LISTEN HERE
 Jessica Goyder is the latest musician to put her singles on our site. Listen here
| THE INSIDER
 Get the lowdown inside the corridors of power in Oxfordshire here.
| SEND AN OBITUARY
Send us a tribute to someone who has passed away
| ON YER BIKE
 Get the view from the gutter with cycling group Cyclox in Oxfordshire
|
|
|
|
‘Real’ Oxford disappearing says author
 |
| Philip Pullman unveils the renamed narrowboat |
Award-winning novelist Philip Pullman has warned that encroaching development is threatening Oxford's unique character.
Mr Pullman, who lives in Cumnor and is the author of the His Dark Materials trilogy, spoke out while lending his support to campaigners who are concerned by plans to redevelop the Castle Mill Boatyard site in Jericho.
He said: "The boatyard is going to vanish and it is not just the boatyard itself, it is the importance of the life of the canal that I am concerned with as well as the beautiful view that we have of the church and the trees that will grow.
"Unfortunately I do think it is symptomatic of how Oxford as a whole is changing.
"People like myself who have been here for 40 years will remember St Ebbe's as it used to be. It is now the concrete wasteland of the Westgate Centre.
"The Covered Market is changing, and Cornmarket is now a street like any other High Street in the country, so it is all the more important we protect little spots like this."
He added: "People need to protest and make their views heard as soon as possible. Oxford is unique and different to any other city in the world.
"The way the developers want to work is to make it like every other place in the world because it is cheaper and easier and quicker to build that way. But it is wrong for the face of Oxford, and it is wrong for the character of human beings.
"It must be resisted - and we will resist."
Mr Pullman renamed Esther Pozzani's canal boat Lyra's Defiance on Saturday, to mark the campaign.
Spring Residential has submitted plans for blocks of flats on the former boatyard site which do not include provision for a boatyard.
Filming of The Butterfly Tattoo, based on Mr Pullman's novel of the same name, finished yesterday.
6:00am Monday 1st October 2007
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Nikki, Botley on 7:37am Mon 1 Oct 07
I agree so much with this gentleman. I took a walk down the Oxford Canal yesterday. I was amazed at the buildings and was going to write a letter to the Oxford Mail to highlight my horror at the amount, size and appearance of flats, built like a maze of rabbit hutches next to the Canal - they look like a prison. There are no trees left, they have built right to the very edge of the canal. There are hundreds of flats - it was a real shock, everywhere you walked there were high rise buildings concreting over the area. The noise and pollution, the area covered up - Berkley Homes - you should be ashamed of yourselves, the greed in which you have squahsed these homes into that space is horrific. And as for the beautiful Jericho Boat Yard - NO MORE HOMES - NO MORE HOMES!!! Listen to the people, you are destroying this area - keep it green keep it clean!!!!!
I agree so much with this gentleman. I took a walk down the Oxford Canal yesterday. I was amazed at the buildings and was going to write a letter to the Oxford Mail to highlight my horror at the amount, size and appearance of flats, built like a maze of rabbit hutches next to the Canal - they look like a prison. There are no trees left, they have built right to the very edge of the canal. There are hundreds of flats - it was a real shock, everywhere you walked there were high rise buildings concreting over the area. The noise and pollution, the area covered up - Berkley Homes - you should be ashamed of yourselves, the greed in which you have squahsed these homes into that space is horrific. And as for the beautiful Jericho Boat Yard - NO MORE HOMES - NO MORE HOMES!!! Listen to the people, you are destroying this area - keep it green keep it clean!!!!!
Posted by: Olive, Oxford on 7:42am Mon 1 Oct 07
It is quite disturbing to see huge vast amounts of land covered in this way, no longer are we building family houses with gardens, where nature and people can thrive together, there is absolutely not a scrap of green to be seen underneath these new dwellings. AND please dont try and defend the homes that will help with the 'housing crisis' - could you afford £950,000 on your working class wage? Surely, even if you can afford a flat by the river you do not want to see these parts of the county become concrete suburbia - a walk by the river is now simply like a walk through the centre of carfax, noisy, smelly, over populated and a concrete nightmare. Once gone, these places of nature will never return.
