Future Development in West Berkshire. Options

[Richard Garvie]

In response to a question on another thread, I don't actually believe there will be a need for additional residential development for some time to come due to the fact that by the time of the election, we will be stuck with the decisions that have been made to date. That being said, we owe it to those land owners who wish to develop to listen to their ideas and if their is a need identified in the coming years or a proposal that will benefit the area, we owe it to them to have an open and honest discussion with residents to identify a development that would be acceptable in the future.

What I would support now is in areas where residents wish to have affordable housing and in some cases villagers have already bought land, the construction of housing that is both reasonably priced and allocated to people who have a natural affinity with those areas. If there are a couple of additional units sold at a higher price to help fund it, then the full council needs to make a common sense decision.

The immediate need in West Berks is infrastructure. Roads & Rail capacity, schools, medical services, policing and fire cover. All of the things that should have been in place first to accomodate growth, we are now going to have to do in hindsight. With everything running at or close to capacity, I just worry where the funding is coming from because there is a distinct lack of provision from the developers. Do we have full pressure water supply to all allocated and proposed developments??? I know that there isn't at Pincents Hill which is likely to get the green light in January. What about flood prevention??? Will West Berks be left to finish the roads within all of these developments??? Far too many questions which should have been answered a long time before any construction begins.

PS. I guarentee that the space ship design pavillion would not be built under Labour, and we will fight any attempts to give it permission before the election. We would rather see a similar building that is of similar size to the existing building which consists of a cafe and boat store. I think Victoria Park should be left to NTC, who have a superb vision for the park already.

[user23]

I think you might be confused as to who I am Richard.

Anyway back on topic, could you please let us all know which of the two contradictory statements you have made you now support

1) I don't actually believe there will be a need for additional residential development for some time to come
2) Isn't the problem in West Berkshire a lack of affordable housing

A "1" or "2" will suffice, not a load of waffle to try and dig yourself out, thanks.

[Iommi]

I think you might be confused as to who I am Richard.

Anyway back on topic, could you please let us all know which of the two contradictory statements you have made you now support

1) I don't actually believe there will be a need for additional residential development for some time to come
2) Isn't the problem in West Berkshire a lack of affordable housing

A "1" or "2" will suffice, not a load of waffle to try and dig yourself out, thanks.

You are being unfair. One of the sentences you quote is incomplete and distorts the meaning.

He actually said, "In response to a question on another thread, I don't actually believe there will be a need for additional residential development for some time to come due to the fact that by the time of the election, we will be stuck with the decisions that have been made to date."

As for the affordable quote, his argument is about the ratio of affordable/luxury homes being already built, and the councils apparent feeble planning department who seem to have at best: blundered.

[user23]

You are being unfair. One of the sentences you quote is incomplete and distorts the meaning.

He actually said, "In response to a question on another thread, I don't actually believe there will be a need for additional residential development for some time to come due to the fact that by the time of the election, we will be stuck with the decisions that have been made to date."

Well there's another one, "we need real change" vs "by the time of the election, we will be stuck with the decisions that have been made to date".

Is he going to change things or is he going to say he'll change things, then when he gets his new job blame the fact that he didn't do anything on the previous administration?

He'll say anything even if it contradicts what he's said before, which it does a lot of the time.

[Iommi]

Well there's another one, "we need real change" vs "by the time of the election, we will be stuck with the decisions that have been made to date". Is he going to change things or not?

Come on; no-one can change that which is already approved! Even you must know that!

He'll say anything even if it contradicts what he's said before, which it does a lot of the time.

That might be - 'ain't all politicians like that' - but if you are going to try to expose his contradictions, it would be better for your argument if you select an incidence which is contradictory.

[user23]

Come on; no-one can change that which is already approved! Even you must know that!

You're against his comprehensive (and no doubt costly) planning review then are you?

In fact there's another contradiction from him. A full scale review of decisions, when in his own words we are "stuck with the decisions that have been made to date".

Seriously, do you think we need a fame hungry career politician and champagne socialist in Newbury?

[Richard Garvie]

You're against his comprehensive (and no doubt costly) planning review then are you?

In fact there's another contradiction from him. A full scale review of decisions, when in his own words we are "stuck with the decisions that have been made to date".

Seriously, do you think we need a fame hungry career politician and champagne socialist in Newbury?

I don't do champagne... Can't cope with white wine or bubbles!!!

Back on topic, the review is required to see WHY these somewhat dubious decisions have been made. If there is no wrongdoing or anything untoward, nothing will be found and the review will be relatively cheap. As you work for the council, maybe you know something will be found, and that is why you are desperate to attack me and discredit me.

[user23]

I don't do champagne... Can't cope with white wine or bubbles!!!

Back on topic, the review is required to see WHY these somewhat dubious decisions have been made. If there is no wrongdoing or anything untoward, nothing will be found and the review will be relatively cheap. As you work for the council, maybe you know something will be found, and that is why you are desperate to attack me and discredit me.

I don't think you understand what the phrase means.

I'm not "attacking you", I'm just trying to get you to answer a straight question for once. 1 or 2?

[Iommi]

I'm not "attacking you"

I think you are.

I'm just trying to get you to answer a straight question for once. 1 or 2?

But it isn't a straight question, it is a loaded and distorted one.