Public Meeting Planned Over El Brute’s Romano-Regency Riverside Plan

To paraphrase former plucky-Brit-cum-war-boss Winston Churchill, we cannot forecast the actions of Richmond Council when it comes to Twickenham Riverside. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. Wise words Winston! But what is that key? Is the key to understanding it the Council’s desire to just get something built and move on so that they can say, “At least we did something?”. Is it about building a fancy-dan lasting legacy to something or other? Or is it to provide ‘new heart for Twickenham’ as their most recent consultation push suggested? Dunno.

Extract of design from LBRuT website

Extract of design from LBRuT website

But what we do know is that the original regency themed design concept complete with colonnade and amphitheatre proved unpopular with a significant majority. Yes, there will always be naysayers, nimbys, blockers and haters but the lack of public support for a redevelopment that is desperately needed was quite telling. Telling too was the Council’s second big consultation on the subject which took place over the summer and which barely mentioned the original scheme despite a clear intention to stick with the same principles and the same architects.

Public meeting about Twickenham Riverside

Public meeting about Twickenham Riverside

This latest Council consultation has now closed but opponents of the scheme in the form of the Riverside Action Group are pressing on with their campaign to ensure that the plans for this prime site reflect the views of the people in the town. Having already showcased some alternative designs, RAG are now hosting a public meeting on Saturday 24th September to give people an opportunity to assess the designs, evaluate the information provided by the Council and discuss the whole bally site. They’re even organising their own referendum on the matter administered by the Electoral Reform society. LBRuT have said they’re listening but are they listening hard enough?

Riverside Action Group flyer

Riverside Action Group flyer

To be fair, El Brute are in a difficult position. Everyone agrees the site needs improving. Everyone likes the idea of making better use of Twickenham’s river frontage. But how to do it? It’s at this point where we look for inspiration to hip hop legends Run DMC and say… “It’s Tricky”. Yes, it is tricky but there does seem to be a clear consensus that the Council has misjudged what Twickenham needs and wants. Here at twickerati HQ we can’t see what’s wrong with a contemporary scheme which takes a nod towards Twickenham’s riverside heritage and which focuses on public space next to the river and opens up Water Lane to connect Embankment to King Street. Job done.

So, with RAG continuing to campaign hard for re-starting the whole process as the Council tries to press on with re-vamping its own scheme, like the old River Thames itself, this one could run for a while yet.

Twickenham riverside site from Embankment

Twickenham riverside site from Embankment

LINKS & INFO:

* RAG public meeting: 10.15am, Saturday 24th September, Clarendon Hall, York House.(Doors 9,45)
* Riverside Action Group
* Richmond Council – Twickenham Rediscovered
* Richmond Council’s original proposals

66 Comments

Filed under Council, Local Issues & News, Twickenham Action Plan

66 responses to “Public Meeting Planned Over El Brute’s Romano-Regency Riverside Plan

  1. twickerman

    El Brute have released a summary of their ‘deep listening’ campaign over the last few months.

    Despite claiming to be ‘publishing a summary of all the points that have been heard’, there is not one mention of the most controversial and most discussed topic at the pop-up shop and workshops, namely Francis Terry (and his unsuitability/inexperience for the job).

    Instead, El Brute have given significant weight to a meagre handful of comments from Talk Richmond, including the suggestion of modern style development ‘such as Regal House’!

    See the press release and summary report and judge for yourself how deeply and/or selectively the council have listened.

    http://www.richmond.gov.uk/home/council/news/press_office/older_news/october_2016/twickenham_we_are_listening.htm

  2. The print RTT of 14.10.16 ha s3 letters (pp. 16-17): Architecture from Anon; No hidden intent here from Cllr Fleming; and Not what I heard from Garth Ward. http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?pbid=c7955673-549d-44a9-9a9c-a642bedeaef8