It is quite disturbing to see huge vast amounts of land covered in this way, no longer are we building family houses with gardens, where nature and people can thrive together, there is absolutely not a scrap of green to be seen underneath these new dwellings. AND please dont try and defend the homes that will help with the 'housing crisis' - could you afford £950,000 on your working class wage? Surely, even if you can afford a flat by the river you do not want to see these parts of the county become concrete suburbia - a walk by the river is now simply like a walk through the centre of carfax, noisy, smelly, over populated and a concrete nightmare. Once gone, these places of nature will never return.
Posted by: Jock, Headington on 8:41am Mon 1 Oct 07
Whilst I see what he two previous commentators are getting at - I wonder if they would be so nostalgic for the days of belching fumes and noise from the Eagle Works? No trees then either!
Whilst I see what he two previous commentators are getting at - I wonder if they would be so nostalgic for the days of belching fumes and noise from the Eagle Works? No trees then either!
Posted by: Dan, East Oxford on 9:13am Mon 1 Oct 07
At least, if I remember correctly, a lot of the workers at Lucys had somewhere to live - provided by Lucys. This city now depends, to an increasingly large degree, on tourists. We may well find no green and pleasant river or canal to walk along, no one stopping to spend money here. I also remember St Ebbe's - with some thought I am sure the properties could have been modernised and though we might not still see little old ladies sitting, knitting, on their doorsteps at least we would have had one attractive city centre square to cherish. Are we using all the business and industrial areas dotted round the city - put affordable housing there, on the spot for offices etc.
At least, if I remember correctly, a lot of the workers at Lucys had somewhere to live - provided by Lucys. This city now depends, to an increasingly large degree, on tourists. We may well find no green and pleasant river or canal to walk along, no one stopping to spend money here. I also remember St Ebbe's - with some thought I am sure the properties could have been modernised and though we might not still see little old ladies sitting, knitting, on their doorsteps at least we would have had one attractive city centre square to cherish. Are we using all the business and industrial areas dotted round the city - put affordable housing there, on the spot for offices etc.
Posted by: Jock, Headington on 10:34am Mon 1 Oct 07
I'm not sure there's evidence that teh city's economy is increasingly dependent on tourism. And, even if it is, what makes that a bad thing? Tourism is business just as any other. Indeed in many ways it is good as tourism is often supplied by the more local independent traders, including small hoteliers and so on that we would want to be encouraged in a sustainable economy.
Of course some would include in tourism the "educational tourists" who come here because it is a world centre of learning - also a good thing.
I can see why there are worries about using up non-residential land for housing, important as that is. However the city has been quite careful to protect employment land in locations where it is appropriate (Lucys and Oxford Automotive were clearly out of place in predminantly residential neighbourhoods by the time they closed). And from what I can gather there is now a surplus of commercial lettable property on the market (look at "post-Oxfam" Summertown for example).
Besides, I'm betting that within the next couple of decades at the very most, the patterns of work, livving and commuting we are used to will be a thing of the past and we will increasingly look at urban living as something driven by one's social life and needs rather than one's work life and needs. Live in Oxford because you like it and your friends are here but work, remotely, in Osaka, because that's where your skills are needed, sort of thing.
I'm not sure there's evidence that teh city's economy is increasingly dependent on tourism. And, even if it is, what makes that a bad thing? Tourism is business just as any other. Indeed in many ways it is good as tourism is often supplied by the more local independent traders, including small hoteliers and so on that we would want to be encouraged in a sustainable economy.
Of course some would include in tourism the "educational tourists" who come here because it is a world centre of learning - also a good thing.
