I had not read a French book for quite a while and found it relatively easy. I have also not read any fictions for a while as I normally prefer to read self-development books and autobiographies. I read this very quickly in fact as I started while waiting for the New Year and finished this morning while waiting for my mother in law to cook us breakfast. The house was quiet and I enjoyed my time in Plassans (the place where the action took place in the book) although events there are quite troubling.

This week I also read two more books and even started a forth one. The second book was Making This Year Your Best Year Ever!: Personal Goal Setting Ideas And Strategies To Get You Motivated To Make Positive Change In Your Life. I bought this as I could not find another book I read a few years ago and wanted to refresh my memory. This was not the book I could not find and this one was particularly rubbish.

The third book I read was yet another terrible book. All I Want for Christmas is You by Lisa Mondello. This book is predictable from the first page.  The story was poor and badly written.

Since starting my own company in 2009, I have not read as many books as I used to and I seem to miss the daily escape that it gave me. Asobi has taken over my life and I feel that it is time for me to regain some “Me” time. The “Me” time at the moment seems to be spent in front of the box, which clearly is not quite as fulfilling.

I nearly took up the 52 books in 52 weeks challenge for 2011 but thought that I needed to give Asobi my totally undivided attention for one more year. This has definitely born some fruits as in this recession, we managed to increase turnover by 37%.

Googling 52 books in 52 weeks yielded this site This is as good as any to ensure that the challenge is taken and the shame of publicly missing one week will make procrastination go away.

The rules are extremely simple:

1. The week starts on Sunday
2. You have to read one book (at least) every week
3. Re-reads are OK but the book must have been read before 2011

I will be posting my reads on this site too. Are you also going to take up the challenge?

My first comment was asking the question as of why the government chose Mary Portas, a TV celebrity who, although she has worked for high street names, has never owned her own shop. Is the government once again playing the celebrity card? After all it makes good publicity to mention that a high profile TV personality is looking into a high profile issue. Personally I would have preferred a real life entrepreneur. Don’t take me wrong, I do enjoy watching Mary dolling out her advice to lost shop owners.

A few suggestions Mary made really jumped at me immediately. She suggested that the government taxed out of town shopping centres car park. I think not! You know that the retailers will not pay for this and car parks will then become pay on exit. I feel that car owners are already taxed enough. The other suggestion was the relaxation of delivery time. The small shops will not be equipped to take deliveries in the middle of night, who will take advantage but yet again my good friends the supermarkets…

I agree with Mary that markets will bring life, a sense of community and variety back to the high street. A national market day would be good. Market traders have had it tough in the past few years. In this time of unemployment creating more market will only help with creating more employment. I also feel that becoming a market trader gives an insight to any budding retailer in the difficulties of trading on the high street without too much financial risk.

There is already a movement called Independents day that promotes the idea that everybody should buy at least one thing from an independent retailer on July 4^th every year. Why not tag on this one?

Mary also mentions rents and rates as a massive issue as of why shops are still empty. Rents are in the hands of private landlord so a little difficult for the government to do anything. My suggestion there is to treble the rates on empty shops, this would help landlords making the right decision on their next tenant… As for rates, they are in the hand of the government who sets them only upwards every year. I bet you that nothing will change there!

Town Teams already exist in most towns so not quite sure what this suggestion would change. In my opinion Town teams have very little power on shop owners and landlords. I am yet to be convinced of their efficacy.

Another suggestion was to control the spread of betting shops. How about stopping the spread of charity shops, pound shops, phone shops and Starbucks clones? That would certainly help too. Charity shops get rates relief so why not give rates relief to new retailers for a number of years to help them getting set up. This would bring variety to the high street.

The good news is that Mary’s report has already created one job as today the government announced that a Minister of the high street will be appointed…

Interestingly during the meeting, I discovered that Burnham Parish council is only concerned with 8% of the development land; the rest (92%) is on Taplow Parish. I believe that there are no Taplow councillors on the planning committee.

As part of the development, Land Securities (LS)will pay for various infrastructure developments in the local area. Sainsbury’s for example paid for the roundabout on the A4. They also paid for a clock tower for the old Burnham Park Hall. You all saw the state of the roundabout until Sherriff Mountford eventually paid for the roundabout to be replanted and maintained.

The clock tower is now in storage as the hall was demolished.

Burnham High Street traders have decided not to fight the proposal. I guess the offer from LS to pay South Bucks District Council for 5 years of 30 minutes free car park has something to do with it.

In comparison, Maidenhead Chamber of commerce sees this development very much as a threat and are willing to put their money where their mouth is by giving a donation to our fighting fund.

