Group photograph of local councillors and campaigners taken at the launch of the campaign at Falkland Memorial, close to the Sandleford site.
Left to right: Diane Smith, Cllr Bob Morgan, Ashley Day (obscured behind the poster!),
Cllr Jeff Brooks, Cllr Roger Hunneman, Cllr Julian Swift-Hook, Cllr David Rendel,
Cllr Royce Longton, Cllr Billy Drummond

West Berkshire’s Liberal Democrats have launched a campaign to stop 2,000 new homes being built on a greenfield site in Greenham.
Sandleford Park is West Berkshire Council’s proposed strategic housing site for the next 15 years, but local councillors and campaigners are fighting the plans.
“We have been opposing the plans since they were first suggested two years ago,” said Cllr Royce Longton, “but the Conservatives won’t listen, so we are asking local people to sign our petition to ‘Say NO to Sandleford’ and let the Council and the Planning Inspector know that we don’t want it.
“There are other previously-developed sites that could provide West Berkshire’s housing needs for the next 15 years,” he continued, “so there is no need to build on Sandleford.”
“Greenham already has DOUBLE the number of homes it had 16 years ago,” said Greenham councillor Julian Swift-Hook, “and we now have another 1,500 on the way at the Racecourse, which will double the number of homes in Greenham again.
“Enough is enough – we just can’t cope with any more.”

They certainly are a glum lot.

“There are other previously-developed sites that could provide West Berkshire’s housing needs for the next 15 years,” he continued, “so there is no need to build on Sandleford.”

Good reason if that was the case but somehow, I doubt it.

If they were in power they'd be developing there. It's just more opportunism. Next they'll be saying they are against tuition fees. They are all as bad as one another and not a single politician deserves a vote.

Quoted from 26

If they were in power they'd be developing there. It's just more opportunism. Next they'll be saying they are against tuition fees. They are all as bad as one another and not a single politician deserves a vote.

+1

Quoted from massifheed

+1

+2

How about a map highlighting the area in question!

Quoted from LocalRes

How about a map highlighting the area in question!

If you click on the image above, you should see an enlargement of the proposed development.

Items for discussion (Add any others that you feel are significant)

1. The number of dwellings involved.

2. The proximity to Park House School - Will the existing facility be expanded or will a new school be provided.

3. A very large open space/public park is being suggested between the development and the River Enbourne.

4 Where will the vehicular access points be sited?

Luckily that nice Dave Cameron is introducing a Localism bill which means that local people will be 'empowered' and able to make their own decisions on planning without any nasty interference from councils and Whitehall.  There's a PDF guide to the legislation here: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/1818597.pdf

I believe we were promised that people would be able to vote on planning applications and that they'd only be agreed if they were given a 51% majority.  An excellent idea, I'm sure we'd all agree.

So presumably, once the legislation is passed, the newly empowered local people in Wash Common will be able to tell the developers precisely where to stick these proposals.  They just need to delay any decision until then.  I'm confident that our local councillors wouldn't want to rush Sandleford Park through just in case Wash Commoners aren't delighted at the prospect of this exciting new development.

All very straightforward, then.  Our local Libdems and Conservative representatives will, we can be confident, be working as closely together as Dave and Nick are to ensure that the promised empowerment, big society, etc. etc. is delivered in Newbury.

(I do hope that I haven't got this all completely wrong and that 'localism', 'the big society' 'empowerment' and the rest just turns out to be so much eye wash.)

(I do hope that I haven't got this all completely wrong and that 'localism', 'the big society' 'empowerment' and the rest just turns out to be so much eye wash.)

LOL. As if!

Luckily that nice Dave Cameron is introducing a Localism bill which means that local people will be 'empowered' and able to make their own decisions on planning without any nasty interference from councils and Whitehall.

You mean let the plebs decide?? Are you really serious?? Of course you know the council know what is best for us.  

Actually it would be good if we could decide ourselves.

My & my neighbours wanted to build a bar in one of our gardens ( cheep beer, late night parties ) but we were stopped by the Council. Party poopers!

The first step to localism would be to recognise that the opinions of elected councillors are more important than those of planning officers.  Today we are in the state that councillors don't bother to override planning officers recomendations because they know that the developer will probably win any appeal purely of the grounds that the planning officers recommended that councillors approve it.

If we decided for our selves, nothing would get done.

Quoted from blackdog

The first step to localism would be to recognise that the opinions of elected councillors are more important than those of planning officers.  Today we are in the state that councillors don't bother to override planning officers recomendations because they know that the developer will probably win any appeal purely of the grounds that the planning officers recommended that councillors approve it.

That's the joy of delegated powers. The powers need to be taken back from the officers.

Do any of the councillors reading this know whether the localism (what a horrible word) bill will actually enable people in, say, Wash Common to have a say in whether hundreds of new houses are built on their doorstep? Or is it actually eyewash, as I surmised?

I see that a  jobsworth councillor from Theale or some similarly godforsaken place in that direction has written to the NWN fully supporting Sandleford and making snide comments about his coalition partners.  Not surprising at all, is it? Of course he wants thousands of new homes built in Newbury.  He's from Theale.