I can see why there are worries about using up non-residential land for housing, important as that is. However the city has been quite careful to protect employment land in locations where it is appropriate (Lucys and Oxford Automotive were clearly out of place in predminantly residential neighbourhoods by the time they closed). And from what I can gather there is now a surplus of commercial lettable property on the market (look at "post-Oxfam" Summertown for example).
Besides, I'm betting that within the next couple of decades at the very most, the patterns of work, livving and commuting we are used to will be a thing of the past and we will increasingly look at urban living as something driven by one's social life and needs rather than one's work life and needs. Live in Oxford because you like it and your friends are here but work, remotely, in Osaka, because that's where your skills are needed, sort of thing.
Posted by: Ed, Oxford on 10:44am Mon 1 Oct 07
Jock, you're missing the point. We NEED tourists to come to Oxford to keep a lot of people in work. By destroying the character of Oxford we will also see less visitors and hence less income.
The city has been changed a lot even in the short time I can remember it (15 years - I'm 26 now). Sometimes for the better (Oxford Prison re-development) and seemingly more often, for the worst (McCornmarket and now McHousing).
Oxford is a jewel that needs protecting. We need those idiots at OCC to realise this and start working to increase Oxford's potential. Removing buses, pedestrianising the High etc will all help. But OCC and the Colleges need to agree...and they rarely do.
Jock, you're missing the point. We NEED tourists to come to Oxford to keep a lot of people in work. By destroying the character of Oxford we will also see less visitors and hence less income.
The city has been changed a lot even in the short time I can remember it (15 years - I'm 26 now). Sometimes for the better (Oxford Prison re-development) and seemingly more often, for the worst (McCornmarket and now McHousing).
Oxford is a jewel that needs protecting. We need those idiots at OCC to realise this and start working to increase Oxford's potential. Removing buses, pedestrianising the High etc will all help. But OCC and the Colleges need to agree...and they rarely do.
Posted by: Dave, Oxford on 10:53am Mon 1 Oct 07
Removing buses you say? So how is everyone going to get to work?
To be honest I think Oxford has a slightly over inflated opinion of itself. Yes the centre is very nice but that's it. Building houses in the suburbs or on the edge will make no difference to the tourists, they will still come.
Removing buses you say? So how is everyone going to get to work?
To be honest I think Oxford has a slightly over inflated opinion of itself. Yes the centre is very nice but that's it. Building houses in the suburbs or on the edge will make no difference to the tourists, they will still come.
Posted by: Jock, Headington on 1:17pm Mon 1 Oct 07
Yeah well - whilst I support the campaign for the boatyard, for example, I doubt very much as if a piece of industrial relic, looking down and heel is what the tourists are flocking to - I'm certainly not supportive of the campaign on the basis that it's a tourist magnet as it is! Nor the Eagle Works.
However the castle, as you mention it Ed, could only really have been done with residential units in it to pay for itself (despite the £10m public subsidy that went into it - whilst still not giving us a free museum and castle mound - for the tourists of course!)
Actually I would say that the Eagle Works, Lion Brewery and BT Building developments, alongside the Castle and the Lower Mill Stream development off Park End - basically all the major development that has gone on in the touristy parts of town over the past decade - have enhanced rather than diminished the centre of Oxford compared with their former industrial/commercia
l uses. All have created places that people can go into and through where there were gates and guards previously. Most have incorporated reasonable to good quality modern design. And are desirable places to be judging by what people are prepared to pay for them. And in most cases they have considerably enhanced what used to be an industrial riverside with open spaces that didn't exist previously.
Yeah well - whilst I support the campaign for the boatyard, for example, I doubt very much as if a piece of industrial relic, looking down and heel is what the tourists are flocking to - I'm certainly not supportive of the campaign on the basis that it's a tourist magnet as it is! Nor the Eagle Works.
However the castle, as you mention it Ed, could only really have been done with residential units in it to pay for itself (despite the £10m public subsidy that went into it - whilst still not giving us a free museum and castle mound - for the tourists of course!)
