Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Greenbox: Desperate for Development?

Over recent years Development in Oxford has galloped towards its precarious financial situation today. All along the canalside increasingly tall expensive blocks of flats tower over local Victorian terraced housing. Jericho Boatyard, operating for over 100 years, was evicted and sealed off by British Waterways, intent on selling it for £4,000,000.

The recent wave of unbridled economic growth has swept aside important landmarks such as a grade II* central Oxford railway building, and a much loved Dickensian ironworks foundry near Port Meadow. The Green Party views these land and buildings as assets to be held in the public domain rather than sold to the private sector.

For example, when Lib Dem, Labour and Tory members supported the proposal to expand the Westgate centre into a giant car-dependent shopping mall, the Greens actively opposed it and by placing one legal challenge after another in its way, delayed it until the credit crunch has it lying wounded, unable to raise the funding to begin work on the site.

Greens argue that pieces of land like this could be developed on a local, human scale like the Lanes in Brighton, with small business units and flats above them, a community centre and some public space. This would regenerate the area, but would not make Oxford so competitive economically in the SE region, which is what successive government policies would have us do. Oxford University gets involved too as a major landowner.

The University’s proposals are usually eventually passed, but the City Council has also rejected plans such as the University’s proposal to build a book depository on a flood plain that has recently flooded, and was thus opposed by local residents and Councillors. This was eventually defeated at Public Inquiry, and a new site will now have to be found for University books.

One of the biggest hurdles to democracy in Oxford is the way public consultations on large planning proposals are carried out. First, the plans are made and nearly set in stone by an ‘in principle’ agreement to accept them. Then, the public are presented with a proposal which is put to them as what ‘will’ happen.

Everyone acts as though at some point a decision had been made, so that when the decision comes to be formally made, it is a foregone conclusion that few local politicians would dare oppose. Suddenly large developments are going to be stalled for an indefinite period, and we are all going to have to think differently about economic growth and competitiveness, because the ‘credit crunch’ heralds a new way of thinking about the purpose of developments and how we use our land.

 

Check out our other content

Most Popular Articles