Solum regeneration of Surbiton Station area

[Highview]

A poster has just appeared on Surbiton station announcing a public consultation next week (at the station) on the plans for redevelopment of the land behind the station (mostly the car park) and the land in front of the station. Fortunately the listed status of the station means it won't be an Epsom/Twickenham/Guildford rebuild but there appears to be no plans or website online at present to show the proposed detail - I will try and attend the consultation next week to find out more.

 

[181]

I Googled 'Surbiton station consultation' and found this document: https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/defaul...ar-park-land-disposal-consultation-report.pdf. It appears to be a report of an earlier consultation in 2021, mostly within the railway industry but including the local authority, on what I presume is the same scheme. It doesn't go into detail, but based on a quick look, I have the impression that the main proposal is to build housing on part of the car park and a multi-storey car park what is left.

Do you know when the consultation is? (I will probably be in Surbiton for part of next week).

 

[nlogax]

Do you know when the consultation is? (I will probably be in Surbiton for part of next week).

Can't find a date unfortunately.

This has been on the list of potential plans for about two decades so good to see it's finally getting closer to something tangible.

As an aside was amusing to see the list of those whom were invited to comment on the plans. Major lynchpins of SW London infrastructure such as Northern, Avanti, Merseyrail and Eurostar. Where was ScotRail's email?

 

[wastedlife]

I lived in and owned a flat in sight of Surbiton station for twenty years - this consultation has been done before, I think when I was living there, which puts in the 2001 to 2011 time frame. From memory, that proposal most definitely was building on the car park - it was notably silent on what the ex-poste car parking provision would be. In fact, my flat was built on land bought from British Rail Residuary Board, so there is I guess some precedent for this, albeit forty years ago. The car park is just outside the Oakhill Conservation area, which would have made getting planning a multi-year process, but even still, I can't see anything quick happening as a result of this (or RBK taking a particularly favourable view).

 

[181]

As an aside was amusing to see the list of those whom were invited to comment on the plans. Major lynchpins of SW London infrastructure such as Northern, Avanti, Merseyrail and Eurostar. Where was ScotRail's email?

Yes, I thought that. I'd guess there's maybe some kind of rule about consulting all Engllish TOCs before selling off railway land.

I lived in and owned a flat in sight of Surbiton station for twenty years - this consultation has been done before, I think when I was living there, which puts in the 2001 to 2011 time frame. From memory, that proposal most definitely was building on the car park - it was notably silent on what the ex-poste car parking provision would be. In fact, my flat was built on land bought from British Rail Residuary Board, so there is I guess some precedent for this, albeit forty years ago.

If that's the block of flats I'm thinking of, my recollection is that it was built probably a little over 40 years ago (45, maybe) on the site of what I presume (my memory of the disused building being rather hazy) was the goods shed. Comparison of the old map and modern aerial view here indicates that the footprint of the flats only slightly overlaps with that of the goods shed, but was definitely part of the yard.

 

[ThisIsSurbiton]

Do you know when the consultation is? (I will probably be in Surbiton for part of next week).

It's:

• Tuesday 12/12/2023: 2pm - 8pm
• Saturday 16/12/2023: 11am - 4pm
• Thursday 11/01/2024: 2pm - 8pm

It's in the old southern ticket hall, so a good opportunity to have look at that if nothing else...

 

[Oldgaloot]

If it's anything like the big up the development at Guildford, there'll be two or three youngsters who don't appear all that clued up about the locality. Good luck.

 

[QJ]

Losing the car park on the down side at Surbiton will make for an interesting challenge when rail replacement buses are required between Surbiton and Clapham Junction.

 

[Fazaar1889]

A poster has just appeared on Surbiton station announcing a public consultation next week (at the station) on the plans for redevelopment of the land behind the station (mostly the car park) and the land in front of the station. Fortunately the listed status of the station means it won't be an Epsom/Twickenham/Guildford rebuild but there appears to be no plans or website online at present to show the proposed detail - I will try and attend the consultation next week to find out more.

What do you mean by "It won't be a...Guildford Rebuild"? Do you not like Solum's new design?

 

[swt_passenger]

What do you mean by "It won't be a...Guildford Rebuild"? Do you not like Solum's new design?

What I think is meant is that the Surbiton station buildings and footbridge are listed grade 2 so will all have to be retained.

 

[Fazaar1889]

What I think is meant is that the Surbiton station buildings and footbridge are listed grade 2 so will all have to be retained.

Ah ok thanks

 

[181]

It's:

• Tuesday 12/12/2023: 2pm - 8pm
• Saturday 16/12/2023: 11am - 4pm
• Thursday 11/01/2024: 2pm - 8pm

It's in the old southern ticket hall, so a good opportunity to have look at that if nothing else...

Thankyou. (I've probably been inside there before, but not for many years).

 

[Highview]

The plans are all online now - this local news article has a summary:https://kingston.nub.news/news/loca...tion-for-surbiton-station-regeneration-214172

 

[wastedlife]

If that's the block of flats I'm thinking of, my recollection is that it was built probably a little over 40 years ago (45, maybe) on the site of what I presume (my memory of the disused building being rather hazy) was the goods shed. Comparison of the old map and modern aerial view here indicates that the footprint of the flats only slightly overlaps with that of the goods shed, but was definitely part of the yard.

It's Saxon Close, which was slightly under 40 years ago - the sale of the land to the developer was dated 1984 and the lease 1986.

