Hello guest, if you read this it means you are not registered. Click here to register in a few simple steps, you will enjoy all features of our Forum.

Our community forum is now open, a warm welcome to all Richings Park residents. Please register in order to be able to post and start new threads (March 23, 2015)


Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username/Email:
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Latest Threads
Slough proposal to annex ...
Forum: Slough BC Emerging Local Plan
Last Post: RPark1
26-06-2017, 04:14 PM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 4,056
Overgrown grass verges/tr...
Forum: Councillor Wendy Matthews
Last Post: Paula Bains
24-06-2017, 09:52 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 453
Cabinet 9 is now in Build...
Forum: Broadband/Internet
Last Post: Paula Bains
08-06-2017, 02:13 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 892
Construction of a 250 veh...
Forum: Local Planning Applications
Last Post: harry7
04-04-2017, 01:41 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1,130
Need to know about it!!!
Forum: Any other Off topic discussions Welcome here
Last Post: Looks stylish
25-03-2017, 06:54 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 3,454
Imperial College Research...
Forum: Noise and Air Pollution Research
Last Post: LisaP
23-02-2017, 02:33 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 894
Public exhibition of rede...
Forum: Thorney Lane Business Park Redevelopment
Last Post: LisaP
23-02-2017, 02:04 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 2,493
bathurst walk copper and ...
Forum: Crime & Crime Prevention - Get a Free Security Check
Last Post: Smartley
29-01-2017, 02:25 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1,034
Breedon consultation even...
Forum: Proposed Development of Thorney Mill Rail Sidings
Last Post: LisaP
27-01-2017, 03:10 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1,862
Object to this applicatio...
Forum: Wallingford Road Planning Application
Last Post: LisaP
12-01-2017, 09:18 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 3,269

 
  Overgrown grass verges/trees Old Slade Lane
Posted by: Paula Bains - 24-06-2017, 09:52 PM - Forum: Councillor Wendy Matthews - No Replies

I have written to the Council to ask about the overgrown grass verges at the top end and middle if Old Slade Lane on the right hand side as you enter from the main road,

Especially near the junction of Tge Poynings, the grass verges are growing more and more taking over the road, therefore narrowing the road so that it is almost impossible for 2 cars to pass each other, so one has to find an area to wait in in order to let the other pass.

I scraped my wheels against some rocks that have been planted on an overgrown grass verge of one property as I tried to swerve to let another car coming in the opposite direction.

Therefore, is it the responsibility of the Council or the properties on the right hand side to cut those back by about five feet or more?

If it us up to the residents, and I am awaiting an answer from the Council, then should those residents be written to accordingly?

Potholes in Old Slade are the other issue.

Paula Bains
Th Poynings

Print this item

  Cabinet 9 is now in Build stage!
Posted by: Admin - 08-05-2017, 12:11 PM - Forum: Broadband/Internet - Replies (1)

Perhaps superfast broadband is now on the cards for Richings park  as Cabinet 9 status has changed to the build stage.
Fingers crossed! 

Print this item

Thumbs Down Construction of a 250 vehicle commuter car park in Richings Park
Posted by: harry7 - 04-04-2017, 01:41 PM - Forum: Local Planning Applications - No Replies

Hi All,

Please see the link to the new 250 vehicle car park for Iver Station and my comments strongly opposing the development below.  

I am in support of a new station car park and a controlled parking zone for Richings Park but strongly believe the Thorney Lane Business Park scheme is far better as due to its closer proximity to the station and benefits from the relief road.


https://publicaccess.southbucks.gov.uk/online-applications/caseDetails.do?caseType=Application&keyVal=OMGDYSOHM4400



Please see my comments below opposing the application.  

I am opposed to the new station car park for the following reasons.

