60.2% 5.4% 1.8% 5.2% 6.7% 8.3% 12.4%

West Oxfordshire 61.7% 5.6% 1.5% 4.6% 4.9% 8.5% 13.2%

2.2.3 From Tables 2.2 and 2.3, the following observations are made:

� Oxford City residents are significantly less reliant on the car for journeys to work (34% driver plus 3.2% passenger) relative to neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs (c63% plus 5.6% passenger averages) (2011 Census);

� Oxford City residents have demonstrated a positive trend toward sustainable modes from 2001 to 2011; the reverse is true for the neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs;

� Oxford City residents use of bus (16%) and walking / cycling (35%) are significantly higher than the neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs (4.5% and 15% average respectively) (2011 census); and

� All LPAs show an increase in train use: whilst this is starting from a relatively small baseline in 2001, the relative increase is significant.

Table 2.4: 2011 Journey to Work Analysis: Origins of Journeys to Work for Oxford Employees and Car Dependency

District (residence of Oxford employees)

% Living in District (2011)

Car Driver Mode Share 2001 2011

Oxford City 54% 28% 24% Cherwell 10% 65% 62% South Oxfordshire 8% 72% 72% Vale of White Horse 11% 65% 62% West Oxfordshire 8% 70% 70% Other 9% - -

2.2.4 From the table above, it can be seen that 54% of Oxford employees also live in Oxford,

compared with 37% of Oxford employees who live in the neighbouring Oxfordshire LPAs. It also shows that journeys to work from outside Oxford are significantly more reliant on the car than employees living in Oxford.

2.2.5 In summary, Oxford City residents adopt significantly more sustainable travel patterns that their counterparts in the adjoining Oxfordshire districts. It should be noted that the Oxfordshire districts are broadly comparable with national averages, confirming that Oxford is the exception to the rule.

2.2.6 This is explained in part by the ‘containment’ shown in terms of travel to work, with 77% of Oxford City residents also working within the city. This reduced distance between home and work provides the basis from which to encourage the adoption of sustainable modes of transport, supported by Oxford’s established and improving network of public transport, walking and cycling routes.



2.2.7 It is recognised that the analysis above has been limited to journey to work trips. To provide some added context, an analysis of the National Travel Survey (NTS) database has been undertaken to determine the relative importance of journeys to work compared to all other trip purposes.

2.2.8 Analysis of the NTS (households surveyed across all regions, excluding London) has confirmed an average of 4.85 home-based trips (i.e. trips either starting or ending at home) per household per weekday. Of these, 1.11 (23%) are journeys to/from work, by some distance the single most significant journey purpose recorded:

� Commuting: 23%;

� Visit friends / social visits: 10%;

� Education: 9%;

� Retail (food): 8%;

� Retail (non-food) 8%;

� Education (escorting others): 7%; and

� Others (various): <7% each.

2.2.9 Whilst the NTS sample size is considerably smaller than the Census, it includes in excess of 70,000 house-holds (excluding London). The comparable car modal share was approximately 65% which is broadly consistent with the Census data national average.

2.2.10 The NTS car modal share average for all home-based journey purposes is approximately 45%. Given that Oxford benefits from the provision of an extensive range of services and facilities within the city, a reflection of its role at the top of the Oxfordshire settlement hierarchy, and established sustainable transport network it is reasonable to assume that the prospect for travel by sustainable modes for all other journey purposes is also high, in comparison to national averages.

2.2.11 The evidence considered consistently reaffirms the highly sustainable travel patterns demonstrated by Oxford City residents. In this context and specifically regarding established movement patterns, strategic development at Oxford would be likely to result in considerably more sustainable transport movements than any alternative location in Oxfordshire.

2.3 Oxfordshire Transport Infrastructure Schedule

2.3.1 The Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) (Oxfordshire LEP, 2014) explores many of the challenges facing Oxfordshire and sets out to drive accelerated economic growth supported by accelerated housing delivery and better integrated transport.

2.3.2 The SEP outlines an ambitious programme of interventions around the following four themes:

� Innovative Enterprise;

� Innovative People;

� Innovative Place; and

� Innovative Connectivity.



2.3.3 Innovative Connectivity provides a focus for improvements to the transport network including infrastructure investment to provide additional capacity and to maximise opportunities for movement by sustainable modes.

2.3.4 Whilst there are many strengths to the existing ‘connections’ across Oxfordshire (including: strategic location on UK road and rail networks, highest level of bus usage outside of London, newest bus fleet in the country, exemplar partnership working with public transport operators), the SEP identifies a number of significant challenges to be overcome:

� Slow / indirect international connections;

� Key arterial routes at capacity resulting in significant congestion and delays; and

� Limited connectivity across Oxfordshire, with poorly connected and dispersed development across the county.

2.3.5 An extensive package of proposals is identified within the SEP with a focus on improved connectivity through the Knowledge Spine (Bicester – Oxford – Science Vale). Annex A provides a summary of the extensive measures proposed across Oxfordshire (as illustrated at page 124 of the SEP ‘Committed and Proposed Transport Schemes’) and also includes projects / proposals referred to within the SEP main document and alternative sources including proposals led by Oxfordshire County Council.

2.3.6 PBA has collated the schedule at Annex A from known and available information sources, primarily the SEP, Oxfordshire County Council website, including the Local Transport Body prioritised list of schemes and early LTP4 proposals. It is recognised that these funding opportunities are subject to different funding and scheme delivery programmes. It is also recognised that additional proposals are likely to emerge over time. In this context, Annex A should be seen as a guide at this point in time. The schedule has been shared with Oxfordshire County Council to seek their views on its contents and to confirm any additional schemes that should be included.

2.3.7 The proposals identified have been split into the following categories, although it is noted that each individual scheme is responding to locally specific issues:

� Strategic Rail : investment in rail infrastructure that will provide improved journey time, reliability and capacity through the Knowledge Spine;

� Strategic Highway : investment in strategic highway infrastructure to address existing bottle necks / pinch points in the network;

� Local Sustainable Transport: investment in local public transport interchange, bus priority and/or pedestrian and cycle infrastructure; and

� Local Highway : investment in local highway infrastructure to address existing bottle necks / pinch points in the network, often with associated benefits for pedestrians, cyclists and bus movements.

2.3.8 An extract of the Oxfordshire Transport Infrastructure Schedule provided at Annex A focusing on schemes in and immediately around Oxford city is summarised in Table 2.5 .

2.3.9 Table 2.5 confirms that there is an extensive range of planned transport infrastructure improvements proposed for the local area drawing on funding from the City Deal, the Local Growth Fund (via the SEP) and other sources.

2.3.10 Strategic rail improvements feature highly amongst the committed schemes with the electrification of the main line through Oxford together with the Evergreen 3 and East-West



Rail service enhancements and new Oxford Parkway station, and investment in Oxford City rail station providing a step-change in service provision.

2.3.11 Strategic highway improvements to the A34 remain at the proposal stage and subject to the outcomes of a Highways Agency led corridor strategy that is due to report on preliminary outcomes in 2015.

2.3.12 The strategic rail improvements are complemented by a number of localised improvements to the transport network focusing on unlocking highway congestion at pinch points whilst also delivering improved connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists and more reliable bus services.

2.3.13 These localised improvements reflect consistent policy aspirations as outlined in recent Local Transport Plans, however, they are primarily orientated to addressing existing problems. The scale of SHMA housing growth currently under consideration will lead to the identification of further measures. This will be considered within the emerging LTP4 and the associated renewal of the Oxford Transport Strategy, led by Oxfordshire County Council.

2.3.14 One of the goals of this study and subsequent stages of assessment will be to assess potential development options and to begin to explore the likely transport infrastructure requirements, which in turn could inform the emerging Oxford Transport Strategy and LTP4.



Table 2.5: Oxford City Transport Infrastructure Schedule

2.4 Transport Infrastructure Funding Challenges

2.4.1 The SEP outlined an ambitious ‘ask’ for funding through the Local Growth Fund (LGF): the total amount of LGF funding identified amounted to:

� £678.34m total ask over the period through to 2021, of which £201.92m was identified for Innovative Connectivity (transport) proposals; and

� £155.11m total short-term ask for 2015/16, of which £24.14m was identified for Innovative Connectivity (transport) proposals.

Scheme NameLocal Planning

Authority

Committed (funding

secured) or Proposed

Funding Source (if Committed) or expected promoter

Type of Scheme (Strategic or Local Highway, Strategic

Rail, Local Sustainable Transport)

A34 Improvements Phase 1 (short-medium term relief measures) Multiple Proposed LGF (LEP) Strategic Highway

A34 Improvements Phase 2 (longer term strategic improvements) Multiple Proposed DfT / LGF (LEP) Strategic Highway

East-West Rail to Bedford and Milton Keynes*Oxford & Cherwell

Committed DfT / East West Rail Consortium Strategic Rail

Chiltern Railways Evergreen 3 (Oxford - Bicester - London Marylebone)*

Oxford & Cherwell

Committed Chiltern Railways Strategic Rail

Electrification of the Great Western Rail network Multiple Committed DfT Strategic Rail

Freight Lengthening Project Multiple Committed Network Rail / DfTStrategic Rail

(freight)A40 Public Transport Enhancements (Witney to Oxford Northern Gateway)

Oxford & W Oxfordshire

Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable

TransportA40 to A44 Link Road (Oxford Northern Approaches) Cherwell Proposed City Deal (part funded) Local HighwayNorthern Gateway Internal Access Road (Oxford Northern Approaches)

Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway

Wolvercote Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford Committed City Deal Local HighwayCutteslowe Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford Committed City Deal Local HighwayOxford Parkway Rail Station (Water Eaton)* Cherwell Committed Chiltern Railways Strategic Rail

Oxford Station Non-Rail Improvements Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable

Transport

Oxford Station Improvements Oxford CommittedOxford City, Oxfordshire County

& Network RailStrategic Rail

Frideswide Square improvements Oxford CommittedOxford City and Oxfordshire

County CouncilLocal Highway

West End / City Centre Improvements (Oxford) Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable

Transport

Eastern Arc Transportation Improvements (Oxford) Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable

TransportHeadington Phase 1 Improvements** Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP) Local HighwayHinksey Hill Interchange (Oxford Science Transit Phase 1) Oxford Committed City Deal Local Highway

Re-opening of Cowley branch line Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable

Transport

A420 London Road (Oxford): bus and cycle improvements at the Green Road roundabout and on London Road in the area of the Lyndworth Close junction followed by road surface improvements**.

