Portmore Park & District Residents Association

Supporting local heritage, quality of life and community

  • Home
  • About
  • Join
  • Links
  • Contact
  • Archive
  • Guest pieces
  • Privacy
  • Events
  • Planning
  • Parking
  • Traffic
  • Schools
  • Green Belt
  • Riverside
  • Litter
  • Surrey
  • Opinion

Help save our local riverside car park

The WLARC car park, with the River Thames in the background

The WLARC car park, with the River Thames in the background

The Environment Agency (EA) proposes to replace some much used local riverside parking with a hot food and drink concession, right next to the Weybridge Ladies Amateur Rowing Club (WLARC) at the end of Thames Street, Weybridge. The EA has applied to Elmbridge for planning consent for this change of use of part of the car park, EBC 2025/0385.

The deadline for comments to Elmbridge is 27 April 2025.

Most residents and visitors we have spoken with think the proposed change would be a very bad idea. 
Here are some reasons why:

  • This popular small car park, in riverside Green Belt, is often fully parked, so removing some spaces would disadvantage riverside visitors
  • The EA plans are inaccurate on number of spaces: the area shown for change of use would in practice remove much more than two parking spaces
  • The EA plans fail to show the Thames Path and National Cycle Route 4, which both pass through the middle of the car park
  • Any queue for food, or standing by the vendor site, would dangerously obstruct the footpath and cycle path
  • There is nowhere to sit and eat, so food would be eaten on the hoof, resulting inevitably in litter along the riverside
  • The EA has a history of failing to maintain this car park, so there is good reason to believe they would fail to manage daily clearing of litter
  • A hot food vending concession here would be out of keeping with the many healthy riverside activities for which people visit this location
  • There are already two excellent food-serving pubs and two riverside cafes within 200 metres, each with ample seating for their customers
  • The application site is Class 3 Floodplain, directly adjacent to the river, and part of the car park was flooded in 2003 and 2014.

Help save our car park by objecting by 27 April to Elmbridge Planning Application 2025/0385 at
https://www.elmbridge.gov.uk/planning/find-or-comment-planning-application.
You can use the QR code below for direct access to the application details:
https://qr-code.click/i/680a17b88e317


EBC Planning Application 2025/0385 – Car Park South West of Weybridge Ladies Rowing Club Walton Lane Weybridge KT13 8LU – change of use from car park spaces to hot food and drink concession.

Update

We note that a different part of the Environment Agency has objected to this Environment Agency planning application, on the grounds that it is in Class 3 floodplain, and the application has no Flood Risk Assessment yet.

We also recall that a corner of this car park was flooded in 2003 and again in 2014.

It is still very important to object for all the other applicable reasons, to prevent an amended application with a favourable Flood Risk Assessment simply getting around that objection.

Some background 

The history of this car park is one of serious neglect by the EA

Elmbridge Borough Council believed it owned this land for many decades. EBC tended it, collected waste from three EBC-owned bins in the car park, and by 2008 had allocated capital for improvements. Then in 2009 the EA registered ownership, as part of its major riverside land registration for the Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy.

When Elmbridge then withdrew its bins on losing ownership, the EA refused to arrange for waste collection from the site, telling Elmbridge, ‘we are not in the business of managing car parks’. Which left some of us wondering why the EA had registered ownership.  Subsequently an agreement was made for EBC to provide and empty three bins and provide a weekly clean up.

Elmbridge also used to maintain the adjacent stretch of riverbank, and kept it immaculately, but the the EA registered ownership, and has rather neglected its upkeep. See before and after pictures of the riverside.

Improvement funding

Some years later, local Weybridge residents worked closely with Thames Landscape Strategy and Elmbridge BC in framing a well-conceived and practical improvement plan, to resurface the dangerously uneven and neglected car park, and create a viewing platform on the sloping land overlooking the river, and remove self-seeded saplings and scrub, opening up the view towards Shepperton weir.

This excellent landscaping project was awarded a grant of circa £72,000 capital funding from the Elmbridge Community Infrastructure Levy.

However the project foundered, we understand because of lack of agreement from the EA about paying for future maintenance of the car park, and the funding has lapsed.

