Please feel free to air your views about the development of the Mortlake Brewery site
by posting a comment.
The views expressed here are not necessarily those of MBCG.
Please avoid any comments that might be construed as offensive.
We will edit or remove postings that we deem inappropriate or not relevant.
We will not put e-mail or postal addresses on the website but may hold a digital record of them and use them to contact you.
|| 29 August 2017
We have been taking many riverside walks this year and
paying particular attention to riverside developments
west of Putney. We have noted that a vast majority of
these new or under-construction developments consist
of four floors of housing/apartments. A few are of five floors.
The same applies to the buildings in SW14 (with the exception of Vineyard Heights).
This height of these buildings appears natural to the area and
proportionate to existing buildings (we are not central London after all).
Where there are seven floors, the buildings overwhelm even if there is some
green space around them. We had always believed the proposed new development
in Mortlake to be too densely built, but comparing it with other existing developments
in similar locations brings home the reality of that density and height.
|| 28 August 2017
I am a local resident and use the train station daily for work
and often drive to places in the local area at the weekend. Both
the trains and roads close to the development are already over crowded.
I am very concerned about the pressure the new housing and increased
population will put on these services which are already operating to their maximum.
Aesthetically I would also welcome that the new buildings do not exceed 4 stories
given the location next to the river.
Anything in excess of this would I feel really be detrimental
to the beauty and history of the local area.
|| 19 July 2017
The revised plans have taken a number of residents points onboard for
which they should be commended and there are some positive points such
as provision of green and public spaces, better river access/views,
social provision of GP surgery, facilities for older people including
dementia friendly area etc. The development is still very dense, twice
the density of the original Developers plans, and if such a density is
allowed it must only be allowed if 200 affordable units are included -
such agreements have been reneged on recently elsewhere. The road junction
improvement at Chalkers Corner is to be welcomed but the area will still
be overwhelmed with even more traffic and transport issues - there just
isn't enough room to satisfactorily absorb such a huge increase in population.
And the railway/capacity/crossings issue won't get better either.
|| 18 July 2017
I visited the updated development exhibition on Saturday 15th July.
I was pleased to see how much compromise the developers have put in
to the revised plans, particularly with regard to reduced housing density,
the inclusion of the care village, affordable housing and the siting
of the new secondary school. To my mind, this represents a strong
compromise between developer and community, and that many voices
on the most important issues have been heard, respected and action
has been taken. I am also conscious of the warning given by both
Richmond Council and our local MP that failure to reach a suitable
compromise on this development would involve all further decisions
being taken out of the hands of the local council, community and developer,
and placed under the sole jurisdiction of the Mayor's Office. This is not
sabre-rattling, as precedent of this happening has already been set recently
in Kingston, on a development where no local stakeholders got what they wanted after
a prolonged disagreement between developer and community. Although
I cannot be present at tomorrow night's meeting, I feel it is important
for the more conciliatory voices in the community to be heard, and
for the Love Mortlake campaign to fully appreciate that further objection
to the significant compromises made by the developers may be highly
counter-productive at this stage. Grateful if you could ensure this
viewpoint is publicly recorded, as I get the strong sense that the
Love Mortlake campaign does not always accurately represent the wider views of nearby residents.
|| 26 April 2017
I was very excited about this redevelopment until I realised just how congested it is in the
area, already. This area will not be able to support the traffic generated by a school, gym,
cinema, or lots of new private residents coming into the area. We need more housing for the
local community, green leisure areas, some private luxury flats, a few cafes and restaurants.
Some boutique shops. A community centre. ALL no more than 4 stories high. I also believe the
Upper Richmond Rd is very polluted, and we do not need the same situation around the Brewery
Corner. Traffic is backed up to the Upper Richmond Rd, when the level crossing is down, and
back to the Brewery already many times a day. This means the site cannot support more than
about 200 homes, and the traffic they and the businesses and visitors generate. An underground
car park would be preferable to accommodate all the parking. Making the whole area traffic free,
with entrances to the car park as you enter the area. I think any development of Mortlake High
St into boutique shops and cafes would enhance the area. Trees all along there would be welcome,
making it less drab. If this is to go ahead all building works should be kept
within the perimeter of the site.