Oxford Committed VariousLocal Sustainable

Transport

The Plain Roundabout: Cycle City Ambition Grant Oxford Committed Cycle City Ambition GrantLocal Sustainable

Transport

Headington Transport Improvements** Oxford CommittedLocal Sustainable Transport

FundLocal Sustainable

TransportNotes:Primary source documents: Oxfordshire LEP Strategic Economic Plan, LTP4 Goals & Objectives Consultation information, Oxfordshire Local Transport Body

List of schemes assesmbled from available information at the time of writing (sources listed where known) and remains subject to review with Oxford City and Oxfordshire County Councils.

It is recognised that some schemes will have a strategic and local function in certain areas and that some schemes are multi-modal. A single descriptor has been assigned to each scheme to best reflect the main objective of each scheme.



2.4.2 The Oxfordshire Growth Deal was announced in July 2014, confirming a total LGF investment of £108.5m:

� £10.6m funding (previously confirmed from Local Growth Deal);

� £9.2m additional funding for 2015/16;

� £53.7m funding for 2016/17 to 2021; and

� £35m provisional funding for projects starting from 2016.

The total of committed and provisional funding is £108.5m.

2.4.3 In respect of what projects these funds will be direct toward and specifically in relation to Innovative Connectivity, the following commitments have been made:

� Invest £8.2m in Headington Phase 1 and Eastern Arc Transport Improvements (£1.0m 2015/16);

� Invest £4.5m in Science Vale Cycle Network Improvements (£0.8m 2015/16);

� Invest £9.5m in the Didcot Station Car Park Expansion (Foxhall Rd) (£0.6m 2015/16);

� Invest £1.3m in Bicester London Road Level Crossing (£0.8 2015/16); and

� Provisionally allocate £35m to the Oxford Science Transit Phase 2 pipeline project, starting in 2017/18.

2.4.4 In addition to these projects, the Government has also made the following commitments:

� Construction of a new rail link from the Great Western Main Line east of Slough to London Heathrow Airport (Terminal 5) to enhance access to Heathrow Airport from Thames Valley and the West. Investment is subject to a satisfactory business case and construction is programmed to commence during Control Period 5 (2014-19). Network Rail’s provisional programme is to start construction in April 2017 with completion by December 2021;

� Improved Network Rail and DfT engagement with the LEP in respect of future long-term rail planning; and

� Improved Highways Agency engagement with the LEP in respect of future long-term network planning and specifically through the emerging Route Strategies (e.g. for the A34).

2.4.5 The Oxfordshire Growth Deal announcement confirms the continuing funding challenges that face the LEP and local authorities with £3.2m of funding secured for the 2015/16 period against an LGF ask for £24.14m, and a funding gap for transport (Innovative Connectivity) schemes to 2021 of approximately £100m.

2.4.6 However, this funding outlook should be seen in the context of significant committed investment (pre-LGF) in a range of schemes through Pinch Point (improvements to the M40 and A34) and City Deal funding (various improvements across the county) and most notably in strategic rail investment including:

� Chiltern Evergreen 3 proposals providing a new connection from Oxford to London Marylebone via the new Oxford Parkway station and Bicester;



� East-West Rail providing new connections to Milton Keynes and Bedford;

� Electrification of the mainline;

� Western Rail access to Heathrow;

� Investment in new rolling stock; and

� Investment in existing stations.

2.5 The Oxford Opportunity

2.5.1 The current Transport Policy context is well established and centres on minimising the need to travel and encouraging the adoption of sustainable modes of transport.

2.5.2 Analysis of existing Movement Patterns have confirmed that residents of Oxford City travel shorter distances to work and adopt more sustainable modes of transport relative to residents of the neighbouring LPAs: 34% of residents rely on the car to get to work with a comparative figure of 63% for the neighbouring LPAs.

2.5.3 A review of the current Transport Schemes identified within the SEP and LTP and related Funding Context confirms the continued challenge securing the necessary funds for strategic infrastructure improvements necessary to support the scale of growth planned for Oxfordshire over the next 20+ years. Notwithstanding, there is also a requirement to ensure that the committed investment being directed toward strategic rail improvements is maximised: Oxford is particularly well placed to capitalise on this given the Chiltern Evergreen 3 and East-West rail proposals, the new Oxford Parkway station at Water Eaton and proposed redevelopment of Oxford rail station.

2.5.4 In this context, Oxford provides the opportunity to deliver strategic housing development in accordance with primary transport policy objectives; in a location that has proven and improving trend toward sustainable travel choices thanks to a comprehensive and established network of local bus, walking and cycling routes; and in close proximity to a sustainable transport network benefitting from significant inward investment in the rail network in a period of continued funding uncertainty.



3 Stage 2 Framework Transport Assessment

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 A Framework Transport Assessment approach has been identified based around five key parameters which together combine to provide a high level assessment which can be used to compare the identified development sites. The parameters are:

� Threshold;

� Proximity;

� Connections;

� Accessibility; and

� Infrastructure.

3.1.2 The parameters identified will be considered in progressively more detail as the Strategic Growth Options study advances through the identified stages of assessment, as summarised within Table 1.1 .

3.1.3 This section of this report reports on the high level transport constraints and opportunities analysis undertaken at Stage 2 of assessment and follows the methodology summarised within Table 3.1 .

Table 3.1: Stage 2 Framework Transport Assessment Outline Methodology

Overview Method Threshold Assume all sites provide basic

day to day facilities on-site. • All sites assumed to for provide day to day

needs through provision of on-site local centres with associated facilities.

• No ‘comparison assessment’ proposed at this stage.

Proximity Distance assessment to a range of higher order off-site facilities & services.

• Key facilities and services identified across the City.

• Distance measurement (m) taken from each site to each node to enable site comparison .

Connections Primary focus on public transport connections.

• City wide assessment of rail and bus provision and review of existing services at each site, including known committed improvements.

• Preliminary assessment of service enhancements expected to be required to serve development at each site.

Accessibility Initial assessment based on journey distance by walking and cycling.

• Preliminary assessment of accessibility to each node by walking and cycling, based upon distance only .

Infrastruc ture Review of planned transport infrastructure improvements.

• Appraisal of current strategic transport proposals and their potential benefit to each site.

3.1.4 For each assessment parameter, a brief description of the assessment methodology is

provided, expanding on the summary provided within Table 3.1 , before presenting the results and analysis. Any notable limitations of assessment are then considered together with the proposed scope for Stage 4 assessment, which will follow conclusion of the broader study Stage 2 works and Stage 3 Sustainability Appraisal.



3.2 Stage 2 Assessment Outcomes

Threshold

3.2.1 The size of the potential urban extension (number of dwellings) will determine the level of self-containment or internalisation which can be achieved in terms of trip making. It is therefore important to consider the threshold for potential development for an urban extension site.

3.2.2 Given that site constraints and opportunities are being evaluated as part of this stage of the broader study process, it is not yet possible to define site developable areas or expected development capacity and mix of land uses to be provided on-site.

3.2.3 For the purpose of this stage of assessment, it has therefore been assumed that each site will bring forward the same level of supporting facilities and amenities which are anticipated to include provision of local centre(s) catering for the day to day needs of the community including for example primary school provision.

3.2.4 Accordingly, no site comparison is provided for this assessment parameter at this stage of assessment. This will form part of the Stage 4 assessment.

Proximity

3.2.5 The proximity (distance) of an urban extension to the range of services and facilities located within an existing urban area is important in terms of accessing higher order facilities not provided on-site. This is especially the case where good connections to local services can reduce the need to travel and encourage modes such as walking, cycling and public transport. If trips have to be made by car, minimising distance will reduce overall travel and minimise resulting emissions.

3.2.6 A desk-based assessment has been undertaken identifying the key destinations accommodating higher order facilities across the city and a simple distance measurement undertaken to enable site comparison.

3.2.7 Analysis of NTS data (households surveyed, excluding London), as considered in more detail at Section 2 of this report, has confirmed an average of 4.85 home-based trips per household (i.e. trips either starting or ending at home) per weekday. Of these, 1.11 (23%) are journeys to/from work, by some distance the single most significant journey purpose recorded. The most frequent journey purposes are:

� Commuting: 23%;

� Visit friends / social visits: 10%;

� Education: 9%;

� Education (escorting others): 6%;

� Retail (food): 9%;

� Retail (non-food) 8%; and

� Others (various): <8% each.

3.2.8 These journey purposes have been used to help identify key destinations across the city where jobs, education and retail services are primarily located, with the exception of visiting



friends / social visits which are likely to be diluted across a broader number of destinations and accordingly have been discounted for the purpose of this comparative assessment.

3.2.9 For significant employment opportunities, the key destinations have been identified as one of the following:

� Oxford city centre: measured from Carfax;

� South of the city covering the range of opportunities located in this part of the city including Oxford Business Park, UNIPART and BMW/MINI: measured from a single location determined as Oxford Business Park (Oxfam HQ on John Smith Drive);

� Oxford Science Park: measured from the Robert Robinson Avenue / Edmund Halley Road roundabout;

� Northern Gateway: measured from Peartree P&R;

� Headington to reflect the range of education and health care related employment opportunities: measured from Oxford Brookes main building on Gipsy Lane;

� Begbroke Science Park: measured from the centre of the Park; and

� Abingdon Business Park: measured from the Colwell Drive / Blacklands Way roundabout.

3.2.10 For education and based upon the assumption that primary school provision would be provided on-site, the nearest secondary school site has been identified for each site.

3.2.11 For retail trips, the city centre, nearest district centre and large supermarket have been identified as the key destinations providing for higher order retail services, based upon the assumption that day to day convenience retail provision would be provided on-site.

3.2.12 For each site, a single location has been identified from which to take distance measurements. This has been identified by selecting a location on a local arterial route passing the site adjacent to the existing urban area and where possible, broadly centrally located relative to the whole site area under consideration:

� North of Oxford: measured from the A4165 Oxford Road / entrance to North Oxford Golf Club;

� South of Kidlington: measured from the Kidlington Roundabout A4165 Oxford Road / A4260 Frieze Way;

� Yarnton: measured from the junction of A44 Woodstock Road / Cassington Road;

� Wick Farm: measured from Bayswater Road immediately north of Waynflete Road (N);

� Wheatley: measured from the junction of London Road / The Avenue;

� South of Grenoble Road: measured from the junction of Grenoble Road / B480 Watlington Road; and

� North of Abingdon: measured from the junction of A4183 Oxford Road / Dunmore Road.

