We, the undersigned, demand the protection of Mapledurham Playing Fields (MPF) for the sole purpose of playing fields and recreation ground. We support the refurbishment of the Pavilion as part of this very valuable local resource. We completely reject any proposal to use any part of MPF for a school, housing or other development that will cause loss of land.
Hi, I've sent this Email to Robert Wilson tonight; (not that I expect any answers) following the 'Update' sent today.
This little parcel of ambiguity is very disappointing!
Some facts which I will energetically disperse over the next few weeks.
1. If you had not agreed to facilitate the narrow interests of the residents of Upper Warren Ave (NIMBY, disguised as safety concerns) then the EFA due process solution would have stood and there would be no issue at all; the turmoil is entirely of your making in my view in challenging the EFA decision ostensibly on behalf of the very few but clearly very influential Upper Warren Ave residents !
2. The Mapledurham Playing Field Trust is based on the site being used “For recreational purposes only” only on this condition do RBC have ‘ownership’ of the site; it’s an option, if chosen, which would offer the potential for legal dispute for years.
I and many others would support any such action energetically.
You have demonstrated no interest in the Recreation Only condition and have never as far as I can ascertain referred to it or acknowledged it; this is significant
3. Labour (who favour the Mapledurham site) have had in my view an agenda for the MPF site for decades, surely you know this much about local politics?
a. First, a Primary School,
b. Then a secondary school,
c. Then Key Workers or affordable / social housing?
d. RBC tried to trade a rebuild of the Pavilion for a sale of MPF land to developers.
Once RBC break the Trust condition “For recreational purposes only” there is no obstacle to them doing whatever they like on the site; this in my view is their real intention, its why they would not fund the repair of the Pavilion in Fred Pugh’s time. Is this news to you?
They clearly intend to deal with the COI issue by appointing some subcommittee (will that committee get appointed by a referendum of Caversham residents!)
4. If, as you say, the Lib Dems favour Bugs Bottom and Labour favours Mapledurham Playing Fields then where do you or even our invisible Conservative Councillor stand?!
You had a clear view as to where it should not go, i.e. the EFA chosen option in Upper Warren Avenue!
It is significant that the EFA second time round conclusion is that the location at Upper Warren Avenue is viable and they have not withdrawn it!
5. I predicted that this would be delayed, kicked into the long grass until after the election, as a piece of so called local democracy it has been a divisive shambles from beginning to end.
6. If the MPF site is selected (I predict to my contacts that it will be) then expect every possible legal resistance and obstacle to be put in the way of the project.
7. Come on Robert / Isobel get off the fence; at least we know where the others stand; apart from with the residents of Upper Warren Ave that is!
Shah Z Alam
Please stop the school being built in this playing field.
Amanda Loyd5 days ago Comments: rg4 7hs
Immanuel Jarakana3 weeks ago Comments: RG4 7 PF
Valerie Elgeti3 weeks ago Comments: RG4 7PF
- From now on we will try to keep you informed of the progress of the consultation and what you can do to help to protect Mapledurham Playing Fields from development at the Facebook group "Mapledurham Playing Fields and Pavilion"
- As you are probably aware the Educational Funding Agency did not publish their review of prospective sites. Instead they have asked Reading Borough Council to conduct a consultation on their behalf. The proposed plans for the consultation are due to be approved by the Policy Committee on Monday 19th January. The proposed plans can be accessed at http://beta.reading.gov.uk/media/2452/item10/pdf/item10.pdf
- The Education Funding Agency (EFA) has announced that it expects to publish the outcome of its review of prospective sites for The Heights by the end of November. The review was originally expected to take 8 weeks from the end of August. Four sites were proposed: Highridge, Mapledurham Playing Fields, Bugs Bottom and Caversham Lawn Tennis Club. Members of Caversham Lawn Tennis Club voted not to sell the site, so this has been discounted. The delay is worrying. We know that Mapledurham Playing Fields were initially considered nonviable as renegotiation of the Trust, if indeed possible, would take a very long time. Is this what is being explored and causing the delay? If you are concerned please write to Ministers as detailed below.