Actually I would say that the Eagle Works, Lion Brewery and BT Building developments, alongside the Castle and the Lower Mill Stream development off Park End - basically all the major development that has gone on in the touristy parts of town over the past decade - have enhanced rather than diminished the centre of Oxford compared with their former industrial/commercia
l uses. All have created places that people can go into and through where there were gates and guards previously. Most have incorporated reasonable to good quality modern design. And are desirable places to be judging by what people are prepared to pay for them. And in most cases they have considerably enhanced what used to be an industrial riverside with open spaces that didn't exist previously.
Posted by: Peter Metro, Oxford on 1:54pm Mon 1 Oct 07
Oxford is not any better than any other City it just thinks it is, infact Cambridge,Chester,Yo
rk,Bath etc could be argued to be prettier,what Oxford does have is a lack of affordable housing and very poor nightlife in the City centre,we have far too much Greenbelt,we must build on Grenoble Road.
Oxford is not any better than any other City it just thinks it is, infact Cambridge,Chester,Yo
rk,Bath etc could be argued to be prettier,what Oxford does have is a lack of affordable housing and very poor nightlife in the City centre,we have far too much Greenbelt,we must build on Grenoble Road.
Posted by: Roger, Oxford on 1:58pm Mon 1 Oct 07
The Council recognised the mistakes it had made with St Ebbes, and instead of redeveloping East Oxford and Jericho beyond recognition it handed out grants to build bathrooms and make other improvements, in fact the areas were to some extent gentrified but without losing their character. Now with its new rubbish policies, it seems intent on turning them back into slums.
The Council recognised the mistakes it had made with St Ebbes, and instead of redeveloping East Oxford and Jericho beyond recognition it handed out grants to build bathrooms and make other improvements, in fact the areas were to some extent gentrified but without losing their character. Now with its new rubbish policies, it seems intent on turning them back into slums.
Posted by: adrian, jericho on 6:29pm Mon 1 Oct 07
it's so possible to have housing/ artisinal space and a boatyard - it just requires a less greedy developer...and one that has an imagination. Sadly Spring,the current developers, don't appear to have one.
Have a look at: http://www.jcby.co.u
k/page72.html
where other towns have made it work. With a bit of investment we could do the same and better in Oxford.
it's so possible to have housing/ artisinal space and a boatyard - it just requires a less greedy developer...and one that has an imagination. Sadly Spring,the current developers, don't appear to have one.
Have a look at: http://www.jcby.co.u
k/page72.html
where other towns have made it work. With a bit of investment we could do the same and better in Oxford.
Posted by: Pat Schlueter, Jericho, Oxford on 6:51pm Mon 1 Oct 07
Philip Pullman is so right - we already have enough ugly, charmless buildings. The city of Oxford is extremely special and needs to be preserved which it is danger of not being. The boaters too have every right to their way of life and when the council and developers bang on about "creating affordable housing" I wonder quite what they think living on a boat is. Surely that is extremely affordable housing and also of little danger to the environment. Let's say a rousing NO to any more of these ugly ugly builds, and demand that any new buildings are ones we can look at with joy and delight in their beauty, not shudder at their awfulness.
Philip Pullman is so right - we already have enough ugly, charmless buildings. The city of Oxford is extremely special and needs to be preserved which it is danger of not being. The boaters too have every right to their way of life and when the council and developers bang on about "creating affordable housing" I wonder quite what they think living on a boat is. Surely that is extremely affordable housing and also of little danger to the environment. Let's say a rousing NO to any more of these ugly ugly builds, and demand that any new buildings are ones we can look at with joy and delight in their beauty, not shudder at their awfulness.