|| 20 April 2017
We are local residents (Barnes, SW13) who regularly use Mortlake High Street/Lower Richmond Road
for both business and personal journeys. We are concerned that the density of housing proposed
will put additional intolerable pressure on the local transport infrastructure. Pinch points
at Mortlake High Street/Sheen Lane and Chalkers Corner are greatly compromised as it is by
the volume of rail transit through Mortlake Station and, depending on the time of year, by
local road- or other building works and ongoing problems a little further afield such as
Hammersmith Bridge which have significant knock on effects on the whole area. The proposal
for a secondary school seem not to take account of DFES requirements for outdoor space
for 1200 pupils + staff and from what one can see from the plan, the school site would
also be very cramped in its basic buildings. Including sheltered housing for our growing
elderly population seems a more positive aspect of the development, but it's not
clear whether enough account has been taken of the additional services the elderly
need and whether e.g. the proposed parking capacity has taken account of carers
and medical personnel who would also be commuting onto the site.
|| 10 April 2017
I am deeply shocked to learn that a new secondary school is proposed to be built
on existing playing fields. This will greatly reduce what is already a modest
size of the playing fields area. A primary school could possible cope with reduced
size but not a proposed secondary school whose size requirements for an open space
are far greater.Secondly, a 14 (!) storey building in the middle of the development
will be completely out of keeping with the local architecture.
|| 8 April 2017
I am a Barnes resident and whilst I understand the need for a new school
and for residential housing, the high density, high number and tall buildings
are all out of keeping with the area. There seems to be no open space and
playing fields (isn't this now a mandate?). I am also very concerned with
the traffic flow. Barnes already feels like an "island" with the frequent
closures of Hammersmith bridge, the constant traffic jam that is the South
Circular and the build up of traffic near the Mortlake Brewery (already).
Have the planners considered any of this? What will happen when there are
1,000 schoolchildren trying to get to school and potentially 2,000 residents
trying to get to work? The area will be in even more of a grid lock. Barnes
and Mortlake are small villages within the metropolis and cannot support
this massive development.
|| 6 April 2017
The density of the development and the large school would further exacerbate
the TRANSPORT congestion in the area. The roads are already horribly
overloaded with Chalkers Corner a major problem. This Development
will pull more private cars into the area , the school will too
regardless of what they say about encouraging pupils to walk or cycle,
and additional buses will be needed which will add to the problems.
There are 15 level crossings along the local railway line towards Windsor/Eton
or Reading. Already 10 coach trains have been put on one of those lines which
increase capacity on the trains but also increase the times the barriers are down.
The Developers say they are taking to South West Trains about capacity- but they are
NOT TALKING TO RAILTRACK. The HEATHROW AIRPORT EXPANSION PLAN is talking about
Network Rail putting in an AIRTRACK to run trains along that route to Heathrow.
Either it's all disingenuous or the left hand doesn't know what the right hand
is doing. It won't all fit!
AIR POLLUTION as we know is already a problem in the area and
it's all going to get worse. Legal limits are broken consistently.
Talking of which there is talk of cutting down trees as they are
'diseased'! Really, they don't look it or is someone planning to drive
copper nails into them or similar ?
The physical SCHOOL SIZE looks small for that number of pupils
and teachers, as does the green open field. Originally it was
stated that the field would be a public amenity at times for the area.
Looks like that has been reneged on. The immediate vicinity of Mortlake
will lose a lot of Green Space, a terrible move in my view.
The proposed DENSITY IF DEVELOPMENT is too great and out of all scale
to the rest of Mortlake where housing is typically low rise. To take
blocks to the proposed height is too high and will block light.
We appreciate that Developers want to maximise returns on investment
but the constant degradation of unique opportunity sites like this
just continues to erode the quality of life for the actual people
who LIVE around here. This is a fantastic site on the River,
don't turn it into another Vauxhall. This is a family area and
needs to preserve that quality which the plan exhibited recently does not do.
|| 1 April 2017
The proposed development of the stag brewery is one that does not consider the local residents now,
during or after the development. I agree that there should be a redevelopment of the brewery
however the scale and aspects of the design are not in fitting to this historic area of London.
The fact you will build on green space makes it even worse. Why do you need office spaces
in a residential area? I agree facilities are needed as are houses and flats, but the density
and the scale will impact the residents for 10 years during the phased development and for
decades to come. The bottlenecks on Lower Richmond road and the railway crossing which cause
them should have flagged to the developers the risk of such a large development. Look at
newer buildings in the area near the brewery to see they are much more in keeping with the area.