  3. The following Press Release went out yesterday:
    LOCAL COMMUNITY DEMANDS A TOTALLY NEW APPROACH TO TWICKENHAM RIVERSIDE
    93.9% of local residents want a totally new, transparent and collaborative approach from the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames’ Council to the Riverside site in Twickenham, a referendum conducted by the Electoral Reform Society revealed today.
    The referendum, which was circulated randomly to more than 4,000 voters on the published electoral role in Twickenham and throughout the wider Richmond borough returned 1,015 in favour with only 66 votes (6.1%) against. A parallel electronic survey attracted 213 further respondents and also produced a similar degree of support for starting afresh, with 98.11% in favour.
    The Riverside Action Group (RAG), which commissioned the referendum – has called for a new start by Richmond Council both to the choice of architect and the design of the site, developing the views expressed by the local community at a series of public meetings and an exhibition of different options organised by RAG as well as ‘workshops’ organised by the Council.
    The key features of these were summarised by RAG following a public open meeting held on 24th September and have been sent to the Council and posted on the RAG website. They call for a design which fits in with the historical, cultural, riverine, artistic, musical and other heritage which makes up the unique character of Twickenham.
    RAG’s outgoing Chairman Susan Burningham welcomed the result: “This makes it crystal clear that local residents and the wider Borough have overwhelmingly rejected the Council’s original concept. Residents and stakeholders want a new design from a new architect and landscaper who will connect with this wonderful stretch of the river and create public open space at the heart of Twickenham. The Council must now throw open the future of this central site to other designers and architects on the basis of a new and properly constructed Brief which reflects the wishes of the community.”
    Mark Brownrigg commented: “What is needed is a coalition which brings together all parties and local interest groups to guide the development of and decision on new designs for this critical opportunity and oversee the implementation of the chosen option.”
    A new development which increases the opportunities for the area is the coming onto the market of the entire row of buildings on King Street which run across the Riverside plot and currently make up a significant portion of Twickenham’s high street.
    “This emphasises the importance of taking a holistic view of the whole Riverside site; planning piecemeal with special interest groups is unacceptable,” Dr Burningham commented.

    • aristophanes

      The Press report shows that 1081 votes were cast with “more than” 4000 ballot papers issued. This amounts to a turn-out of about 25%. These papers were sent to a random selection of residents on the “published electoral roll in Twickenham and throughout the wider Richmond Borough”, and also residents were invited to register with RAG if they wished to vote. This latter fact is not mentioned in the Press Report.
      For the sake of transparency, can we have answers to these questions:
      – How many spoilt papers were there?
      – Was Electoral Reform Services (ERS) happy that actively encouraging residents to register did not bias the sample?
      – What is RAG’s feeling about the rather meagre turnout?
      – There are about 140,000 registered voters in the Borough; was the random selection taken from all Wards, and if not, which Wards were selected?
      – RAG’s Press Statement of 4 October states that more than 3000 residents and stakeholders reject the Francis Terry scheme; why then did the Referendum vote amount to only just over 1000?
      – The ballot paper had three separate questions, but only a single yes/no box. How could the paper be completed if a voter did not agree or disagree with all three questions? Does ERS have an opinion on this?

  4. A.Robot (Mrs)

    Haven’t been here for a while but it seems clear that a thumbs down army has been mobilised against all those objecting to the bonehead option.

  5. aristophanes

    My recent comment must have touched a nerve in Dr B, if all she can think of in reply is to attribute to me words I did not write

  6. twickerman

    For Sale: 3-33 King Street. £23,500,000.

    Details below include 2 redevelopment options (flats or townhouses). See brochure.

    http://www.allsop.co.uk/properties/twickenham-3-33-king-street-tw1-3sd/

    • There has to be a Local Planning Authority strategy on this with good infrastructure planning.
      Even more essential to stop the Fleming-True-Terry scheme and take a proper look at whole town planning.

    • illiad1

      erm I think you will find there is something MISSING from that plan….. 😛

    • illiad1

      the allsop one…

    • Instead of comprehensive redevelopment they suggest:

      ‘ . . Development Potential:

      The property provides a number of potential residential led development opportunities (STP) including:

      – A residential development within the rear service area.

      – Potential to create an attractive new frontage facing towards the Diamond Jubilee Gardens and River Thames, which could also complement the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames’ emerging proposal for the development of adjacent land.

      – Immediate conversion from office to residential use through the application of ‘permitted development rights’ at the first floor of 23-25 King Street.

