News

Langborough Rec
advertisement

Langborough Rec 'Disney theme park' play area divides families

By Victoria Smith
February 16, 2012

Hundreds of townspeople have been asked to re-submit their views on plans for new play equipment likened to a ‘Disney theme park’ by objectors.

A fresh consultation on plans by Wokingham Town Council to spend £80,000 on new play equipment for all ages at the Langborough Recreation Ground off Gipsy Lane is running until Monday next week.

The town council had submitted plans to Wokingham Borough Council that would involve more than doubling the size of the existing play area from 680 square to 1,724 square metres.

However, residents with a view over the park spoke out against the plan, saying it would spoil their view of the park and promote anti-social behaviour on the park, and the plan was withdrawn last month.

A previous questionnaire put out by the town council before it submitted the planning application showed most people who responded were in favour of new play equipment.

The new questionnaire, which has been sent to 250 homes in the vicinity of the park, offers people four options to support or reject.

The options are to go ahead with the original plan, featuring new play apparatus for two to six-year-olds, six to 12-year-olds and gym equipment that can be used by adults, or the original plan without the three pieces of gym equipment.

The other options are to put in just a few pieces of new equipment, and the final option is to keep the existing equipment for two to six-year-olds and add to additional play facilities.

Residents are at loggerheads over the plan, with two separate camps distributing leaflets in the area both for and against the proposal.

Mum-of-two Lucy Allen, of Langborough Road, has been delivering leaflets around the area in support of the original plan.

She said: “A lot of people I have spoken to are keen that the original application should be re-submitted.

“I understand that some people in Gipsy Lane feel the extra play equipment will spoil their view and create too much noise but this is a recreation ground and at the moment there is really nothing there for children to play on.

“The application only proposes four extra bits of children’s play equipment and three bits of adult fitness equipment and still leaves around 90 per cent of the rec untouched.

“Perhaps if the zip wire is the major bone of contention it could be moved away from the edge of the park and away from the houses in Gypsy Lane, then we would still get something fun for the children without it creating too much noise for the residents.”

Councillor Phillip Mirfin, leader of the town council, said: “The new consultation document has been distributed and residents have been given two weeks to respond.

“What we do next will be based on that response.”

The consultation form can be downloaded at www.wokingham-tc.gov.uk. The closing date for the consultation is Monday, February 20.

| View Comments (16)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Most recent user comments 15 of 16

1 | 2 | Next Page Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

What is actually needed on Elms Field to start with are a few seats in the area between the Virgin Gym and the site of the demolished council offices. The latest reports to the government show that town councils need to contract the number of shops in a controlled manner.

Rather than take up green space there are areas in the town centre screaming for refurbishment and redeveloment. Why not start with Broad Street Walk where demolishing the Hardy's offices and replacing row of delapidated garages with small shops and flats could create a pleasant walk from Broad Street to Asda with no loss of green space. Being even more contentious I would like to suggest that area could be turned into artisan wokshops.

PoneRana, Wokingham
18/02/2012 at 14:58

Let's put this into perspective NIMBYs or no, this is another "dedicated" green area in our beautiful town that is to be cut up and vandalised by out Town Council without thought for the hertitage or the environmental impact of our town. Update the existing area yes and provide some useable equipment for the children in the immediate area, but why continue to chip away at the one "Village Green" space that remains in Wokingham? I thought Great Langborough was supposed to contain a conservation area - what is being conserved for future generations here?

It's good to finally see some passion in the town about the decisions that are being made without consultation which affect all who live and visit here - There is far too much apathy around today and the fact that residents care about what is being done to this part of our town is good thing. Bring on the debate, but let's be adult about it.

'ham rules
17/02/2012 at 17:11

TC - certainly welcome an adult debate, but the rhetororic used by the "anti" campaign has hardly set such a tone. Even your own comment here which is not using the scaremongering used in the couple of leaflets distributed is a little OTT IMHO - using ~5% of the total park area for the first update in many many years is hardly cutting up and vandalising ! You are correct however in this decision being all about our future generations - yes we do want to be able to conserve green space for them and there is still ~95% of the park available for that whilst also providing state-of-the-art facilities to encourage them to get out and enjoy the park.

