| Join CPRE | About CPRE | Contact us | Search | Green Belt Way | 
Campaigning to protect Oxfordshires's countryside for 75 years
Latest News
November 11 2008: Prime Minister's Office responds to HandsOff! Our Green Belt petition.
The Prime Minister's Office has responded to the petition submitted by John Howell, MP, South Oxon, to honour his pledge to protect Green Belt land, and to not allow proposals for 4,000 houses within the Green Belt in South Oxfordshire to be included in the South East Plan. 566 people signed the petition.
To view the Prime Minister's response click here.
August 25 2008: CPRE Oxfordshire responds to SODC consultation on South of Oxford Urban Extension.
Following the announcement by the Secretary of State on July 17th in the Proposed Changes to the South East Plan, that there will be a review of the Oxford Green Belt, to allow for the building of 4,000 homes south of Grenoble Road, SODC were asked to demonstrate how it can accommodate the proposal in its planning documents if it becomes a requirement. As a key stakeholder, CPRE Oxfordshire were asked for its views on the issues and options raised by the proposal should it go ahead.
In its response to the consultation on the South of Oxford urban extension, CPRE Oxfordshire made it very clear that we don’t believe that any incursion into the Green Belt is warranted, and that there is no credible evidence to justify it.
March 2008: SODC Hands Off! Our Green Belt campaign.
At the end of March, South Oxfordshire District Council initiated an on-line petition for people to register how important the Green Belt is to us.
At the end of the petition time (August 2008) Downing Street will send all signatories a message giving the government's reason's for either doing something or not taking any notice of what the public wants. The main thing is to have 1000s of people signing up. So please take a few minutes to sign up and encourage friends living in or near the Oxford Green Belt to do the same.
The address of the on-line petition is: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/SOxonGreenBelt
Green Belt Myths and Grenoble Road
There are two myths about the Green Belt and those determined to build on it resorted to both of them in defence of the Inspectors' recommendation that at least 4,000 houses should be built in an urban extension south of the City. The first myth is that developing small areas of the Green Belt is of no consequence—who will notice the loss of a meagre 1%? The second myth is that if the Green Belt is ugly it might as well be developed.
The reason that 1% of the Green Belt matters is that the purpose of Green Belt policy is to prevent sprawl. If planners are allowed to nibble 1% off here and 1% off there, Green Belt policy will cease to function. The edge of the Green Belt adjacent to Oxford is also the most important. Trimming a bit off the inner edge and adding to the outer edge, would undermine the primary Green Belt aim of preventing urban sprawl.
One of the great myths of the countryside is that the Green Belt has been put in place to protect beautiful landscape. That is not its purpose. Green Belts have been designated to prevent cities like Oxford sprawling ever outwards. Whether the land designated as Green Belt is attractive is immaterial to the policy, though almost everyone would wish it to be beautiful—except perhaps property developers who shudder at attractive countryside as it tends to be harder to get permission to build on it. Take a look at the landscape south of Grenoble Road. It is run down both aesthetically and ecologically. Ecological erosion is particularly important; it gets Natural England and the wildlife trusts off developers' backs.
What then of Grenoble Road? Below, Oxford East MP Andrew Smith and Ian Scargill from the Oxford Green Belt Network take opposite views on the need for an urban extension. The master plan shown is based on documents submitted by David Locke and associates to the Examination in Public. It is a cynical plan, where the undevelopable and beneath electricity power cables is labelled "green infrastructure" and the south boundary alongside the Baldons is called a "country park". The plan is designed to squeeze as many houses as possible onto the plot. The Inspectors hinted that the site might take more than 4,000 houses and David Locke has suggested 8,000 houses could be built there.
A decision on Grenoble Road is still a long way ahead. The government has yet to agree the Inspectors' recommendation and a review of the Green Belt south of Grenoble Road must first take place. But in the light of recent policy developments, the odds are more stacked in favour of the development than at any time in the past.
But that just makes the fight tougher. CPRE will continue to oppose this unecessary and damaging development.
Master Plan for Grenoble Road based on a design by David Lock Associates
submitted to the EiP for the South East Plan
Green Belt campaigner Ian Scargill
The proposal to build an urban extension to Oxford in the Green Belt south of Grenoble Road is both unnecessary and wrong. It is unnecessary because it will contribute little to the demand for affordable housing and it diverts attention from what is a much better approach to the housing issue. It is wrong because it runs contrary to 50 years of Green Belt policy and will destroy Oxford's countryside where it is most needed.
Oxford house prices are inflated by student demand, by property speculation and by house builders skilled in avoiding the need to build cheap housing. The City Council's wish to see 50% of new housing affordable has been declared by the South East Plan Inspectors to be unattainable. So any urban extension to Oxford will have a high percentage of expensive housing, of no benefit to the most needy.
Oxford's countryside provides the setting for the historic city and the Green Belt ensures this is so by preventing the city from sprawling outwards. An urban extension is sprawl by another name. The Green Belt protects village communities from absorption into the city but this proposed extension threatens not only Sandford, but the Baldons, Garsington and even Horspath.
The Green Belt is where urban populations connect with nature. It doesn't have to be beautiful; it is where people take exercise and the youngsters learn about an alternative environment to the street and the local shopping parade. Do the residents of Blackbird and Greater Leys approve of plans to destroy their local countryside?
The alternative to an ever expanding Oxford is to share the city's growth with the other towns of Oxfordshire as the County Council has sought to do. Bicester and Didcot, in particular, are now beginning to take off as employment opportunities and services improve. The Green Belt is essential to this policy. It benefits us all and should be kept as it is.
Ian Scargill, Chairman, Oxford Green Belt Network
Oxford MP Andrew Smith
Although this may not be a fashionable view, I strongly believe that the recommendation of the South East Plan Inspectors to build review the Green Belt south of Grenoble Road is one that all friends of the countryside should warmly welcome.
I grew up in the countryside, and greatly value the beauty of our natural environment. Indeed, CPRE members might have seen me cycling over from my home on Blackbird Leys of a summer's afternoon. The arguments for an urban extension to Oxford are compelling, on environmental grounds alone.
Firstly, significant environmental harm is caused by "Green Belt hopping". Where a Green Belt is too tightly drawn, it simply means that cars (often caught in congestion) pass over it. That is very much the case in Oxford, where a recent study found that there are some 27,000 more jobs than homes in Oxford. This harmful environmental impact would only get worse if, rather than building south of Oxford, more houses were put in Bicester and Didcot instead.
Secondly, we are seeing a real threat to existing urban areas in Oxford. Play areas, allotment sites, and even Southfield Park golf course have been under threat, and there are numerous instances of unacceptable over-development, because the City is totally unable to meet its housing need, yet it cannot expand outwards. The only way to stop this "pressure cooker" effect is to build south of Grenoble Road.
Of course, the arguments for an urban extension are not just environmental. As an MP, I have hundreds of cases of families who are overcrowded, in substandard accommodation, or whose children are desperate to live in the City in which they grew up. If Oxford is not to become the preserve of a wealthy elite, we need to offer these families some hope—and an urban extension to the City would do just that.
Andrew Smith MP, Oxford East
Published by CPRE Oxfordshire, Punches Barn, Waterperry Road, Holton, Oxfordshire OX33 1PP. 01865 874780.
campaign@cpreoxon.org.uk. www.cpreoxon.org.uk.
The Campaign to Protect Rural England promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England by encouraging
the sustainable use of land and other natural resources in town and country. National website: www.cpre.org.uk.