Victoria Park News, new Cafe causing disquiet at EA Options

[Mr Brown]

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2014/environ...eviation-scheme

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Living in Parkway, I use the park quite a lot, it's a very pleasant green area actually my nearest.

From what I can make out, this 'cafe' will be much bigger than the existing one. What with the mountain bike fitting, the children's play area and the fenced off bowling area, it's not a place for restoration.

As this is a council designed scheme, surely they would have designed in Environmental Agency wants from the start. Leaving it until planning permission stage seems to suggest someone is simply taking a risk.

[Cognosco]

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2014/environ...eviation-scheme

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Living in Parkway, I use the park quite a lot, it's a very pleasant green area actually my nearest.

From what I can make out, this 'cafe' will be much bigger than the existing one. What with the mountain bike fitting, the children's play area and the fenced off bowling area, it's not a place for restoration.

As this is a council designed scheme, surely they would have designed in Environmental Agency wants from the start. Leaving it until planning permission stage seems to suggest someone is simply taking a risk.

Welcome to Newbury. It has not taken you long to cotton on to the efficiency, or lack of, of our local authorities?

[Simon Kirby]

Because of the objections from the Environment Agency we are going to have to modify the plans. The increased height will allow the building to accommodate some empty voids under the floor that will fill with water in case of some one-in-100 year extreme flooding.

As these areas had quite high ceilings anyway, nobody should notice. The actual cafe can be at the current level.

The EA spent £2million, as well as £45,000 from the town council, to put the flood alleviation scheme through Newbury.

We have now got an objection from the very people who put the scheme in to prevent flooding.

If anyone puts in a plan around Newbury and thinks they are going to be saved by this flood alleviation scheme it now looks like they may not be.

Cllr David Allen of the Town Council misunderstands what the Flood Alleviation Scheme does, so perhaps when he's had a chat with the chap from the EA he might be a little less brusque.

The Flood Alleviation Scheme is designed to prevent fluvial flooding - that is, flooding from the river. It's a levee, keeping the river within its banks. However, land can flood for a number of other reasons such as when the groundwater rises up through it (groundwater flooding), and when water flows onto it from higher ground (run-off). Fluvial flood defences are a gamble that pays off if the river would have burst its banks, but fluvial defences can compound the problem from groundwater and run-off flooding because they impound that water and hold it back from entering the river. The Environment Agency model this kind of thing, and for Newbury the balance was that fluvial flood defences would improve the town's resilience to flooding, taking into account both the improved defence against fluvial flooding and the increased risk from groundwater and run-off flooding.

So it's a mistake to think that the Newbury Flood Alleviation Scheme necessarily makes it any more sensible than before to build on a field which, before it was called Victoria Park, was called The Marsh. Victoria Park is still susceptible to groundwater flooding because of its hydrogeology, and being relatively low-lying it's also susceptible to run-off flooding, and building on it doesn't just expose those buildings to flood-risk, but it puts stuff in the way of flood waters trying to find their way to the river which increases the up-stream flood-risk.

David Allen should understand this - he voted public money to support the Flood Alleviation Scheme.

[On the edge]

Don't worry Mr B, the park will stay green, that's the only colour Astroturf do! What's the betting that will be the next move.

As for the Council being surprised about the Environment Agency's interest, you have to appreciate that Newbury Town Council doesn't do planning so can't be expected to know the rules and why should they? After all this 'little cafe' is the other side of the path to the canal. As you know, living in the Town Centre we are desperately short of cafes.

On a serious note, the EA got roundly slagged off last year for apparently not doing their job. So, here in Newbury, when they actually do it, what happens? They get slagged off. Coming from NTC that's rich!

[JeffG]

Haven't I seen blue Astroturf somewhere?

[On the edge]

It looks as if the park has had its day anyway. In public enjoyment terms it really would be far better to pave the whole thing. There isn't much green left now, and the absence of grass and flower boarders would help keep the kiddies clean as they played. Much easier to sweep away the dog poo, crisp packets, coke cans and the like. Much better for joggers too, a clean firm surface. Do it with a decent foundation and the fair could go there as well. Seriously, we have Northcroft what's the point of Victoria now it looks like a municipal,scrap yard?

[Simon Kirby]

From the very first line of the Town Council's November newsletter:

We are very excited to announce that the Victoria Park café project is progressing
well.

But it isn't, is it?

[spartacus]

It looks as if the park has had its day anyway.

It's a green space of sorts and should be retained (and I take it your comments are slightly tongue in cheek) however that concrete circle of fetid stagnant water advertising itself as a 'boating pond' or whatever is a thing from a bygone era and should be broken up and consigned to the nearest landfill.

[On the edge]

Couldn't agree more! Wouldn't it be ironic if our dear Council found that it had been leaking for many years........!