Overall this is a sad tale of neglect by the EA. And now the added insult and injury of a ‘hot food and drink concession’ diminishing the parking facility for visitors, and changing the character of this length of riverside, to the dismay of many.  

History suggests that the EA will do nothing effective to manage the daily use of the concession and ensure that all the resulting litter it creates along the riverside is cleared up.

Residents and visitors alike hope to enjoy our beautiful and largely unspoilt lengths of local riverside. This application takes no account of their needs and expectations

Highways hitch delays Weybridge Hospital rebuild

Weybridge Hospital fire July 2017

Weybridge Health Centre proposed design

Weybridge Hospital / Health Centre past and future

More than seven years after Weybridge Hospital burnt down, hopes of the replacement Weybridge Health Centre plans (EBC 2024/3065) receiving consent this month were dashed by a mix up over a secondary pedestrian and cycle entrance.

A proposed new active travel entrance via Portmore Way received strong objections. Planning consent will now be delayed at least until July 2025, the earliest date that Elmbridge Borough Council can consider a slightly revised application.

Why was a Portmore Way entrance proposed?

The NHS Property Services 2024/3065 plans for the Health Centre building and landscaping looked excellent in most respects, but for the unexpected pedestrian and cycle entrance via Portmore Way.

It seems Surrey Highways had insisted the plans should include a Portmore Way entrance, to give easier active travel access for those of us who live in north Weybridge — access previously made easy by Footpath 20 (FP20) from Portmore Park Road to Minorca Road.

Justified objections

This single aspect understandably brought fifty objections, around the undesirable impact of opening up a completely new access from Portmore Way on safeguarding the primary school, and on church parking. This means the planning application has to wait to be decided by a planning committee of councillors, rather than be decided quickly by a planning officer.

A Portmore Way entrance would also bring practical issues and further potential delays, as the hospital site is a metre higher than Portmore Way, and separated from it by mature trees.

So it would mean tree felling, purchase of carbon offset, and also, outside the NHS land, the design and construction by Surrey of a zig-zag sloping connecting path and handrails on Surrey Highways’ adopted Portmore Way land, plus provision of street lighting. How long would that take? And where is the budget?.

Why not Footpath 20 / Minorca Road?

The Surrey Highways’ intent was good, but their active travel solution ignored (or was unaware of) the fact that there was already a much-used active travel route from north Weybridge, via dual use FP20 from Portmore Park Road to Minorca Road, giving — prior to the fire — convenient direct (and level) pedestrian and cycle access into the Hospital site via the pavement which curves from Minorca Road into the site’s NHS land.

Weybridge Hospital Minorca Road entrance in 2016 with pedestrian pavement access

Extract from 2024/3065 Transport Assessment showing Minorca Road access in 2016, with pavement entrance

We are told by NHS Property Services that, while non-emergency vehicle access to the site will be blocked here, there was no intention in the Health Centre 2024/3065 plans to prohibit use of this FP20/Minorca Road pavement pedestrian and cycle entrance. They were simply preventing motor vehicle acccess other than emergency.

Surrey has a history of forgetting FP20. In 2009 it had fallen off their radar and lacked any maintenance schedule. It was becoming very overgrown despite daily use by many residents. But these days it is clearly shown on Surrey’s official online map as FP20, and it is in their dual use pedestrian/cycle active travel scheme. It is a very convenient active travel route from Portmore Park Road.

Amended plans coming

NHS Property Services is very willing to amend its plans and remove any reference to a Portmore Way entrance, which was not part of the original concept, and make it explicitly clear that active travel access will be restored via FP20 / Minorca Road.  It will need Surrey Highways approval, and then Elmbridge planning consent.

The revision will mean submitting updated plans to Elmbridge Borough Council after consulting relevant bodies, plus the statutory 21 days for public comment.

Lobbying Surrey County Council

Following discussions of the issues with our Weybridge Surrey County Councillor, Tim Oliver, we have been told that if NHS amend their plans to make it clear they include pedestrian [and cycle] access from a FP20/Minorca Road entrance, the issue should be resolved without the need to open up a new entrance via Portmore Way.

Local support will help

Given the 53 current objections, it would be really helpful to have at least as many letters of support for the revised plans. And then we may at last get a proper Health Centre to replace our much missed Weybridge Hospital.

