I totally oppose the high level of rates imposed by WTC and think they waste money on many things. However I have to admit I can afford to take the granchildren swimming at Bulmershe but cannot at Lower Earley. The con-merchants have increased every charge across every leisure service such as parking for OAPs at Dinton. Privitisation or off loading serivices to private operaters who charge the earth to make a profit is not in the punlic interest. And again, why isn't Sandford Lane being made into a proper road to aid the grossly overloaded road network in Woodley. And talking of wasting money, WBC resurfaced on the cheap Sandford Lane (presumably becuse it was being increasingly used and they supported this) without repairing the base etc where required or increasing the width to allow cars to pass. Have a look now at the premature failures that are occuring as people have to run off the side of the road. And the waste of money spent on resurfacing Lines Road in similar manner, which is a no through road. Councillor Baker, put your own house in order before preaching to others.

   Phil - I stand by everything I said about Bulmershe Pool.

I note that you did not comment on the fact that the town Council has declined to consider the Borough Council taking over the running of this pool! The conservative group have been trying to get you and the Liberal Democrats to discuss this for over 4 years now but you have not b een interested!

It is a shame that you would rather run it at huge loss and stick the cost onto Woodley Residents through the town council tax. You are always quick to complain about the Borough Council not investing into Woodley yet here they are and you are not interested!

Finnally, re Sandford Lane - do you really think signs are going to stop traffic vans etc. going down there? I do not know what world you live in!

The scheme was supported by local residents, the highways depart, the planning department, the developers and Hurst Parish Council - so who is mad here - all of them or you?

   The width restriction of Sandford Lane that Cllr Baker mentions would have been at the Dinton Pastures entrance end.

Trucks would have travelled down Sandford Lane got to the restriction and then had to turn round and go all the way back along Sandford Lane again - how mad would that have been!

Put a speed limit on the road, put a weight restiction on the road, improve the signs to stop HGVs using the road - the proposed scheme was mad and would not have been to the benefit of most of Woodley's residents.

Did I mention that the council would have got their car park laid to tarmac under the scheme - perhaps not such a good idea in this flood prone area!

   When Cllr Baker does not know the facts he makes something up, pretends it is a fact and then complains that others are not telling the truth.

Cllr Baker says “When the county council was disbanded all the leisure facilities were passed over to the new unitaries. Wokingham asked all the local Town Councils if they would want to participate in the Leisure Connections / Harpers deal they had lined up or run it themselves. Wokingham and Earley Town Councils said yes to the deal whilst Woodley Town Council said no we will run it themselves.”

Now the facts:-

Berkshire County Council built the pool as part of their educational training establishment at Bulmershe (now part of the university). When they decided they no longer wanted to operate the pool (over 20 years ago) they offered it to, the then, Wokingham District Council. At that time there were no other pools in Wokingham and Wokingham declined and Woodley Town Council stepped in to keep this valuable facility running by leasing it from BCC.

Some time later Wokingham built the Carnival pool and Loddon Valley pools. Perhaps you will remember that we all had to pay a £25 surcharge on council tax for the Carnival Pool.

Some time later still Berkshire County Council was disbanded and their remaining assets (including the Woodley pool lease) were passed over to Wokingham. District Council.

Eventually WDC proposed to hand Carnival and Loddon Valley pools over to Leisure Connections to operate and at this time the option of including the Bulmershe pool was discussed between Woodley Town Council and Wokingham District Council, but WDC decided that it did not want to include Bulmershe pool in the deal because there was too much capital investment required.

Where is the myth Cllr Baker?

   Local Lady - I note your comment about Bulmershe Pool. I also note the incorrect statement from Cllr Challis about the Berkshire county Council days. Let me correct this Liberal Democrat Myth!

When the county council was disbanded all the leisure facilities were passed over to the new unitaries. Wokingham asked all the local Town Councils if they would want to participate in the Leisure Connections / Harpers deal they had lined up or run it themselves. Wokingham and Earley Town Councils said yes to the deal whilst Woodley Town Council said no we will run it themselves.

The results of those decisions are clear to see -Carnival and Loddon Valley Pools are excellent Bulmershe is not at the same standard.

