Cookham Discussion Board
September 21, 2018, 09:57:03 AM *
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]
  Print  
Author Topic: POUNDFIELD LATEST  (Read 12036 times)
Gazzetta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 288


« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2014, 10:04:04 PM »

It's not about whether or not I am in favour of housing on the Poundfield Lane site.   I was just saying that the potential for 1000 years old relics on the site should not be a reason for not developing the site.   The options are 1, excavate the site to expose the ancient history, 2 accept its there but realise you need to move on and live for the future.   
Logged
monty
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 705


« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2014, 10:11:52 PM »

So more houses and more cars, Chelsea tractors etc xxx
Logged
Dragonman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 348


« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2014, 11:37:02 PM »

Cervantes, Google can say what it likes. Every year the words of Nostradamus seem to be ringing very true. Oh! I forgot, you would rather build houses on top of history!
Logged
Gazzetta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 288


« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2014, 12:33:03 PM »

There is clearly a massive difference between an AONB and a dirty on field with some broken pots buried deep below it.
Logged
Merlin
Guest
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2014, 12:55:56 PM »

Clearly a distinct difference of opinion here.

If I read Gazzetta rightly - to hell with history and archaeological sites and build on the land.

Frankly, I would more than welcome any archaeological dig, site, remnant, village, artefact
or whatever if it means delaying, discouraging or indeed stopping completely any  thought
or idea of building on the aforementioned land. Let's kill it off once and for all.

More houses means more people means more cars means more of a drain on our current
limited resources like roads, doctors, transport, shopping, schools, sewage, water supply etc.

So how do you propose we cater to all these additional houses and people Gazzetta?
At a guess .... another 200 souls ... another 50 cars ... another 50 kids .... another
1000 litres per day of effluence .... all contained within a small village environment.

And that's just guessing at the numbers.

Nice .... neat and tidy, eh!
Logged
Paris
Guest
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2014, 01:41:33 PM »

Gazetta there's also the world of difference between a dirty old field as you call it, that will be teeming with wildlife (rare or otherwise) and an almost sterile housing development where the gardens (if they are of a size to be called a garden) will be managed to a point of neatness that defies all attempts by most wildlife to build a home. 

Also go along with what Merlin said.
Logged
monty
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 705


« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2014, 03:52:58 PM »

Thanks Merlin very well put  Roll Eyes
Logged
Gazzetta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 288


« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2014, 06:36:09 PM »

I think you are missing the point.   If you do not want additional housing or any other development then form a reasonable argument, such as shortage of parking, schools, doctors etc......

I don't honestly believe the prospects of having an ancient village below the ground is a suitable reason for declining the planning application. 
Logged
monty
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 705


« Reply #23 on: November 20, 2014, 08:11:16 PM »

Have you looked at the amount of parking at Station Hill for shopping, it is a nightmare. traffic in the Pound difficult. more houses ,more traffic is that you want for our beautiful village
Logged
Dragonman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 348


« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2014, 08:52:55 PM »

Some of those posters Monty, from their viewpoint must be Chelsea Tractor owners, and want Cookham to look like Chelsea, heaven forbid.
Logged
monty
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 705


« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2014, 09:16:14 PM »

I love the village and hate to see what it could be descending into with all this extra housing - god forbid xx
Logged
jumpingjackflash
Guest
« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2014, 03:26:56 PM »

This is bad news! Seems Cookham will soon become a TOWN if they get permission to build!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  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!