You can read a full case against having a Portmore Way entrance in this document [2MB pdf], which was shared with SCC Councillor for Weybridge, Tim Oliver, along with the following covering note:


To Tim Oliver from Miles Macleod, 10 April 2025

Submission re Surrey Highways view on Portmore Way vs FP20/Minorca Road for active travel access (EBC 2024/3065)

Tim
Thank you again for your very prompt and helpful responses on this. The highly negative impact of creating a new Portmore Way access is an extremely important topic locally, as is avoiding any further unnecessary delay in rebuilding the hospital.

I attach a submission summarising what we believe is a very strong case for an active travel entrance to Weybridge Health Centre via Minorca Road & FP20 and NOT via Portmore Way. This was compiled after meeting with representatives from the local community, the church and school in Portmore way, NHS Property Services, NHS Surrey Heartlands and an EBC councillor. Please do look at it, and share with Surrey Highways.

I understand that NHS Property Services will be submitting amended documents showing no access from the Portmore Way site boundary, and reinstating the former pedestrian and cycle access from Minorca Road. The hope is that this updated application can be considered and accepted by EBC planning (sub-)committee in July, so that construction can at long last start this summer. Plainly it would be helpful if Surrey Highways are supportive. Further delay would be hugely unpopular.

The Transport Assessment will also be modified accordingly, but I note that even in the current version para 5.3.8, limiting Minorca Road access to ‘emergency vehicles only’, sits under a subheading ‘Vehicular Access’, and would not therefore apply to pedestrian and cycle access. I understand from NHS Property Services that there was no intention to prohibit pedestrian and cycle access from Minorca Road.

I hope the attached submission proves sufficiently persuasive for Surrey Highways to revise their view. It seeks to be self explanatory, but failing that, I would very much welcome a meeting to discuss the issues with you and Surrey Highways.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,
Miles
———————
Miles Macleod

Response from Tim Oliver, 14 April 2025

Miles
I have discussed the matter with […] the officer at SCC dealing with the application. His simple point is that in the absence of pedestrian access from Minorca Road the existing footpath would mean a long loop round via the High Street to access the site. If the NHS are now saying, there will be pedestrian access then I think the matter will be resolved without opening up a route from Portmore Way.
Kind regards
Tim

Tim Oliver OBE
Leader of Surrey County Council


Watch for updates

Once the amended plans are submitted, we will update this posting accordingly, and we hope the revised plans will receive strong local support.

PPDRA comments on plans for Weybridge Library

The following comments on the Surrey County Council plans for Weybridge Library Community Hub have been sent by PPDRA to SCC Leader and Councillor for Weybridge, Tim Oliver.

Dear Tim,

Below are some comments from the Committee of Portmore Park & District Residents Association on the Surrey County Council plans for the Weybridge Library building, as set out in the Consultation Planning Application submitted to Elmbridge (EBC 2023/2312) which offered no opportunity for public comment.

We believe the comments below reflect feelings widely held within the local community, and hope that you and the Library Community Hub design team will give them genuine consideration.

Support for aims

  1. We strongly support the use of the Carnegie model to guide and inspire redevelopment of Weybridge Library as a library and integrated community hub.
  2. We are delighted that Surrey County Council has allocated budget for this.
  3. We believe that there is a great opportunity to create an appealing, engaging and popular new library and integrated community hub in the current library building, if a more community-centred design is developed.

Disappointment with current plans and process

  1. We are very disappointed that the current SCC plans for the library building show a lack of imagination and integration, and appear to ignore community input, particularly in the proposals for hub elements on the first and second floors, which seem like little more than refurnishing existing rooms.
  2. We implore SCC to reconsider, and to reshape the design with more community involvement (which we understand is already envisaged for finalising the ground floor library element).
  3. We are disturbed by the opaque planning process by which SCC can grant itself planning consent, without any clear opportunity for public comment on the current plans: EBC says “please consult the relevant authority”, yet the SCC website doesn’t suggest how to do that.
  4. We want to avoid a repeat of the 2004 New Walton Bridge fiasco, when SCC spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money awarding itself planning consent for a deeply flawed, oversized bridge and twin-loop junction design, and on trying to fend off public opposition (happily unsuccessfully, as a public inquiry imposed a much better bridge and junction design which conserved valuable riverside public amenity land and saved Weybridge residents from the extra rat run traffic the twin loop junction would have invited).
  5. We hope for a planning process for the Library Hub where evidence and community input and comments are recorded and publicly visible (an essential element of the EBC planning process).

