Save Woodcote Way's Dedicated Post Office Counter

In November I raised awareness of a consultation by The Post Office about its proposal to move post office services away from the Woodcote Way shop to Conisboro Stores.  The Post Office proposes to do away with having a dedicated post office counter and salaried Post Office Master in favour of a commission-based arrangement where all customers would use the same counter.

This issue has got everybody talking as residents cannot see any benefit in getting rid of the highly successful current arrangement at Woodcote Way.  I have been inundated with strong objections from all of the Mapledurham Ward residents* who have contacted me, including many elderly residents heavily reliant upon this local Post Office and shop.  

Such is the public outcry I have started campaigning to “Save our Woodcote Way Post Office with its dedicated post office counter”.  

How you can help:  

1. If you are free tomorrow, Monday 7 December at 12 noon, please come along and join me at the Woodcote Way Post Office as the local press are coming to talk and take photos of objectors
2.  If you haven’t done so already, please sign my petition which is in the Woodcote Way Post Office or alternatively the online version
3. Lastly please respond to The Post Office’s consultation so your views can be taken into account. Scroll down to my previous post (27 November) for further details

NB The Post Office's consultation ends 8 January 2016

* The one exception was a resident who lives opposite the Woodcote Way Post Office and, understandably, he would prefer the Post Office parking to go elsewhere.

Do you want Post Office services to leave Woodcote Way?

The proposal:    To move Post Office services away from the Woodcote Way shop to Conisboro Stores. Post Office services would be accessed at the same counter as currently sells groceries/lottery tickets/newspapers etc. There would not be a dedicated Post Office counter in Conisboro Stores.

Main benefit:     Increased access to Post Office services as hours extended to Conisboro Stores opening times.

Whatever your views, please respond to the Post Office’s online consultation at: www.postofficeviews.co.uk  [Branch Code: 148939] *  Here are the links to download The Post Office's local consultation poster and letter (which can also be downloaded direct from its website as mentioned above.

In addition please let me know your views: Isobel.Ballsdon@reading.gov.uk  so I can respond as the local Councillor, having weighed up all the pros and cons. So far several residents have raised their concerns with me.

If you know someone who doesn’t have access to a computer I am happy to help them to respond.  Call me or drop a letter through my door, 10 Fernbrook Road.

Several residents are helping me leaflet the area to raise awareness of this important consultation.  Let me know if you too would like to help.

Thank you

Isobel Ballsdon

Mob: 07717 292003

* Consultation ends 8 January 2016

Survey of Mapledurham Playing Fields for The Heights

Mapledurham Playing Fields (MPF) are being surveyed to see whereabouts The Heights primary school's permanent home could be built on the 22 acre site, subject to: consultation, legal hurdles and planning permission.

Back in August the Education Funding Agency announced its intention to pursue MPF for the permanent location for The Heights, following a public consultation run by Reading Borough Council.  The results showed majority support for MPF over the other four sites.

Here's GetReading's report and Rob Wilson MP's statement, both published this afternoon.

Police Message of Criminal Activity in Caversham Heights

Be aware of reports that there has been a spate of thefts from vehicles in the area due to what is thought to be a "tool" enabling criminals to clone the infra-red signals when the owners lock their vehicle.

I've been told that the Pangbourne area was targeted recently and that last night several vehicles in Caversham Heights were targeted (further details below).  Vehicle owners found no sign of break-in, but that contents had been taken and doors left open.

What can you do?
Take out all valuables from your car whenever you park up.  Don't be tempted for example to leave your golf clubs or sat nav as these expensive items could be at risk of being stolen.

Please see information emailed by Thames Valley Police this afternoon below:

"Overnight last night and in the early hours of this morning (16/11)  a number of vehicles were broken into in the following roads .

Upper Warren Avenue , Gurney Drive, Chazey Road and Hewett Avenue .

Various property has been stolen and a number of the vehciles were insecure.

Also there was an theft from motor vehicle in Priest Hill, Caversham between 08/11/15-14/11/15 between 19:00-10.40 :  Vehicle was broken into and Sat Nav broken

Please follow the following crime prevention advice: 
 

·         When leaving your car, close all windows and lock your car

·         Park your car in an attended car park

·         Look for public car parks approved by the Park Mark scheme

·         When parking at home, use your garage. If you don't have a garage, park in a well-lit area

·         Don't leave anything on display in your vehicle

·         Take all your personal possessions with you

·         Remove sat nav holders and visible sat nav ring marks from windscreens

·         Leave the glove box open to show there's nothing inside

·         Fit an alarm or immobiliser to your car

·         Record the details of your property on the Immobilise website

·         Do not store your car's documents in the car

·         Secure your wheels using locking wheel nuts

·         Always check you have locked your vehicle and if using a key remote double check your doors are locked by hand

Please report any suspicious incidents, sightings or any information to The Thames Valley Police Enquiry Centre on 101"

Cleaning up Planning in Reading (1)

Regular readers of my blog will know that I have been campaigning for years to improve how planning is handled by Labour-run Reading Borough Council.  I am going to write a series of posts about the campaigns as there is lots to tell.

