' Global Science Cities' Report part two - from the Oxford Science Park
- Jun 7
- 23 min read
Image: contributors to our 'Science Cities' discussion event at The Oxford Science Park - with Ylva Williams of Stockholm Science City Foundation on screen
In the second part of Future Cities Forum's 'Global science Cities' report, from our discussion event held at The Oxford Science Park, contributors spoke on the topics of best practice and the use of data in the design of science hubs, retrofitting older buildings for science use and the diversification of Oxford city centre for science R&D expansion.
Those taking part in this section of the discussion were Sebastian Johnson, Strategy Lead, Advanced Research Clusters, Richard Knight, Partner, Ridge, Anna Wai, Partner, Price & Myers, Eugene Sayers, Partner, Sheppard Robson, Jitesh Patel, Director, The Oxford Science Park, Professor Dave Valler, Oxford Brookes University, Matthew Humphreys, Director, Scott Brownrigg, Laura Ludlow, Partner, Mills & Reeve, Daniel Talbot-Ponsonby, Partner, Marks & Clerk, Carolyn Ploszynski, Head of Regeneration and Economy, Oxford City Council and Victoria Collet, Director of Development, Thomas White Oxford.
Attracting talent
Sebastian Johnson opened this section of the debate on the issue of careful planning of lab spaces and the need to provide science environments for a range of talented workers:
'We've heard a number of people talk about talent and you've got to find every possible angle and opportunity to attract the greatest talent. If that's around how you organise your space in terms of recognising that many people are not neurotypical and creating a space that attracts people who may be actually the best and most capable and skilled people, you have to provide the best space to work in.
'Looking at the challenges people face, neurodiversity is one of them. You think about the sectors and the various skills areas that people work in, in an innovation-intensive environment, I don't think there's a massive surprise. But I think some of the things touched on today are really interesting. and what makes a great science environment, many of the bits we've talked about is talent, it's about the environment, it's about density. Creating those places where people come - because they don't all necessarily come to see the science - we've got a 365-day-a-year MRI scanning centre here (at ARC Oxford at Cowley), those spaces have to work.
'That scanner brings hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people onto the campus at Cowley in east Oxford. They're not there to research science, they're there to try and get better, but it brings them onto the campus. There's a great opportunity for us on the campus then to engage with them through the amenities we have, through walking their dog while they're on campus or through coming into the cafe and having a roast dinner, it's very cheap and subsidised. And that, as Victoria Collett from Thomas White Oxford mentioned when discussing Oxford North, the cafe there, it's full of people who aren't necessarily working on campus. But that's great, it creates a buzz, it creates an environment. But equally, we've got to encourage and we need to encourage people to come out and talk to each other. And my job is all about, I guess, facilitating serendipity.
'I want people from different organisations at all the different research centres and different companies to be bumping into each other and having those magical conversations like 'oh we need to work together', that's what it's all about, that's what drives innovation, that's what's going to continue to save this brilliant country of ours. That kind of getting people together with someone from the space cluster at Harwell for instance, talking to someone from the energy tech sector and thinking, 'well actually there's something we can do together', and likewise on health and quantum computing. It's great to hear about Exeter College's EXOq development. Obviously, we need to have a conversation because we've got supercomputing, AI and quantum on our doorstep at Harwell.'
The use of data
Richard Knight, Partner at Ridge, talked about meeting individual needs when building campus facilities and how data collection can help:
'So a bit of research we've done with partners and from the knowledge we've got from the Science Park, Harwell and the University is in over-designing buildings. What the data tells us is that we can still provide the capability for selling to tenants, but we are over-designing the buildings. And I know when I was working on a piece with the University around smart buildings, how they're used, how they're facilitated, how we respond to that, the data is very key. I mean one of the examples was we were designing a new auditorium, a 300 seat auditorium. The engineers default to that is 300 people, when in reality it's used three times a year. The actual answer is there's 25 people in there 98% of the time. So you put supplementary support in for that.
