The University held this consultation on their plans to develop Osney Mead.
The architect’s impression and explanation of the development is here
https://www.seh.co.uk/projects/osney-mead-masterplan,-oxford/
Members of the Hinksey and Osney Environment Group and the Oxford Flood and Environment Group attended and have sent this report and comments.
- No draft masterplan was on show. There were Information boards and a questionnaire that might imply that a draft exists but is not yet for public eyes.
- Planning – evidently the City Council is asking for a masterplan to accompany the forthcoming planning application for a new Engineering Science Department.
- The Information Board said - Policy SP2 of the current Local Plan allocates Osney Mead for mixed use development, including employment uses, academic uses, student accommodation, employer linked affordable housing and market housing. The draft Local Plan promotes Osney Mead as an extension of the city centre, contributing to the city’s employment land supply. The SPD recognises Osney Mead’s location and opportunity to contribute to the wider vision for Oxford’s West End with innovation and mixed-use development that complements city centre uses. The vision is to tranform “an underperforming, underdeveloped, edge of city centre location, into a liveable quarter of the city, where innovation as part of Oxford’s knowledge economy is integrated with a strong community and a vibrant mixed use quarter”
- Masterplan Team - Looks like most of the Kevin Murray team were present, plus one officer from Oxford University Developments. A red line on the map suggested that Osney Mead can expect no direct connectivity with Oxford’s West End development, remaining as a cul de sac accessed from Ferry Hinksey Lane.
- The Information Board said - The site could be transformed into a place that is focused on people with new places and squares that are connected by well-designed, accessible and active streets. The connectivity could be enhanced by active travel and ensure that those connections meet the needs of all people. There could also be the opportunity for the site to be served by a high frequency of buses that would terminate and re-enter service at Osney Mead
- Engineering Science Building There were no images of how the building will relate to the existing Thames towpath, and no views from the meadow. There is a concern that once the OFAS flood scheme is in place Osney Mead could be saturated with piecemeal development with no community balance, citing the University’s saturation development of Old Road campus.
- Flooding – the Engineering Science building would sit in an area of Flood Zone 2 and 3a (100-year event), with SUDS to protect against surface water (rainfall), relying on flood barriers proposed under OFAS for river flooding. It was accepted that since OFAS is proposed to be built in reverse, barriers cannot be used until there is an outlet at Kennington plus one year, soonest 2037. Developer had been told 2030!
Comment and reaction
Topic: the Thames Towpath on the Osney Mead side.
(A)The Oxford University Development officer present and the Kevin Murray architect present confirmed that the University does not intend to build the Osney Mead site out over the Thames Towpath (as originally envisaged in .University Master Plan for Osney Mead by Shepheard, Epstein, Hunter :(https://www.seh.co.uk/projects/osney-mead-masterplan-oxford/)
This is a relief to all the residents and locals who walk the existing towpath for school or work or recreation and refreshment. The image above erases quiet fishermen on the bank, narrowboats, dog walkers, joggers etc who already actively use the towpath as a place that is ‘focussed on people’ but contains the mature eco-system vital to their well-being.:
(B) The representatives at Osney Mead disclaimed any University insistence on the extra bridge at Grandpont (which necessitates £10million+ of public money, plus felling the last wood on the Thames Towpath before Oxford at the point where it currently surrounds both sides of the path with its bluebell, narcissi and slipper orchard glades: see saveGNP.org). Oxford City Council has claimed the extra bridge as a condition of the developers and also that it provides a vital ‘flood-proof’ exit from Osney Mead (that exit regularly floods under the railway bridge, and would necessitate Osney Mead residents using Botley Rd to get to the city centre). The representatives nevertheless seemed to feel the extra bridge was necessary, though the flooding problem is admitted to be insoluable. Residents also fear the acoustic effects of the large amphitheatre planned for Oxwed: together with the mass development on that bank, it should put paid to any bats, pollinators, small mammals that survive the cutting down of the wood at Grandpont Nature Reserve. This latter appears to be intended years before the Osney Mead and Oxwed sites on either side of the Thames can have residents.
Topic: Sewage concerns along the Thames: On the Oxford West End Development (Oxwed) side, the council has been warned that full occupancy of their big development (in a 50% partnership with Nuffield College) will be impossible unless Thames Water constructs the sewage infrastructure needed (Thames SAY they will do this by 2032, but given it’s taken them 4 years to begin serious work on the leaking Thames Water pipe under Osney Bridge, this seems unlikely).
There is so far no public information about whether Thames Water can provide adequate sewage for the Osney Mead development, but as there has already been sewage bubbling up through the Osney drains in South St and TW have announced a permanent lowering of waterpressure because their ageing pipes cannot cope (so for instance making showers on upper floors and some appliances ineffective), there is some concern about the intensity of development and hard surface planned for an area so close to the flood plain (note that the OFAS scheme claims ‘alleviation’ but no guaranteed protection).
Even with a ‘master-plan’ required, it is not clear that the joined-up effects and the unintended consequences of massive and intensive development in the area have been thought out.
(C)
- If anyone wants to see what Oxford University sponsored development looks like, they just need to look at Old Road Campus, Headington (where Ithe writer has worked for the last 18 years).
In 2008 there were just 3 large buildings on the site, which was quite pleasant. There was woodland with mature scots pine, green areas to sit and picnic benches where we used to have lunch under cherry trees. All of this has now gone.
The University began its sustainable development policy by building a huge multistorey carpark. We were promised leisure facilities, a café a bar and a gym, but these things never materialised. Gradually, the university has developed every available inch of land on the campus, replacing open space with tightly-packed, ugly 3 or 4 storey laboratory buildings. Architects have provided token outdoor seating for about 50 of the roughly 5000 people who work there. There are no shops, banks, pubs, cafes, parks or other public amenities within a mile and a half. The University is not obliged to provide these. The place is a research desert.
- The University produced its own plan for compulsory purchase of the land on Osney Mead it does not already own to build a new engineering department, science park and staff housing. In England, the legal responsibility for town and country planning lies with local planning authorities, which are usually local councils. That’s fair enough. As a local resident, I can vote for who I like on the council and have my say. But Who voted for the University?
- Osney Mead is symptomatic of Oxford’s failed town planning. It’s a stupid place for an industrial estate. Half of the available space is carparking and everyone who works there or delivers/collects from there has to drive down the Botley Rd and down Ferry Hinksey Rd cutting West Oxford Primary School off from its unusable playing field. If people need to drive to an industrial estate it needs to be somewhere on the ring-road, not 5 minutes' walk from the city centre. Oxford does not need 20,000 new jobs. It needs housing for the people who already live and work here. Osney Mead could provide 5-10,000 units of high density affordable car-free housing within walking distance of the city centre.