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

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

Elmbridge ‘No objection’ to Weybridge Library Hub plans – with reservations

Elmbridge Borough Council has registered ‘No objection’ to the Surrey County Council plans for Weybridge Library Community Hub redevelopment, with reservations. Surrey has the right to permit or refuse its own plans on Library redevelopments, following due consultation.

Reservations

However, the Elmbridge BC Officer Report requests “that greater consideration is given for the creation of increased community space provision on the first floor, e.g. enlarged kitchen/servery along with break out seating areas for community groups“, and that there is a ‘missed opportunity’ around the treatment of the entrance from Churchfields.

This EBC judgment aligns with some strong local feeling in Weybridge that the Community Hub element requires more space and facilities, and a more thoughtful approach to creating a flexible community Activity Hub on the first floor, to help it become an appealing community destination.

Library vision good, but Community Hub limited

The Library element of the redevelopment proposals, drawing on the Carnegie model, seems very positive in creating a Library which will enable and promote more community involvement, and bring increased cultural, social and learning interaction.

But the small community ‘Activity Hub’ on the first floor misses the opportunity to go beyond the limitations of the current first floor community hall (apart from adding toilets). The majority of the first space is taken up with tightly fitted traditional office desks and chairs, in a large open plan ‘Business Hub’ and in meeting rooms. It even seems to move away from adaptable community use by proposing to turn two potentially flexible current spaces, a Tea Room and Staff Room, into small traditional office-style meeting rooms.

Yes, residents want to see facilities for local business use. But is this an effective design, when there is a golden opportunity to create a well designed integrated Community Hub within the Library building, supporting multiple local activities?

Surrey County Council has a statutory duty to provide Library services, but not wider community facilities, and that rather shows in the proposed design. 

Here is the existing Weybridge Library first floor plan.

Community input overlooked?

During the public consultation phase there were many suggestions about how to make a first floor Community Hub a more desirable community destination, through increasing its space and enhancing its facilities, e.g. by:

  • Extending its space laterally, incorporating doors onto a new open air terrace on the roof of the planned single storey extension, with outdoor seating and tables
  • Increasing the flexibility of the internal space, to accommodate more varied activies
  • Enhancing its catering potential by expanding the kitchen area
  • Offering cafe facilities for visitors, to make it a local destination
  • Providing controllable shading for the west facing windows, to reduce the room’s greenhouse-like summer heat, without reducing its admirable winter light

Support for a more appealing Hub

Proposals for enhancing the plans and shaping the Hub more around what people want received strong support in the WeyBetterWeybridge Stakeholder Reference Group. A visiting Surrey County Councillor at one meeting said that a terrace would be a great idea and a significant improvement. It would greatly enhance the potential income from letting the space for social functions, since many people want the option of access to a terrace and fresh air for function guests.

A Surrey County Council Officer who presented draft plans agreed that a terrace would be an achievable addition to the Activity Hub, at modest extra cost (including repositioning some rooflights), and suggested that it could be added to the planning application as a minor amendment.

Joined up thinking needed

Subsequent local discussions have gone further, and suggested a far more integrated approach to the design of the building’s interior layout, combining the Library and Community Hub and Brooklands Radio elements in a way which would be much more inviting, appealing and engaging. This seems entirely in line with the aims of the Carnegie model, which is an inspiration for the redesign and extension into a community hub.

Improving access from Churchfields

The EBC Officer Report also suggests improving the design of the the access from Churchfields.
“The approach from the rear car park / pedestrian footpath is an important secondary access. Whilst some improvements have been made to the approach over the existing arrangement, it is considered that this is a missed opportunity to create a more welcoming space with better permeability/ connectivity through the site which would help encourage an increase in footfall and activity within the area. It is considered that this could be improved further by creating a more prominent accessibility entrance at the rear with an enhanced landscaped setting with a seating area through the relocation of car parking spaces to the main car park.”

This aligns with views of the Stakeholder Reference Group about the significance of this entrance, and the fact that this area of the Library exterior is the most tranquil and sheltered from A317 traffic nuisance.

Note that Elmbridge stated that its ‘No objection’ was ‘subject to consideration of the issues above’ listed in the Officer Report.

An opportunity for improvement

We hope that the Surrey plans for the refurbishment may yet be amended, to achieve a more effective and appealing Community Hub by exploiting the great potential of an extended and improved Library building.

At the very least the first floor Activity Hub design must be improved, something which can be done at modest cost if incorporated now while there is the opportunity. Preferably the entire redesign of the building will be revisited, to offer an integrated community hub which is closer to what the community wants. But it is entirely up to Surrey County Council to decide this.

What currently seems unclear is how to get effective feedback to Surrey County Council about the proposed plans, other than by contacting our councillor for Weybridge Division, Tim Oliver.

We are still seeking clarification on how residents can make publicly visible comments on this Surrey County Council planning application.