We have also secured funds from a Burnham High street trader who feels that this development will not serve the local community.

LS is also very keen to engage the local community and to pay for some local developments. LS mentioned Taplow Station, street lighting, etc… As far as I know the only people talking to LS about this at the moment are ThinkBurnham and Burnham Street Traders association. When you think that only 8% of the land from the project is under Burnham, those guys will do rather well out of the development. I also find it difficult to understand why it would be beneficial to the local community for Taplow Station to be revamped. Surely, as a commercial enterprise, Network Rail should be doing this.

In the meantime, it is important for you to write about your opposition to the plans to the council. At the public meeting we did say that we would prepare a letter so you could copy it and send it to the council. We have now taken advice on this and it seems that if we all send the same letter, this will be considered as one objection. It is therefore important that you send individual letters or file your objections. You can do so online, by email planning@southbucks.gov.uk or by writing to: The address to write to is:

Planning

South Bucks District Council

Capswood

Oxford Road

Denham

UB9 4LH

The planning application reference number is: 11/01625/FUL

It is very important that you contact the Council to object as without objections, it is possible for the application to be passed without going to committee. i.e no public hearing

Simply writing that you do not want Tesco there will not be good enough. Please use traffic, loss of high skilled jobs, environment, over development, etc… as your reason for objecting but please object! The more objections the better.

Please also make sure you talk to your local councillor, after all he is the elected official in your area that is supposed to represent your views.

We need £5,000, the funds that are to employ a professional town planner to review the plans and give us advice on how we can fight the application. If you are willing to contribute any amounts to the fund, please contact me.

The money will be used strictly to buy legal advice, public meeting expenses and printing. The accounts will be audited by an independent third party so rest assured that the money will be put to good use. At the end of the project, if any money if left, the balance will be given to Thames Valley Adventure Playground.

Yes both companies offer help but not free help. Both cost around £5 per week to join. When you look at the demographics of the people in need of help with weight loss, a great majority are in the lower income bracket. Those people are surely not able to pay £5 per week to be members of slimming clubs.  Mind you, it seems that people on low income are able to afford Sky TV if you go by the number of Sky dishes on council properties. It also seems that the same demographics are able to afford smoking cigarettes at well over £6 per packet. Almost 20 years ago, I smoked 20 Marlborough per day; at today’s price it would cost me almost £2,500 per year. I certainly could not afford this today.

The NHS are offering free NHS help on stopping smoking, why aren’t they doing the same on weight loss? I have been trying to make an appointment with my GP about weight loss. The earliest appointment I can get is just over one month from today… This is not an urgent appointment but a routine one. Something is surely wrong.

Overweight people will know that motivation to lose weight very often comes after a bad experience. Would you really wait for one month after a bad experience to make a life changing decision?

If the government was serious about helping people lose weight shouldn’t they either have slimming club membership on prescription or have their own weight loss clubs?

Yes, the Centre needs a face lift. Call me cynical but is it possible that Land Securities let the site run down so they could say that it needed to be demolished to be replaced by something more modern?

Quite a lot of people came to the exhibition; I am pleased to say that a great majority are against the plan. Most people agree that the centre needs a facelift but that the last thing we need here is another food shop when we are in such proximity of Sainsbury. Incidentally, Sainsbury has obtained planning permission to extend the shop in Taplow upwards.

Tesco did wheel out a couple of people at the public exhibition. Although I was impressed by the guys of Land Security, I was a lot less impressed by the Tesco lady. When pressed for questions on how many lorries would be coming to the site and when, she was unable to answer. On many other questions, she was not able to answer and told people to go on the Tesco website.  A couple of us were standing outside and she came out to speak to us. She asked why I was against Tesco and what my interest was. When I replied that I was a local resident, she called ma a NIMBY. The next comment left me bewildered. She asked me if I would feel the same way if it was a Carrefour coming here. For those who do not know, Carrefour is the French equivalent to Tesco. Yes, I am French and this was a cheap shot. Two unnecessary comments from somebody that is obviously under qualified to represent such a large company. She also said that Land Securities were entitled to a return on their investment but that currently a great majority of the tenants in the Bishop Centre were not paying rent. Several of the tenants I spoke to vehemently deny this.

The Tesco Lady, I do have her name but will not publish it here, said that the Tesco lawyers were not involved and would not be involved in the planning application. The planning application is the work of Land Securities. She said that Land Securities approached Tesco to come here as they already had planning permission for a 30,000sqft food shop at the Bishop Centre. It seems that planning was granted in 2009. I have lived in Hag Hill Rise since 2002 and I really do not remember having been consulted on this huge change. Have you?