NIMBY!

Quoted from noobree

Do any of the councillors reading this know whether the localism (what a horrible word) bill will actually enable people in, say, Wash Common to have a say in whether hundreds of new houses are built on their doorstep? Or is it actually eyewash, as I surmised?

The bill is available online but I found it impenetrable - but I believe they are aiming to encourage development, not prevent it.  The encouragement will probably come in terms of financial reward - places that build lots of houses will get nice fat grants for infrastructure etc.

Quoted from noobree

Do any of the councillors reading this know whether the localism (what a horrible word) bill will actually enable people in, say, Wash Common to have a say in whether hundreds of new houses are built on their doorstep? Or is it actually eyewash, as I surmised?

I see that a  jobsworth councillor from Theale or some similarly godforsaken place in that direction has written to the NWN fully supporting Sandleford and making snide comments about his coalition partners.  Not surprising at all, is it? Of course he wants thousands of new homes built in Newbury.  He's from Theale.

Alan Law represents Bucklebury I think, the most north easterly ward in the district!!!

Wherever he lives he presumably he supports his Supreme Commander's Big Society wheeze.  I'm sure part of the scheme involved allowing local people to make decisions about their own community rather than have councillors like Mr Law do it for them.  It would make no sense at all to have a localism bill but then not actually give any real powers to locals.

Unfair though it might be, many people are going to assume that the Conservative councillors are trying to rush this through so that it can't be stopped by a local vote.  Who owns the land, I wonder, and do they have any conservative party connections?

Incidentally, talking of the Supreme Commander, wasn't it pathetic to see him apologising for cocking up the rescue mission to save UK expats in Libya?  He should have had the courage of his convictions and told them that now that we have a Big Society it was up to them to rescue themselves.  He and little Haig had much more important things on their minds this week: selling more British arms to other middle eastern despots.

Quoted from richard.garvie

Alan Law represents Bucklebury I think, the most north easterly ward in the district!!!

I guess geography is not your strongpoint - Pamela Bale, the leader of the Newbury Vision 2025, represents Pangbourne (to the north east of Bucklebury).

Quoted from noobree

Incidentally, talking of the Supreme Commander, wasn't it pathetic to see him apologising for cocking up the rescue mission to save UK expats in Libya?  He should have had the courage of his convictions and told them that now that we have a Big Society it was up to them to rescue themselves.  He and little Haig had much more important things on their minds this week: selling more British arms to other middle eastern despots.

I find it refreshing to hear a politician apologising - when was the last time we heard one of our local councillors admitting they made a mistake or got it wrong?

Yeah, I agree with you really.  But I do think the whole Big Society thing is dire as well as being relevant to Sandleford. I'm sure they don't intend that ordinary people should have direct control over things like major housing developments.

As Norman Tebbit points out, Dave seems to be very confused:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n.....n-westminster-abbey/

Anyone know where his mate Nick stands on this? Would he 'empower' local people or is he in favour of councils and Whitehall forcing developments like this on us?

Quoted from noobree

Yeah, I agree with you really.  But I do think the whole Big Society thing is dire as well as being relevant to Sandleford. I'm sure they don't intend that ordinary people should have direct control over things like major housing developments.

As Norman Tebbit points out, Dave seems to be very confused:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n.....n-westminster-abbey/

Anyone know where his mate Nick stands on this? Would he 'empower' local people or is he in favour of councils and Whitehall forcing developments like this on us?

People in government probably view local councils as 'the people' - at best we can look forward to more power for parish councils and (I think this is in the localism bill) some form of local referenda.  I cannot imagine that they will end up with a system that allows a couple of neighbours preventing reasonable development. If only it was easy to define reasonable.

I'm sure you're right.  Hey ho.  If only Dave and Nick weren't so clever and busy and took time to read Dilbert they'd know that 'empowerment' is a rubbish idea.



Much more on that theme from the excellent Dilbert.com here: http://search.dilbert.com/comic/Empowerment

Anyone know if any good independents will be standing in the council elections?

Quoted from richard.garvie

Alan Law represents Bucklebury I think, the most north easterly ward in the district!!!

Not sure whether geography is your weakness or if it's just your understanding of the local political map that lets you down, but Alan Law represents Aldworth, Basildon and Streatley.  P Bale represents Pangbourne but that's not the most north easterly ward


Did someone mentions NIMBYs??

Quoted from noobree

Anyone know if any good independents will be standing in the council elections?

Not getting cynical about politics are we? Welcome aboard.

Quoted from noobree

Unfair though it might be, many people are going to assume that the Conservative councillors are trying to rush this through so that it can't be stopped by a local vote.  Who owns the land, I wonder, and do they have any conservative party connections?

I doubt even the local Tory would be that naive, but there's something fishy going on. Even this rival development are left wondering why there's no level playing field on where these houses go.

http://www.beyondgreen.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Pincents_Hill_101025.pdf

Sorry, Alan Law does in fact represent Basildon, which is the North East ward on the map (above Pangborne).

There seems to be more "political effort" being put into stopping this development, than the incincerators at Curridge ? Is this right ??

It is probably because Sandleford affects more voters people.