Protect Mapledurham Playing Fields

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.


PLEASE PUT YOUR POST CODE IN THE COMMENTS BOX (just in case we have to prove that signatories are beneficiaries of the Mapledurham Playing Fields Trust)

Discussion

  • john heaps Hi, I've sent this Email to Robert Wilson tonight; (not that I expect any answers) following the 'Update' sent today.

    Hi Robert,

    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.

join the discussion

Recent signatures

  • username

    Patricia Heaps

    3 days ago Comments: rg4 7lbHi Robert, 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 challenging the EFA decision ostensibly on behalf of the very few but 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 potentially. I and many others would support any such action energetically. You have demonstrated no interest in this fact 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 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. Tick box on some diversity pro forma! Once RBC break the Trust condition “For recreational purposes only” there is no obstacle to them doing whatever they like on the site; this 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 trumped up subcommittee (will that get appointed by referendum!) 4. If the Lib Dems favour Bugs Bottom and Labour favours Mapledurham Playing Fields 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!
  • username

    Patricia Heaps

    3 days ago Comments: rg4 7lb
  • username

    Geoffrey Pearce

    4 days ago Comments: The new school should be built on the High Ridge site originally chosen by the EFA. The only reason it is not already under construction there is blatant nimbyism on the part of wealthy and well-connected residents who do not wish to suffer any disruption.
See more

Petition highlights

  • 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.
  • Thank you for all of your support. 1300 signatures were sent to the Charities Commission at the beginning of September. There has been a steady stream of signatories, both online and at events, since then. We are raising the profile of the campaign now, by publicising it in local media and writing to politicians. John Madejski has added his support. Articles have been published in the Reading Post. Interviews have been broadcast on Berkshire Jack FM. Letters have been sent to local councilors and government ministers. If you would like to add your support to the lobbying please contact Gordon.watt@balliol-watt.co.uk for addresses and details of themes covered so far.
  • We have started a Facebook page, ProtectMPF, for you to post photos of activities and events you have enjoyed on the Playing Fields
See more