News

Woodley's town councillors have written to Eric Pickles over a decison not to call in Wokingham Borough Council's decision to allow 300 homes on the Bulmershe campus
advertisement

Disgusted Woodley bosses write to minister over Bulmershe homes

By Jon Nurse
February 20, 2013

Disgust over the latest blow against protecting the green gap between two of the borough’s towns will be raised with Whitehall.

Frustrated Woodley town councillors are writing to Eric Pickles MP after he decided not to call in Wokingham Borough Council’s decision to allow The University of Reading to build nearly 300 homes at its Bulmershe campus.

Councillors are angry the plans include building on 10 per cent of the green space between Woodley and Earley.

They voted unanimously to write to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government during a meeting on Tuesday, February 12.

Councillor Phil Challis said: “The letter confirming this decision says the Government is committed to give more power to councils and communities to make their own decisions on planning issues. In this case both the town councils opposed but weren’t taken note of.”

Cllr Keith Baker, executive member for highways and planning, said he wasn’t surprised by the Secretary of State’s ruling, referring to a Government inspector’s decision to allow development in Shinfield that overrode councils’ and residents’ wishes. “My sentiments are exactly the same as yours – this is not localism,” he said.

The University plans to build houses, apartments and a sports pavilion on the site.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (18)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 15 of 18

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

Cllr Baker it is well noted in the relevent article concept of visually recording only the council and developers or the presentation screen. The shy (anyone ask 5 people I have yet to meet a filmed public meeting avoider) members of the public can simply write a note for someone else to read. It's been two weeks now since the article. Are you going to continue to put it off by ignoring the obvious solutions.

Are you going to even advertise the meeting at the Town hall on the 22nd of April from rush hour (6pm) to 7:45 on a week day so that concerned working parents can arrange to leave work early as well as childcare. Poster in town, outside supermarket. Anyone would think you don't want the public getting involved?

Kaz4Wokingham, Wokingham
26/02/2013 at 16:00

Mavdo, In this case I can't agree. WBC have recently updated policies and guidance which would have given them enough evidence to refuse this application. It seems to me that the fear of the costs of an appeal by the University may have affected the decision.'

Jenny Lisssaman
23/02/2013 at 13:10

Silver Royal - unfortunately since you choose to hide behind a false name I cannot track your alledged letter. However, even without this I can absolutely deny I ever said "the council could do with it what they liked".

I also have never been asked by anyone about the new road link.

To answer his question about which way I voted on this application. Easy answer. I am not on the planning committee therefor had no vote on this at all.

My final comment to you is that if you are going to make these allegations about me then ,might I suggest you provide actual quotes from me. I know you will not be able to substantiate a single allegation because what you say is untrue!

Cllr Keith Baker
23/02/2013 at 09:19

Kaz4 - I have never said that public meetings should not be filmed. In fact I have said the reverse in that I think it is a good idea.

However, there is a difference between you and I. I think that attendees of a public meeting should have the right to decide whether they are filmed or not. That is a democratic right. Whereas you keep on saying that we should film regardless of what those rsidents say. That is a dictatorship.

I asked the last town forum held whether they wanted future forums filmed and they emphatically said no. I will continue to ask the same question.

I will respect their views will you?

Cllr Keith Baker
23/02/2013 at 09:07

@Jenny - the government say they have given council's the power. In reality, they've done absolutely nothing of the sort. Eric Pickles has given council's the power to build stuff, but not the power to *refuse* to build stuff. If you do, he'll just override it and build it anyway.

Wokingham refused building on the cricket club. It got built anyway. They did the same round the back of Cantley park. That got approved anyway, but isn't built yet. They know they can't refuse it. They know they have no power to stop developers - only delay and modify. It is scandalous.

mavdo, Wokingham
22/02/2013 at 09:53

What is the purpose of the planning dept and the planning committee at Wokingham Borough council. Government has given them the power to refuse applications like this. Local people from Woodley and Earley didn't want any houses built on the green space which is also a playing field. There are policies in place at WBC to prevent this kind of development. The question is why didn't WBC use them? Jenny Lissaman, Earley

Jenny Lisssaman
22/02/2013 at 09:23

If you can get to one of the planning meetings (6pm weekday in a town centre) you will find only a handfull of members of the public and 20+ business or council representatives. Cllr Baker does not wan't the public meetings filmed and shared on line and says it is those that we as members ofvthe public can feel comfortable. 22nd April in Wokingham Town Hall is a public mweting about the North Wokingham SDL. Please make arrangements to attend just to request the right to hear what was discussed openly online at your leasure, that developer answers are on record and we are able make public comments / discuss. The current pdf bashing is keeping us in the dark. Part of the 'We asked but no one complained' tactic used as the borough sells planning permissions to land speculators far too cheep and pays over the odd with the infrastructure contributions. I think. Not sure because they will not share the evidence.

Kaz4Wokingham, Wokingham
21/02/2013 at 13:25

So when will Mr Baker listen to the voice of his customers - The voters? Im sorry councillor Baker but you are rude and arogant to your electorate

Why oh Why oh Why, Reading
21/02/2013 at 08:48

I wrote to Councillor Baker when the new school moved to and and the existing enlarged their take of the green fields, asking him why the Council where promoting the reduction of Bulmershe Common, a very historic open space for the area. He replied it wasn't a common and the Council could do with it what they liked. Is it any wonder UoR are adopting the same attitude, and now to suggest he would oppose the development if he could would be amusing if it wasn't sad. And in passing could I ask him to confirm how he voted when the application came before the Council?? I did suggest the Council, if they had to go along with the application, should require a road link from Woodlands Avenue to the A3290 at the developer's cost. He dismissed the idea. So more houses and no new infrastructure. Thanks Councillor.

Silver Royal, Woodley
20/02/2013 at 22:05

As Cllr Baker is Executive Member for Planning and he agrees this is not localism can we assume he is working tirelessly to get his planning department to be more responsive to local objections and also to follow the policies that councillors have adopted.

Phil Challis, woodley
20/02/2013 at 17:06

Eric Pickles was always unlikely to call this in as Wokingham Borough Council had voted to support Reading University's plans - even though the really local council's in Woodley and Earley had strong objections.

So I think residents should really blame the Development Control department at Wokingham Borough Council, who no sooner had they had written a new policy to protect this area (Site of Urban Landscape Value) than they buckled under pressure from Reading University and recommended approval of a scheme that drives a horse and cart through their own new policy - before the ink was even dry.

Phil Challis, woodley
20/02/2013 at 16:58

This is just another case of WBC ignoring the need to maintain the green spaces beween towns. The situation between Wokingham and Bracknell is exactly the same.

Living in Wokiingham used to be living in a small town surrounded by countryside. Why do our elected representatives insist on destroying this situation. Most of the new residents commute into London anyway.

PoneRana, Wokingham
20/02/2013 at 16:31

Forgot to add - this is typical of WBC’s attitude, Wokingham and the c/offices are 7 miles away so they wont be effected by it – in fact Reading will bare the brunt of all the extra traffic etc!

A Concerned Local, Reading
20/02/2013 at 13:20

I do find it annoying that green land is slowly disappearing but this piece has been doing that for a log time now

The schools / university have slowly expanded, along with extra car parking and other things being built on it

Certainly more houses will spoil it – plus the nature reserve close by could be effected

And no I don’t live there