Why is there a glass tower in the middle, the chimney of the brewery does
not need to be replaced. This development must be reconsidered,
it's time to go back to the drawing board and work on keeping the green space and
fitting must haves in the plan and get office spaces and glass towers out of the plans.
A more car free area would also be welcome by residents. Otherwise this will go from
one the best places in London to live to the worst.
|| 31 March 2017
Developments in the Kew Riverside area are capped by the council at 5 stories,
so why are they considering 7+1=8 for this site? Mortlake Green is extremely popular
and unlikely to cope with the increased footfall from the residents of the new development,
which seems to have no similar large open space.
|| 31 March 2017
||Waldeck Terrace and Waldeck Road Residents
Although there were some positive comments – for example with regard to the proposed avenue of trees
extending Sheen Lane down to the river – a number of concerns and suggestions were raised as follows:
1. It was felt that the proposed development has a very high density and that the
proposals do not adequately replace the green spaces that will be lost as a result of
the building over of the playing field and the road layout changes at Chalkers Corner.
2. The high density is felt to be partly in consequence of the decision to cram
a 1200 pupil secondary school onto the existing playing field. This is a significant
deviation from the original proposal for a much smaller primary school and there
is a view that it is being forced through by the Council when there are better
locations available in the Borough (eg at Barn Elms).
3. The possible new configuration of the school building to
face the road on the far side of the existing playing field was, however
, felt to be an improvement, as was the fact that it would enable
the site to accommodate a full scale football pitch with floodlighting
that would be available for community use. There was some discussion of
adding leisure facilities for pupils on the roof.
4. The proposal for a school and the high density of the residential
development were likely to increase substantially the traffic passing through Mortlake.
There was a general view that the current proposed road layout changes were insufficient
and inadequately modelled. Furthermore the “improvement” of rail services by running more
trains across the level crossing for extended periods was simply going to enhance
the psychological divide with Sheen, further damaging shared community spirit.
5. Concern was expressed at the inadequate provision for parking within
the residential development (600 spaces for c 2000 residents), the school
(barely any and no clear drop off arrangements) and the hotel (nil provision).
Controlled parking would be costly for residents and would not solve the problem:
there is simply insufficient space to accommodate the cars of existing residents as it is.
6. A number of people mentioned how much they valued the diversity and spirit
of the existing Mortlake community, and felt that inadequate attention had been paid
to preserving this. Skepticism was expressed at the failure of the development plans
to split out the affordable housing from the care home accommodation; clarification
was required of what “affordable housing” would mean from the perspective of this development.
7. A cycle lane which was properly separated from the road was suggested for Lower Richmond Road.
8. Concern was expressed that the retail area could, without proper planning, become a soulless mall.
Residents value the diverse nature of the shops in Sheen Lane and felt that efforts should be made to promote
this in the new development. Query whether the Council/ the developers
would be prepared to offer rates or rental holidays or concessions to
smaller retail and food outlets and locally run businesses to avoid the site
from being overrun by chain stores.
|| 28 March 2017
|| Charmian Goldwyn
In some ways the development on the Stag Brewery site is exciting,
it could prove a great asset to the area. In other ways it could be a great blight.
I looked at the 2011 recommendations and they seemed very good,
opening up the river bank, providing 480 housing units and a nursery school.
At that time the site had not been sold. But now the developers from Singapore
are suggesting 1,000 housing units. And a large secondary school to be built obliterating the playing fields.
I am devastated that the original plans have been scrapped to
fulfil a developer’s money grabbing designs.
I fear that there will be high rise buildings, possibly
gated communities bought by Russian oligarchs, as we see all
along the Thames from Putney to Waterloo. Also now the housing regulations have gone, these flats could be cramped, but the developers will reap huge profits. And I don’t see any evidence of ‘Affordable Housing’.
What ever happened to the recommendations in the 2011 plan (1.5) ?
“The council will require a mix of uses throughout the area and particularly
to the east of Ship Lane to create a new Mortlake Village, to generate vibrancy,
local employment, community and leisure opportunities. These should include restaurants,
cafes and small retail spaces, community leisure uses, a museum. Boat houses and
the river-related uses/activities. It should also include lower cost units suitable
for small businesses, creative industries and scientific and technical businesses
including green technology, together with a mixed tenure high quality housing.
