Sir – With reference to recent correspondence regarding Brookes’ development proposals, it would seem that many of the issues raised are beside the point.

The debate is not about Brookes’ status as a university, the work carried out by its staff and students, its place as a local employer, nor indeed its plan to develop the Headington site.

Certainly its existing buildings are unsuitable for a modern university.

The nub of the argument is the way in which it has chosen to expand. Headington Hill is a conservation area. As we know from experience, it is impossible to fell a rotten tree without getting planning permission and agreeing to replant the same in order to maintain the existing neighbourhood.

Of particular concern in Brookes’ expansion plans is their proposal to erect a six-storey building. If this is built, it will dominate the Hill, dwarf and overhang existing houses and change the ambience of the neighbourhood. Nor have Brookes’ previous decisions favoured the residents of this area. By providing extra buses it certainly ensured more students could be transported. Simultaneously, we are unable to walk on the pavement outside our houses because of the number of students queueing. Proper liaison with the transport authorities could surely have avoided this.

Mike Ratcliffe suggests that it is challenging to regulate student cars. I am afraid that even when a named driver/car is reported to the Brookes authorities, the only action taken is to issue a verbal/written reprimand and, as we can vouch from experience, this is no deterrent.

I would urge the planning authorities to turn down the proposal for this ‘monster’ building.

Patricia Lee, Oxford