£1m U-turn: Call to take two storeys off building (From The Oxford Times)
When It Happens Panel Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting 'OXFORD NEWS' to 80360 or email
£1m U-turn: Call to take two storeys off building
9:00am Saturday 9th February 2013 in News
By Pete Hughes, Reporter. Call me on 01865 425431
Buy this photo »
Save Port Meadow protesters at Oxford Town Hall on Thursday night
UNIVERSITY bosses were last night urged to pull down the top two storeys of “stark and aggressive-looking” student blocks.
Despite giving permission for the Castle Mill scheme, Oxford city councillors yesterday admitted they don’t like how it looks.
Campaigners say the buildings in Roger Dudman Way, which received planning permission last February, damage the historic view of Oxford’s ‘dreaming spires’ across Port Meadow.
And – after a hard-fought campaign by protesters – councillors have now pleaded with Oxford University to demolish the top of the half-finished buildings.
However, the council has been warned by its own officers that it could be faced with a bill of around £1m from the university for compensation if this takes place.
At an emotionally-charged meeting which was attended by around 100 campaigners and residents, councillors agreed to begin negotiations with the university.
Chairman of the councils West Area Planning Committee (WAPC) Oscar Van Nooijen said: “The city council has agreed to negotiate with the university in order to reduce the size and impact of the buildings.
“Those negotiations started yesterday.
“In addition, we will be setting up a high-level group with leading councillors and local amenity groups to learn lessons for the future.”
Councillor John Goddard, who sits on the committee, said: “We need to get this development two storeys lower, that would be our ideal.
“That is what’s needed to move it below the tree line, and that is our objective.”
As it stands, the scheme will create 312 flats and bedsits over four and five storeys on unused railway land near Oxford Station.
A review of the development was ordered in December after the Campaign to Protect Port Meadow from Oxford University (CPPMOU) handed the council a petition, signed by 1,666 people.
At Thursday’s committee meeting, representations from the CPPMOU, residents, the Freemen of Oxford and local historians were all greeted with applause from the public gallery in the Town Hall.
Sushila Dhall, who started CPPMOU, said the petition – which now has more than 2,000 signatures – would now be withdrawn from the city council and presented to the university.
The city council can revoke planning permission, but needs the Government’s approval – unless the university does not object. Either way, it would need to pay compensation.
Council officers last week warned the compensation claim could amount to a seven-figure sum.
Campaign member Toby Porter told the committee: “I know it is a difficult decision to take and could potentially cost £1m, but the chance that the university, which is severely embarrassed, would seek reparations of that amount from the city in which it is hosted is zero.”
Oxford West and Abingdon MP Nicola Blackwood met campaigners yesterday and said she was pleased with news of the negotiations. She said: “Of course the city council has a responsibility to try to ease the pressure on the local housing market and the university has a role to play in that by providing sufficient accommodation for students.
“But this should not come at an irreversible cost to a historic and environmental heritage site like Port Meadow.”
Head of city development Michael Crofton-Briggs yesterday met the university’s director of estates, Paul Goffin, to begin talks.
Mr Crofton-Briggs is due to report back to the committee in April.
A spokesman for the University of Oxford refused to say whether it would reduce the buildings’ height and who would pay the bill if it did.
Spokesman Matt Pickles said: “We welcome the report’s finding that the university acted properly when securing planning permission for the Castle Mill student accommodation development.
“We are always happy to meet with planning officers and to hear what they have to say.”
CASTLE MILL TIMELINE
February 15, 2012: Oxford City council gives Oxford University permission to build 312 students dwellings in four- and five-storey buildings at Castle Mill
October 1: Resident Sushila Dhall starts the Campaign to Protect Port Meadow from Oxford University (CPPMOU)
December 1: CPPMOU hands a petition against the development, with 1,666 signatures, to the council
December 17: Councillors order a report on how the impact of the new student accommodation, pictured, can be reduced
February 7, 2013: The west area planning committee agrees to begin negotiations with the university.
Comments(15)
SNJ
says...
9:35am Sat 9 Feb 13
Andrew:Oxford
says...
9:48am Sat 9 Feb 13
jooly
says...
2:25pm Sat 9 Feb 13
Myron Blatz
says...
