LDF SUSPENDED, six month suspension for West Berks to get house in order... Options

[Richard Garvie]

Hidden away in a tiny piece of the advertiser, the LDF process has been suspended for six months by the request of West Berks to allow then to address concerns raised in the examination. A minimum commitment for affordable housing at the Racecourse may now be included, which is excellent news. Thanks to everyone who also made comments on that.

The big question is, will it now go ahead at all or will they re-draft do the whole thing?

[blackdog]

Hidden away in a tiny piece of the advertiser, the LDF process has been suspended for six months by the request of West Berks to allow then to address concerns raised in the examination. A minimum commitment for affordable housing at the Racecourse may now be included, which is excellent news. Thanks to everyone who also made comments on that.

The big question is, will it now go ahead at all or will they re-draft do the whole thing?

If they are making significant changes will the content go out for consultation again?

As Prescott's targets have been dropped by the ConDems will the LDF continue to aim for Prescott's 10,500 new homes?

[Richard Garvie]

It's only been suspended for six months, we will have to see what West Berks come up with but if there is significant change, I will ask for it to be thrown out and I'm sure the Lib Dems if requested to do so would follow suit for the good of the District. What this does mean is that if another party won control, the LDF could be completely thrown out before it goes live.

[blackdog]

Would the demise of the LDF be a good thing? Surely it is better to have a plan to guide developments, to limit them. Without some sort of local plan we would be in danger of planning chaos and far more development than Prescott could have dreamt of.

The issue is to have a plan that makes sense and the support (well acceptance at least) of the people of West Berkshire and not one dictated to us by the planners.

[Richard Garvie]

I agree, to restart the process would be a disaster. What I would do though is make majort changes to the document. We need an LDF, just not some of the suspect decisions made by the Tories.

[blackdog]

I agree, to restart the process would be a disaster. What I would do though is make majort changes to the document. We need an LDF, just not some of the suspect decisions made by the Tories.

There are precious few decisions made by the Tories - the LDF is, essentially, the WBC planning department's response to instructions from the Labour government. I doubt it would have been much different if another party was in power.

[Richard Garvie]

I disagree.

[Iommi]

There are precious few decisions made by the Tories - the LDF is, essentially, the WBC planning department's response to instructions from the Labour government. I doubt it would have been much different if another party was in power.

That is how it looked to me as well.

[Richard Garvie]

That is exactly how it happened. The only input the Tories had was campaigning and promoting the Sandleford site, which was selected (by the Tories) despite being least suitable. What we really need is a bit of leadership, and we don't have that right now. Not effective leadership anyway. I know that if Labour do win control of the council, there will be a number of changes.

What we need is for Graham Jones to step up and tell us exactly where he sits with all this. If he's not leading the policy, why not? If he is leading the policy, why was Sandleford selected? Why was the minimum commitment to affordable housing dropped from the Racecourse development? Why were there no improvements to the road network to allow for future development? Why were there no improvements to education capacity? Why is the public transport network shrinking? Why has Thatcham been cut adrift, with improvements planned being shelved? What is the plan to help Hungerford grow and thrive? Why are we not being more ambitious with the racing industry and why are we not getting people around the table to see if we can make West Berkshire THE racing destination for all of the best talent? Why is it that people from Lambourn cannot commute to London via public transport connection, or even catch a movie in the evenings (weekdays or weekends)? Why will all public transport be directed via Parkway when the area is already going to be gridlocked with traffic? Why was there no thought given to the increase of traffic through Aldermaston Wharf relating to Padworth Waste Facility, and action taken to avoid any problems? Why have there been no efforts to create a designated transport corridor in the Eastern Area to relieve pressure on the A4 at Calcot? These, plus many others are not just questions asked by myself, or the Labour Party. These are questions that I expect are being asked by other political parties, interested parties and the residents of West Berkshire. If Graham Jones can't answer these questions (and believe me, he couldn't when I asked them) then he really shouldn't be leading our council.

[blackdog]

That is exactly how it happened. The only input the Tories had was campaigning and promoting the Sandleford site, which was selected (by the Tories) despite being least suitable.

This is not the impression I got when talking to a planner during the consultation. He made it plain that he thought Sandleford was the obvious choice (for planner-type reasons), far better than the alternatives. I have to say that I agree with him, I cannot see how you can think it was the least suitable site.

The contentious part of the LDF, as far as I am concerned, was the decision to lump almost all the building into the urban fringes around Newbury and Tilehurst. This was picked up by DEFRA (is that the right department?) when they criticised the lack of provision for affordable homes in the villages.

[Richard Garvie]

It came bottom of the council's own sustainability study.

[dannyboy]

It came bottom of the council's own sustainability study.

Such a biased study should be read with a pinch of salt.

[Richard Garvie]

How do you mean?

[dannyboy]

How do you mean?

The way the points are awarded is not consistent.

Sandlefordscores badly because it is 'not near the centre' ( of Newbury ) and will 'impact a much loved historic landscape' ( Sandleford Priory ). The whole point of Sandleford is that it isn't in the centre. Strange how it scorse nothing for being near the retail park. And Sandleford Priory lost any historic value when it became St Gabriels. If Sandleford will imapct the vew of St Gabriels, then anything N of Newbury should score low points for impacting Donnington Castle.

[Richard Garvie]

I don't set the criteria, simply using the fact that it was judged to be least sustainable. But if the council set the criteria, they can only blame themselves.

[dannyboy]

I don't set the criteria, simply using the fact that it was judged to be least sustainable. But if the council set the criteria, they can only blame themselves.

you know full well the council do not set the criteria.

[blackdog]

It came bottom of the council's own sustainability study.

You may be right, but all I can find is (from the Sustainability Appraisal Report) - The sustainability appraisal did not indicate an obviously more sustainable option. It was therefore considered appropriate that further consultation on these options for a reserve site in the Newbury/Thatcham area be carried out as part of the consultation “Options for the Future”.