THE LATEST attempt to build on a fenced-off recreation ground should ‘set alarm bells ringing’ for the whole of Rugby borough, say campaigners.
Housebuilder McCarthy and Stone has submitted a planning application to build a 62-apartment, 14-bungalow extra care retirement village on Oakfield Park, while leaving part of the Bilton Road site as public open space.
But a spokesman for the Save Oakfield group says the application relies on challenging Rugby Borough Council’s policies on open spaces which, he claims, could threaten green spaces across the whole borough.
The park was fenced off by its owners, the Heart of England Co-operative Society, after its plan to build 50 new homes there was rejected by Rugby Borough Council (RBC) in 2016 on the grounds it should remain a community park.
McCarthy and Stone now argue the park should not be considered as a public open space because it has been fenced off.
And a consultant employed by the Co-op has challenged the council’s as-yet-unadopted Local Plan on the grounds that standards for green spaces in Rugby are too high.
In a objection to the proposed Local Plan, Narvinder Bains of PJ Planning said: “The two typologies of parks and gardens and amenity green spaces should be combined into a single typology as residents treat them for effectively the same purpose. This would result in a new standard for urban and rural housing development. This is considered appropriate as existing and proposed standards for parks and gardens in Rugby are double the national average.”
Richard Joy of Save Oakfield said: “The attitude of the Co-op should set alarm bells ringing for everybody in Rugby.
“They are seeking to reduce standards across the entire borough. Their motivation is to profit on this small piece of land.
“Everyone living in the borough who values their green space should be aware of the Co-op’s actions and how any precedent set could affect them in the future.”
An artist’s impression of the proposed corridor of public open space which would run down one side of the retirement village.
Rugby MP Mark Pawsey said he had always opposed any form of development on the site.
He said: “Oakfield Recreation Ground is situated in one of the most densely populated areas of the town which already suffers from insufficient open space.
“It is an invaluable community asset and should be retained as open green space. I remain firm in my opposition to the application.”
RBC leader Coun Michael Stokes said: “We extended an open invitation to the Co-op in 2014 to negotiate the sale of Oakfield Recreation Ground to the council in order to protect it as a public space.
“I’m deeply disappointed the Co-op has repeatedly ignored our requests, the latest of which was made in November.
“However, now a planning application has been submitted, the council must determine the application in line with national and local planning policies, and shall do so.”
In November, when the retirement village plan was first made public, Coun Stokes told The Observer: “Any proposal to develop the site would require a compelling justification in line with national and local planning policies. To date, such a justification has not been forthcoming and any application that fails to meet this test is likely to be refused.
“Oakfield Recreation Ground has been a recreation ground for as long as anyone can remember.
“The Co-op can restore their standing in the community and dispose of an asset they have no interest in by accepting our offer to buy the land at its current market value.”
Martin Edwards, Deputy Regional Managing Director at McCarthy and Stone, said: “Our plans offer an opportunity to improve local housing choices, delivering specialist accommodation for older homeowners.”
Visit www.planningportal.rugby.gov.uk/welcome.asp and search ‘R18/0214’ to see the planning application. Search Facebook or Twitter for ‘Save Oakfield’ for the latest from the campaign group.