Posted by: adrian, jericho on 7:53pm Mon 1 Oct 07
picking up on Jock's comments regarding keeping work space in Oxford, or as he has it, moving it out: artisinal space on the boatyard site should be retained as as part of a housing development. In an
oil poor future building on wharfs and boatyards is madness - surely we need to keep some light industry space in towns. It seems to have be completely eradicated from Oxford. Were in danger of making anywhere central into dead commuter zone. We should be making this space into a functioning and diverse community.
Canal boats are around 12x more efficient in carrying 1 tonne of freight over road freight
picking up on Jock's comments regarding keeping work space in Oxford, or as he has it, moving it out: artisinal space on the boatyard site should be retained as as part of a housing development. In an
oil poor future building on wharfs and boatyards is madness - surely we need to keep some light industry space in towns. It seems to have be completely eradicated from Oxford. Were in danger of making anywhere central into dead commuter zone. We should be making this space into a functioning and diverse community.
Canal boats are around 12x more efficient in carrying 1 tonne of freight over road freight
Posted by: Anna, Jericho on 8:30pm Mon 1 Oct 07
Living on a boat - affordable, please. If you want a permanent mooring add 50K to the 50K the boat is going to cost you. Nevermind the annual surcharge of over 2K British Waterways is contemplating charging permanent moorings. There is no such thing as affordable in this country. Many people against this development have not been honest in declaring that their house and garden backs on to the proposed sight and they don't want anything built on the site full stop. The Berkeley Homes up and down the canal are today's version of Wilkinson & Moore (circa 1880s) along Southmoor. Get real!
Living on a boat - affordable, please. If you want a permanent mooring add 50K to the 50K the boat is going to cost you. Nevermind the annual surcharge of over 2K British Waterways is contemplating charging permanent moorings. There is no such thing as affordable in this country. Many people against this development have not been honest in declaring that their house and garden backs on to the proposed sight and they don't want anything built on the site full stop. The Berkeley Homes up and down the canal are today's version of Wilkinson & Moore (circa 1880s) along Southmoor. Get real!
Posted by: Isidora Deeley, Hythe Bridge Arm on 9:14pm Mon 1 Oct 07
I agree with Philip Pullman, I have lived on the "ARM" for over 4 yrs now. All I have seen is the canal slipping away (by the way BW has done no maintaince on the ARM except when hounded to do so, and no plans to dredge etc in the future either!) to developers in the name of improvements!!! Ha!
It pains me to walk my dog along the tow path! I look at what has been done and shudder, it looks like it was all built to extract the highest price! Now because of that BW wants to raise the mooring fees to be in line with the price of the flats! They want to increase our fees 124%! That whole can of worms is another story! Can you see the trickle down affect things are having??? So the affordable housing ie on a narrow boat is soon to be ending! Let alone the horrible plans "SPRING" are trying to flog as affordable nice looking housing etc, an old term comes to mind "GAG ME WITH A SPOON" If they are allowed to con't with these plans, history and a way of life will be gone forever, and will never be the same again.
I think that Spring, the OCC, BW, and anyone else who thinks they know whats best, should spend some time ON the canal in a narrow boat, and cruise on it use the services along the canal for fuel, pump out and repairs, before any other choices are made as to WHAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO !?!
I agree with Philip Pullman, I have lived on the "ARM" for over 4 yrs now. All I have seen is the canal slipping away (by the way BW has done no maintaince on the ARM except when hounded to do so, and no plans to dredge etc in the future either!) to developers in the name of improvements!!! Ha!
It pains me to walk my dog along the tow path! I look at what has been done and shudder, it looks like it was all built to extract the highest price! Now because of that BW wants to raise the mooring fees to be in line with the price of the flats! They want to increase our fees 124%! That whole can of worms is another story! Can you see the trickle down affect things are having??? So the affordable housing ie on a narrow boat is soon to be ending! Let alone the horrible plans "SPRING" are trying to flog as affordable nice looking housing etc, an old term comes to mind "GAG ME WITH A SPOON" If they are allowed to con't with these plans, history and a way of life will be gone forever, and will never be the same again.