The new green space will be the core of the new community and it should provide
the centre piece of a new community hub as well as a high quality open public
realm and landscape with open access to the river as well as maximising the
considerable assets and history of the area. Opportunities should be taken
to enhance biodiversity throughout the site and particularly along the River.”
From the LBRT ‘School Place Planning Strategy 2015’ it seems a new school is needed,
but why destroy the very playing fields that the school could use ? Besides which,
they could hire those fields to sports clubs. The only reason must be that the greedy
planners want to stuff as many houses as possible into the area. There is no reason
why the school cannot be built next to the playing fields, though of course that
will mean less money for the developers.
Finally, whatever is going to be built there, there is going to be a huge
increase in traffic, for the housing, the schools and any other enterprises.
At present the 419 runs past every quarter hour, Mortlake station is already
overburdened at rush hour, and the level crossing causes further congestion.
If, as promised, we have more trains going through, Sheen Lane might as
well be closed to traffic.
I am very familiar with that stretch of road from Barnes to the 316,
since when I was working as a GP I travelled to Twickenham every day.
It was daily congested, with tail backs, and adding further to the volume
of traffic is madness.
We need greatly improved public transport. However, there are those
who need their cars for their work, I used to do home visits as do
nurses, midwives and health visitors. Many teachers have heavy piles
of books and equipment and also need to drive to work. How is the traffic
congestion going to be overcome ? Where is everyone going to park ?
I am also concerned about the air pollution emanating from all
the cars stuck in tail backs, and the environment in general.
We must not let the rapacious developers destroy all that is
good about Mortlake and the 2011 aspirations.
|| 29 March 2017
I have some concerns:
• High density of people in relation to the size of the Mortlake. Imbalance between number of
apartments to houses. This is a great opportunity to introduce more houses to an area which is short
of housing stock. If the development is to be vibrant part of the community it needs to have a mix
of accommodation for singles, couples, families & the elderly not predominately apartments for
wealthy investors to use for buy to let properties.
• The impact on local services by introducing such a high volume of people.
The commute into London from Mortlake Station will be unmanageable. Currently
people are standing in the rush hour and even with the introduction of 10 carriages
in the summer this will not accommodate the extra number of people. Doctors – how
will they be able to cope with the number of people, are there plans for a new surgery?
• The tower seems incongruous to the area and kowtowing to the current trend
in architecture for machismo buildings of height with no sensitivity to the surroundings.
• Traffic congestion. The lower Mortlake Road is too narrow to take the increase
in traffic, the traffic is often at a standstill at the mini roundabout due to the level
crossing, the train frequency will remain the same and tailbacks increased. Even if the
road is widened at Chalkers Corner the congestion will still occur in the narrow part
of the road. Unless the developer’s long term aim is to take some of Mortlake Green
in the future when traffic issues inevitably occur?
• Traffic – with the introduction of a school to take up to 1,500 pupil,
these pupils will need to cross the road plus parents may be bringing them in
the car to school. This will cause added difficulties to the traffic problems
especially in the rush hour.
• Loss of the playing fields. Laying astro turf in replacement to the
grass fields will have a detrimental impact on the environment and is
not future proofing Mortlake.
• Cinema, hotel, gym etc. Has there been a feasibility study
of the demand for these services? Currently there’s a cinema in
Barnes and Richmond, a gym near Chiswick Bridge - if companies
do not take up the lease then the area could be a ghost town.
|| 29 March 2017
I welcome a serious redevelopment
of Stag Brewery, but the current proposal from Reselton Ltd is far too big.
My main comments are:- There is not sufficient room for a secondary school
with 1000 students, and I am not convinced that further secondary school is
needed here. The proposed number of new homes/units of nearly 1000 plus a
hotel is far too big. It will add unacceptable pressure to the train
station and local traffic etc, and I am not convinced that more shops,
and/or a cinema and/or a hotel are needed. I welcome the proposed
improvement at Chalkers Corner (since that is needed now), but it
will not be sufficient to allow the additional traffic to move. The green
space should not be reduced at all.I welcome a serious redevelopment
of Stag Brewery, but the proposal from Reselton Ltd is far too big.