  7. Congratulations to this year’s winners of the Stirling Prize. Peter St John and Adam Caruso have designed a gallery that is perfect for its place. It shows what can happen when an intelligent client works with a knowledgeable architect.
    Now let’s find the right architect for Twickenham Riverside – and let the community be the knowledgeable client.
    Ditch the current ‘concept’ and let us have imagination and sensitivity to the whole site including the Jubilee Gardens.

    • aristophanes

      Architecture is very subjective. You seem to like the Newport St Gallery, I don’t. The pictures I have seen make it look like a Victorian type factory. I don’t see how “the community” can be “the knowledgeable client”, as each member of that community is bound to have different tastes

    • Claims to act on behalf of the ’community’ are always suspect and usually conceal strong prejudices in favour of this and against that.

      Councillors claim to act on behalf of the ‘residents’ who have elected them for a term, which makes their mandate concrete. Cllr Palmer has a mandate from her electors and her fellow councillors to decide what to do, subject to Council veto, until May 2018.

      It’s our bad luck that she is comically unfit for purpose, so let us oppose her plans by all means but not indulge in fantasies about how easy it would be to get agreement as to what to do instead.

    • Who is Cllr Palmer? Please don’t tell me there’s another gorgon’s head to chop off.
      Hercules divert the river, wash the York stables of the manure and use your trusty shield to identify monsters!
      As for Aristophanes he / she is apparently okay with the idea that two councillors and their two (very) well paid employees should choose the buildings we and our children will live with for the next century.
      We don’t want a C3 architect for an A1site. Be proud of our Riverside ask for the best.

    • Cabinet member for the environment – wot’s ‘er name – ah, Fleming, that’s it!

    • Aah much clearing of mucus from throat.

  8. twickerman

    Cllr Fleming may claim “there are currently no plans for the Twickenham Riverside on the table”.

    However, the El Brute’s TwIckenham Rediscovered interweb says ‘we are working to revise our Original Proposals’.

    From which we can only assume that Francis Terry’s original plans are currently on the drawing board being tweaked slightly to show that he and Fleming have ‘listened deeply’.

    • That is why we have worded the referendum to cover these ‘current’ plans.
      In July 2016 the Council published examples of a Doric entrance porch for the town centre, an “enriched modillion cornice”, “imposts and Archivolts”, and many more features of Classical architecture, all in support of their plan.
      Has anyone looked at the Francis Terry website recently – full of his dad’s designs. Enough twirls to confuse our eels!

    • It would be helpful if you could provide a link to items you quote from.

      This comes from: NEW HEART FOR TWICKENHAM http://www.richmond.gov.uk/print/twickenham_rediscovered_revised_consultation_material.pdf page 8:

      ‘ . . WE ARE CONSIDERING: Over the past few months the architects have been reviewing local architecture. They have been considering how the materials used could best reflect the local area. We think there can be a statement development that is financially viable including open and community space. We know that there are many different styles of architecture in the Twickenham area. We believe that we can develop the proposals to take reference from key local buildings, for example the below:

      William Webb Ellis Stone ground floor with rustication and ornate doorways. Mixture of stone and brickwork for the next two storeys with level of stone reducing with height. Window surrounds to first floor include entablature with keystones and pediments, consoles and side scrolls to end windows. Modillion cornice with stone blocking course. K

      . . Kings Street above Greggs Enriched modillion cornice, parapet with urns to ends and stone coping, dormer windows behind parapet within slate roof.

      . . Barclays Bank King Street Stone building comprising rusticated ground floor with Doric entrance porch 2 storeys of plain walls above with Gibbs detailing on windows to projecting bays. Modillion cornice and pediment, roof parapet balustrade with panels of balusters centred on windows below . . ‘

    • And it would be useful if the Council would be clear about who ‘we’ is. If it’s darling Francis he had stay in Essex.