3.2.13 For the purpose of this stage of assessment, each spatial option has been considered in the context of these trip purposes and associated destinations as summarised in Table 3.2 .



Table 3.2: Proximity to Services: confirmation of key destinations

3.2.14 Figure 3.1 illustrates the location of the broad site locations and key employment destinations.

3.2.15 No weighting has been applied to account for the increased significance of any single journey purpose at this stage of assessment.

3.2.16 A measurement of shortest walk distance has been determined for each journey identified in Table 3.1 and for each journey purpose; the spatial options have been ranked with the closest ranked 1st and furthest away 7th.

3.2.17 The outcomes of the assessment are presented in Table 3.3 .

Table 3.3: Proximity to Key Services: distance comparison

3.2.18 The South of Kidlington, North of Oxford, Wheatley and South of Grenoble Road sites perform comparably with a total score of 14, 16.5, 17 and 17.5 respectively. South of Grenoble Road and North of Oxford perform better in respect of proximity to the city centre, local employment and district centre. South of Kidlington and Wheatley benefit from being located closest to a supermarket and secondary school.

3.2.19 The Wick, Yarnton and North of Abingdon sites score comparatively poorly with a total score of 23.5. 24.5 and 27 respectively.

3.2.20 When compared to the average distance across all of the sites to each destination, it is notable that the Wheatley site is considerably further away from a key local employment opportunity. Given that 22% of all weekday household trips are commuter journeys; this is likely to have a significant impact on movement patterns.

3.2.21 The North of Oxford and South of Grenoble Road sites perform best in terms of proximity to the city centre, key local employment centre and local district centre. This is worthy of note given that local retail facilities and/or a secondary school could reasonably be expected to be

DestinationPrimary Trip Purpose(s)

City CentreEmployment, Retail, Education

Local Employment Employment

District Centre (or equivalent)

Retail

Supermarket Retail

Secondary School Education

Waitrose, Abingdon town

centre

The Oxford Academy

Wheatley Park Cheney School Gosford Hill Gosford Hill Gosford Hill Fitzharrys

Tesco Superstore,

CowleyAsda, Wheatley

Tesco Superstore,

Cowley

Sainsbury's, Oxford Road,

Kidlington


Kidlington


Kidlington

Kidlington Abingdon

Abingdon Business Park

South of City (Oxfam, Oxford Business Park)

South of City (Oxfam, Oxford Business Park)

Headington Area (Gipsy

Lane)

Northern Gateway

(Peartree P&R)

Northern Gateway

(Peartree P&R)

Begbroke Science Park

Blackbrid Leys Wheatley Headington Summertown Kidlington

North of Ab ingdon

Carfax Carfax Carfax Carfax Carfax Carfax Carfax

South of Grenoble Rd

Wheatley WickNorth of Oxford

South of Kidlington

Yarnton

Dist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankDist (m)

RankAv Dist

(m)

City Centre 6400 3 6800 5 5400 2 5000 1 6500 4 7000 6 7900 7 6429

Local Key Employment Site 1750 2 6850 7 2800 5 1900 3 2300 4 1600 1 3700 6 2986

District Centre 1600 2.5 1000 1 1600 2.5 2200 5 2000 4 2500 7 2400 6 1900

Supermarket 1700 4 800 2 5000 7 1600 3 110 1 2890 6 2300 5 2057

Secondary School 2600 6 1600 2 3200 7 2500 4.5 900 1 2500 4.5 1700 3 2143

Total

Overall Rank 2 1 6

27

7

17.5 17 23.5 16.5 14 24.5

4 3 5

South of Grenoble

RdWheatley Wick

North of Oxford

South of Kidlington

YarntonNorth of

Abingdon

-Date

Scale

Drawn by

Checked by

Mark Revision ChkdDateDrawn

A

J:\30798 Oxford Transport Consultancy Support\Technical\Corel\Figure 3_1 Oxford Growth Strategy Figure REV A.cdr

NC

SH/ASa

A3 - N.T.S

02.10.2014

FIGURE 3.1

PROFORMA REPORT APPENDIX 3:TRANSPORT OVERVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF SITE

OPTIONSOXFORD GROWTH STRATEGY

OXFORD CITY COUNCIL

KEY:

OBJECT 1

OBJECT 2

OBJECT 3

OBJECT 4

OBJECT 5

OBJECT 6

OBJECT 7

OBJECT 8

OBJECT 9

OBJECT 10

OBJECT 11

OBJECT 12

Offices throughout the UK and Europe

www.peterbrett.com

© Peter Brett Associates LLP

Client

N

NC16.10.14ASA Minor revisions for final issue



delivered as part of any future urban extension, subject to the scale of development. The development threshold will be assessed in more detail at Stage 4 of the assessment process.

3.2.22 Further refinement to assessment will be required when development capacity and level of on-site facilities and services (threshold) are available; this will be informed by the completed sites constraints and opportunities being undertaken across the broader range of technical studies at this Stage 2 of assessment. This will also necessitate a review of the location identified from which the respective site proximity measurements have been determined.

3.2.23 This will be complemented by site visits to review and where necessary adjust the routes identified and distances measured at this stage of assessment, currently limited to desk based investigations.

3.2.24 The key destinations identified will also be reviewed against the socio-economic assessments undertaken as part of the broader study and reported under separate cover.

3.2.25 These refinements together with the potential to apply weightings to reflect the importance of destinations (by journey purpose) will be considered at Stage 4 of the assessment process.

Connections

3.2.26 Having established the proximity of the higher order facilities it is important to establish the transport connections from the site to these facilities. Connections will range from walk/cycle to public transport and car. The individual routes or connection should ultimately be physically identified, the modes operating over the route / connection and a qualitative assessment made.

3.2.27 Walking and cycling will have a hugely important role, however, this will be considered when a more detailed understanding of site constraints is held following completion of the broader Stage 2 works.

3.2.28 In the absence of a confirmed site boundary and developable area, it is not possible to define third party land ownership constraints which will be critical when identifying physical connections into each site including walk, cycle and highway connections.

3.2.29 At this stage in the assessment process, distance is considered to be an adequate gauge of whether a destination is broadly accessible on foot or by bicycle. A high level appraisal of this is set out under Accessibility below.

3.2.30 It is also noted that strategic walking and cycling connections to each site will have to overcome significant barriers to movement including crossing the inner ring road and other strategic rail and highway infrastructure. This is not unusual for an urban extension proposal and whilst it will require full consideration at a later stage to identify appropriate mitigation, it is not considered further at this stage.

3.2.31 Highway connections are also better considered when a broad development capacity is known as this will determine the number of points of access and scale of infrastructure required.

3.2.32 At this stage, the focus has been on assessing public transport connections. Alongside walking and cycling and based upon the existing movement patterns revealed by census data as considered at Section 2 , public transport will be a key means of moving future residents from any future urban extension to the key destinations across the city.

3.2.33 A comprehensive desk-based appraisal of existing public transport provision across Oxford and serving each spatial option is provided at Annex B , together with a preliminary view of how future connections could be provided to serve an urban extension at the locations identified.



3.2.34 Pedestrian connections to local bus stops have not been considered at this stage of assessment for the same reasons for not assessing walk and cycle connections as outlined above; any signifcant barriers to movement will be identified at Stage 4.

3.2.35 Annex B confirms that Oxford benefits from a high quality network of bus routes which is being complemented by significant investment in strategic rail improvements, as also considered within Section 2 of this report. This is borne out by high levels of bus modal share, with 16% of Oxford residents using the bus for journeys to work and a growing proportion of rail use increasing to 2.5% modal share at the 2011 Census.

3.2.36 A summary of the appraisal at Annex B is provided within Table 3.4 , confirming that each site can be connected to the city centre, rail stations (at either Oxford station or Oxford Parkway) and key employment areas. It should be noted that the South of Grenoble Road which is less easily connected to Oxford rail station by bus without finding a way to secure connections through Blackbird Leys and across Grenoble Road. Any proposals to re-open the Cowley line branch to passenger rail services would provide much improved access to rail services and counter this potential constraint.

3.2.37 The South of Kidlington and North of Oxford sites also benefit from being located within 2km of Oxford Parkway station, which is currently under construction.

3.2.38 The assessment outlined at Tables B5 and B6 at Annex B provide an initial view in respect of which services could be extended or enhanced to serve development at each site. The detail of any such proposal remains subject to review following confirmation of the broad development capacity at each site as this will inform additional revenue calculations and underlying service costs, as any service enhancements will need to be financially sustainable.

3.2.39 Given that each spatial option can be readily connected to the key destinations identified, the comparison of each site at this stage of assessment has been informed by the qualitative review and by the frequency of existing services passing each site in the peak periods as outlined in Annex B .

Table 3.4: Public Transport Connections

Can these key destinations be readily accessed by bus from each spatial option?

Located within

2km of a Rail

Station?

Frequency (services

per hr)

Rank (based on frequency

only) City Centre Rail Access Employment

Yarnton �� 6 7

South of Kidlington �� 19 2

North of Oxford �� 41 1

Wick �� 11 5

Wheatley �� 11 6

South of Grenoble Road �� 20 3

North of Abingdon �� 13 4

3.2.40 As all of the key centres would be able to be reached by bus, the differentials between the

sites are related to frequency and the current penetration of existing routes.



3.2.41 North of Oxford comes top of the comparative assessment because of the very high frequency of service and the ability to access the city centre, Oxford Parkway and employment areas by existing services that would not require significant amendment.

3.2.42 South of Kidlington has a slightly lower frequency than South of Grenoble Road, the former comes second by virtue of the fact that services operate through the area of search whereas in the latter, services would need to be extended or diverted to serve the site.

3.2.43 North of Abingdon ranks fourth on frequency grounds.

3.2.44 The Wick and Wheatley sites are evenly matched in terms of accessibility to Oxford city centre, with similar frequencies; however, two separate and technically competing operators serve Wheatley and the lack of ticket inter-availability means a reduction in effective frequency for most passengers. Wick is ranked fifth and Wheatley sixth, with this last comparator being the differential between the two sites.

3.2.45 Yarnton is therefore ranked seventh as a result of the relatively low existing frequency of services.

3.2.46 Refinement to the assessment will be required when development capacity and level of on-site facilities and services (threshold) are available; this will be informed by the completed sites constraints and opportunities being undertaken at this Stage 2 of assessment. This will be complemented by site visits to review and where necessary adjust the routes identified and any constraints identified, currently limited to desk based investigations.