' I think we can sit down with clients and landlords and basically say, look, this is the way we use design buildings. This is how people use them. This is what the data tells us. And one of the examples, which Jitesh and I talked about - we sell, certainly in life science, around 70% lab, 30% office, 6 air changes, etc. You can design that fully flexibly. When you look at it in the detail, there's write-up spaces, there's back-of-house spaces. So you can still sell the capability of six air changes, etc. But in actual fact, you have to design it. So I think we need to just clarify the technical performance of building slightly differently from a tenant's view. I've worked with a lot of tenants, people around this table, where they're facing those challenges. And there is still a massive demand in Oxford. We've got a number of tenants that really want space. And we've got buildings that aren't occupied. It's a bit odd, but a lot of them say, I want to know what that ecosystem is, where's that support, that collaboration? And you need to wait for that ecosystem to mature.
Image: Plot 5000 at ARC Oxford campus at Cowley, courtesy of Price & Myers
The balance of retrofit over new build
Price & Myers, as a leading consulting engineering practice, carry out both retrofit of older science buildings as well as designing new laboratories from scratch. Plot 5000 is situated at a strategic nexus point of the ARC Oxford campus, Plot 5000 aligns with the broader masterplan’s goal of creating a dynamic innovation place that embodies a forward-looking urban response, enhanced connectivity, and a commitment to communal and environmental well-being.
The state-of-the-art, lab-enabled office building is designed to cater to the evolving needs of scientific research and development. The project stands out for its forward-thinking approach to infrastructure, facilitating lab retrofitting with comprehensive ‘plug and play’ solutions, including primary plant, ductwork, pipework, risers, and fume extract routes. With a strategic focus on achieving a 70:30 ratio of lab-to-office provision, the building spans a minimum net internal area of 86,000 square feet, optimising space with a target efficiency of 78%.
Price & Myers are continually pushing the boundaries on the excellent of retrofit and carbon capture. The firm has written research papers on the topic asking the question, how does treating a research facility as a living, adaptable platform - rather than a static building - benefit both its carbon footprint and its users?
Partner Luke Spence and Structural Engineer Emily Appleton from Price & Myers collaborated with Morgan Sindall Construction, Beyond Carbon, Ridge and Partners LLP, and BondBryan:Fairhursts on a research paper exploring a new approach to economical office and lab space in the UK.
FUSE - Flexible. Upgradeable. Sustainable. Ecosystem - reframes science space as a living platform: a high-performing workplace designed to evolve. By avoiding day-one overspecification, it reduces both embodied and operational carbon, shortens delivery timelines, and remains cost-accessible from the outset. Structure, services, and fabric are aligned around a lean baseline, with clear enhancement pathways - whether for airflow, building services, or vibration performance - without preloading unnecessary cost or carbon.
By layering essential infrastructure with built-in adaptability, the model reduces upfront capital expenditure while sustaining long-term performance. The result is a building that is lower in embodied carbon, more cost-effective to operate, and faster to deliver. Critically, FUSE addresses the growing disconnect between rising construction costs and affordability for occupiers - offering a smarter, more responsible model for the future of research space.
Anna Wai, Partner at Price & Myers and the Oxford office leader, spoke at the forum discussion, about the importance of retrofitting versus new build in the science and innovation area.
'I think it is important because there's lots of sustainability aspirations and actually, you know, from an engineering point of view, a building will exist (already), so it's probably fit for purpose, but I suppose not all buildings are fit for purpose with questions like 'Is it the right frame?' 'Is it going to offer everything that we need?' But actually, life science isn't just about the science, there's lots of other requirements that need to support this, so maybe we're not all blessed with having an old building, you know, with big floorplates and tall ceilings, so could this building be used for something else to supplement the campus as cafes or social spaces, but also whether there are more offices to help support, going from a small scale to more, that sort of thing. So I think it has to be quite strategic, when we look at buildings and how we're using them, maybe it's not fit for science but it could be something to support that function.