    • Terry’s idea is to make his plain classical design more acceptable to us natives by decorating the King St end to resemble the nearby Barclays bank building:

      ‘modillion, n. < Middle French . . Archit: Any of a series of projecting brackets placed on the underside of the corona of the cornice in the Corinthian, Composite, and (less commonly) the Roman Ionic orders . .
      . . 1970 H. Braun Parish Churches xvi. 200 Amongst its standard ornaments are..the rows of shaped brackets or ‘modillions’ which help to support the overhanging ‘corona’ . . ‘ (OED)

  9. Subject: the Riverside Referendum: for information
    The Riverside Action Group (RAG) refutes the claim by Cllr Fleming “there are currently no plans for the Twickenham Riverside on the table”.
    A spokesman for RAG said “speaking at an Open Public Meeting on 24th September, a Council officer made clear that designs for the Riverside will be made by Francis Terry & Associates”.
    In July 2016 the Council published examples of a Doric entrance porch for the town centre, an “enriched modillion cornice”, “imposts and Archivolts”, and many more features of Classical architecture, all in support of their plans.
    Over 3000 residents and stakeholders have rejected Francis Terry as a suitable architect for Twickenham and seek a new architectural Brief overseen by professionals from the Royal Institute of British Architects and members of the local community as made clear in the original petition and current referendum.
    The Council has chosen consistently to ignore the local community’s requests for a more sympathetic and landscaped design.
    RAG expects the result of the Twickenham Riverside referendum on 13th October to confirm local residents’ rejection of Francis Terry as the ‘Council’s commissioned’ architect.

    • whiteknight

      As the referendum does not put the question “Do you reject Francis Terry as the council’s commissioned architect”, its result cannot be used to confirm (or otherwise)!

  10. aristophanes

    As my name is on the open electoral register, and I live locally, I am looking forward to receiving the ballot paper for the Referendum promised this week by RAG. The question was published on the website and at Saturday’s meeting. However, in common with a correspondent in today’s RTT, I really do not know how I will complete it. There is a three-pronged question (the first of which is now irrelevant) with only one box to tick. Advice, please (or should I ask Electoral Reform Services?)

    • I was assured that the Electoral Reform Society could be relied on draft a clear and unambiguous question as they have great experience of running referenda. Instead it appears to have been drafted by a committee – hence the several parts.

      The only bit that matters is the first: ‘I Reject the Council’s current concept for the development . . ‘.

      This concept is being turned into a plan to be submitted for planning consent at the year end in order to push ahead with the scheme before the election in May 2018. Delay piled upon delay is the only way of stopping it. So stop being so precious, tick the box and think no more about it.

  11. Many thanks to everyone who attended the Open Public Meeting on Saturday, 24th September – and to those who sent their good wishes.
    The slides from the meeting are available on the Riverside Action Group’s website, as are the Key Features written by the meeting’s Chairman Mark Brownrigg: http://www.riversideactiongroup.uk

  12. Sally

    At the meeting it was very interesting to be given a potted history of the awful soulless schemes for the site put forward by various administrations .And ,thank God, battled successfully by determined locals. Bingo hall? Multi storey housing? (That one is such a favourite) Blocks of flats and shops? No problem. Every dud scheme put forward with a token bone for residents. Usually that the flats/bingo hall/ shops will “bring Twickenham, alive”. That they will be an asset for locals. That we will all flock to admire and make use of of whatever it is. I am sure the same claims were made about Regal House.

    What is remarkable is the lack of imagination and greed characterising all of the schemes right up to and including Terry’s lump of housing and retail. Nobody involved seems to have valued our riverside or to even have looked at it. The pretty jumble of old riverside buildings, boatsheds and trees with St Mary’s the highest point- that is what the locals love and people come to see. This is what photographers and other artists love. Nobody will ever, ever say “Quick! Let’s run into Twickenham! I hear there is a multi story retail and housing development!
    Pamela Fleming is very Richmond centric. I don’t think she likes Twickenham, at all. To her if our Borough is a garden, Twickenham is the nasty bit of land at the back, in need of screening off.
    She really seems to believe that it is unthinkable to build on Richmond riverside but just fine to try and try again to sell off and build on Twickenham riverside.
    Richmond riverside is very well protected now. Hence lovely greenery, strictly controlled building heights and an enormously popular riverside area. Our bit of riverside land is small, all the more reason you would think, for making it lovely and in keeping with what is there.
    We are not allowed to reject Terry. I don’t know why not. OK then, when do we see the new plans. For they certainly exist right now.