3.2.47 Connections to any additional key destinations specifically relevant to each individual site would also be considered, at Stage 4 when fewer site options will be under consideration.

3.2.48 Localised pedestrian connections to local bus services will also be considered together with a more detailed assessment of which services are likely to pass by each site and which services may be able to penetrate into a site.

3.2.49 These refinements together with an assessment of pedestrian, cycle and highway connections will be considered at Stage 4 of the assessment process. Consultation with Oxfordshire County Council will also be extended to enquire about any proposed service or infrastructure enhancements proposed or emerging through the LTP4 and Oxford Transport Strategy renewal, not identified within Table 2.5 . Extending related consultation to engage with local transport user groups will also be considered.

Accessibility

3.2.50 Accessibility typically relates to the time a journey would take (journey time) from a site to an identified facility by walk, cycle, public transport and car. The accessibility or aggregate journey times of trips from a site to a range of facilities enables comparisons to be made between competing sites.

3.2.51 The journey time to any of the destinations identified is sensitive to a range of parameters including: the location and form of access provision into a site, any missing connections across the transport network; and the operational performance of the local road network whereby peak period congestion can significantly impact on journey times and journey time reliability, particularly for trips by bus and car.

3.2.52 Due to the limited information available at this stage of assessment, an assessment of car and public transport journey time has not been considered at this stage.

3.2.53 For the purpose of this Stage 2 accessibility assessment, distance is considered to be an adequate gauge of whether a destination is broadly accessible on foot or by bicycle.



3.2.54 There are limits to distances generally considered acceptable for walking and cycling and these vary according to journey purpose and are influenced by an extensive range of factors.

3.2.55 The now expired PPG13 Transport stated (at para 74) that walking offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly for journeys under 2km and (at para 77) that cycling has the potential for substituting short car trips, particularly those under 5km. This is substantiated in the recent NTS, which identifies that the average trip length by bicycle is 3.0 miles (4.8km).

3.2.56 For the purpose of this Stage 2 assessment, these guidelines have been used to determine the assessment approach.

3.2.57 A simple scoring system has been determined to assess the walk and cycle accessibility of each site to the destinations previously identified with a point scored for walking when a site is located within 2km and a point scored for walking when a site is located within 5km. The points for walking and cycling accessibility have then been tallied and a ranking allocated for each site based on points scored, as detailed in Table 3.5 .

Table 3.5: Walk and Cycle Accessibility Comparison

3.2.58 The outcomes of this pedestrian and cycle accessibility assessment support the broad

conclusions of the proximity assessment, confirming that the North of Oxford, South of Kidlington and South of Grenoble Road sites are more accessible than the Wick, Yarnton and North of Abingdon sites. However, the margin of difference between sites has been reduced.

3.2.59 Refinement to the assessment will be required when a more detailed understanding of site constraints is available, this will enable firmer assumptions to be made about physical connections into each site and the resulting journey time determined by walking and cycling to the destinations identified. A more refined assessment will confirm if there is a greater disparity between sites than currently reported.

3.2.60 These refinements together with an assessment of public transport and car accessibility will be considered at Stage 4 of the assessment process.

Infrastructure

3.2.61 The provision of transport infrastructure in terms of the available connections to facilities from a site enables trips to be made in an efficient manner. If walk, cycle and public transport infrastructure is available then trips will potentially be of a more sustainable nature and will aid reductions in car commuting and related congestion and emissions together with health benefits associated with more active travel choices.

Walk Cycle Walk Cycle Walk Cycle Walk Cycle Walk Cycle Walk Cycle Walk Cycle

City Centre 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Local Key Employment Site 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

District Centre 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1

Supermarket 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1

Secondary School 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

Total 3 4 3 3 1 4 2 5 3 4 1 4 1 4

Combined Walk / Cycle Score

Overall Rank

7

2

5

6

7

2

6

4

5

6

7

2

South of Grenoble

Rd

5

6

Wheatley WickNorth of Oxford

South of Kidlington

YarntonNorth of

Abingdon



3.2.62 Existing infrastructure backed by committed improvements will enable any potential shortfalls to be identified, whether new or enhanced infrastructure can be provided and thus aid the overall accessibility of the site compared to others.

3.2.63 The identification of any site specific infrastructure required to deliver development could enable site comparison based upon associated infrastructure costs and delivery risks. However, this information will not be available until later in the assessment process.

3.2.64 Notwithstanding this, a preliminary review of planned infrastructure improvements has been undertaken, considering the relative benefits of the proposals identified within Table 2.1 in respect of each site. An appraisal has been determined to score the sites against the improvements identified adopting the criteria outlined in Table 3.6 .

Table 3.6: Significance Assessment of Planned Transport Infrastructure Proposals

Significance of Scheme Delivery Prospect (refer to Table 2.1) Committed Proposed

Significant: situated locally and likely to directly impact on travel patterns 3 2 Moderate: situated locally with the potential to impact on travel patterns 2 1 Negligib le: situated locally although unlikely to have an impact on travel patterns

0 0

Table 3.7: Local Transport Infrastructure Comparison

Scheme NameLocal Planning

AuthorityYarnton

South of Kidlington

North of Oxford

Wick WheatleySouth of

Grenoble Rd

North of Abingdon

Committed (funding

secured) or Proposed

A34 Improvements Phase 1 (short-medium term relief measures) Multiple 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

A34 Improvements Phase 2 (longer term strategic improvements) Multiple 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

East-West Rail to Bedford and Milton Keynes*Oxford & Cherwell

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

Chiltern Railways Evergreen 3 (Oxford - Bicester - London Marylebone)*

Oxford & Cherwell

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

Electrification of the Great Western Rail network Multiple 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

Freight Lengthening Project Multiple 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

A40 Public Transport Enhancements (Witney to Oxford Northern Gateway)


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

A40 to A44 Link Road (Oxford Northern Approaches) Cherwell 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 ProposedNorthern Gateway Internal Access Road (Oxford Northern Approaches)

Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

Wolvercote Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CommittedCutteslowe Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 CommittedOxford Parkway Rail Station (Water Eaton)* Cherwell 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 Committed

Oxford Station Non-Rail Improvements Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

Oxford Station Improvements Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

Frideswide Square improvements Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

West End / City Centre Improvements (Oxford) Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed

Eastern Arc Transportation Improvements (Oxford) Oxford 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Proposed

Headington Phase 1 Improvements** Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProposedHinksey Hill Interchange (Oxford Science Transit Phase 1) Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 Committed

Re-opening of Cowley branch line Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Proposed

A420 London Road (Oxford): bus and cycle improvements at the Green Road roundabout and on London Road in the area of the Lyndworth Close junction followed by road surface improvements**.

Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

The Plain Roundabout: Cycle City Ambition Grant Oxford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Committed

Headington Transport Improvements** Oxford 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 Committed

Total 4 4 4 1 0 3 2Ranking 2 2 2 4.5 6.5 4.5 6.5



Notes (Table 3.7): *these rail proposals have been considered in combination with a score of '2' allocated to Water Eaton only **these proposals in the Headington area have been considered in combination to score '2' allocated to Headington Transport Improvements only

3.2.65 The assessment undertaken and presented at Table 3.7 indicates that all of the sites will benefit from planned infrastructure investment and that there is little difference between the sites in respect of how they are likely to benefit from these planned improvements to local transport infrastructure.

3.2.66 However, one distinction is that the sites at Yarnton, South of Kidlington and North of Oxford will benefit more directly from the committed strategic investment in rail which is likely to deliver sustained benefits over a longer period of time.

3.2.67 The proposals identified within Table 2.1 , with the exception of the strategic rail and highway proposals, are all largely orientated toward addressing existing localised transport constraints. This study is primarily related to supporting the additional strategic housing requirement identified for Oxford within the SHMA, or at least the extent of additional housing over and above levels previously planned for.

3.2.68 Accordingly it is recognised and expected that additional infrastructure will be required to support this additional development. Furthermore, one of the goals of this assessment is to assess options for growth and identify the broad infrastructure needs of future development to inform the strategic planning context including the emerging LTP4 and renewed Oxford Transport Strategy.

3.2.69 It remains important, however, to recognise existing transport infrastructure commitments when planning future development. Funding uncertainties and the inherent challenges in delivering infrastructure improvements ahead of or in line with future development will remain. It is therefore important to maximise the benefits of planned improvements, for example by locating new development in close proximity to areas benefitting from or able to benefit in the future from investment in strategic transport improvements.

3.2.70 Oxford will benefit from committed rail infrastructure and service enhancements with the opening of Oxford Parkway opening up new opportunities for sustainable travel from areas north of Oxford including the North Oxford and South of Kidlington sites. The potential to extend passenger services along the Cowley line branch could also potentially open up improved rail access to the South of Grenoble Road site.

3.2.71 An assessment of site specific transport infrastructure requirements will be considered at Stages 4 and 5 of the assessment process.



4 Summary and Conclusions

4.1.1 Peter Brett Associates LLP (PBA) has been commissioned by Oxford City Council (OCC) to provide transport consultancy advice, supporting a broader study into growth options in and around the city.

4.1.2 A Framework Transport Assessment approach has been outlined based around five key parameters which together combine to provide a high level assessment which can be used to compare the identified development sites. The parameters identified will be considered in progressively more detail as the Strategic Growth Options study advances through the identified stages of assessment, as summarised within Table 1.1 .

4.1.3 This Stage 2 assessment takes forward previously completed Green Belt Review work and appraises six potential spatial opportunities for future development to meet the strategic housing needs of the city. The purpose of this report is to provide transport inputs into the wider Stage 2 assessment works covering a broader range of technical considerations being coordinated by Turley on behalf of OCC.

4.1.4 At Section 2 , this report has provided some background context for the study, including an overview of existing national transport policy, a review of existing movement patterns and a summary of the current transport planning and infrastructure delivery programme in Oxford and Oxfordshire.

4.1.5 This review has confirmed Oxford as the right location for accommodating at least some of the strategic housing requirement. Analysis of data extracted from the National Travel Survey and Census has confirmed the importance of locating housing development within close proximity to jobs: 23% of all weekday household trips are commuter journeys and existing Oxford residents demonstrate significantly less reliance on the car for travelling to work (34%) than people living in the neighbouring Oxfordshire districts (63%). Placing further housing development adjacent to the city will provide the best opportunity to replicate these sustainable travel patterns.

