Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting OXFORD NEWS to 80360 or email us
3:35pm Tuesday 12th January 2010 in
CITY planners have been urged to drop ideas for large-scale housebuilding across Oxford at a meeting of angry residents.
About 60 people effectively passed a motion of no-confidence in the city council’s planning department when they met at a Town Hall rally on Monday.
The motion was passed at a meeting called to discuss the council’s controversial core strategy – the city’s planning blueprint until 2026.
The strategy contains plans to build thousands of homes on land south of Grenoble Road in Greater Leys, the Northern Gateway, near Pear Tree, and by Barton.
However, they are on hold while a High Court judge runs the rule over the Grenoble Road idea.
A legal challenge was made by the Campaign to Protect Rural England, which argued not enough consideration had been given to building homes elsewhere in Oxfordshire before that chunk of Green Belt land was identified as ripe for development.
But people representing different residents’ groups from across Oxford called on the council to rip up its core strategy and start all over again.
They complained insufficient consultation had been carried out and urged planners to redraw the strategy after consulting them first.
Jonathan Gittos, chairman of Engage Oxford – a pressure group set up to fight the Northern Gateway proposals – said: “There is a fundamental difference of opinion between the council and the people of Oxford.
“The council’s vision is to double the size of the city by 2026.
“Historically, Oxford has been one of the most beautiful cities in the world – it is not Swindon, Reading or Luton.
“The council needs to consult and discuss its vision with the people of Oxford. I am opposed to any development that is not sympathetic to the characteristics of Oxford.
“Development should meet the needs of the people of the city, it should not meet the needs of Government or multinational developers.
“The key point is we want a city that is beautiful. I might be a snob, but I don’t want to live in Swindon, Reading or Luton.”
Large numbers of those at the meeting, which was chaired by Oxford West & Abingdon Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris, claimed they knew little or nothing about the city council’s house-building plans.
Sean Feeney, of Victoria Road, said: “I think councillors knew in detail what was happening with the core strategy.
“It was their duty to tell people what was happening and they failed to do so.”
Last night, a spokesman for Oxford City Council said: “These concerns have already been expressed by local residents to the planning inspector who held the core strategy examination (or public inquiry) in the summer last year.
“The city council has vigorously defended both the policies in the core strategy and the extensive consultation that it undertook during its preparation. We are now awaiting the inspector’s report.”
Comments(7)
Joe Cooke
says...
6:11pm Tue 12 Jan 10
peapoddy2
says...
6:27pm Tue 12 Jan 10
jockox3
says...
6:36pm Tue 12 Jan 10
peapoddy2
says...
6:44pm Tue 12 Jan 10
jockox3 wrote:But we want housing in Oxford to be in short supply - it keeps house prices high thus helping to keep the riff-raff out.
We already have too many in-commuting to jobs in the city on an inadequate transport network, largely because, and for those who choose to remain in the city many are paying exorbitant housing costs. Remember, when you say "houses", you really mean "people".
Isisbridge
says...
9:17pm Tue 12 Jan 10
Jonathan Gittos
says...
11:11pm Tue 12 Jan 10
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Find jobs in Oxford, Banbury and Oxfordshire
Search Now »
Make a date in Oxfordshire and find friendship
Search Now »
Find homes in Oxford, Banbury and Oxfordshire
Search Now »
Cars for sale in and around Oxfordshire
Search Now »
jockox3 says...
5:54pm Tue 12 Jan 10
*Some* of these mystical "people of Oxford" referred to cannot, and see little prospect of doing so.
Personally I agree that this is not the way to solve such issues, and certainly not a "doubling" of the city - but a combination of *re-development* (preferably via mutual bodies like Community Land Trusts) and Land Value Taxation would enable significant densification of many area of the city, but it does not do to report soi-dissant "snobs" as being so seemingly utterly unconcerned of the plight of so many in the city.