I propose a dramatic reduction to about 50% of the current proposal.
||28 March 2017
|| Robert Morton
There are a number of things in
connection with the re-development of the brewery site that give me cause for
1) The proposed 'skyscraper' near Ship Lane. This will completely change the character
of the area, dominate the skyline at Mortlake green and ruin the whole outlook. It is
not necessary should be scrapped but if someone is daft enough to really want a tower
then it should be no higher than the blocks of flats that are being proposed.
2) The road widening scheme being proposed for Chalkers Corner will not solve the traffic
issue and more importantly will have a huge negative impact on the residents of the
flats/houses in that area.
3) The proposed new school is too big and will take away
the existing green space we all enjoy visually and which is used regularly by local
football teams. It will also increase traffic and cause further misery for local residents
with increased levels of pollution which are already too high.
4) The overall density of the
flats being proposed is too large and will put too much pressure on an already stretched
public transport system e.g. Mortlake station. Increasing the number of trains is not
realistic given the existing issues with the level crossing at Mortlake station and
the bottleneck of traffic flows that regularly ocurs day in day out!
5) Finally for
what it is worth I notice that a large part of the residential development will be
on ground that has in the words of the council a 'high probability' of flooding
and I am wondering how sensible it is to therefore do this?
||27 March 2017
The new proposed school is not going to be adequate
for 1200 pupils. They will need a sports ground, so building on an existing sports ground makes
no sense at all. Schools need room to breathe. This places a new school at the eastern side
of the borough and so most pupils we be coming from the West and using bus routes back west,
this puts them onto the busy A316 to pick up the majority of passing buses. Pupils will not
just take the few buses that are diverted to the schoool but will walk up to where they get
the most. TFL surface have no money and a reduced budget year on year, so how is lengthening
bus routes going to be funded? The proposed development is too dense, we need less properties
and less people. There are existing issues regarding traffic, so proposed widening at Chalkers
Corner will only eleviate the existing problem and not futureproof any additional traffic.
The roundabout leading the level crossing has not been considered at all in the developer's proposal.
This is an issue and as the barriers are down for 40 minutes in the hour this can't take any
more traffic. A tower block as a focal point is really ridiculous, when has a tower block ever been a delight.
|| 27 March 2017
I was shocked to see the introduction of a 1000+ pupil secondary school
on the playing fields. This is counter to maintaining green open spaces, and will massively increase traffic
congestion in the area. If the proposal goes ahead it should be built where buildings currently exist, not
taking away green space. The plans to expand Chalkers Corner by removing trees and green areas are totally
unacceptable and won't cope with the increased traffic if the school is placed where proposed. Turning
left from Lower Richmond Road, there are still the same number of lanes, options to exit the junction
and traffic light controls, so traffic will simply back further up down Lower Richmond Road. The proposal
doesn't include cycle lanes, so the idea that children will cycle to school, even if this were likely,
which I doubt, wouldn't be safe. Inevitably parents will drop children at school by car on the main road,
causing further traffic congestion, blockages, and danger near
the school. This will also worsen pollution that is already above the legal limit at Chalkers Corner.
||19 March 2017
|| David Pugh
Although I live close to Richmond Park
I feel that this development will have a massive impact upon the whole area.
Already Chalkers Corner and the roundabout at Mortlake Green are a traffic nightmare
- made worse by the amount of time the railway barriers at Mortlake Station are closed.
The delivery trucks parked outside Tesco on Sheen Lane add greatly to congestion.
Therefore any development of this site will cause years of horrendous disruption to local people,
environment and economy. Once the work is completed it seems likely that there will be increased
traffic congestion in the absence of some joined up thinking regarding car parking and public transport
- especially given that there will be a new school on the site. I am sure most people want to see some
decent affordable housing and understand the pressure on the local authority from Government in this
regard, but building a 14-storey tower block will completely alter the nature of our riverside for the worse.
These new proposals should be rejected and reviewed to ensure that any plans ensure
a greater amount of green space, no increase in traffic congestion/pollution and minimise
disruption to local people. For example as much material as possible
should be taken away/brought to the site by the river.
||16 March 2017
|| Jennie Hartley
I am a local resident to the Mortlake Brewery site and in fact live directly opposite
the open green Playing Fields. Indeed the reason I moved to my house was to enjoy
and look out at the trees and open space opposite. So I naturally
am very concerned and upset at the plans displayed at the Exhibition.