1. 750 car parking space including 500 as planned in the Thorney lane business park development is not required.
2. The Thorney Lane Business Park scheme is far better as due to its closer proximity to the station and benefits from the relief road.
3. The car park will attract increased traffic on Thorney Lane and Bathurst Walk.
4. The scheme will attract more commuters from further afield as it’s by far the biggest car park in the area compared West Drayton and Langley.
5. The zebra crossing will cause extra traffic while people are crossing during peak traffic flow. Also the zebra crossing is too dangerous to cross due to the current speed limits and location on a hill. A bridge will be far more suitable.
6. Will increase air and noise pollution.
7. The scheme is in the wrong location and it is at least 1.1 km to the station.
8. The scheme will permit infill housing development or increased parking space in the future.
9. The existing noise from the motorway will increase once the car park is completed.  There are no acoustic barriers designed in the scheme.
10. The car park is on green belt and  has not been included in the SBC local plan
11. The path required to access the station behind Bathurst walk is not safe to walk and will result in people walking on Bathurst walk and increasing the amount of litter on the road.
12. No details have been provided regarding CPZ in Richings Park as residents are very concerned South Bucks council may charge the residents of Richings Park and my visitors to park on my road.
13. Commuters will still park on Richings park roads if the CPZ allows for free parking at night
14. The car park will be a complete eyesore.
15. The car park is too isolated and will attract crime.
16.    The quantity of the number of car parking space is too large taking into consideration that the developer’s     Angry reports showing the vast majority of the Iver station rail users commute to the station by walk.

West Drayton has 15 No. car parking spaces
Burnham has 59 No. car parking spaces
Langley has 83 No. car parking spaces.
Why does Iver require 250 No. car parking spaces for a small village and potentially 750 including Thorney Lane redevelopment???

17.  The developer and SBC should encourage more sustainable methods of transport for rail users eg. Buses, cycling or park and ride and not large car parks encouraging commuters to travel from neighbouring towns and potentially airport users to use the car park.

Print this item

  Need to know about it!!!
Posted by: Looks stylish - 25-03-2017, 06:54 AM - Forum: Any other Off topic discussions Welcome here - No Replies

[Image: cuyahoga-valley-railroad-2-L.jpg]
I like this attraction because its natural beauty is really good for nature lovers. so I am also a one of the member here who loves natural beauty and wants to explore charming destinations. so if anyone has some idea about this place so share with me here as well.

Print this item

  Imperial College Research - Volunteers Wanted
Posted by: LisaP - 23-02-2017, 02:33 PM - Forum: Noise and Air Pollution Research - No Replies

Imperial college are looking for volunteers who live near an airport, an overground railway or a major road (some of us meet all three criteria) to help with their research into noise and ultrafine particle (UFP) air pollution, which would require them taking measurements inside and outside homes.  

If anybody is interested in taking part or wants to find out more email Faridah Naim at f.naim14@imperial.ac.uk

Print this item

  Public exhibition of redevelopment proposals
Posted by: LisaP - 23-02-2017, 02:04 PM - Forum: Thorney Lane Business Park Redevelopment - No Replies

Thorney Lane LLP will be holding a public exhibition to showcase their proposals for redevelopment of the Thorney Lane Business Park.  This is an opportunity to express your views and concerns to the developers before the proposals become too advanced.  There will be three exhibitions:

  • 28 February, 3pm to 6:30 pm - Iver Heath Village Hall, St Margaret’s Close, Iver Heath, SL0 0SG
  • 1 March, 3:30pm to 7:30pm - Iver Jubilee Pavilion, Iver Recreation Ground, High Street, Iver, SL0 9PW
  • 3 March, 4pm to 7.30pm - St Leonard’s Church, St Leonard’s Walk, Richings Park, SL0 9DD

Queries can be directed to James Williamson on 020 3405 1415 or james@spbroadway.com.

Print this item

Exclamation bathurst walk copper and steel beam stole
Posted by: Smartley - 29-01-2017, 02:25 PM - Forum: Crime & Crime Prevention - Get a Free Security Check - No Replies

Between Monday and weds last week some scrap copper and a bespoke steel beam which was made for the renovations we are currently doing were stolen from the front of our house (cul de sac end). A white flatbed transit with a scrap metal cage returned later on weds afternoon but drove away when spotted. Reported to police. If anyone spots this vehicle please let me know the number plate or call 999. Thanks

Print this item

  Breedon consultation event
Posted by: LisaP - 27-01-2017, 03:10 PM - Forum: Proposed Development of Thorney Mill Rail Sidings - No Replies

Details about the Breedon consultation event on Wednesday 8 February 2017 at the Thorney Park Golf Club in the attached document.



