IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Building on Victoria Park
blackdog
post May 15 2015, 01:18 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



Okay it's not a lot of building but it is another little bite taken out of the park - WBC are contemplating using compulsory purchase powers to buy a section of Victoria Park from NTC in order to enable the building of their absurd new junction on the A339.

Where are they proposing to replace this public green space?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MontyPython
post May 15 2015, 02:02 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 15 2015, 02:18 PM) *
Okay it's not a lot of building but it is another little bite taken out of the park - WBC are contemplating using compulsory purchase powers to buy a section of Victoria Park from NTC in order to enable the building of their absurd new junction on the A339.

Where are they proposing to replace this public green space?


Yes they wouldn't take it for a useful scheme like a two-way parkway bridge for all to use - but their pet schemes are OK.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post May 15 2015, 02:50 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (MontyPython @ May 15 2015, 03:02 PM) *
Yes they wouldn't take it for a useful scheme like a two-way parkway bridge for all to use - but their pet schemes are OK.


Come on be fair......a developer needs it to enable him to make more money what is more important than that? rolleyes.gif

Good job the original Pigeon Loft did not go ahead eh? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post May 15 2015, 03:10 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Quite so Blackdog! At this rate the only green we'll see in Victoria Park will be the grass sprouting through the paving slabs.

I wonder if they have consulted the leaseholder about this yet? As I recall, the original lease took the legal people an eternity to sort. Oh well, yet more self inflicted legal charges.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post May 15 2015, 03:16 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



As they appear to be considering compulsory purchase I don't see any leaseholder issues - I think the leased bit is along the canal (ie the bit WBC would quite like to develop) whereas the bulk of the park was passed back to Newbury freehold when NTC was created. I may well be wrong (often am) and it could be compulsory purchase of the leasehold interest that they are contemplating.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post May 16 2015, 05:32 AM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,037
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 15 2015, 02:18 PM) *
WBC are contemplating using compulsory purchase powers to buy a section of Victoria Park from NTC in order to enable the building of their absurd new junction on the A339.

I think I have asked this before but, when the new junction / access (which I agree is absurd) is complete, will the current access to the Faraday Road estate in London Road be removed?
If so, which makes sense, at least there will be some gain to traffic flow.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post May 16 2015, 07:29 AM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Biker1 @ May 16 2015, 06:32 AM) *
I think I have asked this before but, when the new junction / access (which I agree is absurd) is complete, will the current access to the Faraday Road estate in London Road be removed?
If so, which makes sense, at least there will be some gain to traffic flow.
I could be wrong, but I thought traffic on the A339 wanting to go east on the A4 will be able to use this junction to connect to London Road, bypassing the Robin Hood roundabout. Is this where the projected 25% or so reduction in traffic on the Robin Hood comes from?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MontyPython
post May 16 2015, 09:24 AM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (user23 @ May 16 2015, 08:29 AM) *
I could be wrong, but I thought traffic on the A339 wanting to go east on the A4 will be able to use this junction to connect to London Road, bypassing the Robin Hood roundabout. Is this where the projected 25% or so reduction in traffic on the Robin Hood comes from?


So are you saying the estate is going to get clogged up with "through traffic"? That will please them and make the units easy to let then!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post May 16 2015, 10:05 AM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



I have floated this question before, but is there a reason the realignment has to involve Victoria Park, and not be taken on the east side of the road instead?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post May 16 2015, 10:54 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 15 2015, 04:16 PM) *
As they appear to be considering compulsory purchase I don't see any leaseholder issues - I think the leased bit is along the canal (ie the bit WBC would quite like to develop) whereas the bulk of the park was passed back to Newbury freehold when NTC was created. I may well be wrong (often am) and it could be compulsory purchase of the leasehold interest that they are contemplating.


I didn't appreciate that; I had always thought that the whole thing was leased. Thanks for the info.

I'm honestly quite ambivalent about the Faraday Road development; something is needed to properly tidy up this area of the expanding town, but then, 'scruffy commercial areas' are wholly necessary to keep the local economy buoyant. The roads issue is similarly important - the area presently has just one feed into to the districts acknowledged most difficult road hub.

However, as usual round here, there seems to be no joined up strategy plan, no overall vision, no integrated assessment. It's like a jigsaw puzzle being made by different artists individually creating each piece - without knowing what the big picture is supposed to be.

It's made worse, because we have two separate 'authorities' notionally trying to do the same strategic job - NTC and WBC appear to have different and clashing views of the future.

What a mess.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post May 16 2015, 11:30 AM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (On the edge @ May 16 2015, 11:54 AM) *
- NTC and WBC appear to have different and clashing views of the future.

What a mess.


I suspect they will see eye to eye for a while now.

To ensure this WBC could take the radical step of putting a Newbury councillor in charge of the Newbury Vision - rather than the councillor from as far away as possible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st February 2020 - 07:56 PM