Anyway, I note the only point I recall making way back when is still valid now - the proposed MSCP will have 250 spaces, to replace a 443 space ground level car park. Which, even post COVID, is full on a Tuesday - Thursday basis, and pre-COVID full working week basis. So how is that going to work? They can't even get the name of Victoria Road right - since when has it been the "High Street"?
Now I'm in KT8, the local Residents Association political party, which seems to exist solely to object to planning applications, would have a field day with the rest of the proposal. Hugely difficult and disruptive development for very little apparent benefit given the constraints.

 

[nlogax]

First glance suggests this plan is hugely underbaked. Reopening the southern ticket hall for commercial use and exploring step free access is just fluff. Halving the amount of spaces is going to be a major problem. Oakhill is going to hell on toast if this is the intended direction.

Beginning to understand why all these plans have produced no fruit in twenty years of trying.

 

[Highview]

Losing the car park on the down side at Surbiton will make for an interesting challenge when rail replacement buses are required between Surbiton and Clapham Junction.

There appears to be no parking provisions for these in the plans, the current operation of the non stop Clapham Junction RR buses has become shambolic in any case with cancelations "due to the national shortage of bus drivers" (which SWR tweets about on recent occasions). I would not be surprised if they took the opportunity to abandon these all together and force people to use the all station stops rail replacement bus operation from the front forecourt.

 

[181]

It's Saxon Close, which was slightly under 40 years ago - the sale of the land to the developer was dated 1984 and the lease 1986.

Thankyou. I was thinking of Wellington Court, round the corner in the part of Glenbuck Road nearer the station. Saxon Close is on the site of the old British Road Services depot (latterly Roadline, and then briefly used as a warehouse before it burnt down in about 1982). Comparison of the old maps here and here suggests that most of that site was never actually part of the goods yard, but it's not surprising that at least part of it was railway property.

I had a quick look at the documents online (thankyou @Highview for the link), and went to the consultation today. (You go in through the old ticket hall, but most of the exhibition is in the space behind which was presumably the office behind the ticket windows). The staff appeared to have at least some knowledge of the area. They said that surveys last year had indicated a maximum car park occupancy of 297 (so if anyone has evidence that that's wrong or out of date, you'd better tell them), that the council were quite keen on having a smaller car park (presumably because it would mean fewer people driving into Surbiton, I'd guess), and that SWR were keen on maintaining car park spaces (although it seem to me that they could benefit to some extent, if people driving in from further out were to use their local stations instead). I think it was envisaged that residents' parking schemes would prevent rail users from parking in the nearby streets, but that's presumably a matter for the council rather than Solum directly.

I'm not convinced by the idea of a 17-storey tower, which is about twice as high as any other flats in Surbiton. They said they'd looked carefully at townscape, sight lines, etc. and thought it wouldn't be very obtrusive; maybe they're right, but I hope it wouldn't set a precedent. It wouldn't surprise me if they're asking for 17 in the expectation of getting permission for some smaller but still large number.

In principle I think high density development near stations is probably a good way of providing necessary new dwellings without building on green spaces or increasing car dependency, and fewer people driving into Surbiton probably is a good thing in many ways (depending on what they do instead), but there might be problems with this scheme in its current form.

 

[wastedlife]

Thankyou. I was thinking of Wellington Court, round the corner in the part of Glenbuck Road nearer the station. Saxon Close is on the site of the old British Road Services depot (latterly Roadline, and then briefly used as a warehouse before it burnt down in about 1982). Comparison of the old maps here and here suggests that most of that site was never actually part of the goods yard, but it's not surprising that at least part of it was railway property.

I had a quick look at the documents online (thankyou @Highview for the link), and went to the consultation today. (You go in through the old ticket hall, but most of the exhibition is in the space behind which was presumably the office behind the ticket windows). The staff appeared to have at least some knowledge of the area. They said that surveys last year had indicated a maximum car park occupancy of 297 (so if anyone has evidence that that's wrong or out of date, you'd better tell them), that the council were quite keen on having a smaller car park (presumably because it would mean fewer people driving into Surbiton, I'd guess), and that SWR were keen on maintaining car park spaces (although it seem to me that they could benefit to some extent, if people driving in from further out were to use their local stations instead). I think it was envisaged that residents' parking schemes would prevent rail users from parking in the nearby streets, but that's presumably a matter for the council rather than Solum directly.

I'm not convinced by the idea of a 17-storey tower, which is about twice as high as any other flats in Surbiton. They said they'd looked carefully at townscape, sight lines, etc. and thought it wouldn't be very obtrusive; maybe they're right, but I hope it wouldn't set a precedent. It wouldn't surprise me if they're asking for 17 in the expectation of getting permission for some smaller but still large number.

In principle I think high density development near stations is probably a good way of providing necessary new dwellings without building on green spaces or increasing car dependency, and fewer people driving into Surbiton probably is a good thing in many ways (depending on what they do instead), but there might be problems with this scheme in its current form.

I wouldn't be seen dead living in Wellington Court . There is always someone smoking weed when I walk past it anyway. There is already Residents Parking all around the Oakhill area; it came in in Saxon Close while I was living there, about 15 years ago istr.

I do think last year's car park occupancy has been exceeded this year; I recall thinking to myself just how full the car park was one afternoon while changing trains on platform 3/4, Ultimately, if RBK really want to discourage people from driving to Surbiton, then their best way to do that would be to work with Elmbridge and other adjacent councils to get zone 6 extended beyond Surbiton. After that, they would have to work with SWR such that services to surrounding stations weren't so rubbish. Until those are achieved, then there will always be railheading to Surbiton.

I'm also far from convinced by a 17 story tower, and have already fed back on that point. If I lived in Chene Colline court or certain of the Saxon Close flats, I would be protesting vigorously about that. I can't think of a block over 4/5 stories high in KT6 other than a few down on the river, certainly nowhere near the centre of town.