Surbiton Filter Beds plans look dead in the water

By Surb_People | Friday, January 13, 2012, 14:07

The Surbiton Filter Beds site plans took a battering at a stormy council meeting last night. A large turnout of interested Surbiton residents ensured that the detailed plans were fully discussed at the Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee.

The Surbiton Filter Beds site on Portsmouth Road

During the meeting local residents were allowed to put their views across, most of which had already been included in the committee report. The attacks by the groups and individuals were well made, concentrating on: an expected increase in river and road traffic, damage to the environment, lack of affordable housing, out of keeping with the surrounding area, overdevelopment of the area and a wish that the site should be preserved due to its historical importance.

There has been some support for the application with Surbiton residents arguing that the proposal would improve views of the river from Portsmouth Road and would aesthetically improve and regenerate the appearance of the derelict and overgrown site. They would welcome the proposed riverside walkway, public open space around the restaurant, community centre and nature reserve. The site has been derelict since 1992 when it was de-commissioned by Thames Water.

Councillors Mike Burden (Conservative), Liz Green (Lib Dem) and Mary Heathcote (Lib Dem) all spoke against the application. Although the Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee does not make the final decision, it is likely to influence the stance of the decision making Development Control Committee who do. Three members of the DC were in attendance during the meeting (Cllrs Richard Hudson (C), Frances Moseley (LD) and Malcolm Self (LD). As members of the Development Control Committee, they were not allowed to get involved in the discussion, but unusually they stayed seated during the Surbiton meeting, when they would usually be expected to leave the room.

Our reading of the local politics is that up until now, both the Lib Dems and Conservatives have been waiting to see how popular the plans are. Unusually neither party has really gone out of the way to make this a big issue, with even the MP being quiet. However, the good organisation of those who oppose any development on the site has now been noticed by councillors. It now seems that both sets of councillors have made their mind up and are likely to oppose the application on political grounds. We expect this application to get refused when it comes before the decision making Development Control Committee on the 25th January.

The proposals would for the Filter Beds site in Portsmouth Road are for 64 residential homes on a floating pontoon, a marina & lock gate, restaurant, publically accessible nature reserve, riverside walk, heritage & education centre, flood storage and a river taxi stop.

The application will be commented on by Kingston Neighbourhood Committee before the final decision is made by Kingston Council's Development Control Committee. We will bring you a full report once the final decision has been made.

Re-post Write a story

Ads by Google

Comments

Wetlands, (in Barnes) is a nature reserve converted from reservoir beds and run by the WWF, although they charge a whopping £10.99 to access the site...

http://tinyurl.com/64m9q9w

By burbiton at 15:02 on 24/01/12
Report
The developers could really get the people of Surbiton onside and bring great benefit to them by funding a pedestrian bridge across the river from the site. Thus opening up the under used Home Park to Surbiton (not to mention Hampton Court Gardens and Bushy Park beyond).

By FilterBedsBridge at 21:31 on 21/01/12
Report
I also think it's a shame the idea was dismissed outright.

LoveSurbiton,

With regards to access to the riverside; it could easily be made a condition of any approval, that the developer/management company are required to grant access to the public during an agreed times. This would be a legal requirement and there would be no question of not granting access.

I don't buy the wildlife argument at all no matter how eloquently the experts have spoken. The site has been disused for a long period of time and as a result some wildlife has moved in. Does this mean we need to live with this derelict eyesore for eternity? Wildlife experts by their nature will usually give preference to the concerns of wildlife over human life and other practical concerns.

With regards to this mysterious Plan B which is "for the community" - how exactly is this going to be funded? You need a developer to put in private money and of course that developer is only going to do so if they make a profit (which you refer to as "lining their pockets").

My opinion is that the development is quite bold but would definitely improve the area and be a positive for Surbiton. However, the plans needs to be refined further to meet some of the genuine (not the irrational) concerns of the community.

In order to gain support for their plans and silence the nimbys, the developers should consider giving something substantial back to the community. My personal suggestion would be for the plans to incorporate the building of a footbridge across the Thames but that's a whole other discussion!

By surbitonion at 13:12 on 19/01/12
Report
Unfortunately, the developer's plans won't give access to the river....it will all be controlled by a management company. In a meeting last night, the developer said that the opening hours of the so-called public access would be decided by the site's management company......they're pulling the wool over our eyes. Those houses will be hundreds of thousands and oh yes, a nice place to moor my 10m long £100,000 motor boat. Honestly....those people on that management company will not want public access to ruin their privacy.

Local wildlife experts spoke eloquently at last night's Kingston committee meeting and the wildflife value on that site is remarkable. This will all be lost if the proposed development goes ahead. Yes, perhaps people want the site to be used and for greater public access but that won't happen through this development. There was big support last night for a pause for thought and a proper discussion with the community and local interest groups and organisations to develop a Plan B (and there are lots, given the turn out last night!!). Yes, this can be an exemplar site - but not an exemplar site which lines the pockets of Hydro - an exemplar site truly for the community.

By LoveSurbiton at 09:05 on 19/01/12
Report
I think it's a real shame if your article turns out to be correct. The area looks horrible now and this will be a wasted opportunity to get access to the riverside and walk around the marina in the nice weather. Surbiton has got very little riverside with access at the moment. Too many nimbys around.

By SueBradx at 23:44 on 18/01/12
Report