 

 

PPDRA Community Meeting 20 Sept 2023

Find out what’s happening around north Weybridge at our PPDRA community meeting and AGM
> 7:30pm – 9pm, Wednesday 20th September 2023, CPP Parish Hall, Portmore Way, KT13 8JD.

Our theme is positive local activities:

  • Discover what’s planned for Weybridge Library community hub.
  • Learn more about local community activities and clubs.
  • Meet local councillors.

Guest speakers:
> Susan Wills MBE, Assistant Director, Art, Culture, Heritage & Libraries, SCC.
> Tim Oliver, Leader, Surrey County Council, divisional member for Weybridge.
> Representatives from local voluntary community groups and clubs, sharing information about local activities you can participate in.

A great opportunity to find out more about current and future community activities in our town.

All interested Weybridge residents welcome

We hope to see you there!
And if you are part of a local community group/club/activity and would like to contribute to the meeting, please do contact us and participate.

Download our latest PPDRA newsletter and meeting flyer

After 20 years of portmore.org.uk website, we have now finally set up something on FaceBook:

  • PPDRA Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/973688393918141
  • 20th Sept Community meeting: https://www.facebook.com/events/845498233398453/

Weybridge Library Community Hub Redevelopment Plans

Surrey County Council’s consultation planning application (2023/2312) for Redeveloping Weybridge Library as a community hub is now on the Elmbridge Borough Council website.
This is a consultation, as the Library planning application will be decided by Surrey itself.
Update 1 Sept: the full set of 25 plans is now listed on the EBC website, up from the 2 originally listed.
Update 17 Sept: The Elmbridge BC decision on the consultation application is “No objection”.

Application Headlines

Address: Weybridge Library Church Street Weybridge Surrey KT13 8DE
Description : Consultation from Surrey County Council: Change of existing library, museum, public hall (Use Class F1) and Brooklands Radio (Class E) to new community hub to include library with single storey infill extension (Use Class F1), youth support (Use Class F2), flexible community/commercial including public hall (Use Class F1/E) plus external alterations to existing elevations, installation of photovoltaic panels and roof top plant and associated parking and landscaping.
Application Type : Surrey County Council Consultation
Status: Registered. Not decided by EBC. Please contact the relevant authority to make a comment.

Surrey County Council Cabinet on 27 June 2023 approved capital spending to fund the Weybridge Library Community Hub redevelopment.

There is some useful information in the comprehensive Report on WEYBRIDGE HUB REDEVELOPMENT presented to Surrey Council Cabinet on 27 June 2023.

Surrey also provide a summary of the options considered.
The original long list of options to deliver Weybridge Library Community Hub included a complete re-build of the existing building and alternative leasehold or freehold acquisitions to re-site the building.
These options were discounted due to the cost and carbon footprint to deliver a new build and limited alternative sites capable of delivering the spatial needs of Council Services.

WeyBetterWeybridge – PPDRA comments

Imagine breathing life back into Weybridge town centre, with better coordinated community facilities, enriched by our green open spaces…  The WeyBetterWeybridge project is looking to do just that, in the redevelopment of the Weybridge Hospital site and the library site.

PPDRA has provided comments to the project, from residents in the Portmore Park area, on what would help make it a success.

For the project to succeed, we see it as imperative that:

  • Community use of both sites is retained and enhanced for people of all ages
    • with increased youth provision and facilities for young people
  • Better linkage is achieved between the sites
    • with pedestrians’ needs put ahead of passing motorists.
  • The massing of buildings is harmonious with the setting
    • remain close to Church Street on the South (library) site
    • allow the open space behind to stay sheltered from road traffic noise and pollution.
  • All the green space and tranquility of Churchfields is retained and safeguarded
    • the open view of St James’ Church from Churchfields is conserved
    • the togetherness of park, allotments and church respected.
  • The green space between the North site and Portmore Park Road is safeguarded.
  • Facilities are multi-functional and flexible
    • maximise use and differing needs across age groups
    • make available for extended hours
  • Car parking provision is sufficient, but not intrusive or dominant
    • e.g. with undercroft parking on the North (hospital) site

We understand that the project is considering multiple possibilities. We want to see community facilities on these town centre sites, and not to lose them to other purposes, such as high density housing or commerce.  And we want to ensure our green open spaces are not lost or diminished.

View to St James’ Church from Churchfields Recreation Ground (across Churchfields Car Park), Easter 2021

  • It is key to retain the natural open views from Churchfields park, towards the Church and allotments
    • building in the southern two thirds of the car park would have an overbearing and negative impact on the open character of Curchfields park and allotments
  • Any new buildings on the South site should extend no further south than the office building adjacent to the entrance to Churchfields car park
  • New building on the Church Street library site should fit with our characteristic Weybridge town centre gabled street scene
  • New build on the North site could cover most of the hospital site
    • incorporating extensive undercroft parking
  • There would be strong opposition to a tower block or excessive height
  • The North site can benefit from a green and tranquil aspect across the Youth Centre field.

