More trouble for the Twickenham Station plans.
Based on the tireless work of the Twickenham Residents Action Group, there will be a High Court Judicial Review regarding the Richmond Council approved plans to redevelop Twickenham Station.
We have included the Council and the TRAG’s press releases to let you figure out if it is horrible or wonderful news.
Currently the St Margarets Community Website is wondering if the 10 car extensions of St Margarets and Twickenham Station platforms causes the two stations to actually touch, whether that means St Margarets will move into Zone 5?
Twickenham Residents Action Group Press Release
Twickenham Residents Action Group (TRAG) are delighted that permission has been granted by the High Court for the Judicial Review challenge on the redevelopment of Twickenham Station and the case will be heard in court. Despite the Council’s assertions that there was no case to bring, the courts have upheld TRAG’s grounds that the Council:
- Failed to take into consideration the Twickenham Advisory Panel (TAP) Report; and,
- Failed to take into account a Plan B alternative.
It is now for the court to decide whether the council decision to grant planning approval was unlawful, a decision which has gone against overwhelming public opinion, the conclusions of the TAP Report which totally condemns the Solum high-rise flats led scheme and was against the Council’s newly adopted planning policy limiting any buildings to a maximum of 5 storey from track level stepping down to 3.
The cost of taking forward the Judicial Review challenge is considerable and TRAG are seeking the continued support of local residents, business and anyone with PR reach and influence in raising funds towards meeting these costs, which are in the order of £25 -30,000. Donations can be made via the Pay Pal facility on trag-sos.co.uk/,, and by cheque made payable to TRAG, c/o 10 Cole Park Road, Twickenham, TW1 1HW
TRAG continues to campaign for a low rise, policy compliant redevelopment of Twickenham Station with excellent design principles which we can all be proud of long after Rugby World Cup 2015 has come and gone. If the Council and other parties had taken the concerns and proposals of TRAG and local residents seriously some months ago, a Plan B type solution could now be well under way and still can be.
TRAG continues to be open to meeting Network Rail, Solum, RFU and the Council and any other interested parties to share its viable, policy compliant low-rise Plan B alternative which would have the enthusiastic backing of the local community if adopted.
TRAG Press Release - 26 October 2012
Richmond Council Press Release
Council concern that Twickenham Station development is threatened
Richmond Council is disappointed in the decision by the High Court of Justice to grant a Judicial Review hearing on the Council’s Planning Committee approval for the redevelopment of Twickenham Train Station.
In December 2011, the Planning Committee granted planning permission for a development by Solum, a partnership of the landowners Network Rail (whose support is required for any planning proposal to be developed) and Kier Ltd, which had been scaled down from a previous proposal. The development includes key improvements to the station, incorporating a new modern entrance and ticket hall, lifts to all platforms, improved public transport interchange facilities, a café, a riverside walk and a new public plaza with an enabling development of flats above the scheme.
The Greater London Authority or Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government can intervene in certain types of planning applications such as this should they have particular concerns. However, after consideration of the decision and other representations, both announced that they would not be overriding Richmond Planning Committee’s decision.
Since the decision was made a local campaign group, the Twickenham Residents Action Group (TRAG) has sought to challenge it and presented its case to the High Court. Following consideration of the application, a judge has granted permission for a full hearing with the parties presenting their respective cases at Court.
The Council is seeking to have the hearing held quickly with a view to the development being completed and the new station ready in time for the Rugby World Cup, to be held in Autumn 2015.
Lord True, Leader of Richmond Council, said:
“We are naturally disappointed that the new station that Twickenham desperately needs has been further delayed. The Council has full confidence in the correctness of its planning procedures.
“I do understand the strong feelings of those who live near any development site. Throughout the overall process, since Solum presented their first plan, we have sought to hear local views and respond to local interests. However, the scheme approved is not the scheme first presented.
“Twickenham Station is a disgrace to our town and hugely inadequate, not least for those who are disabled or travelling with very young children. In three years time over 400,000 people are expected to come to the town by train for the Rugby World Cup. The eyes of the world will be on us. When they arrive we want them to be greeted at a station better fit for purpose than the present wreck. The delay that this Judicial Review introduces puts this at risk, but we will continue to try to deliver improvement in time for the World Cup. The Council will therefore be robustly defending the reasonableness of the decision taken and the process that was followed in our doing so.”
