IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> NTC bid to improve Victoria Park, support from Greenham Common Trust too
Richard Garvie
post Sep 23 2011, 12:17 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Best wishes go to David Allen and NTC as they bid to improve Victoria Park. Had it not been for WBDC meddling, we would have had these improvements already. I'm not sure all of the improvements are required, but the park will certainly be a better place for the work and much better than having a massive arts centre in the park.

Well done GCT for listening to the people of the town, if only the district council had done that originally!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Sep 23 2011, 12:19 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Sep 23 2011, 01:17 PM) *
Best wishes go to David Allen and NTC as they bid to improve Victoria Park. Had it not been for WBDC meddling, we would have had these improvements already. I'm not sure all of the improvements are required, but the park will certainly be a better place for the work and much better than having a massive arts centre in the park.

Well done GCT for listening to the people of the town, if only the district council had done that originally!!!

Nothing like jumping on a bandwagon eh Richard.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Sep 23 2011, 12:38 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Considering I made the pavilion a big talking point at the local elections and have been supporting those campaigning against it since last October, hardly jumping on a bandwagon!!! You must be gutted, weren't you one of the few actually backing the pavilion???
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Sep 23 2011, 12:42 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Sep 23 2011, 01:38 PM) *
Considering I made the pavilion a big talking point at the local elections and have been supporting those campaigning against it since last October, hardly jumping on a bandwagon!!! You must be gutted, weren't you one of the few actually backing the pavilion???

I could not care either way.

I'm not biased towards it, or against it. The Pavilion was never more than an idea, which some were against & others, like me uninterested. Some would have been in favour.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Sep 23 2011, 12:44 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Look back at your posts on the subject!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Sep 23 2011, 12:50 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Sep 23 2011, 01:44 PM) *
Look back at your posts on the subject!!!

Devils advocate.

I could see the positives of having such a facility in Newbury & aired them on this forum. Newbury has several open spaces - We can afford to have a little bit of one built on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Sep 23 2011, 12:57 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Sep 23 2011, 01:50 PM) *
Devils advocate.

I could see the positives of having such a facility in Newbury & aired them on this forum. Newbury has several open spaces - We can afford to have a little bit of one built on.

Then another, then another, then another...

We have already been demonstrably conned on the impact of the cinema, Parkway and the skateparks. Please excuse some of us from being cynical.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Sep 23 2011, 01:03 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Sep 23 2011, 01:57 PM) *
Then another, then another, then another...

We have already been demonstrably conned on the impact of the cinema, Parkway and the skateparks. Please excuse some of us from being cynical.

You seem to hold the merit of all three facilities purely on their aesthetics. They are all functional buildings, & do their jobs admirably.


To take one of the above, the imapct of the cinema? A boon to the town & saves having to drive to Reading Basingstoke for those that like to spend their leisure time in such a manner.

Newbury was hardly going to win any civic awards for architectural merit before any of the above was it? It isn't as if the above have disfigured the town.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Sep 23 2011, 02:30 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Sep 23 2011, 02:03 PM) *
You seem to hold the merit of all three facilities purely on their aesthetics. They are all functional buildings, & do their jobs admirably.


To take one of the above, the imapct of the cinema? A boon to the town & saves having to drive to Reading Basingstoke for those that like to spend their leisure time in such a manner.

Newbury was hardly going to win any civic awards for architectural merit before any of the above was it? It isn't as if the above have disfigured the town.

It is not they weren't required, more that they were deceptively installed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Sep 23 2011, 02:36 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Sep 23 2011, 02:30 PM) *
It is not they weren't required, more that they were deceptively installed.


Agreed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Sep 23 2011, 02:37 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Sep 23 2011, 03:30 PM) *
It is not they weren't required, more that they were deceptively installed.

I'm lost now. Are you saying that the buildings were claimed to be X & are now infact Y?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Sep 23 2011, 03:14 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Sep 23 2011, 01:50 PM) *
I could see the positives of having such a facility in Newbury & aired them on this forum. Newbury has several open spaces - We can afford to have a little bit of one built on.
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Sep 23 2011, 03:37 PM) *
I'm lost now. Are you saying that the buildings were claimed to be X & are now infact Y?

I'm suggesting when things are proposed, the result doesn't necessarily stay within the original design, or promotion. The skatepark, for instance, was meant to be 'a bit bigger' than the original, but in practical terms it is much bigger, and I believe plans are a foot to build a scooter park now as well. Look at the CGI of the cinema design and then look at the final build; guess which one is proportionately bigger. Look at the Parkway designs, and then the final build.

Another 'con'. When I saw the original suggestion for the pavilion in the original consultation, it was modest. Then look at the 'final' proposal.

WBC planners and approvers don't know the meaning of 'a little bit'.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jack
post Sep 23 2011, 03:16 PM
Post #13


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 17-August 09
Member No.: 283




It is most surprising that Greenham Common Trust are silent on this story, after all it was they who wanted to build the arts buidling and have spent thousands of pounds of charitable monies on it, I wonder just how much ? perhaps next time they will fund ideas that the public desire from the grass roots and not attempt to impose their will over the town. I very much hope that this is the last of Greenham Trusts attempts together with WBC to build on the park. Quite a rediculous place for an arts centre, noisy next to the road, hard to reach, parking not close and a thousand other sensible objections not least SAVE THE PARK !

I rather hope being an old fashioned sort that we allow our local council to get on with their modest plans to enhance the park and build a nice cafe where families can enjoy a cup of tea in the winter too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Sep 23 2011, 04:10 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



I think a large "tip of the Hat" To RG for his determined stance in opposition to this eyesore, we may look at the world through different political spectrums but he has come through for the town on this issue.


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Sep 24 2011, 09:10 AM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



So what was the outcome of the great crack debacle? £15k of public money spent, I think we deserve an answer now.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Sep 24 2011, 12:32 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

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



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Sep 24 2011, 10:10 AM) *
So what was the outcome of the great crack debacle? £15k of public money spent, I think we deserve an answer now.


Obviously not good news or we would have heard by now? Not being able to upset SLI either doesn't helpt the situation. Now SLI are more or less dictating to the local councils I expect it will be all hushed up unless locals start asking questions perhaps....... rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post Sep 24 2011, 01:26 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,933
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



Or perhaps the council were wrong and the cracks affair had nothing to do with Parkway?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Sep 24 2011, 01:32 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



It was a bit weird that the land only sunk after they began extracting water from the water table. I am very cynical of our local authorities, but I certainly believe their will be some compensation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Sep 24 2011, 02:37 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

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



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Sep 24 2011, 02:32 PM) *
It was a bit weird that the land only sunk after they began extracting water from the water table. I am very cynical of our local authorities, but I certainly believe their will be some compensation.


Yes I wonder how much it is going to cost the taxpayers what figure do you reckon SLI will want this time? rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
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: 24th May 2024 - 11:51 PM