4.1.6 At Section 3 , this report presents a high level transport constraints and opportunities analysis undertaken at this stage in the assessment process. The proximity of each site to key destinations identified across the city providing higher order facilities and services has been considered in conjunction with public transport connections and existing walk and cycle accessibility. An appraisal of current transport infrastructure proposals has been undertaken, confirming the extent of planned transport infrastructure investment and how this relates to the sites under consideration for future growth.

4.1.7 Notwithstanding the limitations of this stage of assessment and the need to advance the extent and depth of assessment going forward, preliminary outcomes have consistently identified development to the North of Oxford / South of Kidlington and South of Grenoble Road as performing better in transport terms than the Wheatley, Wick, Yarnton and North of Abingdon sites. This is illustrated within Table 4.1 .



Table 4.1: Stage 2 Assessment Summary

4.1.8 Following completion of the wider Stage 2 studies and the Stage 3 Sustainability Appraisal, the Framework Transport Assessment will be advanced as part of the broader Stage 4 stage of assessment in line with the broad scope of work outlined at Table 1.1 .

Proximity

Walk / Cycle Accessibility

Public Transport Accessibility

Infrastructure

Total

Overall Rank

4.5 6.5 4.5 2 2 2 6.5

13.5

3 4 5 1 1 6 7

South of Grenoble

RdWheatley Wick

North of Oxford

South of Kidlington

YarntonNorth of

Abingdon

2 1 6

6 2 2 6

5 1 2 7

4

2

3

3

4

6

5

19.5 20.5 7 7 21 23.5

7

6

4



Annex A: Oxfordshire Transport Infrastructure Schedule





Scheme NameLocal Planning Authority

Committed (funding secured) or Proposed


Type of Scheme (Strategic or Local Highway, Strategic Rail, Local Sustainable Transport)

Information Source

M40 Junction 10 Cherwell Committed Pinch Point Strategic Highway SEPM40 Junction 9 Cherwell Committed Pinch Point Strategic Highway SEPA34 Improvements Phase 1 (short-medium term relief measures) Multiple Proposed LGF (LEP) Strategic Highway SEP

A34 Improvements Phase 2 (longer term strategic improvements) Multiple Proposed DfT / LGF (LEP) Strategic Highway SEP

East-West Rail to Bedford and Milton Keynes Oxford & Cherwell CommittedDfT / East West Rail Consortium

Strategic Rail SEP

Chiltern Railways Evergreen 3 (Oxford - Bicester - London Marylebone)

Oxford & Cherwell Committed Chiltern Railways Strategic Rail SEP / www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/

Electrification of the Great Western Rail network Multiple Committed DfT Strategic Rail SEP

Freight Lengthening Project Multiple Committed Network Rail / DfTStrategic Rail (freight)

www.oxford.gov.uk/railprojects

Bicester Station Improvements Cherwell Committed Chiltern RailwaysLocal Sustainable Transport

SEP / www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/

Charbridge Lane Railway Crossing (Bicester) Cherwell Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

London Road Railway Crossing (Bicester) Cherwell Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

Bicester Peripheral Road Route Improvements Cherwell Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEPBicester P&R Cherwell Committed tbc Local HighwayA40 Public Transport Enhancements (Witney to Oxford Northern Gateway)


Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

A40 to A44 Link Road (Oxford Northern Approaches) Cherwell Committed (tbc) City Deal (part funded) Local Highway SEPNorthern Gateway Internal Access Road (Oxford Northern Approaches)

Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEP

Wolvercote Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford Committed City Deal Local Highway SEPCutteslowe Roundabout (Oxford Northern Approaches) Oxford Committed City Deal Local Highway SEPOxford Parkway Rail Station (Water Eaton) Cherwell Committed Chiltern Railways Strategic Rail SEP / www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/

Oxford Station Non-Rail Improvements Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

Oxford Station Improvements Oxford CommittedOxford City, Oxfordshire County & Network Rail

Strategic Rail SEP / www.oxford.gov.uk/railprojects

Frideswide Square improvements Oxford CommittedOxford City & Oxfordshire County

Local Highway

West End / City Centre Improvements (Oxford) Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

Eastern Arc Transportation Improvements (Oxford) Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP

Headington Phase 1 Improvements Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEPHinksey Hill Interchange (Oxford Science Transit Phase 1) Oxford Committed City Deal Local Highway SEP

Re-opening of Cowley branch line Oxford Proposed LGF (LEP)Local Sustainable Transport

SEP



Scheme NameLocal Planning Authority

Committed (funding secured) or Proposed


Type of Scheme (Strategic or Local Highway, Strategic Rail, Local Sustainable Transport)

Information Source

Access to Culham Science Centre Vale of White Horse Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEPMilton Interchange (Didcot, Science Vale) Vale of White Horse Committed Pinch Point Strategic Highway SEPChilton Interchange (Harwell / Didcot, Science Vale) Vale of White Horse Committed Pinch Point Strategic Highway SEP

Science Vale Cycle Network ImprovementsVale of White Horse & South Oxfordshire

CommittedLocal Sustainable Transport

SEP

Science Bridge (Didcot, Science Vale) South Oxfordshire Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEPDidcot Gateway (Didcot, Science Vale) South Oxfordshire Proposed LGF (LEP) SEPJubilee Way (Didcot, Science Vale) South Oxfordshire Proposed LGF (LEP) SEPAccess to Harwell Phase 1: Harwell Field Link & Hagboure Hill Improvements (Didcot, Science Vale)

Vale of White Horse & South Oxfordshire

Committed City Deal Local Highway SEP

Featherbed Lane including Steventon Signals (Harwell / Didcot, Science Vale)

Vale of White Horse Committed City Deal Local Highway SEP

A417 Improvements: Wantage to BlewburyVale of White Horse & South Oxfordshire

Proposed LGF (LEP) Local Highway SEP

Wantage Eastern Link Road Vale of White Horse Committed City Deal Local Highway SEP

A420 London Road (Oxford): bus and cycle improvements at the Green Road roundabout and on London Road in the area of the Lyndworth Close junction followed by road surface improvements.

Oxford Committed VariousLocal Sustainable Transport

https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/public-site/future-transport-projects

The Plain Roundabout: Cycle City Ambition Grant Oxford Committed Cycle City Ambition GrantLocal Sustainable Transport


Headington Transport Improvements Oxford CommittedLocal Sustainable Transport Fund

Local Sustainable Transport


Banbury priority north-south vehicular corridor Cherwell Proposed tbc Local Highway https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/transport-investment-programme-0

Didcot Northern Perimeter Road Phase 3Vale of White Horse & South Oxfordshire

Proposed tbc Local Highway

Cow Lane Underpass, Didcot South Oxfordshire Proposed tbc

Didcot Parkway station forecourt South Oxfordshire Committed tbcLocal Sustainable Transport

Didcot Parkway station (Foxhall car park and pedestrian improvements)

South Oxfordshire Committed tbcLocal Sustainable Transport

Grove & Wantage railway station Vale of White Horse Proposed tbc Strategic RailCarterton access improvements West Oxfordshire Proposed tbc Local Transport Board Prioritised ListCogges Link Road and Witney town centre enhancement, Witney West Oxfordshire Proposed tbc Local HighwayA40 Downs Road junction, Witney West Oxfordshire Proposed tbc Local HighwayNotes:Primary source documents: Oxfordshire LEP Strategic Economic Plan, LTP4 Goals & Objectives Consultation information, Oxfordshire Local Transport Body List of schemes assesmbled from available information at the time of writing (sources listed where known) and remains subject to review with Oxford City and Oxfordshire County Councils.It is recognised that some schemes will have a strategic and local function in certain areas and that some schemes are multi-modal. A single descriptor has been assigned to each scheme to best reflect the main objective of each scheme.



Annex B: Public Transport Background Note





1. Introduction This Public Transport background note has been prepared to inform a high level transport constraints and opportunities analysis undertaken by PBA in support of the Oxford Growth Strategy study commissioned by Oxford City Council. This note has been prepared to feed into Stage 2 of the Framework Transport Assessment and considers: � Existing public transport provision in Oxford

� Existing service provision to the proposed development areas

� Potential future service provision to the proposed development areas

� Desirable characteristics of urban extension public transport services

� The conclusions of this stage of work

2. Existing Oxford City Public Transport Provision Oxford is a major transport hub and is well connected on a local, regional and national level by frequent rail, bus and coach services. It is frequently used as an exemplar case study of urban public transport planning and has a long history of providing preferential access to public transport modes.

Rail Services

Oxford railway station is served by First Great Western, Cross Country Trains and Chiltern Railways. A second station at Water Eaton known as “Oxford Parkway” is due to open in autumn 2015. First Great Western are the principal operator and are responsible for the overall management of the station. They provide a mixture of express and stopping services, mostly focused on Thames Valley destinations and London but also with inter-regional services to Worcester and Hereford, and local services to Banbury. A summary of their service provision from Oxford is shown below:

Table B1: Existing First Great Western Oxford Rail Connections

Destination Main daytime frequency

London Paddington express 2 trains per hour

stopping 2 trains per hour

Reading express and stopping 4 trains per hour

Didcot Parkway stopping 2 trains per hour

Banbury stopping 1 train every 90 mins-2 hours

Worcester Foregate Street 1 train per hour

Hereford 5-6 trains per day

Services to and from the west of England and south Wales, and additional services to and from Reading and London Paddington, are available by changing at Didcot Parkway. Cross Country Trains are responsible for inter-regional services linking the South Coast and Midlands with the North West, North East and Scotland. Oxford is a key location on the main South Coast to Midlands route and a summary of their services is shown below:



Table B2: Existing Cross Country Oxford Rail Connections


Reading 2 trains per hour

Southampton Central via Basingstoke 1-2 trains per hour

Bournemouth 1 train per hour

Birmingham New Street via Banbury 2 trains per hour

Manchester Piccadilly via Stoke-on-Trent 1 train per hour

Newcastle via Derby and York 1 train per hour

Edinburgh Waverley 1 train per day

Existing services suffer from journey reliability concerns caused by signalling problems and over-crowding on peak time services. There are a number of committed projects underway that will begin to address these concerns.

