Breaking: Temporary Closure of Mapledurham Pavilion Extended

Pavilion - taken a while ago

This afternoon Reading Borough Council (RBC) published a report to its Policy Committee which recommends the continued closure of Mapledurham Pavilion.  Here is the report.  

As blogged on 21 January, RBC’s administration announced its decision to temporarily close the Pavilion pending a detailed structural survey.  RBC estimated that this would be for a period of 6 weeks.  The decision followed the recommendation of an earlier survey which raised safety concerns about bowing of the southern external wall.

Today’s news of the prolonging of the temporary closure was communicated to User Groups by RBC this afternoon.  I too wrote to the users and as readers may be interested, here is what I said:

“I know your respective groups have all been inconvenienced by the temporary closure of the Pavilion, for which I am very sorry.  I appreciate that the news of the continuing closure is most unwelcome.

“As chairman I have called an urgent meeting of the Mapledurham Playing Fields Management (MPFM) Committee to discuss the report going to Policy Committee, Agenda item 8, a link to which is: http://www.reading.gov.uk/article/8775/Policy-Committee-14-MAR-2016

“MPFM Committee meeting

The MPFM Committee meeting will be in the Civic Centre at 8 am on Thursday 10^th March.  You are welcome to attend as long as you register your wish to attend with Nicky Simpson by noon on Wednesday 9^th March so she is able to check that there is sufficient seating and that your name is added to the attendees list.  This will ensure that security will let you into the building (which doesn’t open until 9 am) when you press the intercom at the building’s main entrance. 

“In order for the meeting to finish in time for people to get to work I will not be allowing observers to speak.  If there are any questions you would like considered, please notify me by noon on 9^th March.

“Policy Committee meeting

Members of the public are allowed to attend Policy Committee which will take place on Monday 14^th March at 6.30 pm.  I will be addressing the committee on Agenda item 8 as MPFM’s chairman.  Simon Hill in Committee Services is the Policy Committee’s administrator to contact if you have any queries, his details are on the same link mentioned above.”

For those interested, here is the detailed structural report referred to in RBC's Policy Committee report.

Should Cycling Be Allowed in Broad Street, Reading?

Reading Borough Council has launched a three-week statutory consultation today on whether cycling should be allowed along the whole length of Broad Street.

Jenny Rynn & me, Broad St, 2012

This follows an informal online consultation a couple of months ago, the results of which showed majority support for the proposal.  However, there was criticism from residents as the consultation wasn’t well-known about - apart from the cycling fraternity – and the results were questioned.  One of my residents who has eye-sight problems has contacted me already, very concerned by the proposal.

I must put my hand up and say that I am a cyclist however I don’t mind walking my bike across or along Broad Street.   Perhaps I would feel differently though if I was always on my bike (which I’m not) and used it to commute.

Back in 2012 when my friend Jenny Rynn was Mayor of Reading I accompanied her on an invitation from Guide Dogs for the Blind to try walking blindfold along Broad Street.  It gave me a completely new perspective, highlighting just how scary it is to have to rely on your other senses in this busy pedestrianised road. To read about my experience here’s the link.

Getting back to the statutory consultation, if you would like to voice your views do email highway.objections@reading.gov.uk or write to C J Brooks, Head of Legal and Democratic Services, Reading Borough Council, Civic Offices, Bridge Street, Reading, RG1 2LU.  You can read more about the consultation by going to: www.reading.gov.uk/cyclingconsultation

Update: On 10 March RBC's Traffic Management Committee agreed to leave the cycling ban along part of Broad Street in place as the results of the statutory consultation were so close. Personally I'm pleased by the result as I believe it is the safest option.  

The Post Office's Decision for Caversham Heights

The Post Office announced today that they are ploughing ahead with their proposed move of the post office from the Woodcote Way News shop despite massive public opposition. 

Protest last year outside the Woodcote Way PO

Their press release admitted that there was “a large amount of feedback…the majority” of which “was opposed to the move of the branch from its current location”.

