Welcome to Newburytoday.co.uk’s message boards where you can have your say and share your views on any number of issues.
Anyone can read messages, but only registered users can post messages, reply to messages or create new topics. As part of the free and simple registration, you will be asked to read and conform to the house rules.
To register, click here ……Enjoy the debate. Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Random Rants
|
|
Reading Borough Council HQ Move, Why? |
|
|
|
May 31 2012, 07:12 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (x2lls @ May 31 2012, 01:00 PM) Considering the austerity situation, isn't £60m an unjustified expenditure?
To quote, from BBC....
"The leader of the Lib Dems in Reading, Daisy Benson, supported the move to Plaza West.
But she said: "... The council must not sign a blank cheque. With public finances under huge pressure at the moment in Reading the council needs to keep a tight rein on costs for the civic relocation project to ensure that an extra burden is not placed on local taxpayers." "
So, when does a blank cheque stop being a blank cheque? Might seem so - but arguably its capital spend. Keynsian economists would argue now is exactly the right time to do such things. Was told a few years back that Reading does have a big vision - to make the place a vibrant 'euro city'. The station means its a transport hub and it now has a first class stadium / shopping centre. Tiogether with a good University. So, retain 'Victorian parts of city centre and the outer terraces, get rid of the Sixties concrete and replace with modern high stack lofts. Delivery is over a decade - but we end up with a real pull in Berkshire. Hope they make it.
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
May 31 2012, 08:11 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212
|
QUOTE (NWNREADER @ May 31 2012, 08:55 PM) Reading can do as it wishes, I guess. Is the matter of the 'new' civic offices another example of big capital spends are sexy, whereas looking after the existing buildings (revenue) is boring? When were the old offices built? 1980? So after 32 years they want to replace at a cost of 60m.... How much maintenance cost over those 32 years would have kept the building in good order? I see you miss the point? It is not about costs etc. that does not enter the equation it is about the Councillors and staff having the latest looking building. You must be seen to have the latest design of building for a modern council you know?
--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
|
|
|
|
|
May 31 2012, 09:44 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56
|
QUOTE (On the edge @ May 31 2012, 09:46 PM) The building is early 70's - not time expired and in very good order "Time expired" is not an expression I had come across before I heard this discussed on the local news. And I'm sure they said it was. What does it mean anyway? Is it the same as a "use by" date on food, meaning that the building is in imminent danger of collapse? Is time expiry the fault of modern building techniques, since there are quite a few 300-year-old buildings still standing (and lived in)?
|
|
|
|
|
May 31 2012, 10:02 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (JeffG @ May 31 2012, 10:44 PM) "Time expired" is not an expression I had come across before I heard this discussed on the local news. And I'm sure they said it was. What does it mean anyway? Is it the same as a "use by" date on food, meaning that the building is in imminent danger of collapse?
Is time expiry the fault of modern building techniques, since there are quite a few 300-year-old buildings still standing (and lived in)? Sorry its simply jargon - comes from working too closely with certain breed of IT people trying to sell upgraded hardware. Trying to explain the preswent building is still adequate for its present use. I don't think it suffers from the issues some concrete clad buidlings suffer - where iron reinforcing rods rust. In economic terms it seems that a far higher utilisatiuon of the site can be achieved by replacing it. So the same site would hold a bigger office block and apartments.
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 1 2012, 01:04 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 1 2012, 09:18 AM) How does this affect us? Absolutley nothing! I suspect we'd (or at least we should be) be quite uptight if Reading charge payers started having a tilt at West Berks. How we choose to run our local affairs is up to us. The only element which may be of political interest is the centrally imposed housing allocation. Apparentkly Reading wants more - to support those high stacker lofts. However, our brightest and best rejected their proposal to take some of West Berkshire's allocation. We do all want to redevelop Watership Down don't we! The other benefit for us, if Reading does make it - we'll have some great entertainment / shopping / cultural facilities just down the road.
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 2 2012, 04:55 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265
|
QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 2 2012, 05:23 PM) Actually, Watership Down is quite safe. Unless Hampshire County Council or Basingstoke & Deane have a cunning plan.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
|