Bertie Park goes to Planning Committee 23rd June

Bertie Park is 90 years old. It was built at a time when it made more sense to invest in recreation grounds to keep people healthy, than hospitals to treat the sick. This means that most people in this area played on Bertie Park, their kids play on it, or their grandchildren do. That’s why we are demonstrating:

Councils legally must produce plans which are “deliverable during the plan period.” OCC boast that Bertie Park has been on local plans for more than 30 years. This just means it was never deliverable. Plans also must meet government guidelines like this:

Plans for building on Bertie Park always said: “Planning permission will only be granted … if the existing Bertie Place recreation ground, including a replacement Multi Use Games Area, is re-provided on land” behind Wytham Street (SP32). But this just isn’t possible; they are going to shrink the park to less than 20% of its current size.

OCC declare that their plans are “in broad conformity with the NPPF (government guidelines)”. Thames Valley Police don’t agree (here and here). We don’t agree. 840 people took part in our survey. This is what they thought:

OCC admit “there will be an impact on local children and young people by the loss / reduction of these facilities (BUT) this is balanced against the provision of new affordable housing some of which is aimed at families.” But new kids won’t have anywhere to run around either! Oxford City Council create complexity in order to obscure the issues. If you want to do your head in, read the officer’s report to planning committee. We have produced a deep dive into the issues; you can either dive or dip a toe in.

Labour silence on Bertie Park

Oxford City Council accept that “the overwhelming local community view … is that Bertie Park is needed.” Labour’s leaflet says they are “investing in our parks and shared spaces.” They’ve got “new play equipment” for Hinksey Park, Fox Crescent and Friars Wharf. But they want to shrink Bertie Park down to 20% of its size.

Hinksey Park Labour candidate Siobhan talks about “giving every young person the best start in life.” But the new local plan talks about replacing our Multi Use Games Area “with an alternative type of facility” or getting rid of it altogether. To compensate they would improve the capacity of an existing MUGA in the neighbourhood. They must mean the MUGA at Fox Crescent which is tiny, and already fills one end of the playground.

Labour says they are “combatting anti-social behaviour.” The police say OCC’s plans for Bertie Park will create a risk of “neighbour disturbances and community tension.” OCC also want to build 237 homes on Redbridge Paddock (on the other side of the Abingdon road) with no facilities for young adults.

That’s more young people with fewer amenities. Isn’t that a recipe for more antisocial behaviour?

What the candidates think about Bertie Park

I asked Rick Tanner, Siobhan Lancaster and Hannah Scott.

Hannah Scott: Green Party

Bertie Park wasn’t mentioned on the Green Party leaflet, so I asked Hannah Scott what she thought. She apologised for leaving it out. Hannah is against building on Bertie Park. She thinks there’s an urgent need for affordable and social housing, but the council should take into account the quality of life for existing residents too. Leisure access to green and blue space is important for mental health. There is already a lack of community provision in south Hinksey. Hannah understands why residents are upset. She expressed an interest in youth facilities in this area.

I asked Labour Party candidate Siobhan Lancaster where her bottom lines were for Bertie Park. Siobhan believes that local recreation grounds are really important. She was surprised to find out the new local plan no longer requires replacement of our Multi Use Games Area. Siobhan was keen to find out more about the campaign, and left with lots of questions. If she is elected, she promised to make sure we aren’t kept in the dark.

Siobhan Lancaster: Labour

Rick Tanner: Lib Dem

Rick fully understands the need for house building. He supports building on Redbridge Meadow, but he has reservations about current plans. Rick has lived here for 33 years. His daughter and friends loved to play in Bertie. Like the rest of us, Rick is against building on Bertie Park. Not only will it add little to the housing stock, he is worried about flooding and sewage. Rick also thinks that the replacement play areas won’t cater for existing users, let alone the new people who will move into this area if Redbridge Meadow goes ahead.

Problem with tall people using Bertie Park MUGA

Oxford City Council want to build on Bertie Park. Government policy says it has to be replaced with “equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location.” OCC have big problems with our Multi Use Games Area (MUGA).

They want to put it 11m from bedroom windows. Thames Valley Police say there is a real “risk of noise having a negative impact on residents, neighbour disturbances and community tension.”

OCC want to lower the MUGA by 30cm from street level to cut down the noise. But that won’t work if people using the MUGA are very tall. So they’ll have “a simple method to report noise complaints, damage and/or misuse.” Thames Valley Police (here) say this just isn’t a good place to put a MUGA; the only real way to solve the problem would be to put higher fencing right around the MUGA so it can be “robustly” locked “outside legitimate hours of usage.”

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/933674

We think Bertie Park isn’t a bad place for a MUGA, but that Bertie is a really bad place to build homes. OCC say the development is going to planning committee very soon. When it does, we will demonstrate. Watch this space for news!

List of Oxford parks, recreation grounds and allotments “suitable for development”

Oxford’s Office and Research and Development space is increasing by 72%. OCC say this a “seismic shift” in the city’s economy (read here p.6). So our housing crisis will only get worse. All parks, recreation grounds and allotments are now “Green Infrastructure.” The following “parcels” of land are now considered grey belt, and suitable for development (read here from p80).

These sites are protected. Planning permission will only be given if there is “sufficient reprovision.” OCC will try to make sure that it is “the same standard or higher, ideally onsite,” but they say that this can be the same quantity or quality (read here p.61). In the case of Bertie Park, this means shrinking to less than 20% of current size, with a bit of new equipment. But now it’s not just Bertie, it’s right across Oxford. For this to happen, government policy must change. This is why we started the petition “Save Britain’s Recreation Grounds.” Please sign and share.

Save Britain’s Recreation Grounds

We are taking a petition to Downing Street (sign here). The government is consulting on changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This controls how councils make local plans and how they make decisions. The changes will mean NO recreation ground will be safe from development. The existing NPPF says:

The government want to change part b:

Even if a recreation ground is well used, councils will never need to …

  • re-provide the same quantity and quality of equipment. OCC has suggested replacing Bertie Park with a much smaller “play garden” for under 5s. With new equipment and safety surface it would be better quality. It won’t matter that it is a huge reduction in quantity.
  • re-provide in a suitable location. They just need to provide better access. OCC want to improve access to the land behind Wytham Street. The police say it’s not safe for unaccompanied children. This won’t matter because OCC will build a massive bridge.

The changes won’t just threaten Bertie Park, but recreation grounds across the country. The government says they “welcome views on the effect of this change”. They are consulting until 10th March. Please sign our petition, and share as many times as you can!

Photo: Sergeant Tom Robinson RLC/MOD, OGL v1.0OGL v1.0, via Wikimedia Commons

We will deliver it to Downing Street on 10th March.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

OCC can’t answer Bertie Park speech

We talked to council on 26th January. OCC’s policy for Bertie Park says our recreation ground has to be re-provided. OCC always knew this was impossible:

The plan was out of date before it was agreed!

The planning application was submitted 2 1/2 years ago …

All this is such a waste of tax-payer money

Thames Valley Police are worried about crime, anti-social behaviour and community conflict if the development goes ahead:

Even the police think it’s a bad idea

Recent OCC policy says that, with the population growing, there is no spare pitch capacity:

Once our Multi Use Games Area is gone, it’s gone forever.

Cllr Hollingsworth said that this is a live planning application. But it has been a live planning application for 2 1/2 years. When we talk to council, we usually get an update. This time they said nothing:

Alex warns the planning committee to retain an open mind.

Cllr Hollingsworth says if Oxford wants to ask its neighbours to help meet its unmet housing need, it can’t start removing sites from the local plan.

We have to build on ….

But that unmet housing need is turbo-charged by new laboratories and hotels being built across the city. Maybe, just maybe, OCC should also think about the kind of Oxford it is building for ordinary working people, and leave a bit of space for kids to play.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Thorny problem for Bertie Park

Bertie Park Recreation ground has a play area with 14 items of equipment. So, when the council’s first drawings showed only 4, we complained. They reassured us that there could be “as many as 9 items of equipment” in their new play area. We wondered how. Now we know!

The new plans show a toddler trail with 5 items of equipment, including 2 ‘boulders’ i.e. rocks. The toddler trail is hard up against the apartment block, and runs between some shrubs. But the police have pointed out that there should be a proper boundary between the play area and the apartment block garden. Instead of ornamental shrubs, they have suggested a thorny species instead. This could leave our young toddlers between a rock and a thorny place!

We will be talking to council again on 26 January. Watch this space!

Or use the form below to contact us:

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

What the police say about Bertie Park

The MUGA and the play area are very close to homes. There are 2 problems with this:

  1. Street lighting will light up the play area and MUGA at night. This increases the risk of crime and antisocial behaviour.
  2. Noise from the MUGA is a recipe for “neighbour disturbances and community tension.”

OCC want to build a long, narrow footbridge between Bertie Park and the land behind Wytham Street (site B). There’ll be “no option for escape” if someone is “approached by a hostile actor.”

Site B “does not have any clear function or purpose, and significantly lacks surveillance.” This could make it “a significant attractor for crime and antisocial behaviour.” The current bridge has bars to prevent joyriding:

Read the full TVP report here: Police Report

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