Anna was asked how important it is for people to work in heritage buildings?
'We do a lot of refurbishment work in London, too, and actually most people would like to work in a lovely, listed facade building. It might not be suitable for science, but there's a lot of traction to it. I think on a lot of these campuses and so on, it's not just about having one look, it's about sort of encouraging lots of other people to come in, and yeah, they're not all scientists, but the general public.'
She also spoke about her concerns over new build:
'I think there's two parts to it. New build has its purpose, and actually we do design slightly differently now. and Richard sort of touched on it, you know, back in the day when we do really high flexibility specs but actually HOT5000 was one of the examples because there's few lines from the city centre of Oxford and we couldn't go beyond a certain height and therefore we sort of negotiated with ARC and sort of said, well actually, why don't we do this, instead of designing for the full-vibration everywhere This is what's in the tenant pack as a default, but this is a retrospective system you could put in to achieve things. So just designing a bit more intelligently is sensible. Refurb is, it can be good because if you're in a busy city centre space, you can get something up and running much quicker. There are other sort of restrictions to it, and one of the big things is the VAT. You know, new build versus refurbishment is one thing that's always sort of quite irked us in the engineering industry. We want to leave these buildings where possible, but the policies probably would lean you towards doing a new build instead.'
'When we specify materials, we try and be as environmentally friendly as possible. concrete examples, cement replacement, but actually during COVID, for example, we couldn't get cement replacement and actually we ended up building something in embodied carbon a lot higher. And we're probably going to encounter something very similar fairly soon with the current politics. So it's kind of designing intelligently and not just saying let's have blanket flexibility for everything. I think that is the engagement with everyone around the table and potentially knowing what the tenants want to do. These are good challenges.'
Image: CGI of Melbourn Science Park, Cambridgeshire, courtesy of Bruntwood / Sheppard Robson
Using heritage and creating space for industry
Eugene Sayers, Partner at Sheppard Robson, was brought into the conversation to talk about heritage, creating town centres in science parks and mixing industry with science as in the firm's development of MIX Manchester:
' I've worked in and around science and technology for over 20 years in that show. I feel like it's a very optimistic time because, obviously, there's been a huge growth in the number of built examples that we're looking at. There's been a lot of learning. I think some of the schemes that we're doing are new build, completely from scratch, like MIX Manchester. That's wonderful because you do get a chance to explore the potential of new typologies arranged in a way in which they're intended. So that's a project near Manchester Airport and the idea is that you can, within that park, you can graduate from the kind of incubator, the beginning of a company's lifespan, all the way up to pilot production, you know, maybe as the company matures, so it's providing a home for a complete spectrum and I think it's picking up on some of the things that people here have touched on and which is about when get priced out of the centre. We're working at the same time in the centre of Manchester on Upper Brook Street, providing something that's very closely sort of linked to the university science quarter.
'So there's clearly kind of stepping stone sequence that companies will take from the academic research stage, curiosity driven research, to start up formation and then finding a home somewhere, perhaps not in the city centre immediately, but before they're fully fledged and have things in full swing. I think the interesting thing when you look around science parks is they all come about in very different ways. Some of them are legacy industry, like Wilton Centre up in Middlesbrough, which is an old ICI campus, so they're led by regeneration, preserving jobs and also using an existing, reusing an existing facility which is quite magnificent. And then others are commercial enterprises. I think one thing that they all share is they need to sort of create a sense of place. You need to know when you get there, and the Red Roof / Red Barn (at Oxford North) is a fantastic example of what one of our clients, called the Instagram moment, so you have to have something that is identifiably you.