Future Proposals

The electrification of the Great Western Main Line will extend through to Oxford with resulting journey time and reliability improvements. Following completion of electrification, a new fleet of rolling stock will be introduced delivering increased capacity and improving the current user experience. Chiltern Railways currently operate the Oxford to Bicester Town service. The trains on this route are currently replaced by a bus service whilst work progresses on the “Evergreen 3” scheme which will provide two trains per hour from the new Oxford Parkway station at Water Eaton to London Marylebone via Bicester Town and High Wycombe from autumn 2015 and from Oxford in spring 2016. This work complements the “East West Rail” proposals for direct services between Oxford, Bicester Town, Milton Keynes Central and Bedford, due to commence in spring 2019. From 2019 onwards, the range of rail destinations available from Oxford to the east will be significantly increased, complementing the already good level of provision to the north, west and south and opening up significant new journey opportunities to the north and east through interchange possibilities at Milton Keynes Central and Bedford. In terms of future proposals, the infrastructure and capacity improvements delivered at Oxford through these projects has resulted in Oxfordshire County Council including the potential opening up of the Cowley line branch to future passenger services within the early stages of its LTP4 preparation. This proposal would provide a significant opportunity to improve sustainable transport links from the city centre to Cowley and the local area, although at the time of writing it remains subject to further investigation by a number of stakeholders. Network Rail has announced proposals for a rail link from Reading to Heathrow, which would offer a much improved link from Oxford. A number of options are under consideration and subject to public consultation and a satisfactory business case, enabling work could begin by 2018 with project completion in 2021. The “East West Rail” project also has a longer term goal to extend across to Cambridge, although the plans for this continued extension are less well developed. It is clear from these committed projects and emerging proposals that improvements to the rail network will provide significantly improved connections into and across Oxford in the coming years.



Bus

Oxford is widely known as one of the most well served cities in the UK, a situation that has arisen as a result of balanced transport policies implemented since the 1970s. It has a comprehensive network of urban, inter-urban and regional services plus an intensive Park and Ride system. The two principal operators in the city, Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach, used to compete on several of the main urban corridors, but since 2012 have participated in a “Qualifying Agreement” which permits the companies to operate joint services on the most heavily trafficked routes, with ticket inter-availability. Daytime frequencies on the key corridors to Blackbird Leys (15 buses per hour) and Kidlington (12 buses per hour) are amongst the most intensive in the country, but most routes operate with a frequency of between 4 and 8 buses per hour and have good coverage in the early mornings, evenings and on Sundays. There are five Park and Ride sites covering the main arterial routes to the south, west, north, north-east and east. Three dedicated Park and Ride bus routes serve these sites and operate up to 5 buses per hour on the busiest sections. Oxford’s long-term strategy to discourage car traffic from entering the urban core has led to a total of 5,030 parking spaces being available on the edge of the city; these are well used and some sites can reach capacity by 0900 on weekdays. Unlike the majority of Park and Ride services in the UK, the Oxford services are operated on a commercial basis by Oxford Bus Company and require no external financial support (except for operation of the sites themselves, which are publicly-owned). In tandem with the excellent provision of Park & Ride, the wider county of Oxfordshire is fortunate to be served by one of the most comprehensive inter-urban networks in the UK, both in terms of coverage and frequency. Most services are provided by Stagecoach, Thames Travel or Arriva. Many inter-urban routes operate 7 days per week and also late at night. The table below indicates the main links available from Oxford and the principal daytime frequencies:

Table B3: Existing Oxford Inter-urban Bus Connections


Banbury via Deddington 1 bus per hour

Woodstock 3 buses per hour

Chipping Norton 1 bus per hour

Witney 6-7 buses per hour

Carterton 4 buses per hour

Wantage via Grove or Harwell 4 buses per hour

Swindon via Faringdon and Shrivenham 2 buses per hour

Abingdon 12 buses per hour

Didcot 2 buses per hour

Wallingford 3 buses per hour

High Wycombe 4 buses per day

Aylesbury via Thame 3 buses per hour

Bicester including X5 coach service 7-8 buses per hour

Several of these routes are operated with high quality vehicles fitted with a range of high specification equipment such as leather seats and Wi-fi. Oxford city centre is covered by a Low Emission Zone (LEZ) which requires operators of most services to use vehicles of a minimum Euro 5 emissions standard, and consequently the average age of the bus fleet in Oxford is one of the lowest in the UK.



Future Proposals

There are a broad range of transport projects underway, or recently completed, across Oxford that will delivery improved public transport service across the city. These projects range from the suite of measures (e.g. Thornhill Park and Ride improvements, new bus lanes and the launch of the Oxfordshire Travel Hub) introduced into Headington and along the A420 London Road into the city. In addition , a number of new services are being introduced such as the City 600 service that, from the end of September 2014, will connect Pear Tree Park and Ride with Oxford University Science Area and the John Radcliffe Hospital every 30 minutes during weekday daytimes. A number of highway improvements are also underway to reduce congestion at pinch points in the road network with associated bus service journey time and journey reliability savings, these include improvements at Wolvercote and Cutteslowe junctions on the Northern Approaches into Oxford and Science Transit Phase 1 improvements at the Hinksey Hill interchange. Provisional funding has also been secured to investigate strategic bus corridor improvements along the A40 from Witney to Oxford. These measures confirm a continued commitment to investing in improved bus service provision into and across the city.

Coach

Oxford’s status as a tourist and student centre means it is well served by the coach network, with services operating to London, the London Airports and to other strategic destinations across the country. The corridor between Oxford and London is one of the most heavily-trafficked coach routes in Europe. Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach both provide high specification double decked coaches at bus-style frequencies throughout the day, with Stagecoach operating their “Oxford Tube” service 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including Christmas Day. Services to the Airports are also frequent, highlighting the importance of Oxford to business and students from overseas. A summary of the main coach destinations available from Oxford is shown below:

Table B4: Existing Oxford Inter-urban Coach Connections


London Oxford X90 and Oxford Tube 7 coaches per hour (higher at peak times and on Saturdays)

Heathrow Airport 2-3 coaches per hour

Gatwick Airport 1 coach per hour

Stansted Airport via High Wycombe and Luton Airport 8 coaches per day

Cambridge via Milton Keynes and Bedford 2 coaches per hour

Birmingham 7 coaches per day

Southampton 5-6 coaches per day

Cheltenham 3-4 coaches per day

The relatively dispersed nature of National Express and Megabus operations means that a number of destinations are served by 1-2 journeys per day. Direct services from Oxford serve a number of towns and cities on the South Coast and in the North of England and Scotland, but too many to list in full here.



Most coach services must be booked in advance, but two coach services operate as local bus routes and accept walk-on passengers – these are the X5 to Cambridge via Milton Keynes and Bedford, and the 853 to Cheltenham and Gloucester.

Strengths and Weaknesses

The strengths of the public transport network in Oxford can be summarised as follows: � Excellent joint working between the local authorities and public transport operators, facilitating the

conditions needed to encourage high public transport use;

� Excellent coverage of the urban area by frequent bus services;

� Good links to all the main centres around Oxfordshire and further beyond by both bus and rail services;

� High vehicle quality on bus and coach operations;

� High levels of ridership;

� Good temporal coverage, including early mornings, late evenings and Sundays;

� Comprehensive coverage by a Park & Ride network to reduce car travel into the city centre;

� Good level of bus priority on main radial routes and in city centre;

At the present time, identified weaknesses or problems include: � Journey reliability performance constrained by peak period congestion across the city;

� Poor coverage by rail services to the east, although this will be corrected by the “Evergreen 3” and “East West Rail” schemes;

� Inter-urban bus services are subject to considerable congestion, particularly those that use the A34, A40 or A420;

� Some areas lack a direct bus connection to Oxford station (e.g. Kidlington, Barton);

� Capacity issues at key city centre bus stops, and a shortage of suitable available space for expansion.

3. Existing Service Provision to Proposed Urban Exten sion Site Options As outlined above, Oxford has an established network of high quality public transport connections which will be further enhanced by a range of committed and proposed strategic and local improvements. Any urban extension to Oxford would need to be supported by a network of frequent and reliable public transport connections to key destinations. Existing movement patterns identified through analysis of the Census journey to work datasets has confirmed high levels of containment within Oxford with 77% of people living in Oxford also working in Oxford. Of those living and working in the city, 17% rely on bus services to get to work. In fact, 16% of all Oxford residents rely on the bus to get to work irrespective of their work place. It is also notable that train usage has increased from 1.8% in 2001 to 2.5% in 2011, accordingly providing connections to local rail services is also an increasingly important consideration – especially so given the scale of investment planned in rail infrastructure in the locality.



An initial public transport assessment of each proposed development area has been undertaken. This has included a review of existing service provision and a preliminary view on how each area could be connected to: � Oxford city centre;

� Oxford rail stations (city centre and Oxford Parkway at Water Eaton);

� Headington area; and

� Southern employment area (broad area accommodating Oxford Business Park, BMW/MINI and UNIPART) and broader area often referred to as the Eastern Arc.

This assessment has been limited to consider the service provision and the broad potential to extend existing services to the key destinations identified, to enable comparison of the development areas. It is recognised that further refinement of destinations will be needed in due course which may identify the requirement for additional connections. This will include, for example, access to local education, employment and further retail opportunities local to each respective site. This added detail will be considered when the number of sites has been refined through the broader Growth Strategy study. The exact routing of any proposed extensions including how they might access and route through the proposed development areas will also be required, alongside the scale of development proposed at any given location to refine any proposals for service enhancements. This falls outside of the remit of this initial assessment. Table B5 provides a summary of the existing bus service provision for each area.