What a better design can offer

  1. We hope to see an integrated library and community hub created, with:
    1. Appealing, inviting entrances from Church Street and Churchfields
    2. More open and flexible design of the hub elements to meet multiple community uses, creating a desirable destination for all kinds of local residents
    3. Outdoor spaces as well as indoor spaces (including a terrace, and a landscaped seating area by an improved Churchfields entrance, as recommended by Elmbridge Borough Council)
  2. We hope for a design which makes the first floor of the Community Hub a more desirable community destination, through increasing its space and enhancing its facilities, e.g. by:
    1. Extending its area laterally, incorporating doors onto a new open air terrace on the roof of the planned single storey extension, with outdoor seating and tables (thereby, as a visiting county councillor observed, making it a far more profitably lettable space for functions)
    2. Enhancing its catering potential by expanding the kitchen area (in line with comments from Elmbridge Borough Council), not reducing it
    3. Offering cafe facilities for visitors, to help make the hub a genuine local destination
    4. Increasing the flexibility of the internal space of the whole first floor, making it more open and adjustable to accommodate more varied community activities
    5. Providing controllable shading for the west facing windows, to reduce the main room’s greenhouse-like summer heat, without reducing its admirable winter light
    6. Reconsidering the design and location of a business hub element, to make it better suited to use by multiple small businesses and individuals (the current design looks outdated and inappropriate), and thereby enhancing income.

Wider community involvement

  1. We support suggestions by the Weybridge Society for bringing the building to life by having a visibly operating Brooklands Radio live broadcast studio on the ground floor, as part of a more open plan, integrated and flexible hub design, shaped with the help of community input.
  2. We support the views of local EBC councillors that it is essential to have wider community involvement in defining and shaping local community facilities which will serve Weybridge into the future.

Transition arrangements

  1. There are strong local concerns about negative impact on the Centre For The Community of transition period proposals to relocate Library services there, displacing current activities.
  2. We wish to see transition achieved in a way which avoids negative impact on the Centre For The Community.
  3. We would support a proposal to relocate library books to the former bowling green pavilion (subject to relocation of current services provided there to other EBC owned properties) for the duration of any works, with the more socially interactive library services relocated to the Centre For The Community.

Lifetime management costs

  1. We wonder if sufficient consideration has been given to the longer term benefits of investing more now in energy efficient measures (e.g. triple glazing, insulation, heat recovery, etc), which could significantly reduce lifetime energy costs.

 

Thank you again for suggesting that comments are sent to you, in your role as our county councillor.

We sincerely hope that there will now be an opportunity for proper public input into the creation of an amended and improved design for the community hub within an extended library building: a design which is much more community-centred and user-centred than the current proposals.

Kind regards,
Miles Macleod

Chair, Portmore Park & District Residents Association

Beales Lane plans cause concern for residents

Plans for a three storey block of 17 flats and 11 houses in Beales Lane, with 53 bedrooms, are being considered by Elmbridge Borough Council (application 2019/0386). Over 100 objections have been registered with Elmbridge.  Read our PPDRA letter here.

Bigger, higher, denser, closer to road

The new block would replace the existing St Catherine’s buildings (lacking merit but inconspicuous, total 27 bedrooms) with a significantly taller block, of more than twice the mass, with its bulk much closer to the road.

See the photo and plans above to get a feel for the proposed scale. It is 55% higher from ground to rooftop compared with present, towards the Thames St end.

The plans propose parking spaces for 28 cars behind the block, accessed via a height-limited entrance mid-building.
The style of the proposed building is quite unlike other properties in north Weybridge. Some residents feel strongly that it is wrong for the location.

Many are concerned about the excessive bulk, and negative impact of the proposed development on the streetscene, traffic and parking – that it would transform the character of Beales Lane, and not in a good way.

Open, light, green and small scale

Residents are worried that the character of Beales Lane will be lost.  Beales Lane is green and open towards its Thames Street end. The St Catherine’s buildings are low and mostly set well back. Their layout is staggered so it doesn’t impose.