PPDRA’s comments for weybetterweybridge share local residents’ thinking on facilities needed, young people’s needs, linking the sites, traffic, parking issues, nearby town centre improvements, and more.

You can download a copy of our full PPDRA comments for weybetterweybridge here

 

Houses to replace garages in Grenside Road?

Traffic chaos in Grenside RoadResidents have mixed views about a planning application to build four terraced houses on the site of 22 lock up garages in Grenside Road (EBC 2020/3495). While new homes would be welcome, and would look much smarter than the current garages, the resulting loss of parking spaces for local residents is a serious worry.

Unfortunately, the application seems misleading about parking – it claims there are ZERO spaces at present (where even the application’s own photos show parked cars) and that it would be creating four additional parking spaces: ‘Existing spaces 0, Proposed spaces 4’.  In reality, it would be taking away spaces used by current residents, and giving some of them to the new homes.

The application’s Transport Technical Note explains that ‘the garage site is within private ownership therefore cannot be relied upon for off-street car parking’. It does not mention the currently used parking spaces on the access road, where the ‘new’ spaces are proposed.  Strangely, it even gets the site location wrong – it shows the development site covering part of the Broadwater Path and a large patch of St George’s Junior School land.

What is needed is some coordinated action to ensure Grenside Road residents have somewhere to park – for example, on-street in Grenside Road, where currently places are taken by heavy school-related parking during termtime.  If suitable controls can be brought in, then residents may even welcome the addition of smart new homes.

The challenge is that while planning consent is given by Elmbridge Borough Council, on-street parking controls are decided by Surrey County Council.  Yet Surrey have repeatedly refused to acknowledge that the parking issues (and traffic issues) in Grenside Road are serious enough to require effective action – despite evidence like the photos accompanying this article.

PPDRA strongly supports residents’ attempts to get the parking issues looked at again, in the light of this planning application.

Wey Road parking restrictions proposed

A controlled parking zone (CPZ) is proposed in Wey Road and Round Oak Road, “to increase space for short stay visitors to Weybridge by discouraging all day parking by non-residents in these roads”.  Surrey is inviting comments on the proposals by 2 October 2020.

Surrey County Council has put forward these proposals as a late addition to the previously drafted Weybridge parking review, in what we understand is an exceptional move in response to a request from residents in these roads.

We have heard very diverging comments on the proposals from local residents, and will make a summary of these available online.

Details of the Wey Road and Round Oak Road CPZ proposals are available on the Surrey County Council website, with the statement of reasons being the primary document, and the weybridge parking review drawings showing what is described in the statement of reasons.

If you would like to object, support, or comment on the proposals, you must do so by 2 October 2020, by either:

  • filling in Surrey’s online survey, or
  • writing, quoting ‘Elmbridge parking review’ to: Parking Team, Hazel House, Merrow Depot, Merrow Lane, Guildford, GU4 7BQ.

UPDATE – SCC Elmbridge Parking Review January 2021 findings and decisions

Wey Road, Round Oak Road

Overview:
  • Objections: 140
  • Other comments: 6
  • Support: 24
  • Final decision: do not proceed.
Analysis summary
  • 11 objections (58%) and 8 comments in support (42%) from Round Oak Road residents
  • 29 objections (66%), 12 comments in support (27%) and 3 other comments (7%) from Wey Road residents
  • 76 out of 79 responses (96%) from outside of the two proposals roads were objections
Conclusion

Given that the analysis shows residents to be against the scheme and would be even if considerable amendments were made to it, and that non-residents were vehemently against the proposals, we have decided not to proceed with any changes to parking in Wey Road and Round Oak Road at the current time.

 

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

Grenside Road school parking

Traffic chaos in Grenside Road

Parking and turning on private land, obstructing residents

Residents of Grenside Road face school traffic and parking issues which need help from Surrey Highways.
Grenside Road is a cul de sac with no turning space, so things can get fraught when large numbers of parents park up on the pavement and neighbouring land, wait with engines running, then try to turn around and drive out.

The private access to residents’ parking spaces and lock up garages is often obstructed by parents parking and manoeuvring and trying to turn around to depart from Grenside Road.

 

The school’s use of the Grenside Road gates as a secondary entrance is in line with Surrey’s policy of multiple access points. But the road lacks the parking controls expected around a school entrance.  There are still no zigzags or special parking restrictions around this entrance, despite the optimistic comments made by an outgoing councillor, before last year’s Surrey County County local elections, about Surrey making safety improvements in Grenside Road.

St George’s Junior School is trying to make sure parents are considerate, but official parking restrictions from Surrey would allow traffic wardens to enforce better behaviour.  PPDRA will continue to draw this to the attention of the new County Councillor, Tim Oliver.  Action is needed to improve a situation residents find unacceptable.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

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