Campaigners are set to try to buy meadow

From left, Friends of Warneford Meadow Joanna Long, Graeme Salmon, Andrew Carter, David Sutton, Anne Copley and Sietske Boeles, front, with Charlie the dog, at the meadow.  Picture: OX56213 Ed Nix

From left, Friends of Warneford Meadow Joanna Long, Graeme Salmon, Andrew Carter, David Sutton, Anne Copley and Sietske Boeles, front, with Charlie the dog, at the meadow. Picture: OX56213 Ed Nix Buy this photo

First published in News Oxford Mail: Photograph of the Author by , Council Reporter, also covering Oxford city centre. Call me on 01865 425429

A CAMPAIGN group is gearing up for a fundraising effort as an 18-acre town green in Oxford goes on sale soon.

The Department of Health wants to sell Warneford Meadow but has yet to officially put it on the market. It was due to do so this week but it is understood that has been delayed.

But campaigners are gearing themselves up to raise money to buy the meadow, should it be needed.

Friends of Warneford Meadow member Andrew Carter said: “We have made ourselves into a limited company with charitable aims which means we have been able to sign a licence with the department to do some work on the meadow.

“We are just about to start a campaign to make sure people understand what is happening because a lot of people think it is all sorted out and there is nothing else to do.

“Aligned with that there is the possibility of a fundraising campaign to buy the meadow ourselves.”

Friends of Warneford Meadow put its name forward hwne the Department of Health asked for expressions of interest earlier this year. Mr Carter would not comment on how much he thought the meadow was worth.

Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land.

Related links

Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. That was then upheld after the trust challenged the decision in the High Court.

In the meantime the value of the land, on which it is now unlawful to build, is believed to have fallen from £30m to as little as £500,000.

The department had originally offered to sell it to both Oxford City Council and Oxfordshire County Council, but they turned it down. Other groups have put themselves forward but their identity has not been revealed.

The department would only say it was selling because it no longer needed the land.

Department of Health spokesman Tanya Holden said: “Warneford Meadow is due to formally go on the market early next year after the Christmas and New Year period. Currently no price has been set for the land.”

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:59pm Thu 13 Dec 12

Pavinder Msvarensy says...

Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land
Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development.

Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.
Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above. Pavinder Msvarensy
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Thu 13 Dec 12

2befrank says...

E
E 2befrank
  • Score: 0

9:36pm Thu 13 Dec 12

2befrank says...

.....and they managed to deprive the NHS of millions of pounds . Perfect!
.....and they managed to deprive the NHS of millions of pounds . Perfect! 2befrank
  • Score: 0

9:47pm Thu 13 Dec 12

Danny A says...

Pavinder Msvarensy wrote:
Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land
Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development.

Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.
Hear Hear!

The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.
[quote][p][bold]Pavinder Msvarensy[/bold] wrote: Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems. Danny A
  • Score: 0

7:12am Fri 14 Dec 12

Andrew:Oxford says...

It's going to be interesting.

We've already seen the issues in North Oxford where the "saviours" of the land have since attempted to inhibit access to the land to "protect it" - from people in the cheaper houses.
It's going to be interesting. We've already seen the issues in North Oxford where the "saviours" of the land have since attempted to inhibit access to the land to "protect it" - from people in the cheaper houses. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

8:48am Fri 14 Dec 12

EricTheRed says...

Simples all the NHS have to do is price the land value out of reach of the charity and it will go to the highest bidder which Im pretty certain wont be the charity but someone like Mr Wimpey or Mr Persimmion...
Simples all the NHS have to do is price the land value out of reach of the charity and it will go to the highest bidder which Im pretty certain wont be the charity but someone like Mr Wimpey or Mr Persimmion... EricTheRed
  • Score: 0

8:50am Fri 14 Dec 12

EricTheRed says...

But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars!
But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars! EricTheRed
  • Score: 0

9:36am Fri 14 Dec 12

cweb says...

Danny A wrote:
Pavinder Msvarensy wrote:
Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land
Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development.

Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.
Hear Hear!

The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.
I'm afraid the City and County council don't have the power to revoke acts of parliament yet...

And while it cannot be developed, I very much doubt a development company would even bother thinking about buying it.
[quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pavinder Msvarensy[/bold] wrote: Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.[/p][/quote]I'm afraid the City and County council don't have the power to revoke acts of parliament yet... And while it cannot be developed, I very much doubt a development company would even bother thinking about buying it. cweb
  • Score: 0

1:22pm Fri 14 Dec 12

Andrew:Oxford says...

cweb wrote:
Danny A wrote:
Pavinder Msvarensy wrote:
Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land
Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development.

Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.
Hear Hear!

The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.
I'm afraid the City and County council don't have the power to revoke acts of parliament yet...

And while it cannot be developed, I very much doubt a development company would even bother thinking about buying it.
Not yet...

A developer can manipulate things though - for example:-

Refusing to permit an "action group" the privilege of tending a green.

Prohibiting dogs.

Suddenly finding Japanese Knotweed in the green - requiring closure for excavation and decontamination...

Bringing footpaths up to DDA compliance standards - they should be wide and smooth enough for two wheelchair users to pass by...
[quote][p][bold]cweb[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pavinder Msvarensy[/bold] wrote: Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.[/p][/quote]I'm afraid the City and County council don't have the power to revoke acts of parliament yet... And while it cannot be developed, I very much doubt a development company would even bother thinking about buying it.[/p][/quote]Not yet... A developer can manipulate things though - for example:- Refusing to permit an "action group" the privilege of tending a green. Prohibiting dogs. Suddenly finding Japanese Knotweed in the green - requiring closure for excavation and decontamination... Bringing footpaths up to DDA compliance standards - they should be wide and smooth enough for two wheelchair users to pass by... Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Fri 14 Dec 12

EMBOX1 says...

