We were assured that the Bertie Park consultation was due any day. Now there is yet another delay. Could this be anything to do with the upcoming elections?

Wanting to understand, we sent some questions to the council. They replied we are “not able to go into the detail you are requesting at the moment”. Here are the really tough questions that Oxford City Council do not want to answer:

OCC say that they will share the information with the community “at the appropriate time in the future”. Would that appropriate time be after the election?

We would like the council not to treat us as enemies, or to blame us for the problems that they are having with the Bertie Park development. All we have done is point out what is in the agreed local plan and draw the attention of the council to its own policies.

Oxford City council’s new economic strategy is incoherent by design. It is driven by the Venn diagram below:

Choosing a Venn diagram allows the council to use a pick and mix approach where OCC e.g. can say that inclusion is a priority, but run projects that make Oxford more unequal. For more details of this approach, see the draft economic strategy.

This approach produces many contraditions, but contradictions also appear elsewhere. OCC’s Green Spaces Strategy states: “Play spaces should be located on accessible green space where feasible and include elements of natural and free play” and “A buffer zone should be provided around play areas”. Yet OCC want to build houses on the buffer zone around Bertie Park. The only green space will be on waste-land which is unsuitable for unaccompanied children.

OCC have also been consulting on their City Centre Action Plan. They say that delivering more housing is a priority, but there will be little housing in the city centre, and no family housing. They can build more houses for their money outside of the city centre (e.g. on Bertie Park). While city centre businesses struggle to fill vacancies, the CAP aims to create far more new jobs than homes. Increased demand inflates house prices. The council always use the number of people on the housing list to justify the need to build on Bertie Park, but what if their policies make housing less affordable, driving new people onto the list? The housing list has been the same size for at least 20 years.

The city centre action plan relegates homelessness to the section on “getting the basics right”, just above effective street scene management and cleaning and waste regimes. OCC see homelessness as a symptom to be treated, while their policies drive up the cost of housing, one of its underlying causes.

The Bertie Park consultation has been delayed many times. Ever since last May, it has been postponed one month at a time. Oxford City Council continues to struggle with the practicalities of the project, and so kicks the can down the road. We have been told that an announcement is imminent, so we are treading water, waiting to see what they will come up with.

Why is it so difficult? The Bertie Park development deviates from the local plan. Section 38.6 of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act says that every development should be in accordance with the local plan unless material conditions indicate otherwise. Common law says that any decision to deviate from the local plan should be transparent and based on evidence that is both adequate and intelligible. The local plan says that Bertie Park should not be destroyed or down-graded, but re-provided on the land behind Wytham Street. There are many reasons why this can’t be done. On the other hand, the decision to deviate from the local plan and squeeze the housing and recreation ground into the same plot simply makes no sense.

Bertie Park is NOT a green space, it is a recreation ground.

Last Monday, we went to a council meeting to explain why the current proposals for developing Bertie Park are a deviation from the local plan, and that there have been no “extensive consultations”. The council didn’t try to engage with our arguments, but simply said that they “stood by their words absolutely”. So, on Saturday, more than 20 members of the Save Bertie Park campaign gathered outside Carfax to make it clear what we want for Christmas. Posters for the event were prepared by our younger supporters.

Oxford City Council continues to kick the can down the road. The consultation is now due for January, but we need to show that we still care.

Meet at St Luke’s (Canning Crescent) on Monday 29th 4.00 – 5.00 to prepare posters. On the 4th December, we will be at Carfax 12.00 – 1.00. Passers-by will be invited to post messages of support on our Christmas tree. We will deliver it to St Aldates for the council to put with their Christmas decs. Saving Bertie Park would make an amazing Christmas gift for our community.

Snow not forecast for Saturday 4th, but building snowmen is definitely one of those activities that can happen on an open green space, but not on a nature reserve.

As the consultation approaches, we think that it is important for people to know the facts. Alex Hollingsworth is Cabinet Member for Planning and Housing Delivery. He says:

This IS true but … ALL of the local plans say: 

Plot B is the wasteland behind Wytham St, previously called “the Back Fields” or “Cold Harbour Nature Reserve”. Council policy says this:

The recreation ground can’t be re-provided on the Cold Harbour Nature Reserve because it has no thoroughfare and it is not overlooked. The police say it is not suitable for unaccompanied children.

Other reasons that plot B is not suitable:

• the site is geologically unstable
• the park would no longer be in walking distance* for families living in flats on Gordon Woodward Way.

* defined by Oxford City Council as 400m. Please click here the council’s Green Spaces Strategy and look for p.43 to see where this figure comes from.

It is great to see recent interest in the Save Bertie Park campaign from the Oxford Mail and That’s.tv.
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/19626906.fight-save-bertie-park-city-councils-housing-development-continues/

Both pieces say why the park is important to us. The fact that the current proposals are not in the plan, and that we were not consulted, is edited out. Both pieces end with the statement always made by Alex Hollingsworth (OCC cabinet member for planning and housing delivery):

Are the current proposals for Bertie Park in the Local Plan?

Bertie Park has been on local plans since 2001 because somebody thought that the recreation ground could simply be moved. All of the local plans say:

Plot B is the land behind Wytham St previously called “the Back Fields” or “Cold Harbour Nature Reserve”. It has no thoroughfare, it is not overlooked and can seem quite a scary place. Council policy says that it is not suitable for a play space:

The police agree.

So OCC are planning to squeeze the new development into our recreation ground.

Is this in the local plan?

When they carried out their extensive consultation for the local plan, who did they consult, and which questions did they ask?

Did they ask the police whether plot B was appropriate for a recreation ground?

Did they ask us if we wanted a new housing development squeezed into our recreation ground? How could they, if this was not what the Local Plan intended?

Not in the plan, not consulted, not our choice.

If you support us, please follow this blog or facebook page or contact savebertie@gmail.com to join our campaign.