The houses opposite are a traditionally styled 1998 development, in keeping with the character of Weybridge.

It is currently a pleasant suburban lane, leading to the historic small cottages of Church Walk.

The new building would present a much larger and more dominating profile along its length, and project closer to Thames Street.  It would be a massive difference.

The current St Catherine’s building as seen from Thames Street

The proposed building would be 55% higher, far wider and project much closer to Thames Street

Below we list some objections to the development plans, raised by local residents.

How to give Elmbridge your views

Comments to Elmbridge Borough Council are invited by 29 March, but will be accepted after that. The application will be decided by the South Area Planning Sub-committee.  To register your comments, search for 2019/0386 at www.elmbridge.gov.uk/planning

It is helpful if objections are on grounds that relate to relevant planning legislation / relevant sections of EBC Local Plan. Below are relevant issues of worry to local residents. We list things that Elmbridge Borough Council must consider in deciding planning application 2019/0386:

  • Oppressive bulk and mass
    • The proposed development is EXCESSIVELY MASSIVE compared with neighbouring properties
    • It is taller, with its bulk closer to the pavement, and would dominate a road that is currently open and spacious
    • Its bulk and mass would be excessive for this suburban site.
    • Beales Lane leads to the historic riverside small scale cottages of Church Walk, the contrast is stark
  • Lack of fit with local streetscene
    • The proposed is quite unlike other buildings in the area, in appearance and style as well as scale
    • North Weybridge is characterised by Victorian/Edwardian dwellings with traditional roofs and lots of gables
    • The proposed vertical and rectangular lines might look fine as worker accommodation in Rotterdam, but don’t fit well here
    • It would have a very negative visual impact, transforming Beales Lane
      • from a light, open, airy road with chimneys the highest points & St Catherine’s largely set well back
      • to a visually narrower street dominated by a high, massive, alien building along its south edge
  • Excessive density
    (not a likely winner, given current pressure for increasing density, but worth arguing)

    • This is a much higher density than neighbouring dwellings
    • It squeezes a large volume of habitable space (11 new houses and 17 new flats, 53 bedrooms) onto the site
    • The floor area and number of bedrooms doubles
  • Loss of privacy
    • Neighbouring residents are concerned about loss of privacy, especially in their back gardens
  • Loss of light
    • Neighbouring residents are concerned that the proposed high building will block their light. Some question the measurements supplied in the application, for the height of windows opposite.

Visitor parking being used by school parents for child collection; note narrow roadway

  • Impact on safe traffic flow, safe delivery access, and safe manoeuvring, given lack of turning space
    This is a Surrey matter (so it is worth also writing to our SCC councillor, tim.oliver@surreycc.gov.uk, on this aspect). We are surprised that Surrey Highways has no objection
    to the prospect of large vehicles having to reverse out of Beales Lane into Thames Street (a road which Surrey’s own figures show carries around 5700 vehicles a day) right next to a school crossing:

    • Beales Lane is directly opposite the entrance to St George’s Junior School, so there are special safety factors
    • As sheltered elderly housing (27 bedrooms), there were previously very few residents’ vehicles associated with St Catherine’s
    • Beales Lane/Church Walk is a cul-de-sec with no turning circle
    • It gives resident and delivery access to circa 43 homes (apart from St Catherine’s)
    • Delivery and traffic flow would be greatly increased by 17 new flats and 11 new houses (53 bedrooms)
    • Currently the St Catherine’s visitor parking space is used for turning by delivery vehicles and visitors
    • It is heavily used at school drop-off/pick-up times (scores of vehicles using it to turn)
    • The proposed design would remove current turning facilities, and mean large vehicles having to reverse into Thames Street, which carries high traffic flows and has a school crossing adjacent to St Catherine’s; reversing vehicles would risk the safety of pedestrians including school children and obstruct traffic flow
    • The design does not allow headroom for vehicles higher than approx 2.5 metres to access the rear parking, so big delivery and removals vans would have to park up obstructing narrow Beales Lane
  • Impact on parking
    • 28 parking spaces are proposed to serve 28 dwellings  (9 x 1 bed; 13 x 2 bed; 6 x 3 bed)
    • 40.5 spaces would be required to meet Elmbridge Parking Standards:
      • Development Management Plan – Appendix 3: Elmbridge Parking Standards (DM21 – Access and Parking)
        1 bed residential unit : 1 space per unit
        2 bed residential unit : 1.5 spaces per unit
        3 bed residential unit : 2 spaces per unit

Learn more and register your comments

The number of people who comment is crucial to the future of Beales Lane and Church Walk.

