<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Common Sense</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.westfieldcommon.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org</link>
	<description>The website from the Westfield Common Residents&#039; Association</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:59:35 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Common Land Exchange &#8211; WCRA Letter of Objection by Karen Chilvers</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/10/08/common-land-exchange-wcra-letter-of-objection/comment-page-1/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>Karen Chilvers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.westfieldcommon.org/?p=924#comment-69</guid>
		<description>2nd Planning application PLAN/2009/0878

Any further info on this &#039;new&#039; application?  Is it in addition to the original one?  It would appear so as it has a different reference.

What is WCRA&#039;s thoughts on this?  Are WBC trying to delay or confuse things even more????

Your comments would be welcome so I can put together a coherent objection!!

Many thanks


Karen</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>2nd Planning application PLAN/2009/0878</p>
<p>Any further info on this &#8216;new&#8217; application?  Is it in addition to the original one?  It would appear so as it has a different reference.</p>
<p>What is WCRA&#8217;s thoughts on this?  Are WBC trying to delay or confuse things even more????</p>
<p>Your comments would be welcome so I can put together a coherent objection!!</p>
<p>Many thanks</p>
<p>Karen</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Deadline for Objections to Access Application No. 2 by Karen Chilvers</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/09/22/deadline-for-objections-to-access-application-no-2/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Karen Chilvers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:14:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/09/22/deadline-for-objections-to-access-application-no-2/#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Here is my email just sent to WBC as my objection!


===========================================================

Dear Ms Dunk

I am writing with regard to the above re-application for access to the Moor Lane site.  Having attended the first Planning Committee meeting back in July when the original application was rejected, I am somewhat confused as to how this new application has taken any of the issues into consideration.  The main issues remain as follows:

•	Still only ONE main access to the site via Balfour Avenue, a residential road which already services an increased number of properties since the development of Meadow View last year.  There seems to me to be issues of safety only having one route in and out of a site which will potentially contain well over 400 houses (including existing properties in the Balfour Ave area).  What would happen if there were a serious accident at the Westfield Road/Balfour Avenue junction which means that the exit is blocked.  Not only would residents be unable to get out, surely the emergency services would not be able to get in!  There seems little point having an alternative emergency access point at Newlands Avenue when this would inaccessible in the event of such an incident at the Westfield Road junction!!!
•	It would surely make sense to have an alternative access point into the Moor Lane site.  This would spread the concentration of traffic  between 2 access roads.  I can only imagine the bottle neck in the mornings to get out onto Westfield Road.  I assume that this would mean having to put in traffic lights or a mini-roundabout, which in itself would be a cost to the Council.  Also this would not be a great location for such a measure based on the recently installed pedestrian crossing at The Cricketers.
•	I understand the new application proposes the widening of the top end of Balfour Avenue with the loss of the trees lining this part of the road.  In my opinion, this would significantly impact the overall appearance and ambience of the Balfour estate.  As an extension of the common, Balfour Avenue’s trees are an asset which should be retained to enhance the area.
•	I see that a traffic survey has been done but understand that this was conducted in the school summer holidays, which, obviously does not provide typical data for the majority of the year.  
•	There is still no concrete detail on the actual number of properties to be developed on the Moor Lane site – one of the problems with the original application and one of the arguments presented at Committee when it was ultimately rejected.  This needs to be addressed in considering this new application for access.

On a separate issue to this application, has there been any consideration made to local amenities and their ability to cope with an increase in the number of properties in the area – particularly schools, both primary and secondary?  I would assume this will be reviewed when the actual site application is proposed.

I urge Woking Borough Council to see sense and review this application and revise it to include a separate access point from Balfour Avenue, for safety and common sense reasons.  I appreciate the cost is a consideration but the opinions and thoughts of the local community should be as valuable as saving money.