I think that Spring, the OCC, BW, and anyone else who thinks they know whats best, should spend some time ON the canal in a narrow boat, and cruise on it use the services along the canal for fuel, pump out and repairs, before any other choices are made as to WHAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO !?!
Posted by: pandora, Jericho on 10:22pm Mon 1 Oct 07
I think the views of the local population are clear enough and the councillors who are our elected representatives are aware of those views. If the decision of the planning committee is not the one that pleases the people, those councillors will not see themselves re-elected, will they. We do, at least theoretically, live in a democracy and the permanent officers of the Council are the servants of the elected members, who are in fact representing us, the people. Or have I got it wrong somewhere? It does often seem as though Alice's Wonderland was much more organised than local government here in Oxford.
I think the views of the local population are clear enough and the councillors who are our elected representatives are aware of those views. If the decision of the planning committee is not the one that pleases the people, those councillors will not see themselves re-elected, will they. We do, at least theoretically, live in a democracy and the permanent officers of the Council are the servants of the elected members, who are in fact representing us, the people. Or have I got it wrong somewhere? It does often seem as though Alice's Wonderland was much more organised than local government here in Oxford.
Posted by: adrian, jericho on 11:04pm Mon 1 Oct 07
Anna in jericho what about the fact that the developers Spring are trying to get out of the council's 50% affordable and 20 % renewable
requirements ?
All the people i have spoken to who live next to the site accept that the site will be built on but it's the nature of the build that is the issue ie expensive buy to let investment properties. There have been 500 +letters of objection including a letter from CABE, normally supporters of the building industry, criticising the build.
But above all there are still no replacement boatyard facilities being provided - a condition that we all fought for in the last round of planning and is now a requirement. How is it that Spring think they can navigate round that one...? Well, it appears they are having a go.
Anna in jericho what about the fact that the developers Spring are trying to get out of the council's 50% affordable and 20 % renewable
requirements ?
All the people i have spoken to who live next to the site accept that the site will be built on but it's the nature of the build that is the issue ie expensive buy to let investment properties. There have been 500 +letters of objection including a letter from CABE, normally supporters of the building industry, criticising the build.
But above all there are still no replacement boatyard facilities being provided - a condition that we all fought for in the last round of planning and is now a requirement. How is it that Spring think they can navigate round that one...? Well, it appears they are having a go.
Posted by: John Connell-Hinkes, Jericho on 11:16pm Mon 1 Oct 07
I've just been reading an Oxford City Council pamphlet entitled'Oxford is my world- your Guide to saving the planet' full of useful energy saving advice such as "Open your curtains wide when it's sunny in winter to warm your house and take advantage of 'passive solar gain.'" If the council were really serious about the coming climate and sustainability crisis they would be supporting low energy lifestyles like narrowboat living, not trying to drive these people out just to make a quick buck.Let's not destroy the very thing that keeps house and council tax prices round here so high-the fact that Jericho is a beautiful and historic corner of a beautiful and historic city.
I've just been reading an Oxford City Council pamphlet entitled'Oxford is my world- your Guide to saving the planet' full of useful energy saving advice such as "Open your curtains wide when it's sunny in winter to warm your house and take advantage of 'passive solar gain.'" If the council were really serious about the coming climate and sustainability crisis they would be supporting low energy lifestyles like narrowboat living, not trying to drive these people out just to make a quick buck.Let's not destroy the very thing that keeps house and council tax prices round here so high-the fact that Jericho is a beautiful and historic corner of a beautiful and historic city.
