Latest News

‘Government response to the Report of the Independent Panel delayed until later this year’

The Government’s response to the Report of the Independent Panel that conducted the Examination in Public of the South East Plan, widely expected in mid-January, has been delayed until later this year.

Hazel Blears MP, Secretary of State for Local Government and Communities, is currently considering the Report including recommendations by the planning inspectors to build 4,000 new houses in the Green Belt south of Grenoble Road, to the south of Oxford, threatening not just the surrounding villages and open countryside, but also the setting of the historic city of Oxford itself.

After the Government publishes its Proposed Changes there will be a further consultation period of twelve weeks. Given that this consultation cannot be ‘live’ during an election - there are elections on 7 May - either the consultation will have to start in early February or it will not start until after 7 May.

It is believed that the delay could be due to a conflict between central and local government over numbers of new houses, with central Government pushing for an increase in the number of houses built.

SODC Hands Off! Our Green Belt campaign

South Oxfordshire District Council has set up a website to act as conduit and co-ordinator for a campaign to prevent such destructive development in the Green Belt. They intend to launch it complete on the day the consultation letter is received from Hazel Blears MP. The idea is to ‘sign up’ as many people as possible to visit the website the day it opens in order to demonstrate people’s shock at the Secretary of State’s plans!

The website is not yet fully live but - before it is – CPRE Oxfordshire is appealing for as many people as possible to sign up to receive the campaign launch information. So if you haven’t already done so, please could you visit the website (http://handsoff.southoxon.gov.uk), register your email address, and then forward this email to as many people as you can, encouraging them to do the same.

For further information see the Oxford Green Belt Network site: http://www.oxfordgreenbelt.net

 

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.

The Greoble Road Debate

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

Further Information

• Ownership of land south of Grenoble Road
• Green Belt
• Green Grid