The actual plan for the Tesco store exhibited at the Bishop Centre this week is for a 55,000 sqft store, not 30,000. There will be 30,000 sqft of food; the balance will be non-food, changing rooms, etc… How long will it take Tesco to apply to change the 25,000 sqft into a further trading area? My guess is a few months… In the same way Tesco asked and obtained extended licensing hours for one of their Burnham stores. The tactic is simple, get the foot in the door and then creep up in size and hours. If the local authorities refuse, go to appeal. Make sure you employ a really expensive barrister so if the local authority loses, they have to pay for costs. And at the moment most local authorities do not have the money or appetite for those fights. A preserved tree in your way? Simple chopped it down during a long holiday, Christmas break for example, when most local authorities are not working. Once the deed is done, pay the fine…

It will not only affect Hag Hill but all the surrounding areas, Burnham, Taplow village, Dorney, Maidenhead and of course the Bath Road.

The SGT garage is due to be demolished and replaced by 65 flats. Can you imagine Institute road with a block of flats with not enough parking space? Why do planners let developers build flats with only one car space per flat? Most families have at least two cars.

Taplow Mill is to be developed with 300 houses. The only way out of this proposed development is the Bath Road just before Maidenhead bridge. This will surely require a new junction with traffic lights. We therefore will have traffic lights and extra lanes just before the bridge. The bridge can’t be touched as it is listed. We will have other traffic lights for the new entrance to the Bishop Centre scheme and again extra lanes but will have to go back to two lanes to go under the railway bridge before the Harvester.

The Wyeth site in Huntercombe lane is now closed and is about to become a mixed residential and industrial estate, both obviously coming out on the A4. Interestingly the site is on the territory of two different local authorities. Are they going to work together to make sure that the sites are not over built?

Are those the only local developments that will impact the A4? Probably not….

This is taken directly from Indigo’s website:

“Gaining planning committee approval is our business.

Indigo Public Affairs’ community consultation and political communications advice helps our clients achieve planning consent.

We have an outstanding track record. We work in many sectors, including housing, commercial, retail, energy and waste.

Many of our team are politicians themselves – including many who have been on their own planning committee.”

Those guys are paid to lobby local politicians; we need to do our very own lobbying.

I published earlier a list of local councillors and councillors on the planning committee. If you know any of those people, please get in touch with them to let them know of your feeling for the proposed scheme.

Does anybody know a local celebrity who could be interested in championing our cause?

We have a real fight on our hands; please do not let apathy win this for Tesco. The more noise we make the more chance we will get.

Taplow Councillor:

George Sandy (also on the planning committee)

The Porches
High Street
Taplow
Bucks
SL6 0EX

Phone:  01628 604229

Email:  cllr.george.sandy@southbucks.gov.uk

Burnham Lent Rise Councillors:

Nick Naylor

Rose Hill House
Rose Hill
Burnham
Bucks
SL1 8NN

Mobile:  07986 023722

Email:  cllr.nick.naylor@southbucks.gov.uk

David Pepler

54 Hag Hill Rise
Taplow
Maidenhead
Berks
SL6 0LT

Phone:  01628 663593

Email:  cllr.david.pepler@southbucks.gov.uk

Jane Wallis

Dawes East House
28 High Street
Burnham
Bucks
SL1 7JH

Phone:  01628664336

Email:  cllr.jane.wallis@southbucks.gov.uk

South Bucks Planning Committee members:

Jacquetta Lowen Cooper (Chairman of the planning committee)