The original agreement was for a primary school and the playing fields were to be preserved.
Now it's a large secondary school and the fields will go. I understand this is
the decision of Richmond Education Dept. This goes against all agreed Council
policies of preserving open spaces, especially in London. The school should be
sited elsewhere on the site - it is large enough - to the north east of the playing
fields on an area currently built on. If the school is built on the proposed site
it will blight the area, be in a dangerous position for children right next to an
already very busy road. Accidents would occur.
What's more, if TFL agreed a bus terminal for the 209 next to the school on that corner,
it will be dangerous for the children - there has already been a fatal accident and a
child permanently maimed at the current 209 terminal in North Worple Way.
The 209 terminal should be located at Kew Retail Park.
The proposed site for the school would also directly overlook Lady Elizabeth House
- sheltered accommodation for the elderly, and bring noise, disruption, traffic, and
would overlook bedrooms. The same goes for the adjoining property to Lady Elizabeth
House and for the residents of Watney Road.
Other contentious issues:
- proposed hotel - further increased traffic, taxis, already many existing hotels in nearby Richmond.
- proposed shops - have the developers researched the local area? - there are empty commercial
properties in Mortlake High Street, 4 in Sheen Lane, and nearby Upper Richmond Road
- some have been empty for years.
- proposed cafes - in Sheen Lane alone, from Mortlake Station to
Upper Richmond Road there are already 11 cafes/restaurants.
- proposed pub - there are already 3 pubs on or next to the Brewery site.
- proposed cinema - there is already an excellent new cinema in nearby Barnes - Olympic Studios + cinemas in Richmond.
- underground car parks - do the developers know of the house that collapsed in
nearby The Terrace, Barnes - trying to dig underground so near the River - serious risk of collapse.
- what is the weird skyscraper tower doing in the middle of the model at the Exhibition? Another blight on the area.
- apart from the apparent proposed "14 storey" building - totally out of keeping with the area.
- proposed sheltered accommodation - agreed possibly needed but there
is already one directly opposite the site (Lady Elizabeth House).
- proposed density of the housing development - 8 out of 10 homes built
in London are sold to oversea buyers and left empty.
On a positive note it will be good to be rid of the eye sore
which is the current Brewery buildings. However the increased
population and in particular the traffic will be unsustainable.
Lower Richmond Road is only a single lane road and already jammed all day.
It will not cope with the consequences of the size of this proposed development.
Not to mention increased air pollution, diesel fumes and consequent ill health
of local residents, The open Playing Fields are needed to help oxygenate the
local air quality , provide an area for sports for local primary schools and the football clubs.
||13 March 2017
|| Jean Porter
I have viewed the plans and find the traffic plans unrealistic.
The idea that an extra lane at Chalker’s Corner will solve all the problems on Lower Mortlake Road is ridiculous.
The loss of the long standing community green space for football matches and other activities,
where children can let off steam and get fit, is counter productive.
A gym is no substitute for playing a game as a team. Build the school elsewhere.
I will appreciate an improved Thames Path.
||12 March 2017
|| Sarah Travers
I am concerned about the traffic impact and on the bus routes.
It seems that an extension to the 209 is suggested. This fails to address the fundamental challenges of
the existing bus routes down Castelnau and over Hammersmith bridge which is that there is a bottleneck.
Adding a few hundred extra commuters by bus into Hammersmith will have knock on effects further down
the bus route in terms of crowded or full buses even earlier than now on the route. The 209 is already
very frequent; neither it nor the Castelnau/Hammersmith route have extra capacity. They need to propose
more radical approaches including new bus routes over Chiswick bridge, the closer bridge to the development.
I am also deeply concerned about the levels of pollution that already exist on Chalker's Corner which will be added to.
Sadiq Khan just suggested that cars should be banned
on roads near schools because of pollution- how exactly would that work in the proposed development?
||9 March 2017
|| Frank Porter
General: Judging by the model on display the site seems to be too crowded and lacks a new open-space centre for Mortlake containing building such as a library, meeting rooms and shops where ‘locals’ could gather and which could provide a turn-around point for buses.
