Sandleford and Open Debate Options

[Simon Kirby]

Bit in the Newbury Weekly yesterday about the Lib Dems flouncing out of a council meeting where Sandleford was being discussed.

If I understand it right, Vickers and Swift-Half wanted to be heard but the chair Gordon Lundie wouldn't let them speak. The meeting had agreed to release the latest Sandleford plans for public consultation and Tony Vickers was complaining because the details of the access roads - the most contentious part of the development - are still being worked on.

Sandleford has got a lot of Wash Commoners worried and if the Tories did shut the Lib Dems up then that's disappointing because the people affected are best served by airing the issues and deciding the matter on its merits, and not because the party says so. Vickers has a valid point, and Swift-Half is so often absent from meetings it would have been nice just to let him have a say anyways. Still, at least Swift-Half and his chums weren't subjected to the public indignity of being declared "Vexatious", and flouncing out of the council chamber does sound deliberately disruptive to me.

If the road access has been bodged then that really does hand it to the nimbies.

I was enthusiastic about the prospect of the Country Park that was promised, but that looks to have gone - just a bit of "potential" grass now. That'll teach me.

[Simon Kirby]

OOh lookie:

Growing areas
As part of the approach to sustainable development there are opportunities within the site to provide
growing areas for the local community, such as allotments and community orchards. These features
can potentially be incorporated within the Country Park although there may be scope for this type of
provision in other areas of the site.

If they want an allotment society to manage that they only need to ask and I'll set one up.

[Cognosco]

Bit in the Newbury Weekly yesterday about the Lib Dems flouncing out of a council meeting where Sandleford was being discussed.

If I understand it right, Vickers and Swift-Half wanted to be heard but the chair Gordon Lundie wouldn't let them speak. The meeting had agreed to release the latest Sandleford plans for public consultation and Tony Vickers was complaining because the details of the access roads - the most contentious part of the development - are still being worked on.

Sandleford has got a lot of Wash Commoners worried and if the Tories did shut the Lib Dems up then that's disappointing because the people affected are best served by airing the issues and deciding the matter on its merits, and not because the party says so. Vickers has a valid point, and Swift-Half is so often absent from meetings it would have been nice just to let him have a say anyways. Still, at least Swift-Half and his chums weren't subjected to the public indignity of being declared "Vexatious", and flouncing out of the council chamber does sound deliberately disruptive to me.

If the road access has been bodged then that really does hand it to the nimbies.

I was enthusiastic about the prospect of the Country Park that was promised, but that looks to have gone - just a bit of "potential" grass now. That'll teach me.

I wonder if the day will ever come when our local councils puts everything on the table in an open and transparent way and then asks the electorate what they think?

[dannyboy]

I was enthusiastic about the prospect of the Country Park that was promised, but that looks to have gone - just a bit of "potential" grass now. That'll teach me.

YTou should have listened to me. A bit of grass in the middle of an estate was what I have always maintained it would be.

[Simon Kirby]

YTou should have listened to me. A bit of grass in the middle of an estate was what I have always maintained it would be.

I know I know, I had your comments ringing in my ears when I was going through the plans.

In fairness the detailed plans of what the Country Park will be are not out yet (I don't think) so it is still just about possible that it'll be more than just a bit of grass where they haven't yet built any houses, but it's looking less likely.

[Strafin]

Wasn't there supposed to be a green area at Parkway?

[blackdog]

Wasn't there supposed to be a green area at Parkway?

Only on the roof.

[John C]

Wasn't there supposed to be a green area at Parkway?

Yes where John Lewis is I believe

[Andy Capp]

Yes where John Lewis is I believe

It was to be an open area, but not necessarily completely green.

[Cognosco]

Wasn't there supposed to be a green area at Parkway?

That was only on the plans that were put forward for the public......... not the actual plans that were issued to the constructors......come on you should know our councils ways of working by now.......

[Simon Kirby]

It was to be an open area, but not necessarily completely green.