Yours sincerely



Mrs Karen Chilvers
Of Balfour Avenue</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is my email just sent to WBC as my objection!</p>
<p>===========================================================</p>
<p>Dear Ms Dunk</p>
<p>I am writing with regard to the above re-application for access to the Moor Lane site.  Having attended the first Planning Committee meeting back in July when the original application was rejected, I am somewhat confused as to how this new application has taken any of the issues into consideration.  The main issues remain as follows:</p>
<p>•	Still only ONE main access to the site via Balfour Avenue, a residential road which already services an increased number of properties since the development of Meadow View last year.  There seems to me to be issues of safety only having one route in and out of a site which will potentially contain well over 400 houses (including existing properties in the Balfour Ave area).  What would happen if there were a serious accident at the Westfield Road/Balfour Avenue junction which means that the exit is blocked.  Not only would residents be unable to get out, surely the emergency services would not be able to get in!  There seems little point having an alternative emergency access point at Newlands Avenue when this would inaccessible in the event of such an incident at the Westfield Road junction!!!<br />
•	It would surely make sense to have an alternative access point into the Moor Lane site.  This would spread the concentration of traffic  between 2 access roads.  I can only imagine the bottle neck in the mornings to get out onto Westfield Road.  I assume that this would mean having to put in traffic lights or a mini-roundabout, which in itself would be a cost to the Council.  Also this would not be a great location for such a measure based on the recently installed pedestrian crossing at The Cricketers.<br />
•	I understand the new application proposes the widening of the top end of Balfour Avenue with the loss of the trees lining this part of the road.  In my opinion, this would significantly impact the overall appearance and ambience of the Balfour estate.  As an extension of the common, Balfour Avenue’s trees are an asset which should be retained to enhance the area.<br />
•	I see that a traffic survey has been done but understand that this was conducted in the school summer holidays, which, obviously does not provide typical data for the majority of the year.<br />
•	There is still no concrete detail on the actual number of properties to be developed on the Moor Lane site – one of the problems with the original application and one of the arguments presented at Committee when it was ultimately rejected.  This needs to be addressed in considering this new application for access.</p>
<p>On a separate issue to this application, has there been any consideration made to local amenities and their ability to cope with an increase in the number of properties in the area – particularly schools, both primary and secondary?  I would assume this will be reviewed when the actual site application is proposed.</p>
<p>I urge Woking Borough Council to see sense and review this application and revise it to include a separate access point from Balfour Avenue, for safety and common sense reasons.  I appreciate the cost is a consideration but the opinions and thoughts of the local community should be as valuable as saving money.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely</p>
<p>Mrs Karen Chilvers<br />
Of Balfour Avenue</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The new access application by Colin Weeks</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/09/16/the-new-access-application/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Colin Weeks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.westfieldcommon.org/?p=807#comment-39</guid>
		<description>A couple of key facts from the Report:

TRAFFIC FLOWS PRESENTED IN REPORT EQUIVALENT TO ONE LANE OF WESTFIELD ROAD IN THE RUSH HOUR - ie on average one vehicle every six seconds!

TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TO BE REMOVED FROM BALFOUR AVENUE WHICH ACCORDING TO THE PROJECT TEAM IS BEING WIDENED BECAUSE RESIDENTS SAID THEY WANTED THIS!!

Thought you may be interested in the following Traffic Statistics gleaned from Attacments 5 of the Transport Assesment:

Current Transport Flows along Westfield Road AM/PM Peak - North - 623/561; South 502/664
 
Proposed Flows Balfour Ave - 2014 Peak  - AM/PM - 461/524 - A road already subject to Traffic Calming measures 
 
ie the Volume of Traffic being sent down Balfour Avenue will be the same as the Peak Traffic Flow - albeit in one direction - along Westfield Road.

THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!