'In Melbourn, ten miles to the south west of Cambridge, we worked with Bruntwood to rebadge the old Melbourn Science Park. Their big neighbourly gesture was to open the science park up to the village and create a village green. So there was a village in South Cambridgeshire that didn't have a village green. And so they turned the car park into an entrance. And the central parkland has become a village green, and they will have a pub there and a hotel. So I think there are a couple of themes there also, which is how you activate your own park by opening yourself to communities that are around you. So rather than driving through the gate and just parking your car in the car park and then walking to your office, you actually enjoy that it has a porous boundary with maybe the dog walkers and the coffee and the yoga happening in the park. And it's worth saying some of the science parks, because of their heritage, have wonderful landscapes, spaces, but not many people have enjoyed them.
Eugene was asked how you create a sense of place in a science park with little heritage:
'I think that honestly, yes, you don't have instant pattern and you don't have that kind of accumulation of lived experience that binds us to all, you know, to historic centres, but equally there are other things that drive people's places, you know, convenience, comfort, and convenience is also a driver for the interaction, isn't it? We talk a lot more to people who are close to us. We phone them a lot more, ironically,'
Sebastian commented:
'Can I just add that there's some really important points there, and a place like Harwell, which is kind of celebrating its 80th anniversary this year as a science and innovation campus, has incredible heritage and how you blend that heritage with the new as well and so actually at Brookfield since we've invested into our world we've invested an incredible amount in amenity and landscaping and the place rather than just building I think is so important because you want people to be outdoors, you want people to be milling around the place, you want it to have feel of being busy and so you're having someone like Laura under the garb of a library or a library is, having someone like Adam Frost come in and landscape certain parks and create pocket parks within a big campus is really important and it makes a difference and people comment on it and people come to visit it and when you've got food outlets that are open seven days a week it's kind of about creating a place not just in terms of the bricks and mortar but also in terms of the whole environment, yeah, a place people want want to be, want to visit and go to. We have local schools and local villages playing cricket and playing rugby and doing archery on Tuesday and all that we go.'
Image: The Oxford Science Park - courtesy Future Cities Forum
New institutes and collaboration with existing science parks
Jitesh Patel, Director of the Oxford Science Park, joined the conversation to discuss the development of the Elllison Institute next door and how a collaborative vision could be struck:
'Well it's still very early days with the Ellison Institute transaction completing in September of last year we're sort of what five or six months into that sort of separation. Just to give you context I mean the the actual sale basically sold 50% of what was previously the whole of the Science Park so we are now ultimately left with the east side of the park which still remains as 50% in terms of space.
'For us at the moment we currently working on a master plan which will now look at reviving what is now left on the east side of the park. I'll come on to the relationship with the EIT in a at the moment, but the focus is looking at what can we do in terms of the east side of the park. We have planning approval already consented on two of our plots. So we've got plot 27, which is the one that will be the last one that we'll build out at the moment, but we've got the Leggett Building (on Plat 16), which is the next main development that we're hoping to move forward pretty soon. Now that's the critical project as far as we're concerned, as well what's going to be there in these plots.
'So on the Leggett plot we're talking about a new building and again it's life science facilities, it's a similar building to the Iverson building, which is a twin almost of Leggett. It will provide up to 120,000 square feet of space over four floors. But the key focus of that building itself is that that is the connection, to do with Network Rail's new station, with the City Council, we're also talking with the Ellison Institute about what that design is going to look like for the station, how it can then blend in with what we've got proposed for Leggett, because I think that's quite an important aspect.'
'I think in terms of the collaboration, firstly we're not competing, because they have their own little micro ecosystem. In the way that they work, they'll have their own conveyor belt of how the researchers will come in. They're not into the commercial part of development. Whereas we are. So we continue business as normal. We will build, we will go out, assess the market, assess the demand, and we will fill the spaces. Whereas the EIT don't necessarily have to do that.'