[Exhausted]

Strange and late article in our local newspaper which tells us about the flood risk as if it was thrust upon the planning application last week. Not so, the Environment Agency placed their objection to the application in September 2014.
The application can be seen in full on the WBC planning portal. 14/01791/FUL here http://planning.westberks.gov.uk/rpp/index...ef=14/01791/FUL
In brief a floodplain map which is called the Flood Risk Assessment, is shown which covered not only the whole of the park but also the latest set of buildings recently approved, Parkway shopping centre. So OK for the big boys but not NTC who want to give us a bit of modernity in our main park. It looks for a 1 in 100 years flooding event. Even in the worst flooding since Victoria park was constructed I can find no record of the park flooding.

It is interesting to read through the Archaeology Ground Investigation Report which involved screw boreholes to determine the ground structure. It says that the boreholes began to collapse at less than one metre deep and ground water was entering at 1.2m. What a surprise that the Marsh has high level of ground water but surely this 'discovery' must have weight on the ongoing NTC case against Standard Life. The whole park floats and has been stable on this water table since year dot and removing the water must have caused problems due to the undersurface which is mainly gravel and stone shrinking when the water stabilising feature is removed. There are some photographs at the tail end of this report which shows clearly what the ground looks like.

This application was lodged as a full application in July 2014. It's about time it was offered to the Western Area planning committee. The EA objection is effectively advice to the planners. They could ignore it, in my opinion, what does it matter if during the next 100 years we get a flood, sweep out the water and business as usual. It's only a single storey building, one up from a garden shed unlike its prestigious neighbour in Parkway who didn't seem to have this objection laid at their door.

[On the edge]

Just a couple of points.

I think if I was applying for planning permission for a new building! I'd be more than a tad upset if the designer had failed to produce a design that couldn't easily satisfy the
Planners reasonable demands. Strikes me this is yet another case of NTC knows best fire, ready, aim.

Then the location itself. If your description is that lucid and accurate, why isn't the matter already in Court? After all, being so cut and dried, it would have taken a couple of months max...

[Exhausted]

. Then the location itself. If your description is that lucid and accurate, why isn't the matter already in Court? After all, being so cut and dried, it would have taken a couple of months max...

I assume you mean the park sinking. Have a quick look at the spoil from the test boreholes. It is fairly large stone gravel with smaller stuff on top. There is no sign of any solid chalk or similar so the whole area seems to be very porous old river bed material and as such will use the water as part of its basic structure. Remove that water by massive pumping day and night for weeks on end and the material will compact down as it dries out. This would not be caused by a prolonged drought as suggested as the water table would not have moved downwards by more than a few centimetres. Fairly common sense I would have thought. Using the wrong experts and by the look at the costs, the wrong legal team. At £150 an hour, that is a lot of soliciting that's gone on. You can almost hear them rubbing their dry palms together as NTC came round the corner. Local lads are they ?.

[Cognosco]

I assume you mean the park sinking. Have a quick look at the spoil from the test boreholes. It is fairly large stone gravel with smaller stuff on top. There is no sign of any solid chalk or similar so the whole area seems to be very porous old river bed material and as such will use the water as part of its basic structure. Remove that water by massive pumping day and night for weeks on end and the material will compact down as it dries out. This would not be caused by a prolonged drought as suggested as the water table would not have moved downwards by more than a few centimetres. Fairly common sense I would have thought. Using the wrong experts and by the look at the costs, the wrong legal team. At £150 an hour, that is a lot of soliciting that's gone on. You can almost hear them rubbing their dry palms together as NTC came round the corner. Local lads are they ?.

This lot make the Vicar of Dibley, Dad's Army and yes Minister look positively clever compared to them!
Something must be wrong when they disagree with Vodafone. This lot say that another set of traffic lights on the A339 for the Faraday Road development won't make any difference whilst Vodafone say the towns roads are already at gridlock and are unable to take any new development without infrastructure modifications. Unless you class another set of traffic lights producing more gridlock as infrastructure modifications I suppose!

Does anybody think that an 80 seat cafe in the park is going to be used to capacity considering all the outlets already close by? When asked a NTC spokes person replied No, No, No, Yes!

It would be hilarious if it wasn't for how much all this Parkgate etc was costing the precept payers!

[Simon Kirby]

<snip>

[Exhausted]

The application for the café etc has been lodged by Newbury Town Council but it hasn't been signed so no idea who it was within the council. The agent for the application seems a little strange though, a Paulette McAllister who appears to work from a small house in Herongate, Essex. No idea how that came about. Equally, the project management team, Dayle Bayliss Associates are based in a private house in Suffolk. http://www.daylebayliss.co.uk/contact-page/ nice picture of I assume Dayle.
The design consultants are Joseph Hardy Design & Heritage who don't yet have a website but use the same address as Dayle Bayliss.
There is little information available on the architect Karl Normanton apart from where he studied and some references to his working in Hong Kong.

I'm not suggesting that there is any impropriety here but surely for a little café we could have come up with a local team rather than persons based in Eastern England.

