News

An image of the new Elms Field with the events area to the north, new houses to the left and supermarket and shops to the right.
advertisement

Chance to shape £3m Elms Field plans

By Victotria Smith
April 11, 2012

Townspeople can help shape designs for a £3 million park catering for carnivals and festivals during a fresh consultation on the Wokingham regeneration next month.

Plans will be shown to residents to demonstrate how Elms Field in Elms Road could look and inspire ideas on what facilities people want in their landmark town centre park.

Ideas being put forward include a new children’s playground, community orchard and a large events area to cater for celebrations, such as Wokingham Carnival, Wokingham May Fayre and the Wokingham Food and Drink Festival.

Under Wokingham Borough Council’s plans for regeneration, part of Elms Field will be used for new homes and shops, with a supermarket and hotel earmarked for the old Wellington House site.

Planners now want to finalise finer details for how the regeneration can inject new life into the remaining green space of Elms Field.

A consultation last summer saw hundreds of townspeople give feedback on the town centre regeneration plan, which also includes land in Peach Street, Rose Street and Market Place, where new shops and flats are to be built.

The May consultation will ask people what kind of facilities people want to see in the park and how the park can be designed to work best for a wide range of different uses.

The Wokingham Society has long opposed development on Elms Field, calling for more green space to be retained.

Peter Must, chairman of the Wokingham Society, said members had accepted the plan as it was, but wanted the remaining green space on Elms Field to be treated carefully.

He said: “The last thing we want is for the park to be divided up into little rooms so there is a little bit of something for everyone. It is supposed to be a field and not a series of adventure playgrounds.

“We want there to be a large enough space which is multi-purpose so events like the carnivals and fairs can still take place. We look forward to taking part in the consultation.”

Andy Slay, fundraising chairman for Wokingham Lions Club, said the organisation has been working with the council on Elms Field, as the group had been concerned how it would impact on Wokingham May Fayre, its biggest fundraiser of the year.

However, Mr Slay was convinced the redevelopment of the field would produce a better events area for the event.

He said: “We had been concerned it would be too separate from the Market Place and Denmark Street areas, but having seen more it is not as separate as we initially feared.

“The council is also building water and electricity into the plans for the field.”

Councillor Matt Deegan, executive member for community development, said: “This is another step in the ongoing consultation work with the people of Wokingham. We have been doing this for a long time and each stage we have included their feedback.

“We want it to be somewhere people can hold events and take their children. We also want informal areas and sustainable planting.”

Cllr Deegan added an important design aspect was to manage the transition from the Elms Road shopping parade to the park.

He said: “There will be a strip along the front of the shops where hopefully you can have informal market stands and that market will be different to what we have in Market Place.”

Dates for the consultation will be confirmed in the next few weeks.

| View Comments (21)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Most recent user comments 15 of 21

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

@Cllr Baker.

I do not directly question anyone's integrity, but if planning were handled like the opinion of a juror it would include be friendships or financial relationships with the potential developers and preferred suppliers, even chatting on Facebook. We would at least have some confidence. I believe any public servant should, as a matter of course, should be required to commit stricter control of conflict that the public the represent.

As a local Councillor are you willing to confirm that no member of you family will be likely to profit from the development and if any are seeking to tender then there offers should be made public?

I suspect your objectivity unclouded, but there is a fundamental problem with allowing conflicts to exist. Thus the doners limits being suggested now in parliament.

Will you also demand that of those in the council who are deliberating over these matters. If they have any of this broader conflict of interest (family) they should also leave the derision making as to what should happen and remove themselves entirely from the purchasing chain. They may enter the debate only as can the people they represent.

I can not easily find the planning application from whoever the developer is. £3,000,000 seems a lot for doing that field. I'm concerned that the developer will organize that too with a charge of about £1000 per man day when we could spend £500,000 on that. £500,000 to cover the argument that the £3,000,000 site would last twice as long and the other £2,000,000 get rid of the blue bags, fund regular youth worker presence on the playing fields, getting to know the disillusion youth them and back into our community and proud of what they can do, because they might never afford to support a family no matter how hard they work as skilled labour.

