Cookham Discussion Board
September 20, 2018, 06:32:58 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
20 September 2018 - The Boxford Mosaic

20 September 2018 - Cookham Book Club

22 September 2018 - Live@the Church

25 September 2018 - Cookham Medical Centre Closed for Training - 12.30-6.30pm

TO REGISTER TO POST ON THIS DISCUSSION BOARD email the Webmaster@cookham.com with a User name you would like. This is due to spammers.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
  Print  
Author Topic: New Holy Trinity Parish Centre Community Project  (Read 49302 times)
Cookham Webmaster
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1205


« on: March 16, 2011, 05:30:52 PM »

You should have received an envelope though your door explaining the planned Parish Centre Community Project at Holy Trinity. If you would also like to fill in the questionnaire it would be much appreciated.

http://www.cookham.com/adverts/cookhamnow/churches/holytrinity/htsurvey.pdf

The plans can be seen at:

http://docs-eu.livesiteadmin.com/92fe93f7-3283-4c24-bb69-0248cdb2cad0/cookham-a4-mailshot-ver-4.pdf

« Last Edit: March 26, 2011, 04:46:01 PM by Cookham Webmaster » Logged
anon
Guest
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2011, 05:51:13 PM »

deadline for doing this is tomorrow...
Logged
Showem
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 365


« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2011, 10:25:50 PM »

It says on the survey that the deadline is April 25th, not March.
Logged
Bob
Newbie
*
Posts: 28


« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2011, 11:50:59 PM »

It may be advisable not to rush into responding to this but look carefully into the matter further first, most importantly the plans, which are not included here with the form. (Why not?).

With still a month to go, there is plenty of time for discussion to help everyone decide if this really is a good idea for the parish - we all need much more information.

Logged
turnip
Guest
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2011, 08:58:11 AM »

Looks like the locals in the vicinity are not best pleased going by the Advertiser this week. I can’t say I blame them, it is always a shame to loose what little green space we have left and selling any property is a short term gain as once it is gone, it is gone…
Logged
Kiki1
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 304


« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2011, 10:54:53 AM »

Links to the proposals.

http://www.holytrinitycookham.org.uk/buildingprojects.htm

and Kevin Scott consultancy, not a local man unfortunately.

http://www.kevinscottconsultancy.co.uk/profile.html
« Last Edit: March 25, 2011, 11:04:59 AM by Kiki1 » Logged
anon
Guest
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2011, 12:33:45 PM »

Notice the fact that the Kevin Scott web link http://www.kevinscottconsultancy.co.uk/profile.html has a picture in the top right with no trees, grass or anything remotely living. Let's hope he comes up with something slightly better for the paddock!
Logged
simon
Newbie
*
Posts: 37


« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2011, 01:17:39 PM »

Turnip has hit the nail on the head in saying when it's gone, it's gone. The paddock is a haven of tranquillity which can be enjoyed by everyone and is far too close to the church to be built on. Anyone in the parish who doesn't know it well needs to go there and see for themselves.

But aren't the church and paddock the site of Cookham's Anglo-Saxon abbey or monastery?
Logged
Archimedes
Full Member
***
Posts: 113


« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2011, 03:08:42 PM »

It was only about thirty years ago that Holy Trinity sold their community hall in Maidenhead Road to a property developer, so they could convert the old vicarage into the current Parish Centre and build the new vicarage. Much to the disgust of the many people who had fund raised for the Hall. They are doing exactly the same again.
Logged
concerned
Newbie
*
Posts: 10


« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2011, 07:17:34 PM »

Not just the paddock under discussion - plan B is to build on the present car park.  Has there been a relevant survey on the number who would use an additional facility?  The old Church Hall, paid for by villagers, is in the minds of many of us.  Not enough people used it and it was too expensive to run.
Logged
Blackbird
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2011, 07:40:43 PM »

At least that's what they may have said. There was justifiably a good deal of ill feeling and its important that we don't make any hasty, regrettable decisions this time.

There are many questions which need to be asked before people give uninformed views on the questionnaires. It would be helpful if there was a public meeting arranged soon so that the pros and cons can be discussed.

What do others think?
Logged
number1china
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #11 on: March 25, 2011, 07:55:10 PM »

Very concerning how little information has been provided to those who are likely to be most impacted by this proposal.
I learnt yesterday that those leading the project on behalf of HTC have declined a very reasonable invitation to meet with the community with the view to clarify the many issues that the proposal doucments have artfully failed to mention and also the many questions that the proposal has generated, such as for example, where do they propose to route the increased vehicle traffic.  I would have considered this quite an important point to clarify, in writing, during this so-called consultation period.

I am relatively new to this teriffic community and am very disappointed at the way in which this apparant consultation process has been handled to date.  It is my opinion that the way in which it is being handled reflects poorly on those who are heading the process.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2011, 10:23:42 AM by number1china » Logged
lancelot
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


« Reply #12 on: March 25, 2011, 10:59:46 PM »

The most important reason not to build on the paddock appears in the Cookham History section of this website:

‘Cookham Church was mentioned in a charter as being attached to a monastery in existence in 726. Its actual location is unknown, but it is thought that it was close to the present church.
The present village of Cookham probably grew up around an 8th century Saxon Monastery situated in the parish, probably a twin-house for both monks and nuns. A National Religious Synod once met there. The Saxon Kings also had a Royal Palace here, where the Witan (Saxon parliament) met in 997 held by Ethelred the Unready. Attending the Witan were 1 arch bishop, 3 bishops, 2 aldermen, 3 abbots and numerous lords from West Saxons, Mercians, Danes and English’. 

If these buildings were in close proximity to the church, as I understand many Cookham people have long believed, there must be a considerable amount of archaeology under the paddock.
Logged
Cookie
Newbie
*
Posts: 31


« Reply #13 on: March 25, 2011, 11:41:34 PM »

Like some other contributors, I am relatively new to Cookham. Having previously lived in some heavily urbanised areas, the open spaces of this village are all the sweeter to me, and the loss off the paddock would be a severe blow to the village's semi-rural ambience. I find it difficult to enter the mind of a person who would propose such a development - and for what? If the church can't pay it's way the same situation will soon arise again. What will happen then - development in the graveyard?
Don't get me wrong, although not a believer, I love the old church and all that it represents in village life, and regularly drop something in the restoration box on walks through the grounds, but there has to be a better way of financing any necesary works. After all Cookham is not exactly a poor parish and there must be many who would contribute.
I can't comment on the issue of public funding for the previous hall, which was before my time, but I know that it greatly irks many longer term residents, who feel cheated by the church's action.
If this scheme goes ahead, the church will be diminished, and a valuable open space will be gone for ever.
And here's another thing - a few years back, a local archeological group did some excavation at one end of the paddock, which turned up evidence of Roman and Saxon presence. I learned from some of the diggers that a Saxon monastery is recorded in Cookham. It's entirely feasible it could have been on the paddock, as the Saxons very sensibly built on the higher ground to avoid flooding. If this new building goes ahead, we may never know if it's there, and another piece of local history will have been sacrificed at the altar of Mammon.
Logged
James Hatch
Golden Hatch
******
Posts: 2307


« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2011, 12:18:47 AM »

PRESERVATION! As one who loves the history of the village, preservation is the keyword. Thank goodness from reading these posts that there are quite a few would want to put the clamps on this proposed project. All a developer thinks is how much money I can make out of it. Already a lot of the gravestones have been removed without consultation to the surviving families, including mine.

It seems that those wanting to redevelop, do not want to be open and have a general meeting of all of those who are on the parish roll. Something of this magnitude has to be all above board and with the consent of the majority.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!