Encouraging growth
Professor Dave Valler commented on how accepting of growth the city of Oxford is::
' I am really hopeful, actually. I think things have moved forward. I went to a talk at the Oxford Civic Society a week or two ago, and Neale Coleman was there from the Oxford Growth Commission. And his whole talk was about growth, and I think if he had given that talk 30 years ago or 20 years ago, maybe there might have been riots within the civic society, but I think the general atmosphere is more and more accepting, and I think there is, maybe we're on the cusp of a change, really, that city-regional expansion, I think, is gradually being accepted a bit more.
'A lot rides at the moment on local government reorganisation and the emergence of the new strategic planning mechanisms. So we may have a Thames Valley strategic or spatial development strategy. It will take time. And I think the opportunities are quite enormous, really, but there are going to be big governance challenges around what happens, because the scale of the growth is quite enormous, really. So we have had problems, and we had an Oxfordshire 2050 plan that collapsed. We've had two local plans withdrawn recently. We had an Ox-Cam Arc spatial framework that appeared and within a year was abandoned.
'So we're not very good at doing this kind of strategic planning and large-scale governance. And the hope, I think, is that we'll find some new mechanisms to take that forward. But generally I'm hopeful, though, because I think the government has provided new impetus to a growth agenda and is strengthening strategic planning mechanisms. So I think that might give us a way to find some ways forward. But, I mean, the other side of this is that we're dealing with a 40- or 50-year legacy of pretty much anti-growth attitudes around the city, and it's not going to be easy to fight our way out of that, really.'
Image: Wootton Science Park, at Wootton near Boar's Hill outside the city of Oxford - courtesy of Scott Brownrigg
Matt Humphreys, Scott Brownrigg joined the conversation to comment:
'As an architect you want to be pro-growth, don't you, to a certain degree. But in the right areas, building and designing the right things, creating the right environments for people. We don't just want to see steel and concrete everywhere for the sake of growth. It needs to be well thought through and there needs to be the need. It's never pleasing when you visit places and you see occupancy rates really low. You then start to question, was it the design, was it the idea, was it the strategic plan?
'In the wider context of Oxfordshire, there's a number of places that I feel like we can, you know, we've looked around, done a little bit of work recently in Abingdon and a few other places like that. But it's, I think we talked about it earlier about retrofit in the right places, new build where relevant. And lamp spaces in particular don't always lend themselves beautifully to retrofit. It's quite hard. We're working on a scheme in Canary Wharf at the moment, an existing bank building, lovely floor to floors because it used to be trading floors and things.
'But it is a headache to get that to work successfully, particularly speculatively, because then you're needing to try and create that flexibility because the tenant isn't known and you might then overspec or, you know, build too much. And so it becomes a little bit easier if the tenant is known and you can then design for their actual needs. And we need to ensure that these developments that we're planning knit into their context and the community is involved. There's been lots of good chat already today about some of those initiatives. But it's making sure it's relevant to that context. A cafe isn't necessarily going to be successful in every science park in Oxfordshire or London or whatever. There's certain things within that community that it's all about collective responsibilities to understand, to ensure that people feel part of what's going on in their local.
'I'm proud of the breadth that we've covered, and not to necessarily just become a one trick pony type. Scott Brownrigg has become known for business park, science park, new build, but then we've pivoted into slightly different typologies, whether that's working on GMP facilities or mid-tech, and then more into the retrofit lab office. So actually that breadth of portfolio is something to be proud of, that we're trying to design for context, design for need, rather than going in and, this is our solution everywhere, and then trying to make it fit is actually relating to what's there already perhaps.'
Scott Brownrigg has been working with Hartwell Plc, the automotive and property development company, which in late 2025 received planning approval for its masterplan to deliver new carbon efficient laboratory and workspace buildings for small and medium sized science and technology companies and amenities at Wootton Science Park to the south-west of Oxford.
Hartwell has owned the park since 1975 and built the first office building in 2005. The £44 million Scott Brownrigg-designed masterplan was submitted to Vale of White Horse District Council in May 2024.