Search for 2019/0386 at www.elmbridge.gov.uk/planning.

Comments to Elmbridge BC are invited by 29 March, but will be accepted after that.  Use the comment form on the EBC website or email tplan@elmbridge.gov.uk.

The application will be considered by councillors on Elmbridge Borough Council South Area Planning Sub-committee.

If you feel it is important that they are all aware of your comments, you can email them directly:

Cllr Barry Cheyne (Chair)                            Oatlands and Burwood Park
Cllr Mrs Dorothy Mitchell (Vice Chair) Cobham and Downside
Cllr James Browne                                         Cobham and Downside
Cllr Andrew Burley                                          Oxshott and Stoke D’Abernon
Cllr Oliver Chappell                                         Oxshott and Stoke D’Abernon
Cllr Andrew Davis                                            Weybridge Riverside
Cllr Michael Freeman                                      Weybridge Riverside
Cllr Peter Harman                                            Weybridge St George’s Hill
Cllr David Lewis                                                 Oxshott and Stoke D’Abernon
Cllr Mrs Charu Sood                                         Weybridge St George’s Hill

bcheyne@elmbridge.gov.uk; dmitchell@elmbridge.gov.uk; jbrowne@elmbridge.gov.uk; aburley@elmbridge.gov.uk; ochappell@elmbridge.gov.uk; adavis@elmbridge.gov.uk; mfreeman@elmbridge.gov.uk; pharman@elmbridge.gov.uk; dlewis@elmbridge.gov.uk; csood@elmbridge.gov.uk;

Traffic and parking issues are the responsibility of Surrey County Council, who will prepare a consultation report in relation to planning application EBC 2019/0386.

The Surrey County Councillor for Weybridge is Tim Oliver
tim.oliver@surreycc.gov.uk

You can download a pdf copy of our March 2019 newsletter about application 2019/0386 here

Flats or Flats & Houses?

Some residents are puzzled by the reference to 17 flats and 11 houses in the planning application, when the drawings appear to show a single large block of flats, arranged over three floors.

Below is an extract from the 2019/0386 Application Form

Beales Lane development consultation Nov 2018

November 2018 proposals for Beales Lane

Weybridge  residents viewed plans to develop St Catherine’s House in Beales Lane, at a community consultation on 15 November.  We saw plans for 30 flats, comprising 1, 2 and 3 bed dwellings, with a total of 59 bedrooms, and parking spaces for 28 cars behind the block, accessed via an entrance mid-building.

The architects were seeking local reactions, willing to listen and seemingly willing to consider adjusting designs.

What stood out immediately was the size and style of the proposed building, which is uncompromisingly rectangular, vertical, and flat roofed — no gables, no eaves — unlike other buildings in the area. Its central section would be four storeys tall, stepping down to two storeys where it adjoins existing Beales Lane houses.

St Catherine’s House, Beales Lane, viewed from Thames Street

The bulk of the proposed building would be much closer to the road in Beales Lane than is the case with St Catherine’s House, although the section nearest Thames Street would be set back to accommodate the existing tree.

The consultation and exhibition were organised by Harper Planning, on behalf of PA Housing. The design team spoke with interested members of the local community, answered questions and discussed concerns.

PA Housing, owners of the site, intend to apply for planning consent to construct a mix of one, two and three bedroom apartments, following demolition of the current buildings. There would be a mix of private ownership, shared ownership and social housing.

Initial reactions from residents have included:

  • surprise at the proposed density and appearance
  • concern at excessive height and mass
  • worry about impact on parking for local residents

We have heard strongly expressed views that the design does not fit with the local street scene and is oppressively massive. It would loom over Beales Lane. Most local buildings are brick built two storey dwellings with traditional pitched roofs, many with relatively low eaves. Beales Lane leads into historic and diminutive Church Walk.