Posted by: pandora, jericho on 3:28pm Tue 2 Oct 07
re Johnn Connell Hinkes comments...if the council were really interested in saving the planet and energy saving they would be less obstructive to the rickshaw business my son is trying to run, in the face of continual opposition from the licensing department of the council. I just wish they ( the council) would agree some 'joined up' policies, from green in every area, to considering the boatyard development as part of the Radcliffe Infirmary development, and so look to the importance of amenities and so on being provided. Unfortunately, Jericho cannot remain a backwater, but let us move in the direction the residents feel best, not the pencil-pushers and target-meeters back in the council offices.
re Johnn Connell Hinkes comments...if the council were really interested in saving the planet and energy saving they would be less obstructive to the rickshaw business my son is trying to run, in the face of continual opposition from the licensing department of the council. I just wish they ( the council) would agree some 'joined up' policies, from green in every area, to considering the boatyard development as part of the Radcliffe Infirmary development, and so look to the importance of amenities and so on being provided. Unfortunately, Jericho cannot remain a backwater, but let us move in the direction the residents feel best, not the pencil-pushers and target-meeters back in the council offices.
Posted by: Carolyn Dutton on 4:29pm Tue 2 Oct 07
Mr. Pullman is absolutely right.
Berkley Homes and Lucy's need
to have their road renamed, "Sharkway". So much could have been done to make the Lucy's
development a part of Jericho. Instead they've dumped on Oxford in a big way. "Flat-tipping" at its worst ,creating an ugly urban canyon out of our lovely canal.
Surely investment could also include investment in people and the cultural heritage of their communty.
Hopefully St Barnabas will intercede and not let this happen at Castle Mill Boatyard.
Mr. Pullman is absolutely right.
Berkley Homes and Lucy's need
to have their road renamed, "Sharkway". So much could have been done to make the Lucy's
development a part of Jericho. Instead they've dumped on Oxford in a big way. "Flat-tipping" at its worst ,creating an ugly urban canyon out of our lovely canal.
Surely investment could also include investment in people and the cultural heritage of their communty.
Hopefully St Barnabas will intercede and not let this happen at Castle Mill Boatyard.
Posted by: Don Carlos, Oxford on 4:36pm Tue 2 Oct 07
What's it got to do with Pullman? He's not even from Oxford he is from Norwich!
What's it got to do with Pullman? He's not even from Oxford he is from Norwich!
Posted by: Jenny Mann, Jericho, Oxford on 12:25pm Wed 3 Oct 07
I don't mind if Philip Pullman's from Mars. He lives here now. At least he cares about the city, unlike our Planning Department, who are allowing all the corners of Oxford (outside the precious city centre) to be filled with rubbish development. Greedy developers want to build the maximum number of overpriced 'units' or 'luxury apartments' to the square inch, which will be sold off to speculators or as buy-to-let, not provide affordable homes for local families to live in. The Jericho canalside proposal is for 4 storey concrete blocks of small expensive flats, that would look dated and unacceptable even in Basildon. We don't have to put up with this anywhere in Oxford.
I don't mind if Philip Pullman's from Mars. He lives here now. At least he cares about the city, unlike our Planning Department, who are allowing all the corners of Oxford (outside the precious city centre) to be filled with rubbish development. Greedy developers want to build the maximum number of overpriced 'units' or 'luxury apartments' to the square inch, which will be sold off to speculators or as buy-to-let, not provide affordable homes for local families to live in. The Jericho canalside proposal is for 4 storey concrete blocks of small expensive flats, that would look dated and unacceptable even in Basildon. We don't have to put up with this anywhere in Oxford.
Posted by: John, England on 2:33pm Wed 17 Oct 07
The same challenges face Bath. Bath Heritage watchdog is doing well. I have arranged a demo in Queen Square, Bath, for Affordable housing,[bold]bold[/bold] Sunday 4th November at 3pm. Any support in numbers would be greatly appreciated, as this is a national issue which the government needs to address.
The same challenges face Bath. Bath Heritage watchdog is doing well. I have arranged a demo in Queen Square, Bath, for Affordable housing, Sunday 4th November at 3pm. Any support in numbers would be greatly appreciated, as this is a national issue which the government needs to address.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