All the images we see are to make the little space where the circus usually goes look big and elms field look small.

Regardless of if we are happy with the development or now, we MUST remove the potential for corruption. Even where there is none. Then those with a vested interest to enter 'the debate only' with conflict of interest on the table.

Get rid of the people driving it through and the other issues will stop being glossed over. No spare local school spaces, fact that the carnival is overcrowded as it is when there is no rain, parking (before not promised but after) and that the people who are actually intend to be a listing part of this community and do not have second homes chose to live in a 'Historic Market town'

Kazek Lokuciewski
16/04/2012 at 14:30

I sympathise with Tonk and Mavdo. If Angus Ross is sure that the number of parking places will not decrease then can he please explain how this will be made up. What parking is going to go and how/where (and quantity) it will be replaced. Additionally, what services (shops/hotel/supermarket, elms field visitors, station etc) the remaining and new parking is meant to support. There must be a plan after all the comments made on this website concerning parking over the last few months and more. This would no doubt stimulate even more discussion.

Stig2, Wokingham
12/04/2012 at 12:05

mavdo:

I would suggest that, if the local authority is looking at making Wokingham Town Centre a shopping destination in order to attract an increased footfall, then keeping the same number of car parking spaces will be inadequate, surely it requires an increase, if they're serious about their aspirations.

Tonk, Wokingham
11/04/2012 at 19:23

i have lived in wokingham all of my life.we had a carnival field once where we had funfairs other events and of course carnivals.this was sold by wokingham council and so we lost a much loved green space.we had an outdoor swimming pool once that was given to the people of wokingham.this was sold by wokingham council. so another much used and loved amenity lost. wokingham councillors are voted in to serve and listen to the people of wokingham but they clearly have their own agenda.local elections soon,lets give them everything they deserve!

right said fred
11/04/2012 at 18:22

@Cllr Baker - I do appreciate your interaction with us on here. It is a constant and useful method of the council having a good interaction with the public. I also sincerely do appreciate the time you take to do this, and the efforts you took to provide me with consultation documents on the station recently. I responded to that. Whether my comments are actually noted, or whether it is already a done deal. anyway.. we shall see. The comments on the top car park being only available to residents South of the town, and the crazily small number of taxi spaces would be an interesting indicator to whether my comments have been considered or dismissed just because they don't agree with the planners (which is the way we feel about "consultations").

Recent "consultations" as I've said, on multiple issues, have been issued after plans have been drawn up, and then they have been implemented with nothing but cosmetic changes. I have no proof, yet, that the station, or town centre, consultations are anything different to that. I hope they are. You've given me your word that they are. I wait and see, unable to do much about it anyway.

You and I have had discussions before regarding the loss of parking spaces around the town, and you have given me your word that the number of parking spaces will not be reduced. At the time, I said I did not believe that statement, although I don't doubt that you do believe it. I still do not believe it. To me that doesn't mean you are lying, and I do not wish to imply that. I just do not think you will achieve the aim you have set out.

You are removing one of Wokingham's biggest parking areas (The Paddocks and Shute End (Saturdays)); you are removing another smaller car park (Rose Street), and I have even seen suggestions of building on another (Denmark Street). That leaves only Cockpit Path and our multistorey, plus Easthampstead Road car parks and Carnival Pool, two of which are a walk outside the centre already. To replace what we have lost in this, you would need a *significant* car park development. I don't see it anywhere. You have said there will be an underground car park under the new supermarket, but simply by looking at the area you can see that you'd need to dig up the entire park and replace it over the top just to fit in the same number of cars, unless you plan to tunnel underneath, which would be *incredibly* expensive. I simply do not believe you can do all this and maintain the number of spaces in the town centre. In saying all this, I am not questioning your integrity.

With your word, I am expecting you to be fighting this tool and nail. I don't doubt you are. But I think with some of your colleagues in power and in your party who have seen fit to implement an illegal and stupid rubbish collection system, and now propose to build a bunch of houses and a road in the middle of a popular park whilst saying £1m (saving from rubbish collection, despite all the mess you got into) = £3m (cost of building the new park/road etc)... you will certainly fail.