Through conversations with the Post Office however I’ve learnt that usually there is little opposition to such proposals.  This makes the Post Office’s decision to plough head in this case all the more surprising given the strength and number of objections mustered by my campaign - over 900 supporting my petition and 91 residents writing to me with their strong objections.  Only four Mapledurham Ward residents told me they actually supported the proposal, one of whom understandably gets fed up of people parking for the Woodcote Way shop which is by his home.

Laura Tarling from the Post Office has agreed to meet me on 24 February to discuss the decision. I will be asking her why the Post Office disregarded the robust objections and huge public opposition.  Also I’ll be pushing for the retention of the post box outside the Woodcote Way shop together with its current collection times and asking how they intend to tackle the accessibility and security issues (amongst others) raised in my detailed submission of residents’ objections.

If readers have any other specific question they would like me to put to the Post Office please email me: mail@IsobelBallsdon.com before the 24 February.

Thank you to everybody for supporting my campaign: I am sorry we were unsuccessful. The Woodcote Way’s dedicated post office counter will close on 21 March at 5.30 pm with the new shared counter in Conisboro Stores offering post office services opening on 22 March at 1 pm. 

Mapledurham Playing Fields: Should some residents be banned from observing meetings?

At the last meeting of the Mapledurham Playing Fields (MPF) Management committee on 19 January 2016 there was a debate over whether observers “who openly advocate breaking the Trust" should be allowed to attend. 

Reading Borough Council's minutes of this meeting have not yet been formally agreed by the committee, however when they are I will link to them here.

I argued that it would be undemocratic and discriminatory to introduce such a ban, not to mention impossible to manage, and I am pleased to report that my colleagues Cllrs Hopper and Skeats agreed with me.   The demand (I’d received several emails from the Users’ Group representative in advance of the meeting to introduce this ban) flew in the face of the transparency I have promoted since taking on the committee’s chairmanship.  The vote went 1:3 with Keith Knee-Robinson abstaining.  

Next I tabled a motion that any member of the public be allowed to observe these Management meetings so long as they give me, as chairman, written notice in advance (so I can ensure there is sufficient space) and observers do not disturb proceedings.  My motion was agreed 3 with 2 abstentions.

I am well aware that residents opposed to The Heights primary school going on part of MPF, because of the land having been left in Trust for the benefit of everyone living in Reading and the Parish of Mapledurham for recreation, have extremely strong views, which I respect.  However there is a democratic process by which this legal issue will be determined.

For the avoidance of doubt for readers generally, I am keeping an open view about the Education Funding Agency's anticipated proposal to build a permanent home for The Heights on part of MPF so that I can fully participate in the decision making process.  This will enable me to speak up on behalf of all residents in Mapledurham Ward having first fully assessed the pros and cons of the proposal, tempting though it might be to ignore the tiny minority who try to smear my reputation.  

Update on temporary accommodation for user groups:  All but one user group are back up and running having been displaced from the Pavilion whilst the building is shut for a detailed survey. I have been told that the user group still without accommodation should be restarting this coming week once the council has reopened a building at Caversham Court.

Prospect Street Zebra Crossing Safety Campaign

Cllr Claire McDonald, Ed Hogan and me by the zebra crossing

Cllr Claire McDonald and local resident Ed Hogan have been leading a campaign calling on Reading Borough Council (RBC) to urgently review the safety of the zebra crossing in Prospect Street.

This follows a serious incident on 11 January when a woman walking across the zebra crossing was knocked down by a van.  The woman was rushed to hospital with life threatening injuries.

I've been supporting my Conservative colleagues' campaign which has amassed over 1,250 signatures to date.  It is staggering just how frequently vehicles are seen failing to stop for pedestrians trying to, or actually walking over, this zebra crossing - several times every day.  

If you share our concerns and agree that the safety of this crossing needs an urgent review, please take a minute to read and sign the petition.