The approved masterplan will deliver circa 106,233 sq ft (9,869 sq m) across five new commercial buildings and connected amenities and facilities for future employees and the surrounding community, which will include high quality landscaped areas, secure bike storage, a bistro and gym.
Joanne Churchill, group property manager, Hartwell Plc said: “Wootton Science Park’s masterplan approval marks a significant milestone and is exceptional news. The surge in enquiries from sectors such as life sciences, quantum, AI, and sustainability underscores a growing demand for innovative spaces.
“We are committed to responding to this need by speculatively developing high-quality grow-on lab and workspace that not only fosters cutting-edge research but also integrates amenities catering to the wellbeing of both the workforce and the wider community.
“Our vision is centred on creating an enriching environment that enhances productivity and promotes wellness for all who engage with the park. As we prepare to initiate construction soon, we will be generating jobs during both the building and operational phases, providing positive economic impacts locally. The excitement surrounding this project reflects our dedication to shaping a vibrant hub of innovation – one that we are truly delighted to bring to fruition.”
Wootton Science Park is already home to companies that include Bupa’s Stratum Dermatology Clinic and DeepTech Recycling which are based in Origin, the two-storey, purpose built CL2 laboratory building which was completed in 2024.
The park is accessed by the A420 or A34 and is well located for Oxford, the county’s many science and business parks.
Laura Ludlow, Partner, Mills Reeve, talked of the importance of keeping the attractiveness of the city, while encouraging development:
'Just to pick up on what was just said there, it isn't a one size fits all solution. I think it is different needs call for different solutions, and it's having that ability to offer it all in one city I think is what makes Oxford so attractive. So you've got your small scale start-up space, all the way through to your scale up to your massive companies, and places like the Science Park where they can come. And I think what we're seeing, certainly the work we do across life sciences and tech and education as well, because all our sectors merge very nicely and converge on this kind of topic, there's a lot of public-private partnership going on.
'So we're working with universities and private partners bringing forward life science development. We're working with universities and private companies and the NHS as well. So everybody involved in creating these ecosystems which we've talked about a lot. And I can see that that is something that's going to have a lot of weight going forward to bring forward these projects. So I think it's a really exciting time to be in Oxford because all these projects that we're talking about come forward. There's going to be real transformation. And having lived in Cambridge for 10 years and seeing the transformation that's come forward then, I mean they still talk about the same issues as Oxford. They still don't like the transport and they still don't like the lack of infrastructure and things. So it's learning from what they've done there and building on that here I think will bring the biggest success.'
Daniel Talbot-Ponsonby reflected:
'It's very different for us because we're IP lawyers and so our clients are scattered all over the country. I suppose the one thing which has only just occurred to me, our own needs are fairly basic. We just need somewhere to sit quietly and work quietly. But following the pandemic we don't need people coming into the office very often. And I wonder to what extent the challenges have changed as a result of all firms doing that. Or do you find that actually most people, especially in the science of getting back into...
'So for us, we find that the professional staff come in most of the time. We don't make them. But the support staff come in the bare minimum that they have to, whatever and whatever we'll let them get away with. And the reason for that is not because they can't be bothered to come into work. It's just that they've got two hours of the day that they get back. So they can have shorter working days and achieve exactly the same amount by staying at home.'
Supporting communities
Carolyn Ploszynski, Oxford City Council commented:
'So what was interesting, when I was at Aldi, we had a number of key clients with smart buildings. And they knew how people used the building, how they travelled, whatever. Obviously COVID was interesting to how people collaborated, how they gathered, what they did post-COVID. It was completely different. And that is continuing to evolve. Plus new generations coming in. I'm 47 years old and I recognise that the labs tomorrow, it's for a new generation. They do think differently. They do act differently. They don't have boots on the ground, but they like to move around. It's going to be a different world. You can sit in your house now and work on a robot operating in Boston. So it's different, it's going to change. But collaboration is still important. You've got to find that balance.'
