|
|
 richard.garvie |
| November 20, 2011, 11:24am |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
Does anyone know what happened to the cracks survey in Victoria Park? Surely if something was found, the council would have slapped in a bill for compensation by now? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Greenham Common |
| November 20, 2011, 11:27am |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender:  Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
It seems they are hopping it will go away. Very suspicious. |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
| November 20, 2011, 11:28am |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
It's very odd. How much did the study cost in the end? |
|
|
|
|
|
| MontyP |
| November 20, 2011, 12:12pm |
|
Posts: 42
Posts Per Day: 0.20
|
They couldn't comment against SLI and their chums could they? |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| blackdog |
| November 20, 2011, 2:41pm |
|
Posts: 1,321
Posts Per Day: 1.20
|
They couldn't comment against SLI and their chums could they?
? They were pretty outspoken about SLI until they got the initial feeback on the survey. Given that everyone who knows has stopped talking about it, the only logical conclusion we can make is that the survey has not provided sufficient evidence to support NTC's claim against SLI. |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
| November 20, 2011, 3:50pm |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
We shall see. Either way, let's see the results already. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
| November 20, 2011, 5:01pm |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.81
|
? They were pretty outspoken about SLI until they got the initial feeback on the survey. Given that everyone who knows has stopped talking about it, the only logical conclusion we can make is that the survey has not provided sufficient evidence to support NTC's claim against SLI.
That's a bit off, being outspoken about SLI, after all they have done for Newbury. They gave us a new shopping center you know. I would have thought they would toe the WBC line and fall over backwards to help such a wonderful organisation? They gave us a new shopping centre you know. Just because the taxpayer has paid for the survey it doesn't mean that it has to be published you know? They gave us a new shopping centre you know. What does it matter abourta bit of compensation anyway. Taxpayers money will pay for the repairs. They gave us a new shopping centre you know. Oh that was very kind of them to give you a new shopping center. Did you not have to pay anything for it then. No according to the local councils. Only half of Newbury was given to them to build it on, they have shares in all the car park takings for the next five thousand years or something minor like that and they closed one of the only bridges over the Kennet and we are still trying to find out what else but the council only insist on saying... They gave us a new shopping center you know!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
| November 20, 2011, 5:03pm |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.81
|
We shall see. Either way, let's see the results already.
Probably already redacted before it goes into storage for the next 100 years.  |
|
|
|
|
|
| Greenham Common |
| November 20, 2011, 9:15pm |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender: Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
My view is that it is more likely due to Parkway than not if we hear nothing. |
|
|
|
|
|
| user23.3 |
| November 20, 2011, 9:23pm |
|
Posts: 1,664
Posts Per Day: 1.51
|
My view is that it is more likely due to Parkway than not if we hear nothing.
But then wouldn't NTC have a case against SLI? |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Greenham Common |
| November 20, 2011, 9:25pm |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender: Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
No, because they endorsed the development. They would culpable, |
|
|
|
|
|
| user23.3 |
| November 20, 2011, 9:39pm |
|
Posts: 1,664
Posts Per Day: 1.51
|
No, because they endorsed the development. They would culpable,
Did they? I would have thought the longer we hear nothing, the more likely the cause of problem was the driest Spring for 80 years. |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| blackdog |
| November 20, 2011, 9:59pm |
|
Posts: 1,321
Posts Per Day: 1.20
|
No, because they endorsed the development. They would culpable,
No they wouldn't - they didn't endorse the damage to the bowling green, paths etc. Just because you support a building application (say for a neighbour's extension) it doesn't mean you are endorsing the methodology used by his builder to erect it - if that methodology caused damage to your property your neighbour and his builder would be liable. If the Parkway crane had collapsed over the road and into the park (instead of landing on SLU property) the councils (WBC and NTC) could have expected SLI to sort out any damage. The problem is that the damage is not so self-evidently caused by Costain's activities - it is debatable whether it was the pumping or the weather that caused the damage (you can't argue about a tower crane lying across a road). In reality it was probably a combination of the two - if it had rained more or if the pumping had not been going on the damage may well not have happened. |
|
|
|
|
|
| MontyP |
| November 20, 2011, 10:59pm |
|
Posts: 42
Posts Per Day: 0.20
|
Did they?
I would have thought the longer we hear nothing, the more likely the cause of problem was the driest Spring for 80 years.
More likely a cover up - of course a number of councillors are also on WBC. Did the park get cracks like that 80 or so years ago? I am sure it would have been in the NWN, and if WBC/SLI thought it to be the case would have found the evidence! |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Brewmaster |
| November 21, 2011, 8:04am |
|
Posts: 159
Posts Per Day: 0.15
|
It seems they are hopping it will go away.
Presumably because they don't have a leg to stand on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