Parking will be a very sensitive issue in an area with extremely limited on-street parking. More flats and private/shared ownership mean many additional residents are likely to have cars.  Some residents in neighbouring Church Walk, Jessamy Road and Thames Street, where parking space is at a premium, have to resort to finding a parking space in Beales Lane when needed.

There are also concerns about the loss of the paved space at the front of St Catherine’s which is currently used by many vehicles for turning, as Beales lane is a cul-de-sac without a turning space at the end.

We hope local views will sway the architects (contactable via info@harperplanning.co.uk) and that any planning application will reflect local reaction.

 

Search

Local News – Downloads

Help save our local riverside car park – comment by 27 April 2025

Weybridge Health Centre Pedestrian and Cycle Access from PPR (PDF 2MB)

PPDRA Newsletter January 2024 – Consultation Special

PPDRA Newsletter September 2023

WEYBRIDGE HUB REDEVELOPMENT Surrey County Council Cabinet Report (June 2023)

Walton Lane Open Space — PPDRA Evidence for Local Green Space

EBC Local Green Spaces study – further spaces – PPDRA submission (07-2022)

PPDRA 2022-0980 letter re St Catherines Beales Lane Weybridge

PPDRA 2022-0397 letter re Garages to the side of 16-17 Grenside Road

PPDRA 2022-0395 letter to EBC re Garages off Grenside Road Weybridge

UPDATED PPDRA Comments for WeyBetterWeybridge (Sept 2021)

PPDRA 2021-4412 letter  re Blenheim House Church Walk Weybridge KT13 8JT

Town Centre: PPDRA Comments for WeyBetterWeybridge (April 2021)

PPDRA 2021-0045 letter to EBC re Las Lilas Devonshire Rd (Mar 2021)

PPDRA 2020-3496 letter to EBC re Grenside Road garages (Mar 2021)

Weybridge Parking Review 2019-20 Decision Report (Jan 2021)

PPDRA 2020-3495 letter to EBC re Grenside Rd garages (with pictures)

PPDRA 2020-2821 letter to EBC re Thames St Warehouse (Dec 2020)

Weybridge Parking Review 2019-20 maps + Wey Road & Round Oak Rd CPZ (Sep 2020)

Parking Review 2019-20 Statement of Reasons (Sep 2020)

Elmbridge Local Plan 2019 Consultation – PPDRA Submission (pdf)

LOCAL PLAN SPECIAL NEWSLETTER  (August 2019 – pdf)

News Articles

  • April 2025 (2)
  • January 2024 (2)
  • October 2023 (1)
  • September 2023 (3)
  • August 2023 (4)
  • June 2023 (1)
  • May 2023 (1)
  • January 2023 (1)
  • December 2022 (1)
  • July 2022 (1)
  • May 2022 (1)
  • January 2022 (1)
  • October 2021 (1)
  • June 2021 (2)
  • April 2021 (1)
  • January 2021 (1)
  • September 2020 (1)
  • February 2020 (1)
  • January 2020 (1)
  • September 2019 (1)
  • August 2019 (1)
  • July 2019 (2)
  • June 2019 (1)
  • May 2019 (1)
  • March 2019 (1)
  • December 2018 (2)
  • November 2018 (1)
  • October 2018 (2)
  • September 2018 (3)
  • August 2018 (2)
  • July 2018 (1)
  • June 2018 (1)
  • December 2017 (1)
  • November 2017 (1)
  • October 2017 (1)
  • September 2017 (2)
  • July 2017 (1)
  • February 2017 (1)
  • January 2017 (2)
  • December 2016 (1)
  • September 2016 (2)
  • August 2016 (1)
  • July 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • May 2016 (2)
  • April 2016 (1)
  • February 2016 (1)
  • January 2016 (2)
  • December 2015 (1)
  • November 2015 (1)
  • October 2015 (3)
  • September 2015 (1)
  • June 2015 (1)
  • April 2015 (1)
  • March 2015 (1)
  • February 2015 (1)
  • January 2015 (1)
  • December 2014 (1)
  • November 2014 (2)
  • October 2014 (2)
  • August 2014 (4)

Copyright Portmore Park & District Residents Association 2002-2023