Table B5: Proposed Growth Area Existing Bus Connections

Area of Search Service/ Operator Route

Frequency

Summary Mon-Sat daytime

Evening / Sunday

Yarnton K2/K3 (Go Ride) Kidlington – Langford Lane – Begbroke – Yarnton – Kidlington (Circular)

30-60 mins No service • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 6 buses per hour • “Stagecoach Gold” service S3 frequent peak

service to Oxford, off-peak recently upgraded • High specification double deckers • Links to Kidlington through OCC supported

service due for review in 2020

• Likely that strengthening of S3 service would be needed in this location, and some diversion through the western/eastern areas

S3 (Stagecoach) Chipping Norton – Enstone / Charlbury – Stonesfield – Woodstock – Begbroke – Yarnton – Oxford

10-20 mins Mon-Fri; 20-30 mins Sat

60 mins eve; 30 mins Sun

South of Kidlington

2/2A/2B/2C/2D (Oxford Bus Company/ Stagecoach)

Kidlington Airport (2D) – Kidlington – Summertown – Oxford

5 mins 10 mins • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 19 buses per hour • Very intensive service to/from Oxford from this

area including 2 suite of routes up to every 5 minutes

• Route 2 subject to Qualifying Agreement between Stagecoach and Oxford Bus Company (basically a route sharing agreement)

• “Stagecoach Gold” service S5 runs through the area

• Links to Bicester and Banbury

• Not much enhancement to services would be needed at this location except potential capacity constraints – main services already high capacity buses

25/25A (Thames Travel)

Bicester – Wendlebury (25) / Upper Heyford (25A) – Kirtlington – Bletchingdon – Gosford – Summertown – Oxford

30-60 mins No service

94 (Thames Travel/ Charlton Services)

Bicester – Ambrosden – Charlton on Otmoor – Islip – Gosford – Summertown – Oxford

3-5 journeys Mon-Fri; 1 journey Sat

No service

700 (Stagecoach) Kidlington – Summertown – J R Hospital – Brookes University – Headington & Hospitals

20 mins No service

K1 (Go Ride) Kidlington Local Service 60 mins No service

K2/K3 (Go Ride) Kidlington – Langford Lane – Begbroke – Yarnton – Kidlington (Circular)





Frequency


Evening / Sunday

S4 (Stagecoach) Banbury – Adderbury – Deddington – Middle Barton – Steeple Aston – Kidlington – Summertown – Oxford

60-90 mins 4 journeys Sun

S5 (Stagecoach) Arncott – Ambrosden / Launton / Langford – Bicester – Gosford – Summertown – Oxford

3 journeys operate to JR Hospital and Brookes University after Summertown

15 mins 30 mins

W10 (Go Ride) Woodstock – Shipton on Cherwell – Kidlington – Water Eaton Park & Ride

4 journeys Mon-Fri

No service

X5 (Stagecoach) Cambridge – St Neots – Bedford – Milton Keynes – Buckingham – Bicester – Oxford

30 mins* 30 mins

North of Oxford

2/2A/2B/2C/2D (Oxford Bus Company/ Stagecoach)

Kidlington Airport (2D) – Kidlington – Summertown – Oxford

5 mins 10 mins • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 41 buses per hour (spread across the area)

• Park & Ride at Peartree and Water Eaton bolster frequencies considerably

• Centre of area of search served by same routes as South of Kidlington, and not much enhancement would be required except potential capacity constraints

• To the west, services to Witney include “Stagecoach Gold” services S2 and S3

• To the east, some diversion of services may be necessary

17 (Stagecoach) Cutteslowe – Summertown – Jericho – Oxford

60 mins No service

18 (Stagecoach) (Clanfield) – Bampton – Aston – Standlake – Stanton Harcourt – Eynsham – Oxford

60 mins No service

25/25A (Thames Travel)

Bicester – Wendlebury (25) / Upper Heyford (25A) – Kirtlington – Bletchingdon – Gosford – Summertown – Oxford


94 (Thames Travel/ Charlton Services)

Bicester – Ambrosden – Charlton on Otmoor – Islip – Gosford – Summertown

3-5 journeys Mon-Fri; 1

No service




Frequency


Evening / Sunday

– Oxford journey Sat

218 (Heyfordian) Wytham – Godstow – Five Mile Drive – Summertown – Oxford

1 journey No service

300 (Oxford Bus Company)

Pear Tree Park & Ride – Summertown – Oxford – Redbridge Park & Ride

10 mins 12 mins Sun; 30 mins eve


Water Eaton Park & Ride – Summertown – Oxford

15 mins No service

700 (Stagecoach) Kidlington – Summertown – J R Hospital – Brookes University – Headington & Hospitals

20 mins No service

853 (Swanbrook) (Gloucester) – Cheltenham – Northleach – Burford – Witney – Oxford

3-4 journeys 1 journey Sun

K2/K3 (Go Ride) Kidlington – Langford Lane – Begbroke – Yarnton – Kidlington (Circular)


S2 (Stagecoach) Carterton – Witney – Eynsham – Oxford 15-30 mins No service

S3 (Stagecoach) Chipping Norton – Enstone / Charlbury – Stonesfield – Woodstock – Begbroke – Yarnton – Oxford

10-20 mins Mon-Fri; 20-30 mins Sat

60 mins eve; 30 mins Sun

S4 (Stagecoach) Banbury – Adderbury – Deddington – Middle Barton – Steeple Aston – Kidlington – Summertown – Oxford

60-90 mins 4 journeys Sun; no service eve

S5 (Stagecoach) Arncott – Ambrosden / Launton / Langford – Bicester – Gosford – Summertown – Oxford

3 journeys operate to JR Hospital and Brookes University after Summertown

15 mins 30 mins

W10 (Go Ride) Woodstock – Shipton on Cherwell – 4 journeys No service




Frequency


Evening / Sunday

Kidlington – Water Eaton Park & Ride Mon-Fri

X5 (Stagecoach) Cambridge – St Neots – Bedford – Milton Keynes – Buckingham – Bicester – Oxford*

30 mins 30 mins

Wick 8 (Oxford Bus Company/ Stagecoach)

Barton – Headington – Oxford 6 mins 10 mins • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 11 buses per hour

• North of Barton which has a high frequency (6 min) service to Oxford, but is served on a loop so potentially operationally complex to extend

• High capacity buses already used on this service – potential capacity constraints

• Service 8 subject to Qualifying Agreement between Stagecoach and Oxford Bus Company

• Could potentially also be linked through Barton West development and potential link to Northway/J R Hospital across A40

• Only service through site is OCC supported route 108/118 due for review in 2016

• A number of other services operate on the A40 at Headington Roundabout, although these are to disparate and remote destinations and unlikely to be changeable


J R Hospital – Northway – Marston – Oxford

Requires crossing of A40 to access site

20 mins 30 mins

108/118 (Heyfordian) Brill – Oakley – Horton cum Studley / Forest Hill – Stanton St John – Beckley – Headington – Oxford

7 journeys No service

Wheatley 103/104 (Heyfordian) The Miltons & Haseleys / Cuddesdon – Wheatley – Horspath – Cowley – Oxford

60 mins No service • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 11 buses per hour

• Served by mix of inter-urban buses and buses intended for students at Wheatley Campus (but open to all)

• Arriva 280 is a high specification “Sapphire” service (similar to Stagecoach’s “Gold” concept)

• Links to Thame, Aylesbury and High Wycombe

• Provision split between 4 operators with little ticket

275 (Red Rose) High Wycombe – Stokenchurch / Chinnor – Postcombe – Tetsworth – Wheatley – Headington – Oxford

4 journeys Mon-Fri

No service

280 (Arriva) Aylesbury – Haddenham – Thame – Tiddington – Wheatley – Headington – Oxford

20 mins 30-60 mins




Frequency


Evening / Sunday

U1/U1X (Oxford Bus Company)

Wheatley Campus – Wheatley – Headington – Oxford – Botley – Harcourt Hill Campus

15 mins (term) / 30 mins (vacation)

30 mins (term) / 60 mins (vacation)

inter-availability

U5X (Oxford Bus Company)

Wheatley Campus – Wheatley – Cowley – Oxford

up to 30 mins Mon-Fri

No service

Grenoble Road

1 (Stagecoach) Blackbird Leys – Cowley – Oxford 8 mins 15 mins • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 20 buses per hour

• Blackbird Leys – Cowley – Oxford is the most intensive bus corridor in the city, unlikely to be altered significantly

• Qualifying agreement in place on 1/5 services between Stagecoach and Oxford Bus Company

• Primary challenge will be to connect into/through adjoining developed areas.

• Penetration of buses into Greater Leys is not so good, especially evenings and Sundays.


Blackbird Leys – Cowley – Oxford 8 mins 15 mins

12 (Stagecoach) Greater Leys – Blackbird Leys – Cowley – Oxford

30 mins 60 mins Sun

12C (Stagecoach) Oxford – Littlemore – Sandford on Thames – Greater Leys – Cowley – Oxford (Circular)

No service 60 mins eve

20 (Stagecoach) Rose Hill – Cowley – Unipart House 8 journeys Mon-Fri

No service

89 (Stagecoach) Nuneham Courtenay – The Baldons – Cowley

1 journey Tue, Thu & Sat

No service

101 (Go Ride) Watlington – Chalgrove – Stadhampton – Garsington – Cowley – Oxford

No service 4 journeys Sat eve & Sun

T1 (Thames Travel) Watlington – Chalgrove – Stadhampton – Garsington – Cowley – Oxford

60 mins No service

T2 (Thames Travel) Abingdon – Culham – Clifton Hampden – Berinsfield – Oxford Science Park – Sandford – Littlemore – Cowley – Oxford

60 mins No service

T3 (Thames Travel) Oxford Science Park – Sandford – 4 journeys No service




Frequency


Evening / Sunday

Littlemore – Cowley – Oxford Mon-Fri

X39/X40 (Thames Travel)

Reading – Woodcote (X40) – Wallingford – Crowmarsh – Benson – Oxford*

30 mins 60 mins

North of Abingdon


Abingdon – Shippon – Wootton – Cumnor – Botley – Oxford – Wood Farm

60 mins 60 mins • Total frequency to Oxford: up to 13 buses per hour

• Good links to Didcot, Wantage and Science Vale UK employment expansion area

• West of site is more poorly served by routes to Oxford – only up to 2 buses per hour which would require strengthening

31 (Stagecoach) Wantage – Grove – East Hanney – Marcham – Abingdon – Oxford

60 mins 60 mins

34 (Stagecoach) Harwell Campus – Steventon – Drayton – Abingdon – Oxford

2 journeys Mon-Fri

No service

41/42 (Heyfordian) Abingdon Town Services 60 mins No service

43 (Oxfordshire County Council)

Eaton – Appleton – Longworth – Gozzard’s Ford – Wootton – Abingdon

1 journey Thu No service

44 (Heyfordian) Abingdon – Sunningwell – Bayworth – Boars Hill – Oxford

7 journeys Mon-Fri; 4 journeys Sat

No service

X1 (Thames Travel) Wantage – East Hendred – Harwell Campus – Harwell – Didcot – Sutton Courtenay – Drayton – Abingdon – Oxford

60 mins 120 mins Sun

X2 (Thames Travel) Wallingford – Brightwell cum Sotwell – Didcot – Steventon – Drayton – Abingdon – Oxford