PHJ
17/02/2012 at 14:04

TC Matkin
17/02/2012 at 11:47

MSmith, the council's plan a year or two ago was to have a road running in parallel to Elms Road, along the north side, that started at Wellington Road (a few yards up from the Elms Road mini-roundabout) and came out alongside Shute End. They wanted to build a number of flats along it too, which would've basically wiped-out the park side of Elms Road. The have, at various other times since, planned to make it a through road (although you'd have to knock down some C16 buildings, so I can't see it!), planned to build on the other side of Elms Road (with a 'flagship superstore', car park, shops, hotels(I'm not joking!)).

So I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we'll lose 90% of the lovely natural green space on that road.

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
17/02/2012 at 09:29

I'd be interested to know where exactly they plan on cutting this through road through Elms Field - has anyone seen any plans for this? Cynicism forgiven if they do plan on going straight through the field, but not sure there is actually a need to site the cut-through in this fashion.

MSmith
16/02/2012 at 19:29

Damiano, you may be right. I guess making Elms Field a through road will say goodbye to a good chunk of green land as Pone has already stated.

Artful Dodger, Wokingham
16/02/2012 at 17:38

Artful, do you think that maybe the council is offering to do-up Langborough park in preparation for the backlash that'll come when they concrete-over Elms Field in the regeneration? "We invested heavily in Langborough, so we are committed to parks"? Or am I being too cynical?

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
16/02/2012 at 16:26

I'd agree with Damiano that the footfall at Elms Field would benefit from the investment better. However, the fact that Woky Council are prepared to invest serious money into play equipment should be appualded. I don't see how extra play equipment would attract anymore scallys than the existing play equipment in Langborough. Unfortunately any park with a swing and slide attracts a few no-gooders even the tiny play areas on keephatch have found that!

Artful Dodger, Wokingham
16/02/2012 at 14:56

I too was disgusted by the complete nonsense of misinformation in the NIMBY "anti" leaflet: - Taking up 70% of the frontage of the park ?!? - Damaging trees ?!? - Branding the young people of our community as drunken littering vandals ?!? - No parking ?!? It's a facility for the local community - no need to drive there - plenty of residents within walking distance. PoneRana - this is a recreation park in the middle of a residential area - seems like a perfect place for recreational facilities.

BTW - The only litter I have seen in the park recently has been the "anti" leaflets posted all around that have been blown down...

PHJ
16/02/2012 at 14:54

"The actual effect of this I would wager is that parents and their kids might use it" - MIGHT use it? Is that a good use of £80k then, or could we perhaps re-vamp Elms Field instead, which has much more use and footfall?

I don't live in Langborough road - although I would love to, and looked at properties there in the past - but my two pen'th is that the park there is beautiful as-is, and I would love for it to remain unchanged for as long as humanly possible. When there are other parks in Wokingham that are more accessible, more used and less attractive, I would personally prefer to see these improved instead.

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
16/02/2012 at 14:39

How dare the town council provide new and improved equipment most people will use and enjoy eh?

Nimbyism features extremely heavily on this site, but even by Wokingham's standards this is ludicrous.

Does anyone really think having a playground will instantly lead to gangs of feral youths armed to the teeth maurading wildly around the area?

Really? The Daily Mail really does have strong influence if that is the case.

The actual effect of this I would wager is that parents and their kids might use it, which, obviously, is pretty terrifying if you live nearby and, seemingly, are of the view that anything new is bad.

Megaman
16/02/2012 at 13:41

"“..I understand that some people in Gipsy Lane feel the extra play equipment will spoil their view and create too much noise.."

Whereas the 8 trains an hour that rush by their back gardens are whisper quiet?

MSmith
16/02/2012 at 12:38

The concern is should not be that play equipment for the children should be provided but whether this recreation ground is the right place for it. It is after all hidden away from the people of Wokingham in general and its existence is unknown to many of them. The adult facilities shouldbe located centrally in Elms Field as should the more exotic childrens facilities like the zip wire. The council should have a simple rule that the facilities provided in these hidden localities should not exceed thos provided centrally. I suppose if they are as good as proposed and the council advertises them well we can all drive to the recreation ground and park our cars in Langborough Road and Gipsey Lane. There must be plenty of room for parking and it will only upset a few local residents. Oh! sorry I forgot. There won't be much room in Elms Field for a zip line because they are going to build a new road close to the current play area.