Laura Farris Meeting

Many of you will have attended the public meeting with Laura Farris that was held in the Memorial Hall on 31st August. Thank you to everyone who sent in questions. If you were unable to attend, you missed a positive meeting with Ms Farris listening to our concerns. We are grateful for the support she showed us at the meeting but understand that she is limited in what she can actually do to influence any decision on planning matters such as the one we are fighting.  We recognise, however, that it is quite unusual to get MPs to agree to hold meetings like this one on local issues such as planning which is typically the domain of the local council and we are grateful to her for this.  We are not sure how much of a difference she can make, but she is still in a position of power and influence, and we are pleased to have her attention on this issue.

She made it clear at the meeting that she would still welcome letters from constituents on this matter but urged us also to write in with further questions, views and concerns to Graham Pask who represents us at West Berks Council.

Breathing Space

You may have noticed that we have gone a little quiet since the public meeting. Changes in government policy on planning and the subsequent cabinet reshuffle have meant that phase 2 of the consultation has been delayed. Everything is on hold, which is good news, while we wait to hear what effect a new Minister for Housing and his policies will have on the whole process. Goalposts seem to be shifting…

Despite all this, we know that the issue of the 2,500 houses has not gone away. The Working Group is looking at the implications of the Government reshuffle and how best to continue with the campaign where there are new rules and new stakeholders. 

For those who have so generously donated money to the fund to help fight this development, please rest assured that the money is safe and ringfenced for when we will most certainly need it at the next stage.

We will be in touch again soon, hopefully next week when we will be able to share letter we are currently drafting to Michael Gove. In the meantime please do not stop writing your letters of objection to both Laura Farris (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) and Graham Pask (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).

Thanks, as always, for your support,

The Working Group

These questions have come from Bucklebury parishioners. There will be some further questions sent directly to Laura Farris’ office.

Greenfield vs Brownfield - Boris Johnson said after the Chesham and Amersham by election "we’re not going to build all over the countryside".  THA20 does just that.  Nick Carter, the recently retired Chief Executive of WBC said in interview (p10 NWN, Aug 12th) ’The environment would have been nice, but realistically, given it wasn’t a government priority, it would have been difficult.’ What steps will you take to ensure WBC follow the PM’s guidance?

Size - The Government formula for housing allocation doesn’t account for the area in West Berkshire that is subject to development restrictions due to the AONB, two atomic DEPZones and flood zones.  You told us that you were meeting Robert Jenrick to discuss this.  Could you please tell us the result of that discussion?

AONB - WBC opposed the proposed development of 500 houses at Siege Cross in 2015.  Their vigorous defence highlighted potentially devastating harm to the local environment and setting of the AONB.  This development site is nested within THA20.

The CPRE report "Beauty Still Betrayed" says that "developments within the setting of an AONB should only take place if it can clearly be shown that there will be no adverse impacts on the neighbouring AONB".

What will you do to avoid public money being wasted on a promoting a proposal that inevitably leads to damage to The Common?

Traffic - 2500 houses will create additional traffic at the level crossing, on the A4 and as rat runs through the villages to avoid the gridlock.  This will have a devastating effect on residents, but WBC have produced no analysis or mitigation plan.  What steps will you take to prevent your constituency from grinding to a halt?

Schools/Healthcare - The number of new residents will put impossible strain on local schools.  WBC recognise this but new schools will be built towards the end of the scheme leaving a generation of children searching for schooling.  What steps will you take to ensure every child gets the education they deserve?

A similar issue arises with health care.  Our GP services are already oversubscribed.  A large single development will lead to a service breakdown.

Community cohesion - The community is not opposed to new homes.  It is opposed to THA20 because of its size, concentration, lack of community links damage to our AONB and the strain on community services.  What steps will you take to persuade WBC to consider a plan involving several smaller developments?

LF’s plans - If the new proposed constituency boundaries are approved, would you prefer to stand for the constituency that will then contain Newbury and Thatcham, or the 'mid Berkshire' constituency that will contain Bucklebury and the Pang Valley?