FYI Actual Peak Traffic Flows down Balfour Ave on the morning of Sept 15 were in fact 5% higher between 0745 and 0845 than those indicated between 0800 to 0900 in the report</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple of key facts from the Report:</p>
<p>TRAFFIC FLOWS PRESENTED IN REPORT EQUIVALENT TO ONE LANE OF WESTFIELD ROAD IN THE RUSH HOUR &#8211; ie on average one vehicle every six seconds!</p>
<p>TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TO BE REMOVED FROM BALFOUR AVENUE WHICH ACCORDING TO THE PROJECT TEAM IS BEING WIDENED BECAUSE RESIDENTS SAID THEY WANTED THIS!!</p>
<p>Thought you may be interested in the following Traffic Statistics gleaned from Attacments 5 of the Transport Assesment:</p>
<p>Current Transport Flows along Westfield Road AM/PM Peak &#8211; North &#8211; 623/561; South 502/664</p>
<p>Proposed Flows Balfour Ave &#8211; 2014 Peak  &#8211; AM/PM &#8211; 461/524 &#8211; A road already subject to Traffic Calming measures </p>
<p>ie the Volume of Traffic being sent down Balfour Avenue will be the same as the Peak Traffic Flow &#8211; albeit in one direction &#8211; along Westfield Road.</p>
<p>THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!</p>
<p>FYI Actual Peak Traffic Flows down Balfour Ave on the morning of Sept 15 were in fact 5% higher between 0745 and 0845 than those indicated between 0800 to 0900 in the report</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Review of the bidder presentations &#8211; Disappointment by lisa land</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/09/19/review-of-the-bidder-presentations-disappointment/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>lisa land</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.westfieldcommon.org/?p=815#comment-38</guid>
		<description>We agree. Poor show yet again from WBC.

J &amp; L Land</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We agree. Poor show yet again from WBC.</p>
<p>J &#038; L Land</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WBC Event &#8211; Bidder Presentation Day &#8211; 19th Sep 2009 by lisa land</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/09/09/bidder-presentation-day-19th-sep-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>lisa land</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?p=744#comment-37</guid>
		<description>Great new website

I like the photo of the Common

Well done Bill</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great new website</p>
<p>I like the photo of the Common</p>
<p>Well done Bill</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WBC Planning Committee &#8211; Official Minutes by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/07/22/wbc-planning-committee-official-minutes/comment-page-1/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?p=710#comment-36</guid>
		<description>Comment away people!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Comment away people!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The &#8216;Moor Lane&#8217; Development by colin weeks</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/local-campaigns/moor-lane/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>colin weeks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:31:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?page_id=430#comment-33</guid>
		<description>In case you havn&#039;t seen it, both &quot;The Woking Magazine - Autumn2009 Edition&quot; and Priority Homes web site are indicating:

Latest news
A date for your diaries

The Bidders will be displaying their revised proposals for the Priority Homes Project of 470 homes at a site off Moor Lane at a Public Workshop on Saturday 19th September 2009 between 11am and 4pm at Moorcroft Centre for the Community.

Further details can be obtained by telephoning 01483 755855</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In case you havn&#8217;t seen it, both &#8220;The Woking Magazine &#8211; Autumn2009 Edition&#8221; and Priority Homes web site are indicating:</p>
<p>Latest news<br />
A date for your diaries</p>
<p>The Bidders will be displaying their revised proposals for the Priority Homes Project of 470 homes at a site off Moor Lane at a Public Workshop on Saturday 19th September 2009 between 11am and 4pm at Moorcroft Centre for the Community.</p>
<p>Further details can be obtained by telephoning 01483 755855</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Experimenting with New Theme by Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/07/08/experimenting-with-new-theme/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?p=639#comment-34</guid>
		<description>A well laid out and easy to navigate site.
Well done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A well laid out and easy to navigate site.<br />
Well done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Report issues by Nicola Cull</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicola Cull</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:19:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?page_id=57#comment-28</guid>
		<description>Tuesday 28 July - there were Highway Agency people surveying the traffic at the corner of Balfour Avenue. Its crazy that they do this in the first week of the school holidays - the traffic is nowhere near as busy as normal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tuesday 28 July &#8211; there were Highway Agency people surveying the traffic at the corner of Balfour Avenue. Its crazy that they do this in the first week of the school holidays &#8211; the traffic is nowhere near as busy as normal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Experimenting with New Theme by Ida Harvey</title>
		<link>http://www.westfieldcommon.org/2009/07/08/experimenting-with-new-theme/comment-page-1/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Ida Harvey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 00:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westfieldcommon.wordpress.com/?p=639#comment-21</guid>
		<description>I find this washed-out print very difficult to read.  What is wrong with a decent heavy black print  ?  The lime green background is startling and draws your attention to it instead of to the words.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find this washed-out print very difficult to read.  What is wrong with a decent heavy black print  ?  The lime green background is startling and draws your attention to it instead of to the words.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