Road System: The proposed three turning off the main road (controlled by traffic lights)
will cause extensive delays as much of the traffic will require to turn across one lane
of main road traffic. Also the traffic flow will be very variable in quantity according
to the time if day (especially the road leading to the school). Also no improvement is
proposed for the junction with Sheen Lane either in terms of taking out the bends
and avoiding blockage by vehicles held by the level crossing. Any improvements at
Chalkers Corner will only add to the problem in Lower Mortlake Road [At present the
road system and lights at Chalkers Corner works quite well except when there are road works or broken-down vehicles.
A relatively simple change would be to create a large roundabout
at the Ship Lane/Lower Mortlake Road junction with two lanes so
that straight-ahead traffic was separated from right-turning traffic
to a large extent. An additional modification would take a corner of
Mortlake Green (regrettably demolishing a few trees) so that Lower
Mortlake Road was effectively straight from Chalkers Corner to White
Hart Lane and could provide a dual carriageway right from the school
end of the new development into Mortlake High Street. The lost part
of Mortlake Green would be compensated for by making the saved space
on the North side of the straightened road a green area. Straightening
of the road would also give the residents in the re-established hotel
(at the North end of Sheen Lane) some freedom from noise and pollution.
Vehicles and Transport: The planners’ view that most children will
come to school on foot or on cycles does not reflect historic experience
in the area. Specifically many children are dropped off by a parent on
the way to work. Also the proposed road system would lead to many
children being dropped off or picked up on the main road to avoid
the congestion and delay of going into the side road – particularly
dangerous when the child might have to walk across the main road.
Extension of the 209 bus route and increasing the frequency
of the 419 would be helpful but extension of the 22 bus route
from Putney Common via Barnes and Mortlake would add a new
dimension to the network especially if it continued to Kew
(bringing the Kew part of Richmond into direct contact with
the new school. Extension to Barnes is already under active consideration
School and its recreational facilities: The location
of the school must be reconsidered. To take away from
residents the whole of the open space without providing
comparable public green open space elsewhere is in blatant
disregard of the original concepts
Location of the school on the river would enable
it to offer rowing and a range of water sports. If
finances and space restrictions prevented provision
of adequate green playing fields, negotiations might
get the school use of the playing fields on the opposite
side of the river (with the school providing a suitable
boat as a ferry (also facilitating development of nautical skills)
Regular access to the school could also be thus provided reducing
the number of cars accessing the school from the Mortlake roads.
||20 February 2017
|| Simon Webb
I am a resident of East Sheen and have been shocked by the proposed development plans for the Stag Brewery.
It is disappointing that no real attempt has been made to use this unparalleled opportunity to create
a real heartland for East Sheen/ Mortlake and to build a centre for the community away from
the south circular focus of shops we currently have. This development could be transformational
for everyone who lives and enjoys the area. Instead, as it is planned, it will be destructive
to almost everyone who currently resides here.
What is currently proposed, as I understand it, is for a 1000 person secondary school
which does not benefit the local community as we already have the Richmond Academy
which is under represented by local children as it is.
The number of new homes proposed of 1000 is totally unacceptable.
This number is completely disproportionate to the existing number of homes
in the area and will therefore create undue pressure on the train station
and the local traffic which is already an enormous bottleneck.
It is also very sad to be hearing of plans that look to destroy the few green
spaces we have left in Mortlake/ East Sheen.
These plans are clearly to the detriment of the community and I
suspect that my views are shared by almost everyone who lives in the area.
Finally I am disappointed that the plans have not been adequately shared in advance with those most impacted.
||15 February 2017
|| Sean Dodwell
The development of the Stag Brewery site, will
be a very exciting and challenging time for all concerned, it represents an opportunity to
make a huge positive difference to the area, both immediately on and around the site and
on the surrounding area. We look forward to this development and hope that it can build
on the existing strong community feel within the Mortlake and surrounding areas.
It would be a great shame if this amazing opportunity was missed or somehow de-railed,
by interests other than local community and social needs.
We do feel however that any development of the existing green spaces
on the site is allowed then this will be a great detriment to any scheme, the local area and it’s inhabitants.
As a former PTA chair of a local school, and having organised several Summer Fairs
on the site, I have seen first hand how the local community revels in such local
events on this site, I do hope that you will become personally involved with the
planning process to safe guard the positive aspects of the existing site, and ensure
that the needs and hopes of the local community are put ahead of blatant profiteering.