    • Re: ‘ . . What is remarkable is the lack of imagination and greed characterising all of the schemes . . “

      The 2009 River Centre scheme was neither unimaginative nor greedy. Have you actually looked at it? You’ll find full details, plans, FAQs, a walk-through video, etc. on http://www.rivercentre.org.uk/history2009.

      Actually its business plan was widely criticised for being TOO imaginative, as it relied on future profits from a riverside restaurant to subsidise the River Centre.

      It included a row of private housing at the back to pay for the development; this was denounced by critics as ‘building luxury houses all over the riverside’ when it in fact only occupies a small part. There was nothing ‘greedy’ about this.

      The scheme was postponed and then scrapped after the election and a municipal garden created instead using public funds.

    • illiad1

      *** Twickerati author!!! ** another reason we need an E D I T Function, PLEASE!!!
      proper URL is http://www.rivercentre.org.uk/history2009.htm 🙂 🙂

    • illiad1

      Chris, I do believe she was talking about CURRENT schemes, not old ones… 🙂

    • illiad1: thank you for the correction – apologies.

      Sally’s post referred to ‘a potted history of the awful soulless schemes for the site put forward by various administrations’. I’m surprised she didn’t mention the Mark & Spencer store and the underground cinema.

      The young, particularly, were keen to have a cinema – but they don’t or can’t vote. It was, as ever, the greyhairs with votes where the loudest sound would be the quacking of the ducks who insisted that nice quiet dead municipal garden was the best way to revitalise central Twickenham.

    • Be nice to have a cinema where the old Twickenham cinema was.The Council’s not using the building for anything much.

    • illiad1

      Chris , calm down… 🙂 lets keep on topic…:P 🙂

      and I think you know many cinemas have shut down due to cheap DVDS and internet…

    • Nice to go to the ‘flicks’ though and breath in all the excitement in the company of others. We could build a movie house in the grounds of the Leaders’ Grove and dig an underground car park for good measure.

    • illiad1

      mmm.. I remember when it was only a couple of quid to go to the movies…. 😥
      Nowadays what would you do? spend 12 to 15 on ONE view, for ONE person, or..
      Wait a few months and get the DVD – about a tenner for as many people can crowd round your large screen at home??
      https://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Future-Releases-DVD-Blu-ray/b?ie=UTF8&node=573412
      Lots of tea, coffee, popcorn on tap at a hundredth of the price of the cinema, Big comfortable sofa, and guess what the cinema cannot provide??

      “Can you pause it? I need to pee!” {blush}

    • Never needed to pee if engrossed in a good movie. I just like the audience dynamic – and the knowledge that no one in the family is likely to ‘pop in’ and interrupt my concentration. A child of the 60’s I still get a buzz from the ‘picture house’.
      Sure DVDs are great – I usually buy them if I’ve missed a movie because I have been away or am too busy, or if I loved the film so much I want to see it again – and again! Just bought ‘The Producers’ for instance – a bit clunky in parts, but brilliantly funny.

    • illiad1

      🙂 🙂 some of my friends wish they had your strength, Susan… 😀

      On ‘movie nights’ there is a *strict* rule.. we are NOT at home!! Lights out, all in my converted, soundproofed garage!… :E 😛 🙂
      Friends know and understand…

    • (Stubborn really went confronted with injustice)
      Come and organise my family please, we have obviously failed. When they arrive – unannounced – we are expected to welcome them with open arms! They are quite nice though!

    • illiad1

      😀 😀 😀
      Dear heart, tis a pity, you cannot choose your family… try closing all the curtains, switching off the lights, and ‘gagging’ anyone that tries to answer the knocking and calling though the letter box… 😀 😀

      then you will be awarded with some good ‘quiet time’ for you and yours… 🙂
      Family will soon learn how to use voicemail, etc… 😛

  13. twickerman

    According to Mandy Skinner (LBRUT Asst Dir of something or other) at the RAG meeting, Francis Terry’s latest idea for King Street is a GUILDHALL (i.e. 12th century). Well done Francis for progressing a few centuries from the Roman amphitheatre, but you’ve still a long, long way to go (and please keep going next time you visit Twickenham!).

    It was hardly surprising really that the vast majority of public questions asked during the meeting were for El Brute to ditch Terry junior so that we can progress with concepts and plans that are appropriate for Twickenham Riverside.