Section 106 monies

The point of S106 monies (paid by developers to the council) is to ameliorate the negative impact of a development for local residents in the area.  Planning permission is refused unless the applicant/developer signs the legally-binding S106 agreement between the authority and themselves (where a S106 is deemed necessary against the criteria to make the development acceptable in planning terms).

Back in November 2009 Conservative councillors and I raised concerns with the then Director of Planning over the lack of accountability and the need for a robust system to handle Section 106 developer contributions (S106).

Investigations revealed that the then Labour-run administration had little interest in how S106’s were recorded or allocated, that departments had wildly varying standards of recording these financial contributions and that a number had been misused. S106’s are given to the council by developers to deal with the impact on the local community surrounding each development. Examples of how S106’s may be used legitimately are: increasing the capacity of the local school, providing new benches or play equipment to the nearby park - thereby reducing the extra pressure and making the development sustainable.

Under the Conservative-led administration 2010-11 a new single system of properly recording and tracking S106 contributions was introduced. Following a lengthy internal investigation, my paper entitled RBC’s Usage and Accounting of Section 106 Receipts, and our Coalition partner's - the Lib Dems' - support, Council officers agreed to call in an outside team from Wokingham Borough Council for an independent investigation into past practices and to make recommendations for the future. The report made a number of “High Priority” recommendations to address the failings of the earlier Labour administration, some of which our local Coalition administration had implemented already. 

To be continued…

Training for Councillors on the Planning Committee

Reading Chronicle Apr '15

Back in February I was concerned by the questionable way in which Labour councillors decided a planning application.  After looking into the matter I campaigned put pressure on the administration to provide training as soon as possible.

I highlighted that contrary to Reading Borough Council’s constitution (which stipulates planning training is mandatory), not even half of the Committee had received any training.  In fact no training had been provided for a couple of years, even though requests had been made by opposition councillors.  The fact a response was not forthcoming to my concern that RBC was exposing itself to the possibility of legal challenge speaks for itself. 

The response from Labour initially, to quote a Reading Chronicle report was: “The Council’s Deputy Leader Tony Page said there was no legal requirement for committee members to be trained.  He said ‘We don’t train members of the committee like puppies – going through every single exercise with them step by step.  This is an absolute reflection of the complete gibberish Cllr Ballsdon talks on a regular basis and to be honest, if any member of the committee needs training, it’s definitely her’.”

I am pleased though that common sense prevailed and RBC reinstated planning training in June.  Could it be Labour wanted to avoid a headline in the run-up to the Elections more than avoid possible legal action by discontented applicants?  Readers may draw their own conclusions as to why, after I’d raised the danger and potential cost this could have on the validity of planning decisions, Labour chose to let three Planning Committees meetings and the Local/General Elections take place without providing the constitutional councillor training.  

Update on Shepherds Lane Campaign against Speeding

Local residents and me in March

Back in March this year Vivienne Anderson presented a petition asking Reading Borough Council (RBC) to tackle the speeding in Shepherds Lane.  Agreement was reached that officers would investigate the situation and report back in due course.

On Wednesday, 16 September, officers' update report will be presented to RBC's Traffic Management Sub-Committee.

TVP speed checking with me

The report states that RBC carried out a speed survey on Thursday 6 August and the mean speed was 28.4 mph. Residents I have spoken with are unhappy the survey was done in August, because it is the least busy time of year.  The speed check Thames Valley Police (TVP) carried out with me on 25 March caught a number of vehicles speeding in just 30 minutes in the road.

Unfortunately though the report's recommended action is that because no accidents have been recorded in the last 3 years, added to the fact that RBC gets more requests for speed calming than it has funds to do, Shepherds Lane is not of a high enough priority at the moment for action to be taken.  RBC will therefore continue to monitor the situation.

Should residents wish to attend the meeting, here are the details.  Please note there is no opportunity for public speaking in this agenda item.

Resurfacing Works Woodcote Road

Today resurfacing works are starting in Caversham Heights on patches of the A4074 Woodcote Road between the junctions with Woodcote Way and St Peters Avenue and also between the junctions with Highmoor and Ilkley Roads.

As mains replacement works by SGN are yet to be completed, the planned resurfacing works between Highmoor and Ilkley Road junctions of the A4074 will not be resurfaced this year.

Update:  RBC has just announced that the extent of resurfacing will be even more limited as unexpectedly the contractor has found road tar.  Apparently tar bound material is classified as hazardous when it is excavated and has to be specially treated disposed of separately.  As RBC was unaware, no suitable arrangements had been made which has delayed work.

I've been reassured that those areas the contractor is unable to resurface this year will be included in next year's contract when RBC will have been able to plan for the safe disposal of the material and the associated costs.