Sir – What a self-serving bunch of arguments Professor James comes up with to justify the hideous eyesore his university has built next to Port Meadow (First Person, November 13).

 

First he sets up a straw man, pitching his argument against those who would stop the University from building more student accommodation.

 

I’m not aware of any complaints about building student accommodation, or building it on the Castle Mill site. What objectors have complained about is that these student buildings are ugly, badly designed, and above all — too high.

 

The problem is it is a cheap and shoddy development which the University somehow got past a dozing (or worse, compliant) planning committee.

 

Next, to over-egg the pudding, the Professor goes on to threaten that if the University now has to reduce the height of the blocks, its plans for new research facilities ‘could be badly hit’. Furthermore, this could affect the whole city’s economy.

 

No. Implementing the EIA’s ‘Option 3’ and reducing the height of the buildings would only mean 38 fewer bedrooms for postgraduate students. This is not a great threat to Oxford’s economy.

 

Finally, Professor James attempts to persuade us that the University has the moral high ground because it puts ‘people’ before the skyline. I wonder which ‘people’ he is talking about? A few students who will need to find alternative accommodation — or all the future people who deserve to inherit the beauties of Oxford as well as its research facilities.

 

Sue Gerhardt, Wolvercote