JERICHO ECHO ARTICLE
September 1979
Why is Oxford City Council allowed to bend the rules when and how it pleases? A glaring example is the building of the hideous tenement blocks in Canal Street. Four times the contractors have dug across the street in a single operation. This is illegal, as access to the street must be possible at all tines. Steel decking could have been provided to allow free movement of traffic, but it was not. Neither do the Council have a building site, and we believe unless there is a site large enough to work on with good access to and from the site, planning permission should not be allowed. We quote from the Oxford Mail,"Three applications to develop land near the Oxford Union were turned down because the site was inaccessible." The Canal Street blocks have literally been built off the road. There is no room on site where the dumpers and fork lifts can work.
It is also incredible that the Council is so disorganised that it builds 14 garages and 24 flats onto a narrow street before resolving how it is going to deal with the consequential strain on parking and hazards to passing traffic approaching round a blind corner. Because the flats have been built 'off' the street we have been subjected to unbearable 'noise levels' (the permitted level is 90 decibels) from dumper trucks, fork lifts, huge articulated cement mixers, air compressors, the full orchestra, for days and weeks on end, each vehicle way above the legal limits. We also believe the law is being broken when dumper trucks and fork lifts are used on public highways without road fund licences, and no efficient silencers fitted.
At no time since the building began, ie. last October, has the street been swept or hosed down after a day's work. This also is a breach of regulations. When we approach the Council on·the issues, they politely 'paas the buck', and put the onus on the contractors, but we say the street is the Council's property so they are responsible for it at a11 times. Damage has been done to our property by vehicles shunting back and forth across the narrow street. Cars have been splattered with cement and plaster, the paintwork on our houses has been ruined with dust and dirt from the site. Our ancient rights have been taken away, our privacy has been taken away.
At no time has the Council or the contractors shown any consideration to the residents living in the area It is our opinion that the building of the blocks on a totallyunsuitable site ought never to have been allowed. We intend taking these matters further to get as much public opinion and publicity as possible. We would like to hear from other members of the public who have suffered or are suffering at the hands of the 'gods almighty', Nos. 21, 22, 23, and 24 Canal Street, and other members of the community too numerous to mention.
Author: S. B. Marshall