Oxymoron
Well-known member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 2,861
Must admit I cannot recall that section and in particular the phrase about disrupting vehicle movements but there again there are so many documents out there now it's hard to recall what was said where.That’s not true, I’m afraid.
Here is the relevant section:
The County Council cabinet has required OUFC, before the lease of the Triangle site is finally agreed, to produce detailed plans that include the following:
e) Develop new pedestrian and cycle entrances and routes to improve accessibility, including a new pedestrian route across the Oxford Road, such as a footbridge, that improves pedestrian and cyclist access to the site from Oxford Parkway railway station and the Park & Ride without disrupting vehicle movements on the Oxford Road.
We call on the County Council to stand by this position, and take steps to ensure that the plans for the stadium do not go ahead in their current form.
Robey wrote on behalf of the 4 councils to Liz Lefferman to clarify that OCC would be sticking to that position. She replied with an unequivocal ‘yes’
Unfortunately, as much as we want to believe otherwise, the current proposals, without a footbridge, do not meet the conditions set down by OCC.
Anyway, Google is your friend and the only hit I get on that passage is from the FoSB website, citing a letter from KPC Cllr Robey to OCC
OUFC's Planning Application
Dear Friends As you may have read in the local press https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/24150634.oxford-united-stadium-plans-lack-bridge-causes-concerns/ (paywall) Oxford United has recently submitted a planning application for the stadium. The application will be available to view on Cherwell’s...
www.friendsofstratfieldbrake.org
Of course, I am not privy to any communication between OCC and KPC, so I cannot say whether that is a faithful repetition of Cllr Robey's letter - some might suggests the condition may have been "exaggerated" by persons unknown, who can say? What is interesting to note is that the passage you quote and the FoSB article both contain the misnaming of Cllr Liz Leffman as Lefferman. Now that in itself could be a simple typo but it does show that mistakes (or mistruths) can have significant impact once they are in the wild.
Helpfully, the article does also give detail of Cllr Leffman's unequivocal reply - "We stand by our original decision, and we will not support any proposal that includes the closure of the road on match days". I see that as the council clearly distancing themselves from the original statement by referencing closure when the club are no longer advocating such things and the council would be fully aware of that at the time of reply. Now to me, that looks like OCC putting themselves in a position where they can both sign the lease and not be seen as going back on their word.