60 mins 60 mins

X3 (Oxford Bus Company)

Abingdon – Oxford 15-20 mins 30 mins

X13 (Oxford Bus Company)

Abingdon – Oxford – Marston – J R Hospital

15-20 mins 30 mins



4. Potential Future Provision to Proposed Urban Extension Site Options

Table B6: Proposed Growth Area Preliminary Future Bus Connection Opportunities

Area of Search Service Potential Enhancement/Service Level Notes Connects to

Yarnton S3 Strengthen to 8 buses per hour peak/4 buses per hour off-peak between Woodstock/Yarnton and Oxford city centre

Potential to operate 1 journey per hour to/from Kidlington via Langford Lane, replacing K2/K3

Service may need to split in Yarnton dependent on exact location of development centres

K2/K3 interworked with K1

Begbroke Village served by K2

Potential for links to Langford Lane/ Airport employment area

Oxford city centre ��

Oxford rail station ��

Oxford Parkway station ��

Headington area ��

Southern employment areas ��

700 Extension to Yarnton from Kidlington, replacing K2/K3

Extension to Cowley Centre/other southern employment key destinations

K2/K3 interworked with K1

Begbroke Village served by K2

Potential for links to Langford Lane/ Airport employment area

South of Kidlington

2 Enhancements to service may be required for capacity purposes – likely to be deliverable on a commercial basis

Subject to Qualifying Agreement between Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach






S4 Enhancement to 2 buses per hour between Oxford Airport and Oxford city centre

Avoids Qualifying Agreement issues

Links to Langford Lane/Airport employment area

X5 Establish stopping point in local area Links to Bicester, Buckingham, Milton Keynes, Bedford, St Neots and Cambridge

High specification coach service

700 Strengthen to 4 buses per hour between Kidlington and Headington

Longer hours of operation, and new Sunday service

Potential extension to Cowley Centre/ other southern employment key destinations




North of Oxford

2 Enhancements to service may be required for capacity purposes – likely to be deliverable on a commercial basis







S4 Enhancement to 2 buses per hour between Oxford Airport and Oxford city centre

Avoids Qualifying Agreement issues

Links to Langford Lane/Airport employment area

X5 Establish stopping point in local area Links to Bicester, Buckingham, Milton Keynes, Bedford, St Neots and Cambridge

High specification coach service

500 Dual purpose express service to Oxford

Strengthen to 5-6 buses per hour and extend to Oxford rail station

Possible route around development area after Park & Ride site

700 Strengthen to 4 buses per hour between Kidlington and Headington

Longer hours of operation, and new Sunday service

Potential extension to Cowley Centre/ other southern employment key destinations

Wick 8 Strengthen to 12 buses per hour

Extend to development (potentially via Barton West or by split of service within Barton)


Part of Barton loop would need to be broken






13 Extend over A40 and through Barton West (new crossing required)

Strengthen to 8 buses per hour

Currently interworked with X3 to/from Abingdon

Potentially breaks link between J R Hospital and Northway/Oxford rail station




Wheatley 280 Strengthen to 6 buses per hour between Wheatley and Oxford, with route in Wheatley dependent on exact location of development

Some roads in Wheatley not suitable for double deck vehicles

Also serves Thame and Aylesbury town centres, and Haddenham & Thame Parkway rail station (for High Wycombe and London Marylebone)






Grenoble Road

12 Strengthen to 4-6 buses per hour and extend to Oxford Science Park via development

Deletes section of route on Watlington Road

Need to consider how best to connect into/through adjoining developed areas






n/a Consider opportunities to re-route / revise existing, or provision of new services to improve connections with adjoining community and other key destinations including Oxford city rail station.

North of Abingdon

4 Strengthen to 2 buses per hour with slight diversion into western area of development

Potential deletion of Ock Street extension to allow time for diversion

Relatively long journey time compared to express X3/X13 on Oxford Road






34 Potential for diversion of this peak only service between Peachcroft Roundabout and Abingdon town centre to operate via Dunmore Road and Wootton Road

Provides links to Science Vale UK, not to Oxford (peak time service only)

X1/X2 Peak time capacity may require strengthening by increased use of double deck vehicles

Potential diversion of some or all journeys via Dunmore Road and Wootton Road

Provides links to Science Vale UK in addition to Oxford city centre

X3/X13 Peak time capacity may require strengthening by increased use of double deck vehicles

Already high frequency service using mix of single and double deck vehicles



In summary, each of the sites has a good existing level of public transport service provision and the ability to upscale this to meet additional demand arising from new development through a mix of additional journeys on current services, extensions or diversions, or capacity increases. Table B7 indicates the bus service frequencies in each area, a summary of the key destinations that could be reached and an indicative relative rank order based on these:

Table B7: Stage 2 Public Transport Assessment Summary

Frequency (services per

hr)

Can these key destinations be readily accessed by bus from each

spatial option? Rank

City Centre

Rail Access

Key Employment

Area

North of Oxford 41 �� 1

South of Kidlington 19 �� 2

South of Grenoble Road 20 �� 3

North of Abingdon 13 �� 4

Wick 11 �� 5

Wheatley 11 �� 6

Yarnton 6 �� 7

As all of the key centres would be able to be reached by bus, the differentials between the sites are related to frequency and the current penetration of existing routes. North of Oxford comes top of the comparative assessment because of the very high frequency of service and the ability to access the city centre, Oxford Parkway and the southern employment area by existing services that would not require significant amendment. Whilst South of Kidlington has a slightly lower frequency than South of Grenoble Road , the former comes second by virtue of the fact that services operate through the area of search whereas in the latter, services would need to be extended or diverted to serve the site. North of Abingdon ranks fourth on frequency grounds. The Wick and Wheatley sites are evenly matched in terms of accessibility to Oxford city centre, with similar frequencies; however, two separate and technically competing operators serve Wheatley and the lack of ticket interavailability means a reduction in effective frequency for most passengers. Wick is ranked fifth and Wheatley sixth, with this last comparator being the differential between the two sites. Yarnton is therefore ranked seventh as a result of the relatively low existing frequency of services. 5. Desirable Characteristics of Urban Extension Publ ic Transport Services In order to facilitate sustainable development on any urban extension site, public transport services need to possess several characteristics. Services need to be: � Regular – services operating at frequent intervals (at least 4-6 buses per hour during weekday

daytimes);

� Simple – clearly defined main routes through the development;

� High specification – new, potentially branded, vehicles;

� Fast – taking the most direct and/or quickest route to the key destinations;



� Reliable – provision of priority measures both on- and off-site;

� Relevant – taking passengers to the places they want to go;

� Available – with appropriate hours of operation, 7 days a week;

� Comfortable – sufficient capacity to meet demand;

� Safe and secure – covered by CCTV and access routes designed to deter crime;

� Affordable – fares set at reasonable levels and network passes available where possible;

� Reachable – dwellings and employment areas within 400m of a public transport access point;

� Integrated – easy access to interchanges with other public transport services; and

� Supported by appropriate infrastructure.

Services should be available from the start of occupation at the site, not only to encourage new residents to make sustainable travel choices but also to promote public transport services to potential residents making their house purchasing decisions. Where new routes are required, a phased introduction of services may be necessary to avoid excessive use of pump-priming funding at an early stage. The masterplanning process should give public transport priority access through the development and ensure that all development is located within a 400m walk of a public transport access point (bus stop or railway station). Doubling back or circuitous routes should be avoided. Principal bus routes must be located in the centre of the development and on routes suitable for operation by large vehicles. 6. Conclusions This Background Note has considered: � The general level of public transport provision in the Oxford area;

� The existing public transport services at each of the potential Growth Areas;

� The potential for enhancement of services at each location; and

� The characteristics of a successful public transport offer to urban extensions.

Oxford has traditionally benefitted from a high level of public transport provision. Rail services provide frequent links to London, the Thames Valley and the Midlands, with an additional route to London via High Wycombe opening in 2015 followed by the East West Rail scheme to Milton Keynes and Bedford in 2019. The city has a comprehensive network of bus services that provides access to the city centre and other key employment destinations. Frequencies are high on many of the main urban routes, and there is a good level of service to other key centres in Oxfordshire. The analysis of existing service provision at each of the potential Growth Areas indicates that the sites at North of Oxford and South of Kidlington are located on the most frequent public transport routes, and benefit from high quality connections not only to Oxford city centre but also to Headington and the southern employment area. Oxford Parkway station will also be in close proximity to either development, giving these locations closer access to the rail network than any other options. Services are also available from these areas across North and West Oxfordshire. North of Oxford ’s closer proximity to the urban centre and therefore a greater choice of bus



services leads to it being ranked first in the comparative assessment with South of Kidlington second. South of Grenoble Road is close to high frequency services operating in the Blackbird Leys and Greater Leys areas, and presents a significant opportunity if it is possible to extend some services through this area to the new development; however, these services are circular routes that may make this more problematic. Journey times to Oxford city centre are also significant because of the heavily trafficked nature of the Cowley Road and the number of passengers carried. The site is ranked third. North of Abingdon lies close to fast and direct services to Oxford city centre via the A34 and benefits from direct services to employment areas in Science Vale UK. However, the west of this site is less well served by bus and there are current proposals to reduce this further. As a result, the site is ranked fourth. The Wick and Wheatley sites are evenly matched in terms of accessibility to Oxford city centre, with similar frequencies. Although the Wick site is closer to Oxford, bus journeys to Wheatley benefit from fewer stops in the urban area and therefore the journey times are not as different as may be imagined; however, two separate and technically competing operators serve Wheatley and the lack of ticket inter-availability means a reduction in effective frequency for most passengers. Wick is ranked fifth and Wheatley sixth, with this last comparator being the differential between the two sites. The Yarnton Growth Area currently has the lowest frequency services of all the options and direct access to the Headington area and the southern employment area is currently not possible, so extensions of other existing services would be required. It does benefit from a direct link to Oxford railway station and a connection to Oxford Parkway would be possible. The site is ranked seventh of the growth options for public transport. All of the sites can be served by fast, frequent public transport services to the key destinations in central and east Oxford – the difference is that some sites already lie on such corridors and others would require new or amended provision to reach the same standard. Additional costs would be incurred for these sites in the short to medium term before commercial viability is achieved.

44

Appendix 4: Constraints Atlas

Turley

The Charlotte Building 17 Gresse Street London W1T 1QL T 020 7851 4010