Simple measures that wouldn't need a long-drawn out consultation like proper lighting and raising the crossing up onto a table would dramatically improve visibility.  Such measures would just need the will of the Labour-run council to take immediate action.

Woodcote Way Post Office Update

Protest in December

Thank you to the nearly 1,000 residents who have signed my petition, written via email or letter, stopped me in the street or invited me in to tell me about their objections to the Post Office’s proposal to remove the dedicated post office counter from Woodcote Way.

I submitted a detailed objection listing the arguments against this flawed proposal to the Post Office in the hope that it be scrapped.  In total 903 people signed the petition (paper + electronic copies) and 91 sent me their objections by letter or email. I captured these objections in a spreadsheet which, together with the petition, I enclosed with my response. 

The Post Office is currently, as explained to me by the responsible External Stakeholder Manager, analysing the consultation responses before coming to a final decision.  Their main focus is trying to overcome accessibility issues.  I was informed that a meeting was taking place yesterday to look at the accessibility of Conisboro Stores, where postal services are proposed to go behind a shared counter.

I believe there are significant issues which cannot be overcome and I have worked hard putting together the evidence to substantiate this commonly held view.  A powerful fact is that even those for whom postal services would be much closer to their home objected because of the fundamental flaws with the proposal.

The consultation result is expected imminently and as soon as I hear I will spread the news.

More Detail Behind Temporary Closure of Mapledurham Pavilion

As anticipated there has been considerable interest in the temporary closure of Mapledurham Pavilion and the impact on users.  

Finding alternative available accommodation in the area is challenging as community space, as anyone who has tried to book space will know, is well-used and always in high demand. This highlights, if ever it were needed, the huge importance the Pavilion plays for our community.  Residents of all ages benefit from organisations from babies to retired residents.  

What happens next hangs on the results of the intrusive survey which RBC has commissioned.  For information, here is the latest response provided to me by Reading Borough Council:

Dear Cllr Ballsdon 

You requested a brief history of the latest inspection of the hall.

Following a report that the roof was leaking into a store the building was visited by the Corporate Clerk of Works within Property services to arrange repairs.  While there on the Thursday 14^th January he was concerned about the cladding on the interior of the south facing wall which looked insecure. Given the use of the building and possibility of large panels becoming dislodged and exposed finger traps etc he raised his concerns with the Programme Manager within the Council’s Leisure and Recreation Team the following day (Friday 15^th). A meeting on site first thing on Monday was agreed to assess the situation.  At that meeting it was agreed to seek specialist advice as they could not tell the condition of the structure below and there may be some flexing in the wall.

Advice was sought from the Property Services Manager who recommended engaging KRP consulting engineers who have previous knowledge of the facility.

The Clerk Of Works met KRP at Mapledurham on Tuesday 19^th January.

On the 20^th January the engineer fed back his observations recommending the closure of the facility. This was in the form of an email not a formal report as the extent of inspection was limited in both time and ability to access supporting sub structure. However from what he was able to establish from his initial inspection he made the following recommendation.

“We consider that progressive deterioration has most likely occurred, particularly to the timber framed structural elements, primarily as a result of damp ingress, although we cannot identify the extent or rate of progression.

In view of these uncertainties, for Health & Safety reasons, we suggest that the building be taken out of use until the intrusive investigation is carried out, the extent of the defects identified, and a programme of remedial works undertaken”.

The hall was then closed on the 21^st January. It was also decided that a detailed intrusive survey was required and that KRP be commissioned to undertake this work to produce a report to allow the council to identify the best way forward. This is being arranged for the six week closure which will likely include scaffolding parts of the building to access roof voids, removal of some cladding and necessary reinstatement of damage caused during the survey.

As the service manager for Leisure and Recreation I was aware of the progress of these events and made reference to the inspection at the management meeting on the evening of the 20^th.

Kind regards

Ben Stanesby