With the park opposite was there ever any need for some greenery? The Sandleford Country Park is different issue: we're promised a Country Park and taken together with the housing development that seems to be excellent, but if it's not going to be a Country Park then a) i don't want the houses then, and b ) I really resent being played for a fool.

A Country Park is something like this, and we don't have anything like that around here and it would be great - but it would need to be separate from WBC and owned and managed by a trust, with its funding guaranteed for something like 50 years, or else WBC will just mis-manage it, cut its funding, and when it's nothing but a nuisance to the locals they'll build on it.

The funding also needs to come from somewhere other than WBC because I'm already being taxed dry and if it's a choice of paying more bloody council tax or not having the Country Park (and the rest of the Sandleford development) then it's a no-brainer - I'll keep my money thanks. Gifting 200 acres for a park might sound generous, but if it doesn't come with an endowment to generate running costs for the park - I'd guess at £200k annually - then it's not a gift at all, it's a burden.

[dannyboy]

Wasn't there supposed to be a green area at Parkway?

No - a few trees, a slope & a bus stop. John Lewis neded more ft² so the trees were axed, the slope became steeper & the bus stop was moved.

[Simon Kirby]

No - a few trees, a slope & a bus stop.

We call that a transport hub in Newbury.

[dannyboy]

We call that a transport hub in Newbury.

and why not. If all the busses stop there. Who says a 'hub' has to be more than a place where public transport interchanges?

You read two words - 'transport hub' ' 'country park' & envisage the most elaborate interpretation, wheras I think 'what is the least they'll get away with'

[On the edge]

All this talk about transport hubs; might be nice to have a bus service first! Parkway is a classic WBC 'all gob and no action'. Tried to catch a bus on Thursday last, indicator board wasn't working, bus time table clearly fiction. Gave up and did the usual, called the Mrs. According to the other hopefuls at the stop, it's par for the course. Lets stop all this b******* about bus stations and transport hubs, complete waste of money; as pointless as the platform outside Iceland.

[Cognosco]

All this talk about transport hubs; might be nice to have a bus service first! Parkway is a classic WBC 'all gob and no action'. Tried to catch a bus on Thursday last, indicator board wasn't working, bus time table clearly fiction. Gave up and did the usual, called the Mrs. According to the other hopefuls at the stop, it's par for the course. Lets stop all this b******* about bus stations and transport hubs, complete waste of money; as pointless as the platform outside Iceland.

Yes but to get the public paying taxpayer on board they have to list all the benefits. Just because that falls far short of what the public was expecting well...... typical salesman tactics.
And the council's Rottweiler aka Dannyboy, he with the blinkered vision, wonders why taxpayers are always cynical about everything associated with our local councils?

[Simon Kirby]

and why not. If all the busses stop there. Who says a 'hub' has to be more than a place where public transport interchanges?

You read two words - 'transport hub' ' 'country park' & envisage the most elaborate interpretation, wheras I think 'what is the least they'll get away with'

I read "Country Park" and expect a site that delivers, as a minimum, the core facilities and services expected of a Country Park.

WBC will know full well what Country Park infers and they will have used the term deliberately intending what it connotes. This Natural England site is a useful definition of what to expect from a Country Park.

[dannyboy]

I read "Country Park" and expect a site that delivers, as a minimum, the core facilities and services expected of a Country Park.

WBC will know full well what Country Park infers and they will have used the term deliberately intending what it connotes. This Natural England site is a useful definition of what to expect from a Country Park.

I noticed this - Not all sites calling themselves country parks currently deliver ...guess what sandleford won't be doing.

[Simon Kirby]

I noticed this - Not all sites calling themselves country parks currently deliver ...guess what sandleford won't be doing.

Yes, I saw that too. I'm not sure what your angle is here - it feels odd that we should be agreeing about something. We're agreed that WBC may be selling us a pig in a poke, I'm just not inclined to accept it.

[Cognosco]

I noticed this - Not all sites calling themselves country parks currently deliver ...guess what sandleford won't be doing.

And you ask why taxpayers are cynical of our local councils.................?