Image: Oxford North, Red Barn, courtesy of Thomas White Oxford
Victoria Collet, Head of Development at Thomas White Oxford added:
'It's the same thing online. The social value steering group I just came from. We do every other one online or in person. And the in-person one is invariably more productive. People contribute more, they admit more. They allow themselves to be vulnerable and share lessons learned. Which is a big part of it. We like to talk about what went wrong, not just the things that went well. In the hope that we can improve next time around. But I don't think human needs change. I don't think the next generation is that different. That they like a good cup of coffee and to say hi to the barista who knows them. And then go and sit in a lovely park and admire the view.
'Those human needs are very basic. I go and work in the Red Hall a lot. Please don't tell my boss I said this. But I haven't been to work in our office in the college at St John's for a long time. Because I go to the Red Hall now. Because it's a much nicer place to work. And I work there much more than I have to. So I'm required to be in the office two days a week. But I can often be found in the Red Hall four days a week. Because it's just really nice to go there. And that is two hours a day out of my day. But I make calls in the car. And I think maybe that's the difference with support workers. That they can't necessarily do work over the phone. So I can work on my way up and down the M40. But I don't think human needs have changed. And I don't think the next generation is that different. No, it's just the world's changing.'
Carolyn also stated:
'Science also in a city centre is really hard to manage. Because science likes to happen behind a closed door. So we had it with Beaver House as well. About how you activate the ground floor. It's really tricky. Debenhams will retain its activity on the ground floor to an extent. With some of the more active, more retail focused uses still. So you think it will be that porous? It's really difficult to make science more porous in a city centre environment. And Beaver House did actually work really, really hard on that. To get glimpses in. But obviously there is an issue around how much on view the commercial science tenant wants to be. So that's why you often see the kind of more collaboration space, I suppose, on the ground floor. And how much that can be opened up to the wider community.
'But it's definitely important to have science in the city centre. We've talked a long time about diversifying the city centre away just from retail. And it's naturally happening. The Clarendon Centre building refit will be really interesting as it's now being demolished in part and being rebuilt. So the city centre is a very interesting place. It's also a very, very challenging place in terms of it's a thousand steps across it. So it's very small. And it's not meeting up to the brand that Oxford deserves. But that's a whole other conversation. Essentially our city centre is a problem because you've got science happening to the north of it, to the west of it, to the east of it, to the south of it.
'And ultimately it's becoming more of just a transient place with people cutting through the city centre to get to their destination. It's not in and of itself a destination anymore. So yeah, the Crown Estate investment is interesting in terms of how it refines itself as a destination. And the whole West End development when it comes forward will change that as well. So yeah, it's definitely exciting times in the city. I think my main worry with it all is can the city's infrastructure take it? You know, Dave was talking about planning. But actually I think the bigger problem for Oxford is, as I said at the beginning, we're a very small city. To our colleagues on the call, Copenhagen's bigger than us and it was described as small. And we have Thames Water turning down water pressure in our city because it's whether or not our pipes can continue to take the pressure underground. And energy is a significant problem.
'All these developments could well, you know, we've just come through a major problem with Thames Water. So now we can actually build some of the stuff we've got in our pipeline, but that will only get us to 2040. And 2040 is not very far away. So what happens to the works opposite us? Do we have to, you know, it's sad to see the Cambridge relocation of the waste water works collapse. Because really, you know, that asset opposite can only be upgraded so many times. And then where are we going to move it to? So I think Cowley Branch Line is a brilliant piece of infrastructure. It's going to be fantastic. But actually, the infrastructure problem we're seeing now that's holding up sites is connecting it into the really basic infrastructure, actually. That has been under-invested in now for at least the 40 years and we've been arguing about where to put the growth. So that's the problem.'
Future Cities Forum would like to thank all its contributors to this fascinating debate.
Comments