3:20pm Sat 9 Feb 13
Grunden Skip
says...
2:19am Sun 10 Feb 13
Toby Porter
says...
8:06am Sun 10 Feb 13
I don't think any campaigner has or will call for the tax payer to pay for any remedial work. Wait and see what options emerge, but I think you can discount that one, our Campaign certainly won't be calling for it.
In terms of democracy, all I would say is that had the University and Council properly publicised their plans, there would be petition.
Read what people are saying, no-body knew, thats the point. And for a place like Port Meadow in a city like Oxford, that's just not good enough.
Come along next time there is a campaign gathering or demonstration, and talk to us in person.
You may find we not quite the ghastly group you think we are. Last week, for example, when you called us "lentil munchers", I had a nice steak in the fridge ready to cook that night. I cooked it rare, and it was delicious!
jooly
says...
11:33am Sun 10 Feb 13
Grunden Skip wrote:You're missing the point GS - it is irrelevant how prestigious (or powerful) the developers are. All planning applications should be scrutinised with the same care and amount of foresight. Something as huge as this development should have had a longer period of time and greater publicity for all objections to be raised before planning permission was granted. It is disgraceful how we were steam-rollered with a rushed application. Is it really so 'extreme' to try to preserve special views for so many? Thank God for them. Oxford University appears to have lots it's connection with the people who live here.
What a shame, nay disgrace, that a bunch of rabble rousers, are trying to dictate to the most Prestigious University in the World. I hope The University ignores them, but if they do not and We (tax payers) are landed with the hefty bill, then every name on the petition should be forced to pay the damages, as this planning went through all democratic processes before being granted. As what has happened in Chippy with the Mosque, it seems that extreme groups can now overturn planning decisions. That is not a democracy, and is wrong.
SNJ
says...
11:43am Sun 10 Feb 13
It's St Scholastica's Day today: beware of starting a town & gown dispute....
Myron Blatz
says...
1:12pm Sun 10 Feb 13
Grunden Skip
says...
6:49pm Sun 10 Feb 13
Toby Porter wrote:I support the building, you do not, so there we will have to disagree. But at least you know how to cook a steak :-)
Hi Grunden
I don't think any campaigner has or will call for the tax payer to pay for any remedial work. Wait and see what options emerge, but I think you can discount that one, our Campaign certainly won't be calling for it.
In terms of democracy, all I would say is that had the University and Council properly publicised their plans, there would be petition.
Read what people are saying, no-body knew, thats the point. And for a place like Port Meadow in a city like Oxford, that's just not good enough.
Come along next time there is a campaign gathering or demonstration, and talk to us in person.
You may find we not quite the ghastly group you think we are. Last week, for example, when you called us "lentil munchers", I had a nice steak in the fridge ready to cook that night. I cooked it rare, and it was delicious!
Hafiz Ladell
says...
10:09am Mon 11 Feb 13
Where then can we point the finger?
Following recent local government reforms, planning decisions have been, to a large extent, removed from public oversight, and council scrutiny has been drastically curtailed. Should we ask, to whose benefit?
jooly
says...
10:19am Mon 11 Feb 13
Grunden Skip
says...
3:11pm Mon 11 Feb 13
jooly wrote:Maybe we should just scrap the democratic planning process. It only causes problems and scenes like those on The Town Hall steps pictured in the OM. Instead we could just have a he/she who shouts loudest wins, as that seems to be what is happening here.
Agree with Hafiz Ladell. I'm very concerned that the councillors involved in any review of this should have no involvement with Oxford University in their personal lives. Otherwise the 'council scrutiny' will be extremely unreliable and limited. Take a look on the council website at the councillors to see who their employers are.
Isawyoucoming
says...
3:04pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Grunden Skip wrote:most prestigious university in the world
What a shame, nay disgrace, that a bunch of rabble rousers, are trying to dictate to the most Prestigious University in the World. I hope The University ignores them, but if they do not and We (tax payers) are landed with the hefty bill, then every name on the petition should be forced to pay the damages, as this planning went through all democratic processes before being granted. As what has happened in Chippy with the Mosque, it seems that extreme groups can now overturn planning decisions. That is not a democracy, and is wrong.
in your opinion
Milkbutnosugarplease says...
9:10am Sat 9 Feb 13