How we did it ... Oxford research block fulfils core aspiration

Lee Baker, Planning, 12 December 2008

BACKGROUND: The science quarter developed on an ad hoc basis over 150 years, leading to a site that was confusing to navigate. The biochemistry department was hampered by being spread across six buildings.

WHO IS BEHIND IT? Architects Hawkins\Brown, Oxford City Council, the University of Oxford.

PROJECT AIMS: To consolidate the biochemistry department, replacing the eight-storey 1960s Hans Krebs tower and three other buildings and doubling the total floor space while respecting a four-storey height limit.

SKILLS INVOLVED: Masterplanning, urban design.

The mention of the University of Oxford is likely to conjure up romantic images of Gothic buildings topped by the famous dreaming spires. However, its scientific facilities, built up since Victorian times, were characterised by a number of undistinguished buildings including a 1960s block with a haphazard relationship to each other.

University scientists in the biochemistry department, meanwhile, were struggling to perform research in outmoded buildings scattered around the science site. The university resolved to bring together 300 academics and students into one building. Four buildings would have to be demolished and around twice as much total floor space provided - 27,000m2 - to enable the university to maintain its leading position in biochemistry research.

This was the challenge for architects Hawkins\Brown, appointed in December 2003. They had to create sufficient public space while meeting Oxford City Council's requirement that no building in the central area is higher than 18.2m, or four storeys. The two sides sat down in pre-application meetings to discuss how to achieve these objectives. Development control officers, led by Murray Clark, had to be satisfied that there was a need for such a large footprint.

"There was an understandable fear that, given the size and height restriction, it would entail a large oblong block," says Hawkins\Brown partner Russell Brown. "But we had a shared desire to improve the permeability of the site. Although it contained four separate buildings it acted as one, long monotonous block."

The solution came in the masterplan for the 1ha core science area. Masterplans are not a statutory requirement but are encouraged by the council, giving it an opportunity to become involved in the design.

"In the past, the university had dropped buildings in where it could, leading to the illogical location of entrances. In this case, it was important that circulation and the quality of the public realm were considered given the unwelcoming and inaccessible feel," says council head of planning Michael Crofton-Briggs.

The masterplan, submitted to the council alongside plans for the biochemistry building, outlines its relationship with buildings on all four sides. It includes a route through the centre of the 100m by 40m building via an atrium, with entrances to the east and south as well as the main entrance facing onto a courtyard to the south-west.

This degree of public access is provided despite the importance of security. Protests against biomedical research are likely, Brown acknowledges. Crime and fear of crime are designed out by ensuring that external spaces are overlooked and not siting functional areas on the ground floor. This chimed with the architects' aspiration to demonstrate that research is not secretive.

The architects have also ensured longer, unbroken routes, creating a visual corridor to the main north-south Parks Road to the west. "We wanted to bring people into the site and make them feel safe," says Brown. The idea is that most people will come on foot or by bike, so 65 of 140 car parking spaces have been replaced with paving stones. The first phase opened this week.