Objections to Oxford
SM.. -Your contributor, Terence Bendixson, is somewhat unfair in his article 'Objections to Oxford.' In condemning the city planning depart- ment for failing to indicate in the review of the development plan, where the estimated increase, by 1981, of 36,000 people arc going to live, he neglects to note that since 1961 Oxford has been surrounded by a green belt, whose purpose is to contain the Physical extent of the city to the area of built-up
land as it existed at the time of the Green Belt Public Inquiry (1961). Primarily by redeveloping the outworn suburbs, for example St. Ebbes, it is calculated that an extra 8,000 people can be accom- modated within the city boundaries. Unless the green bolt is abandoned, there simply will be no room for the remaining 28,000, who will have to be housed not merely beyond the city boundaries but even beyond the green belt boundaries.
Although some villages near to Oxford are suf- fering from 'thoughtless elephantiasis,' it should be pointed out that much of the expansion in recent years has been concentrated on the few selected satellite villages in the green belt. Indeed, a com- pletely new village five miles from the city has been established. Thus there is necessarily a 'missing part' in the review of the city development plan; it would not be missing if there were a regional planning authority co-terminous with the city's functional
School of Geography, Mansfield Road, Oxford
Previous page