EricTheRed wrote:
But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars!
South Oxon is affulent, and so a high percentage of households (well over 50%) have more than 1 car. This is a fact.

Also, the big problem in the case of Didcot Ladygrove is that the roads cannot cope with traffic now - the tailbacks through Culham, Clifton Hampden and Long Wittenham to cross the river every day are proof enough. You stick another ~2000 cars on that every day and there will be massive problems. There are no bus services to speak of, either.

More houses need to be built, but the infrastructure needs to be there too. There needs to be another Thames crossing built to relieve the village routes. Oxfordshire CC and the developers refuse to pay for a new bridge....and so its the commuters and residents who will pay the price in delays every day.

The best place to build houses is where the Power Station is now. It has road and rail links already in situ, and is near the A34.
[quote][p][bold]EricTheRed[/bold] wrote: But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars![/p][/quote]South Oxon is affulent, and so a high percentage of households (well over 50%) have more than 1 car. This is a fact. Also, the big problem in the case of Didcot Ladygrove is that the roads cannot cope with traffic now - the tailbacks through Culham, Clifton Hampden and Long Wittenham to cross the river every day are proof enough. You stick another ~2000 cars on that every day and there will be massive problems. There are no bus services to speak of, either. More houses need to be built, but the infrastructure needs to be there too. There needs to be another Thames crossing built to relieve the village routes. Oxfordshire CC and the developers refuse to pay for a new bridge....and so its the commuters and residents who will pay the price in delays every day. The best place to build houses is where the Power Station is now. It has road and rail links already in situ, and is near the A34. EMBOX1
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Fri 14 Dec 12

Andrew:Oxford says...

EMBOX1 wrote:
EricTheRed wrote:
But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars!
South Oxon is affulent, and so a high percentage of households (well over 50%) have more than 1 car. This is a fact.

Also, the big problem in the case of Didcot Ladygrove is that the roads cannot cope with traffic now - the tailbacks through Culham, Clifton Hampden and Long Wittenham to cross the river every day are proof enough. You stick another ~2000 cars on that every day and there will be massive problems. There are no bus services to speak of, either.

More houses need to be built, but the infrastructure needs to be there too. There needs to be another Thames crossing built to relieve the village routes. Oxfordshire CC and the developers refuse to pay for a new bridge....and so its the commuters and residents who will pay the price in delays every day.

The best place to build houses is where the Power Station is now. It has road and rail links already in situ, and is near the A34.
Or build a Long Wittenham bypass and new bridge over the Thames. A fairly straight line from the Ladygrove Road should do.

Close the existing bridge at Long Wittenham to non pedestrian/cyclist traffic. That way the locals still have pedestrian access to the local school and health centre - but are no longer inconvenienced by being on a through road.

(I suspect sometimes people forget that not only is the road a main-route for commuter traffic to Oxford, but also a main-route for people in South Oxford/South Oxfordshire to get to their nearest mainline rail station.)
[quote][p][bold]EMBOX1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EricTheRed[/bold] wrote: But I bet they will use the same strapline from the Campaign to not expand Ladygrove in Didcot.. 1000 homes = 2000 extra cars? I mean where does that come from?? Very big assumption to make that each and every home will have two cars![/p][/quote]South Oxon is affulent, and so a high percentage of households (well over 50%) have more than 1 car. This is a fact. Also, the big problem in the case of Didcot Ladygrove is that the roads cannot cope with traffic now - the tailbacks through Culham, Clifton Hampden and Long Wittenham to cross the river every day are proof enough. You stick another ~2000 cars on that every day and there will be massive problems. There are no bus services to speak of, either. More houses need to be built, but the infrastructure needs to be there too. There needs to be another Thames crossing built to relieve the village routes. Oxfordshire CC and the developers refuse to pay for a new bridge....and so its the commuters and residents who will pay the price in delays every day. The best place to build houses is where the Power Station is now. It has road and rail links already in situ, and is near the A34.[/p][/quote]Or build a Long Wittenham bypass and new bridge over the Thames. A fairly straight line from the Ladygrove Road should do. Close the existing bridge at Long Wittenham to non pedestrian/cyclist traffic. That way the locals still have pedestrian access to the local school and health centre - but are no longer inconvenienced by being on a through road. (I suspect sometimes people forget that not only is the road a main-route for commuter traffic to Oxford, but also a main-route for people in South Oxford/South Oxfordshire to get to their nearest mainline rail station.) Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Fri 18 Jan 13

cweb says...

Danny A wrote:
Pavinder Msvarensy wrote:
Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land
Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development.

Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.
Hear Hear!

The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.
Change the rules? I'm afraid Oxford City Council (and County for that matter) don't have the power to revoke the Commons Act 2006...
[quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pavinder Msvarensy[/bold] wrote: Six years ago Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Mental Healthcare Trust – now Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust – submitted a plan to build 300 homes on the land Campaigners successfully registered it as a protected town green, which prevented any development. Well done to the campaigners for stopping vital homes being built to protect their property value when they go back to their £Half Million homes. You must feel very proud at depriving hard working families of the chance to get out of slum landlord homes which cost them £1,400+ a month in rent alone. I'm Alright Jack. I just can't believe the selfish mentality of some people, such as those grinning Jack-In-The-Boxes above.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! The council could pick up this land cheap, change the rules for development and go some way to tackling Oxford's housing problems.[/p][/quote]Change the rules? I'm afraid Oxford City Council (and County for that matter) don't have the power to revoke the Commons Act 2006... cweb
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree