Kaddy has asked for a judicial review of the decision to appropriate Bertie Park. Part of the challenge is that OCC have appropriated 80% of the park. They say that a new MUGA (Multi Use Games Area) on the 20% which is left will meet the current needs for somewhere to play football and basket ball AND for free play. We think this is not rational. We should know very soon if the council will defend its decision.
This is what we said to OCC on Monday 25th November:
This postage stamp is the same size as the new MUGA
Councillors were asked to decide whether to gamble rate payer money on winning the case. This was councillor Turner’s short reply:
Cllr Turner’s very short reply
For the very first time the council could not say:
When Labour was elected, there was much talk about house building. We asked Anneliese Dodds if the government wanted to build on recreation grounds. This week we had a reply from Angela Rayner (read here). She said her Ministry (MHCLG) currently has no plans to undertake a review of recreation grounds for housing, adding that recreation grounds are “important for the health and well-being of communities.”
Angela Rayner also said that there are no plans to alter government policy (NPPF 103) that states councils should not build on recreation land unless:
We will lose 93% of our space for free play. To “offset” this loss, OCC want to provide alternative recreational provision. Their alternative is improved access to an area of waste land, not visible from Bertie Park. This is what Cllr Hollingsworth said when some-one suggested putting a new MUGA on this waste land:
It’s not “over-looked enough for it to be a secure space for young teenagers. The police said that. Everyone said that. The local council said that. The whole lot. So we said (the MUGA) can’t go there. So, if there is going to be a recreation space there, it’s going to have to be a very different sort of recreational space, not one that’s encouraging children to go … ”
…. Which is the whole point of a recreation space, surely?
It’s taken a while to upload this as the council didn’t record the first part. We had to re-record. This is Michael giving the campaign speech:
Cllr Linda Smith outlined the council’s position. She recommended that the cabinet note our objections, but appropriate the park:
Cllr Smith explains the appropriation
Councillor Hollingsworth said it would be unreasonable not to appropriate the park.
FACT CHECK: To appropriate Bertie Park, OCC have to show that the new Multi Use Games Area will meet the need for free play. This is barking mad. The new MUGA is way smaller than our green space. And if the MUGA is being used for football, there’ll be no space for free play at all. This is what we said was Wednesbury unreasonable.
Cabinet voted to appropriate the park, then members of the public were asked to leave:
Fact check: If you want to appropriate land you have to meet the requirements of the 1972 Local Government Act s122. This says the land should be “no longer required for its present purpose.” Cabinet did not even mention this.
And so, BOTH the campaign AND the council will have to go to the unnecessary expense of judicial review, partly because OCC did not allow for proper exchange and dialogue, partly because they want to build on Bertie Park no matter what the law says. If the council’s plans really are legal, if they really fit with government policy, why doesn’t the council engage with what we say? Why don’t they try to convince us that we are wrong?
OCC cabinet will meet on 16th October to decide whether to appropriate Bertie Park for building. The 1972 Local Government act says that Councils can only appropriate a park if it isn’t needed. So OCC has to show that their new recreation facilities will do everything that Bertie park does. Not easy!
The Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) will be 24% smaller. We think it may be the wrong shape for 5-a-side football. Downgrading facilities for young adults is worrying, especially as there will be 300 new homes on Redbridge Meadow and no facilities for young adults.
Bertie Park has a large area of grass for free play. This will be replaced by a nature trail. A nature trail is not for free play. Police say the nature trail will be unsafe for unaccompanied children. So, where do the council say that the kids can run around? The new MUGA.
That is why, in last week’s Oxford Mail article on Bertie Park, OCC said: “In making the decision cabinet should strike a balance between different land uses in the light of wider community interests, taking a broad view of local needs.”
But that’s not what the 1972 Local Government Act says. The cabinet meeting that will decide the future of Bertie Park will start at 6.00 p.m. on 16th October. Meet outside St Aldates at 5.45 to support the campaign. Here is the speech that we have sent to OCC for approval.
There is a huge amount of paperwork for the meeting. Email: Savebertie@gmail.com for links or further information.
On 16th October OCC’s cabinet will decide whether to appropriate Bertie Park for building. Even if a local authority already owns a recreation ground, they must appropriate it first before they can build on it. If they can’t appropriate, they can’t build!
“Appropriation” is not a paper exercise, but has real consequences for our community. It is the difference between having a recreation ground, and not having a recreation ground. To appropriate Bertie Park, OCC will have to meet conditions set out by section 122 of the 1972 local government Act. They will have to:
Show that Bertie Park is no longer needed
“Properly and conscientiously” consider the community’s responses to their consultation
Oxford City Council consulted the community last year. 150 members of the Bertie Park campaign sent in this response.
Meet outside the Town Hall at 5.45 to support the campaign. Oxford City Council’s cabinet meeting will start at 6.00 pm.
Oxford City Council say: “At present, the expectation is” that OCC Cabinet will decide the future of Bertie Park on 16th October (The big decision). But they are not sure.
10 months ago, people were told that there were “legal issues”. 5 Months ago we asked again when Bertie would go to cabinet. Cllr Upton, Cabinet member for Planning, said “it still needs a couple of things to be signed off.
Now she says:
For a big project like this there are a lot of moving parts, and some are outside the control of the city council. We genuinely do not know when all of the reports necessary will be ready.
You are as well-informed as I am about the likely date of Bertie Park coming to either Cabinet or Planning Committee.
Looks like we are ALL in the dark!
Are they are keeping us in the dark so we can’t let people know what’s happening? … so fewer people turn up to witness this important decision? OCC cabinet may or may not decide the future of Bertie Park on October 16th. Watch this space:
Last week was “Love Parks Week” in Oxford. Does OCC love Bertie Park?
Oxford’s green spaces have many functions: environmental, economic, health and wellbeing etc. In 2022 Oxford City Council carried out a study of its Green Infrastructure (here). This picked out Bertie Park as special. Even though small, it is “multi-functional.” Bertie is estimated to have an annual welfare benefit of up to £250k which means e.g. avoided health costs. This makes sense. Bertie Park was established 80 years ago when Oxford City Council realised that “it is cheaper to keep a well-developed and healthy community fit, than to cure the sickly inhabitants of congested areas by expensive hospital treatment.”
Today there is just not enough space for more parks. OCC want instead to focus on improving what we have. But they are dead-set on down-grading Bertie Park. Meanwhile, OCC have once again delayed their decision on whether they can go ahead and appropriate the land on Bertie Park. The chart shows all the meetings where Bertie Park was supposed to be on the agenda, then dropped:
Once again, OCC put off making a decision about Bertie Park.
Section 122 of the 1972 Local Government Act and the National Planning and the UK National Policy Planning Framework both protect recreation grounds. OCC’s current proposals for Bertie Park don’t follow the local plan. The Environment Agency say that they are unlikely to grant a permit.
Before they can do anything, OCC needs to appropriate the land. They say that this is “just a paper exercise”, that they just need to move the land from one budget to another. But it is not that easy. In November 23 there were “legal issues”. In April of this year there were “a couple of things” to sign off. In May it was the general election.
Our sewerage system cannot cope. Thames Water discharged sewage into the Thames 16,990 times in 2023. Many members of the Save Bertie Park campaign worry that building houses on Bertie Park could only make things worse.
Two organisations could act to stop Thames Water from discharging sewage. One is the Environment Agency. This article from 2012 shows how the agency used to function. The environment agency was then de-fanged by the Conservatives. They cut its funding and said it should not stand in the way of growth. This article from 2024 shows how much things have changed.
The other organisation that could help is Oxford City Council. When granting planning permission for 134 homes near St Frideswide Farm, Oxford City Council added a planning condition that the new homes should not be occupied until there was capacity to deal with the extra sewage. A scheme for upgrading the Sandford sewage works is due for completion in 2027. Even though it is still being designed, in April of this year OCC said that the new homes at St Frideswide could be occupied. See here for further details.
Does this mean that “planning conditions” are not worth the paper they are written on?
Can we both grow Oxford AND solve our housing crisis?
Do we have to live with shit in our rivers, gardens and homes?
Save Bertie Park Oxford 