Childs Play,
35 Orchard Road
Seer Green
Beaconsfield, Bucks
HP9 2XU

Phone:  01494 676686

Email:  cllr.jacquetta.lowen-cooper@southbucks.gov.uk

Anita Cranmer

Slade Farm House
Village Lane
Hedgerley
Bucks
SL2 3XD

Phone:  01753 648724

Email:  cllr.anita.cranmer@southbucks.gov.uk

Ralph Bagge

Wavertree House
Duffield Park
Stoke Poges
Bucks
SL2 4HY

Phone:  01753 693600

Email:  cllr.ralph.bagge@southbucks.gov.uk

Dev Dillon

17 Long Close
Farnham Common
Bucks
SL2 3EJ

Phone:  01753 647658

Email:  cllr.dev.dhillon@southbucks.gov.uk

Lin Hazzell

42 Oxford Avenue
Burnham
Slough
SL1 8HR

Phone:  01628 661628

Email:  cllr.lin.hazell@southbucks.gov.uk

Deidre Holloway

Old Tile House
2 Layters Way
Gerrards Cross
Bucks
SL9 7QY

Phone:  01753 883765

Fax:  01753 893536

Email:  cllr.deirdre.holloway@southbucks.gov.uk

Wendy Matthews

23 Old Slade Lane
Richings Park
Iver
Bucks
SL0 9DY

Phone:  01753 652187

Email:  cllr.wendy.matthews@southbucks.gov.uk

Janet Simmonds

5 Stratton Road,
Beaconsfield
Bucks
HP9 1HR

Phone:  01494 673404

Email:  cllr.janet.simmonds@southbucks.gov.uk

The Earl of Stockton

The Priory
Old Mill Road
Denham Village
Bucks
UB9 5AS

Phone:  01895 834 181

Email:  Cllr.TheEarlof.Stockton@southbucks.gov.uk

Julian Wlison

36 Thornbridge Road
Iver Heath
Bucks
SL0 0QD

Phone:  08445434667

Fax:  08451265583

Email:  cllr.julian.wilson@southbucks.gov.uk

Jennifer Woolveridge

Southview Lodge
Hedgerley Lane
Gerrards Cross
Bucks,
SL9 8SX

Phone:  01753 885646

Email:  cllr.jennifer.woolveridge@southbucks.gov.uk

My first objection is the traffic that this will create in this already difficult location. We all know the issues created on the A4 by the car boot sale on Sundays in the summer.

It seems that Land Securities have already obtained planning permission for a food store on the site. So unfortunately this one is going to be difficult to fight. I really cannot understand why South Bucks gave this permission as there is already a Sainsbury’s 200 meters away. Sainsbury’s apparently has already got planning permission to increase in size by going up one floor. I believe this will be the third extension that they have obtained since it opened a few years ago…

The planned Tesco is apparently only a small one so not similar to the Slough monstrosity but then how long will it be for them to apply for planning permission to increase in size once they are here? Surely if Land Securities have difficulties renting the proposed units in the new Bishop Centre, Tesco will apply to increase in size. Once they are here, we will not be able to consistently badger the planning committed in refusing extensions and will end up with another huge shop on our doorstep.

It also seems that Land Securities have got planning permission to use the old petrol station forecourt entrance next to the Traffic Police Station as the main entrance to the site. Surely there is not enough space there to have two lanes and a filter lane to make this happen without creating yet another bottle neck on the A4, unless of course the A4 is enlarged… Can you imagine the A4 everyday like a car boot Sunday? Enlarging the A4 from the Sainsbury’s roundabout to the new site entrance would be a mistake as the road will have to go back to a two way road at both the A4 railway bridge and Maidenhead Bridge.

A new service entrance will be created in Hitcham Road just before the railway bridge. For those who know the area, the railway bridge in Hitcham Road will not allow artic lorries through so the only way they will be able to come is from the A4, turning in Hitcham Road. The junction between Hitcham Way, Hag Hill Lane and the A4 is already a nightmare in the morning so I let you imagine the result of having artic lorries turning in there as well. Mind you I guess they could always deliver at night but for some reason I do not think that the residents in Hag Hill Rise with houses backing on Hitcham Road being too happy with this…

On the corner of Hitcham Road and Hag Hill Lane, there is a small kids play area. Incidentally, play area that South Bucks Council has left in disrepair for years. Would you let your kids play in this area in the middle of all this traffic? So this play area is now likely to disappear. Where will the kids play now? In the street? With the increased traffic? An accident waiting to happen.

The new service entrance in Hitcham Road will also service the new service road that will come out in Station Road just before the railway bridge. Again the bridge height will not allow lorries to go through so the only way out will be the A4. The lights on this junction are controlled by the police station to ensure that they can go out quickly in case of an emergency on the A4. This narrow road will not be able to sustain extra traffic.

As the A4 is going to be clogged up, there will be a short cut to get on the site from Hag Hill Lane, via Taplow village and Lent rise road. How is Lent Rise Road going to cope with further traffic? Institute Road is already a nightmare now that commuters use it to park during the day. It has become a one way road, which is now putting pressure on Boundary and Station Road. The number of car space planned on the site is not sufficient and therefore customers will seek to park in Hag Hill Lane and Hag Hill Rise. Hag Hill rise parking situation is already critical with people having to park half on pavement already.

This is my first appraisal of the scheme on the impact on traffic.

I plan to go there again today to have another look and chat about the impact to businesses.