A decision to protect Oxford Stadium, a former greyhound racing track and speedway stadium, as a conservation area has been upheld by a judge who described it as one of the most unusual decisions of its type he has considered.
Though Ouseley J said that the largely unused buildings are of “mundane quality at best”, and that Oxford Stadium, in Blackbird Leys, is “not a visually attractive site on any view”, he rejected claims by the landowner that the designation was irrational.
The ruling will come as a blow to GRA Acquisition Ltd, which wishes to redevelop the site with 220 residential dwellings.
The judge said: “I accept that this is one of the more unusual conservation areas I have considered in any capacity. The justification is unusual in the emphasis placed on the ‘ephemeral’ quality of the buildings. They are of a mundane quality at best.
“But these are features which are acknowledged in the Conservation Area Appraisal and officer’s report, and are part of the historic interest and character which the council sees as worth preserving or enhancing, not just for the sporting associations but for their associations with the surrounding factory, suburban developments and their residents’ leisure and sports.
“Assuming that there is no improper purpose behind the designation, I cannot hold it to be irrational, very unusual though the justification is. I cannot hold that the planning judgment, explicit and reasoned, is not one to which a reasonable planning authority could come.”
GRA had also claimed that the stadium was not an “area” for the purposes of section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
The judge said that “area” is not defined in the legislation, nor is their useful authority on what constitutes an “area”, but he ruled that s69 was satisfied in this case.
“It is plain that the word ‘area’ has a very wide scope,” he said. “It connotes some size unspecific but going beyond a mere mathematical square footage.”
He said that Parliament had not defined “area” as distinct from “a building and its cartilage” and that such artificiality should not be imposed on the statutory provisions.
He added: “The council did not err in its understanding of the concept of an ‘area’ for the purposes of s69.”
oxford stadiu
The Queen on the application of GRA Acquisition Ltd v Oxford City Council Administrative (Ouseley J) 22 January 2015
Thomas Hill QC and Philippa Jackson (instructed by Asserson Law Offices) for the claimant
Anthony Crean QC and John Hunter (instructed by Oxford City Council) for the defendant