Attached Files
.pdf   Breedon Exhibition Invite.pdf (Size: 316.43 KB / Downloads: 16)
Print this item

  Slough proposal to annex the former Langley Airfield
Posted by: LisaP - 18-01-2017, 02:24 PM - Forum: Slough BC Emerging Local Plan - Replies (2)

In its emerging local plan, Slough Borough Council is proposing a northern expansion of its boundary into Richings Park for a garden suburb to meet its land shortfall for housing development (hence the reason they so vehemently objected to the Cemex gravel extraction planning application) and citing that '...Chiltern and South Bucks Councils should give detailed and rigorous consideration to the proposal ..."

South Bucks is already proposing two new housing developments in Richings Park: one on green belt land next to the Ridgeway Trading Estate and one at Thorney Business Park. With other developers all rushing forward to grab a piece of our green belt (including Heathrow airport for their businesses that will be displaced by the third runway) before long all our green spaces will have been consumed by development; as well as all the extra traffic that will be placed onto our local roads that are not coping with the current traffic problems.

Register your objection to their question 10: Which Spatial Options do you object to and why?

Here's the link to their Issues and Options Consultation Document (see page 102 for details on their Option J1):

http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/strategies-plans-and-policies/the-emerging-local-plan-for-slough-2016-2036.aspx

The consultation is open until 5pm on 27 February 2017.

There is also a public consultation event at The Curve on 13 February at 7pm.

Print this item

  Prooosed restructure gf Buckinghamshire CC to Unitarv model
Posted by: LisaP - 22-12-2016, 11:15 AM - Forum: Buckinghamshire County Council & South Bucks District Council - No Replies

Buckinghamshire County Council submitted its business case for a unitary council to the government in September proposing to abolish both the county council and the four district councils and replace them with a new, county-wide authority - details can be found here: http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/news/2016/december/statement-on-district-councils-northsouth-unitary-model-announcement/.

The Residents Association has sent a letter to MP Sajid Javid in response to this proposal - transcript below.

This letter is a submission to you, on behalf of the Richings Park Residents' Association (Richings Park, lver, Bucks. - 667 households, 1997 residents) concerning proposed changes to the current two-tier Buckinghamshire county authority structure.

Richings Park Residents' Association strongly supports the dual (North and South) unitary authority structure proposed by South Bucks District Council, which is jointly backed by Aylesbury Vale, Chiltern, and Wycombe District Councils. We emphatically oppose the Buckinghamshire CC proposed single unitary authority proposal.

We support the dual (North & South) unitary approach because:

  • Bucks CC is Aylesbury centric, seemingly indifferent to this southernmost area of Bucks which is strugglin6 to cope with significant changes and threats from major infrastructure developments: Heathrow, Crossrail, HS2, WRatH and more. An integrated, locally focused and responsive unitary authority would more effectively represent our needs and concerns.
     
  • A clear democratic deficit exists within this area. Subject to high-impact projects, all backed by statutory powers, we are near powerless to mitigate adverse impact in the absence of effective representation and support from Aylesbury. Bucks CC routinely fails to attend or make representations at meetings where community life-quality is at stake - so their self-serving, single unitary authority proposal would only embed & intensify the existing deficit.

Bucks CC is demonstrably Aylesbury centric, with nothing in their unitary proposal to suggest otherwise. The current system of Local Area Forums is totally ineffectual, so a model for local partnership working based on that system would be fundamentally flawed - particularly with no proposed formal role for Parish Councils.

A North/South unitary model ensures that we would be listened to & supported locally, and it would be a more creative and effective platform to provide long-term public services within Buckinghamshire as a whole.

Print this item