Comments
The problem with the huge Solum development results from extraordinary costs of £4million for the podium foundations and £6million in Council 'contributions'. That's why Solum have been allowed to build 8 and 9 storey blocks, with little station improvement, to generate 20% profit for Network Rail and Kier Property
twickerman on 2012-10-28 11:45:46 +0000The Solum scheme would not produce a station fit for purpose. The capacity of the station will be reduced and in Solum's own words the station will only be "compliant with Network Rail's minimum standards".
Solum are still stating that the use of Twickenham Railway Station will be minimised during construction. Passengers will be diverted to Richmond, Feltham and Whitton stations.
What will happen to St Margarets Railway Station?
Ian on 2012-10-29 13:09:29 +0000Presumably, the judge is just as surprised as are thousands of local residents that the Council ignored the highly critical TAP (True's Advisory Panel) report, and failed to consider alternative station plans such as TRAG's Plan B.
We would all like a new and efficient station with better facilities for the less able.
We would also like a station that on event days doesn't cause extended closures of London Road and platform overcrowding/safety issues as a result of the massive London bound queues.
Solum's scheme, as Ian points out, fails to improve London bound capacity, and with more visitors than ever expected for RWC2015 this is a recipe for disaster.
If the JR is successful Network Rail must start to focus on station improvement rather than property profiteering.
ruggabugga on 2012-10-29 14:53:11 +0000A small victory for the Nimbies in their struggle to maintain their property valuations. The station redevelopment is desperately needed and TRAG has never properly answered who or how would their "Plan B" station on the cheap be funded. The scaled back mid-rise solution is by far the best and most cost effective solution for the Borough.
sandy clark on 2012-10-30 11:32:57 +0000Anyone who thinks Solum's high rise plans are a good solution needs to read Lord True's TAP report which criticises multiple. aspects of the plans. It also recommends consideration or alternative plans which the Council and Solum failed to do. The TAP report can be viewed at trag-sos.co.uk
twickerman on 2012-10-31 09:49:38 +0000Anyone who thinks Solum's high rise plans are a good solution needs to read Lord True's TAP report which criticises multiple aspects of the plans. It also recommends consideration or alternative plans which the Council and Solum failed to do. The TAP report can be viewed at trag-sos.co.uk
twickerman on 2012-10-31 09:51:09 +0000Here's a direct link to the TAP report on the Council website:
www.richmond.gov.uk/home/council_government_and_democracy/council/council_consultations/twickenham_barefoot_consultation/what_have_they_done.htm
Chris Squire on 2012-11-01 12:51:41 +0000Twickenham residents must have the opportunity to consider the the highly critical findings of the TAP report, prepared by Lord True's "honest brokers", before a planning decision is made. The Council sat on the report for over four months until the planning process was complete. The High Court Judge has agreed that withholding the TAP report was a material consideration.
Residents can make a difference by donating to the Judicial Review Fund (Cheques or Paypal).
Payment details can be found at www.trag-sos.com
Form your own opinion. Don't let the Council choose what you need to hear.
Best regards,
Ian
Ian Blackman on 2012-11-03 12:36:06 +0000Twickenham residents must have the opportunity to consider the the highly critical findings of the TAP report, prepared by Lord True's "honest brokers", before a planning decision is made. The Council sat on the report for over four months until the planning process was complete. The High Court Judge has agreed that withholding the TAP report was a material consideration.
Residents can make a difference by donating to the Judicial Review Fund (Cheques or Paypal).
Payment details can be found at www.trag-sos.com
Form your own opinion. Don't let the Council choose what you need to hear.
Best regards,
Ian
Ian Blackman on 2012-11-03 12:48:19 +0000Would you really rather Twickenham Station just stays as it is, and Solum walk away. This is whats likely to happen - its unlikely anything will happen before 2015 now to avoid disruption at the World Cup and once that passess, the focus on Twickenham will fade and you will get your way. No change..ever! I really don't understand why people are so adverse to change in today's society. Half of you probably live in houses built as a result of change and development...And now begging for contributions towards the review..makes me very angry.
Martin on 2012-11-09 11:27:45 +0000Add a comment