I look forward to any public representations you plan to show that this
important opportunity will be carefully considered, and exercised with
the requisite amount of consideration and empathy for the local community and it’s needs.
||9 February 2017
|| Vicky Johnson
Just received your note that the planned primary school
is now going to be a large secondary school. This is worrying because of the increased traffic and pollution
in the area not to mention the loss of the playing field. Not acceptable.
||15 December 2016
|| James Weeden
The 1st Mortlake Sea Scouts (est. 1909, in the early days of the Scouting movement)
kept their boats moored on the Thames. I have a press photo of the 1st Mortlake vessel/tug "Minotaur lll", at deepwater (PLA)
moorings in the Thames - Surrey side, taken from Ship Lane. I believe the Scouts, based at the Scout Hall in Alder Road, used
the slip/hard at the end of Ship Lane to launch the smaller boats in which Sea Scouts and Guides learnt to sail/row. The Scouting
Movement, incl Girl Guides, made a significant contribution to life in Mortlake during the 20's 30's and 40's and were well
supported by the Brewery and its employees.(photos avaiable) I believe that there are many families in Mortlake (including mine)
who took part in Scouting Acivities. The 1st Mortlake Sea Scouts premises were rebulit in 1954, mainly with the help of the Watney Family.
See also plaque on the Scout HQ building in Alder Road and the memorial plaque in St Mary's Church, commemorating a terrible accident
in August 1950. The Scout premises were rebuilt largely due to the generosity of the Watney family. I would like to think that the Scout
moorings and the slip could somhow be acknowledged in the redevelopment.
||7 July 2016
|| Andrew Howard-Smith
Summary of Thames Bank Area Residents Concerns and Suggestions (8/2/2016) The residents of Aynescombe Path, Thames Bank, Parliament Mews and Varsity Row are referred to as Thames Bank Area.
There follows a summary of the concerns and wishes of the various individuals based on meetings,
local knowledge and the Consultation Document of 2011 and documented in emails sent to
Andrew Howard-Smith who as a resident of Thames Bank is acting as our representative for the proposed Mortlake Brewery development.
We accept that it is early days in the brewery site's development but the group wants to make its feelings known to the Mortlake Brewery Community Group (MBCG) so that they can convey our group's specific views and concerns to the Developers and Town Planners.
In summary; our residents have concerns about effect on character of our area, building height behind Thames Bank, being overlooked, Secondary school and general disruption of demolition and building works. This is explained in more detail below.
Character of Thames Bank Area:-We should try to preserve the character and heritage of Thames Bank area with its many old and listed buildings. Promoting Thames Bank as a 'unique/special' area - we can include things like architecture, history, beauty, wildlife, sporting location. (Parliament Mews won an award when it was originally developed).
To protect the ambience of the Thames Bank enclave, the biggest challenge will be to prevent existing properties being seriously overlooked. A buffer zone should be created on the land immediately
abutting our existing properties, probably through the building of elegant, low rise dwellings in keeping with the existing homes. Limit the height of any development on the western end
of the site consistent with the 2011 Development Brief. Make Ship Lane the divide between the low and higher rise accommodation.
Development Disruption:-Minimise the disruption from Demolition and Building works. This would include hours of working, dust and noise pollution. Parking for workers and lorry traffic would need to be planned.
Road Traffic:-Minimise the disruption to traffic flows on the Lower Mortlake Road. This is a difficult one as it can be over played. For example the development in Williams Lane of 73 dwellings has not generated any significant increase in traffic flow. Whereas an extra 500 car drivers will not help the situation,
traffic is like water the easier the flow, the more traffic will be attracted to the area. The basic problem is that there is nowhere for the traffic to go. Solving one bottleneck only moves the problem somewhere else. There is no ready solution
to traffic the jams at Chalkers Corner or the Rail Crossings as we are bounded by the South Circular and Chertsey Roads.
Parking:-This breaks down into parking during demolition and building works, parking of residents and their visitors. If you take the example of Williams lane, the new development and the existing ex brewery flats generate an enormous number of parked cars which makes it impossible for through lorry traffic.
Public Transport:-Assuming a 1000 new residents and their visitors, will not all use their cars, the development will generate increased rail and bus passengers. As this has to be accommodated using existing facilities, the train and bus operators need to be involved in the development's planning process.