The Consevatives on the Town Council have been trying to get the Liberal Democrats to enter into negotiations to pass on Bulmershe Pool to the Borough Council so that it could be added to the Harpers arrangement. Unfortunately Phill and his mates refused to participate. The Borough wants to take it over but the Town Council will not let us.

We know that the Liberal Democrats lose over £200,000 on Bulmershe Pool every year which has to come out of the Town Council tax which is why we in Woodley pay so much!

Finally, on Sandford Lane and traffic. It was all lined up to put a width restriction along this road to stop large lorries and vans from getting through. It was going to be paid for by the Sandford Farm development. Unfortunately, good old Cllr Challis stepped in and forced it to go to Planning Committee. The officers recommendation for approval was attacked by Phil and a chum and they managed to convince the committee to refuse it. The net result was a double whammy - no restriction and a lot more profit for the developers as they no longer had to spend the large amount of money the scheme would have cost!

   When Berkshire County Council decided to give up the pool over twenty years ago it was the town council that stepped forward to maintain services in Woodley. If Woodley Town Council had given up on the pool at Bulmershe then there would be no pool in Woodley.

Local lady says she would like to save a few pence a week off her council tax – but what would the impact be on the community.

How many Woodley children have learnt to swim at Bulmershe that would not have been able to go to the only pools provided by the Conservative controlled borough council in Wokingham and Earley? How many of our youths would have been stuck for something to do and consequently roamed the streets being anti-social. How many adults would have missed their much needed exercise?

As a town councillor I am proud of Woodley Town Council’s long term commitment to providing services to the community at affordable prices and would contrast it with Wokingham Borough’s continual reduction in services (dog poo bins - gone, public toilets – gone etc)

Woodley is to get around 800 new homes in the near future (Sandford Farm, Bulmershe campus, Old Addington school site etc) and it is absolutely right that the money that developers pay to mitigate the impact of these new residents should be spent on facilities in Woodley and not on a pool in Earley or Wokingham.

   Bingley - are you suggesting a road to go through the Highwood? It's an ancient woodland worthy of preservation.

   Don't understand the argument that Sandford Lane cannot 'easily' be improved. There is spare land on either side all the way from Mohawk Way through to Davis Street. The problem of the current flooding could be easily overcome also - sorry I forgot WBC don't invest in infrastrucure, reallyimg on Sonning Bridge as a modern Thames crossing. This is a golden opportunity to provide a proper route south east out of Woodley. And why have they dismissed the suggestion that a new link road from Woodlands Avenue to the A3290 is another golden opportunity since Bulmershe College is being redeveloped and Section 106 money will be available from that. This would solve the problems of those trying to go north or south.

   Why don't Woodley Town Council give up managing the Bulmershe Leisure Centre? They have not done a very good job at maintaining it. I agree with Phil Challis that huge improvements are needed to bring that pool into the 21st century!

Get Harpers to run it as they do Carnival and Loddon Valley - at no cost to the taxpayer - unlike the costs that every Woodley resident has to shoulder for the Bulmershe and Woodford leisure centres.

   I hope the £1/2m to improve leisure facilities etc are spent in Woodley - there are plenty of options - Bulmershe Leisure Centre and Pool, Woodford Park Leisure Centre to name just two.

I am afraid that WBC have had a history of spending S106 money in other parts of the borough.

We need much more openness on how these monies are spent, so that residents can hold the council to account - this information should be published on the council's website.

   When Sandford mill Lane floods the roads around Hurst, Robinhood Lane and Winnersh Crossroads improve significantly. I don't see any money going to improve this already overloaded area.

   There will be huge impact of 1000+ owners cars and it is a great shame no sensible traffic slowing measures for Sandford Lane were built in this scheme, widening the road was never an option. Well intended resurfacing in the last 5 years has led to an increase in traffic speeds, making it even more dangerous for cyclists and anyone crossing. Nowhere near enough funding has been set aside for conservation and protection of nature along the rivers. I fear for the mammals and small birds as many of the 460+ homes are likely to have cats which will kill everything

   Since many of the residents will use Sandford Mill Lane as an exit as do many residents of the airfield area now, why isn't money being spent to improve/widen this road, which would be quite cheap, which then bypasses many of the overloaded unimproved roads in Woodley?

   Why do people continue to say the developers are paying the money.

These Section 106 costs come off the land value so effectively it is the landowner paying the money in return for the grant of planning permission.