Tilehurst GLOBE 

Response to Reading Council about the Park Lane School Scheme

 

Introduction
This group is one of a network of local community groups, established and supported by Reading Council, dedicated to promoting Agenda 21 issues in a local context. This scheme goes to the heart of many issues of direct concern to this group and embedded within Reading Council’s own policies, (notably those concerning promoting sustainable communities), and current interests, (for example improving local centres). This response is about the principle of the current scheme only; detailed comments on planning issues, adequacy of the schools’ outdoor provision, catchment areas   and Charity matters, will follow if necessary.

 

The group applaud the proposals to improve facilities in this local centre.  Improvements are long overdue and sorely needed. None of the community buildings are acceptable or meet current or future needs.  Little has been achieved in the last 40 years, during which time there has been extensive   growth in population and increase in housing density. We are however, opposed to the scheme as outlined and urge the Council to have a radical re-think. The scheme does not have the backing of local people. It is also contrary to the current RBC Local Plan and would precjudice the revision being undertaken at present.

 

Objections.

1.The scheme is not sustainable. Reading Council should not fund the development of services by selling off assets that are not surplus to requirements. The scheme is predicated on selling off land (the junior school site, and most of Downing Rd playing field) in the heart of a local centre that lacks key facilities. The land it is proposed to sell off  is not surplus. It should be retained in Council ownership and used for community facilities now and in the future in line with Council policies to improve Local Centres.

 

2.It is not acceptable to section-off a well-used local Recreation Ground for partial use as a school playing field. Blagrave Recreation ground is well used, and valued by the local community. It is in a central position, there are only a few problems regarding misuse; it is overlooked and used by many. The community has no other similar facility. The current proposal to section off of the park into an L shape would be hugely resented and long remembered. We welcome the proposal to remove the ‘temporary’ nursery school building from the Park. Its building as an emergency measure is still resented after 60 years.

 

 

3.Reading as a whole is poorly served with outdoor leisure facilities, parks etc. Tilehurst in particular has few such facilities being ranked 12th out of 15 Wards for such provision. Locally we need all categories of play facilities, for example we are short of football pitches, have no basket-ball /hard surface areas for casual games etc. It is not sensible to sell off an existing playing field in a central position   that   could be used to partly ameliorate the shortfall in outdoor play provision.

 

4.We welcome the integrated approach to public services. This integrated approach does not necessarily mean it is essential that many facilities must be located on one site.  If the area available were larger Globe would applaud this concentration   with the improvement in ease of access for the public, opportunities for co-operative working between different professionals etc. However we recognise that there will have to be compromises, since none of the sites available is ideal. There is insufficient   space   within the two storey buildings proposed to allow for all the indoor facilities  which should be provided. We are not convinced that any of the proposed facilities (school, library, early learning centre etc)  would be adequate.  Having waited so long for any improvement to be suggested, we do not want to see a local planning mistake. A local centre fit for the whole of the 21st Century and beyond is needed .  This scheme will not fill the bill , and  precludes future improvements.

 

Summary

 Reading Council’s current   scheme cannot be modified to make it acceptable. The scheme is flawed and another one, not based on selling off assets, should be produced for discussion. The Council must look elsewhere for funds beyond the Local Centre they claim to wish to improve.