[Cognosco]

The application for the café etc has been lodged by Newbury Town Council but it hasn't been signed so no idea who it was within the council. The agent for the application seems a little strange though, a Paulette McAllister who appears to work from a small house in Herongate, Essex. No idea how that came about. Equally, the project management team, Dayle Bayliss Associates are based in a private house in Suffolk. http://www.daylebayliss.co.uk/contact-page/ nice picture of I assume Dayle.
The design consultants are Joseph Hardy Design & Heritage who don't yet have a website but use the same address as Dayle Bayliss.
There is little information available on the architect Karl Normanton apart from where he studied and some references to his working in Hong Kong.

I'm not suggesting that there is any impropriety here but surely for a little café we could have come up with a local team rather than persons based in Eastern England.

Yes unable to obtain much these days without the made in China label somehow being attached?

Perhaps we didn't have the local team this time as there has been rather a lot of criticism in the past regarding wood cladding?
I bet there is rather strong words being issued though as there is a job lot of cladding going spare after the dropping of the Pigeon Loft Pavilion!

I just hope there has been a good business case carried out regarding the viability of an 80 seat cafe being made to pay especially during the winter months?

[Lolly]

The application for the café etc has been lodged by Newbury Town Council but it hasn't been signed so no idea who it was within the council. The agent for the application seems a little strange though, a Paulette McAllister who appears to work from a small house in Herongate, Essex. No idea how that came about. Equally, the project management team, Dayle Bayliss Associates are based in a private house in Suffolk. http://www.daylebayliss.co.uk/contact-page/ nice picture of I assume Dayle.
The design consultants are Joseph Hardy Design & Heritage who don't yet have a website but use the same address as Dayle Bayliss.
There is little information available on the architect Karl Normanton apart from where he studied and some references to his working in Hong Kong.

I'm not suggesting that there is any impropriety here but surely for a little café we could have come up with a local team rather than persons based in Eastern England.

And neither am I (suggesting impropriety) but I do agree that it seems bizarre for a Town Council to have commissioned a team from so far away. Presumably it was put out to competitive tender, so I guess the reasoning will be recorded in Council minutes/paperwork somewhere. You could always FOI it and move up from being a vexatious candidate to being a fully fledged member of the party!

Meanwhile here is what Dayle Bayliss LLP have reported as a testimonial from NTC:

http://www.daylebayliss.co.uk/testimonials/

Granville Taylor of Newbury Town Council, Project Management New Community Café, “The support and professionalism provided by Dayle Bayliss Associates LLP has been exemplarily. The attention to detail and grasp of the project has ensured that the criteria set has been fully understood and met in a timely and professional manner and look forward to continuing onto the next phase of the project and through to a successfull conclusion.”

[MontyPython]

And neither am I (suggesting impropriety) but I do agree that it seems bizarre for a Town Council to have commissioned a team from so far away. Presumably it was put out to competitive tender, so I guess the reasoning will be recorded in Council minutes/paperwork somewhere. You could always FOI it and move up from being a vexatious candidate to being a fully fledged member of the party!

Meanwhile here is what Dayle Bayliss LLP have reported as a testimonial from NTC:

http://www.daylebayliss.co.uk/testimonials/

Granville Taylor of Newbury Town Council, Project Management New Community Café, “The support and professionalism provided by Dayle Bayliss Associates LLP has been exemplarily. The attention to detail and grasp of the project has ensured that the criteria set has been fully understood and met in a timely and professional manner and look forward to continuing onto the next phase of the project and through to a successfull conclusion.”

I wonder if anyone will use NTC's recommendation and use Dayle. Would any of you take a recommendation of a builder "he's a very nice bloke and knows exactly what we want, we look forward to him actually building it" as a reason to use said builder for your extension?

[MontyPython]

I'm not suggesting that there is any impropriety here but surely for a little café we could have come up with a local team rather than persons based in Eastern England.

I should imagine they are either inexperienced or hard up for work judging by the fact that one of the "Projects" they list is doing surveys for loft insulation.

[Simon Kirby]

I'm not entirely sure I want to encourage the town-hall numpties to build on a floodplain, but the thrust of what I was suggesting earlier is that the Environment Agency's objection is principally that building a cafe on the park will occupy a volume of space which would otherwise be filled with flood water thereby increasing the amount of water that will go and flood other people's properties. Building the cafe on stilts is one way of getting round the problem because floodwater can merrily occupy the cafe's undercroft, but it isn't the EA's favourite strategy, and if we're to believe what NTC tell us putting the cafe up on stilts is also going to make the building much more expensive to build.

The EA's first choice strategy when building on a floodplain is to create an equivalent volume somewhere on the edge of the floodplain that can take the floodwater displaced by the development. NTC might think about asking WBC if they can dig a bit out of the hill at Goldwell Park, and if WBC don't want to help out then NTC could also scalp a few inches off the high ground at their Dairy Farm allotment site, but as they dug out a great pile of spoil at that site a few years ago they might also try and make the case to the EA that they have already created the level-for-level compensation that the EA are withholding their consent over.

But it does seem ridiculous that NTC appear to have submitted a completely inadequate Flood Risk Assessment, and it's just hopeless that it seems to have taken them from August until now to grasp their problem.