The rubbish collection is an awful scheme. The Elms field development is also awful. The rest of the Town Centre is ok, but you are still demolishing a very popular pub that brings many to the town, to cater for a big department store. And finally, you are a politician. Nobody, but nobody (least of all you, I would suspect), fully trusts politicians. You have to accept that as a starting point and aim to prove us wrong. There is no other way.

mavdo, Wokingham
11/04/2012 at 16:56

Cllr Keith Baker you and your colleagues - must have thicker skin than that!!

If you cared what we thought Wokingham would not be in the mess its spiralling into ....

Peter Turner
11/04/2012 at 16:50

"Ideas being put forward include a new children’s playground, community orchard and a large events area to cater for celebrations, such as Wokingham Carnival, Wokingham May Fayre and the Wokingham Food and Drink Festival"

Is that so they can keep all the roads open when all these events happen so people can flock to all the cafes, estate agencies, restaurants and closed / boarded up shops in the town centre? ? ? ?

Deary me Wokingham - used to like growing up there........now I am afraid it is a hole in more ways than one. It's almost getting to the stage where it makes Bracknell look great and that says something!

countrylad, Tilehurst
11/04/2012 at 16:04

'The Wokingham environment and therefore Wokingham’s identity is at risk and once it has gone, it will never return.'

Mark Ashwell, 2010 (Source: http://www.markashwell.com/issues/environment/general/)

@No2MarkAshwell

Ivor Biggun, winnersh
11/04/2012 at 15:28

I enjoy it as park. Why can't it be left that way???

Be wary who you vote for, this May 3rd....

Fluffball, Berkshire
11/04/2012 at 14:33

Do we think, though, that me badgering some/all of the councillors in the borough saying 'please don't ruin Elms field, there's plenty of non-green Wokingham to work with, and I think everyone's against it' will make a difference? Do they care what I think? Do they care what EVERYONE thinks? Or do they only care if all of their votes are lost?

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
11/04/2012 at 14:28

MAVDO I am a bit disappointed in your comment about parking spaces. You and others continually complain that Councillors do not listen and here I have given my word that as the person responsible for public parking in the Borough that we will retain the same number of public parking slots. So what do you do - continue on your misheld belief that we will be losing public parking spaces! Clearly you are telling me that I am lying to you which I find incredibly insulting!

Cllr Keith Baker
11/04/2012 at 14:17

Remind prospective councillors who are touting for your vote. Personally, I would like to hear what Mark 'Trademark Windows' Ashwell has to say apart from the 'Vote4me and I'll work4u' filler. @No2MarkAshwell

Ivor Biggun, winnersh
11/04/2012 at 13:38

As I've said before.......I suspect WBC see areas of buildings as an asset; (income from business rates and council tax) and open green spaces as a liability; (costs to maintain etc).

Regarding what to do about it.....Vote sensibly next month.....Do something radical and look outside of the three main parties. Ask the would be councillors what they feel about a whole host of local issues and whether they would vote with their conscience, or just be sheep obeying the party whips. Ask them is they'd be there to represent the electorate and their interests or whether they are there to represent their party and it's interests which, all too often, go against the wishes of the people that elected them in the first place.

Tonk, Wokingham
11/04/2012 at 13:10

The plans look to already be decided.

Why are we building an alternative market place, when we already have a MARKET PLACE.

If the residents have been consulted at every stage, where are all the people that are in support of these plans?

Whatever problems this is trying to solve, eroding green space is not the answer - once it's gone, it'll never be allowed back. And please avoid building flats, they are community-sappers. People live in their own little space and never venture outside their front door. Coupled with this they are normally poorly designed with little thought as to how much extra traffic/parking problems will be created.

MSmith
11/04/2012 at 12:59

How might we go about changing the council's mind on this one? Assuming that enough people would be against it to do this democratically, of course. I'm seeing another 'bluebag' fiasco, where we spend £3m on something that we (the public) recognised as awful ahead of time, but get lumbered with forever. What can we do to stop this? Write to councillors? Arrange a petition? I'd appreciate a little advice on this one. Thankyou.