    • twickerman

      Aplogies for my vagueness about Mandy Skinner’s job title. Her actual official LBRUT title, according to their very own website, is: Assistant Director – Commissioning Corporate Policy and Strategy.
      All clear now??

    • Just add ‘designate’ and you’re there.

    • The agenda leaflet handed out at the meeting labeled her ‘Assistant Chief Executive Designate (customer and partnerships)’ – in effect the Viceroy sent from ‘Home’ (Wandsworth Town Hall) to show the unruly natives of Twickenham that they are the masters now.

  14. You can see all our tweets from Saturday’s meeting via this Twitter hashtag: https://twitter.com/hashtag/twriverside?f=tweets&vertical=default

    • Thanks for this useful precis: a little bit of new information from Cllr Fleming, who said nothing new beyond good morning), and Mandy Skinner, ‘Assistant Chief Executive designate (customers and partnerships)’ who said their next step would be to distil and summarise all the messages received for the next set of proposals in November.

      I expect they publish a revised Terry scheme then, which will be claimed to be so perfect (as a result of a year of detailed consultations) that no further tinkering by the public can improve it.

      Instead it will be lodged for planning approval before Christmas. The electoral clock is ticking louder and louder and time presses ever harder on their heels.

  15. Sally

    From the workshops, it appears the council are holding the line. They want to put luxury riverside flats on the site and retain Terry as designer. Apart from that, we have infinite freedom. The workshops were not much more than an attempt to claim that residents have been consulted. But given the starting conditions this really isn’t not the case.
    Councillor Fleming was at the workshops we attended. She struck me as pained ,with thinly veiled fury peeping through -and somewhat condescending . Such a fuss to help residents understand what a super scheme it is.
    Incidentally ,a good point was raised about parking, The York Street council offices have a great deal of underground parking and it is of course largely empty on the weekend. An older resident told me that the original deal for allowing the building was that residents would be able to use the underground car park. This was quickly allowed to lapse. Well then, here is something which can only help. Open the car park up to locals, either on weekends ,or during the week. Perhaps Lord True. night need to hunt for a parking spot or take the bus-but what better way to really get to know the local amenities?

    • Thanks for this. You are right Francis Terry is the Council’s “commissioned” architect. But the meeting today made it very clear FT is not acceptable to the residents and stakeholders. Nor is a “statement development”. Several very good ideas have come out, and a clear way forward. Nil desperandum – we go forward refreshed. We will put up reports and slides on our website in the next few days – just need to draw breath.

  16. I hear that the Twickenham Riverside Trust, which has a long lease on the Diamond Jubilee Garden (the old pool site), has said informally that they are willing to put the Garden into a scheme for the whole riverside.

    This may just be wishful thinking as it is hard to imagine something so sensible and obvious actually happening in this affair. If true it means that the Terry scheme can shelved/binned without loss of face by Lord T & Co. and we can start afresh. Enabling development will still be needed to pay for the land purchase and a car park, but both can go at at the back of the enlarged site.

    Who knows? we might come up with something like Clive Chapman’s 2009 design:

    ‘This silent, 2-minute long video walkthrough shows how the redeveloped poolsite can look when it’s completed. This is including the grass-roofed river centre, boat-themed play area, open space, and the refurbished embankment – with most of the parking moved to the rear of the site. The housing masks the ugly back of King Street and provides a mix of single dwellings and flats.’

  17. No parking on the riverside

    • aristophanes

      Everybody would like this. BUT .. it simply is not possible logistically. It was discussed in detail during the workshops recently held. The parking has to go somewhere, and proper traffic circulation must be maintained.

  18. Ex-Twickenham Resident

    Cool flyer! Looks like a fairy story. Lovers united after arduous escape by boat from the distant palace of the merciless ruler.

    • Please don’t mention the word boat – we are still recovering from the Gloriana episode.
      Glad you like the flyer – the one we are using now shows how cross we all are but it would be nice if we can triumph over the merciless (and somewhat tetchy) Leader and his ‘cohort’.

    • Yes, it evokes the Willow Pattern legend:

      Once there was a wealthy peer Baron True, who had a beautiful daughter, Riverside. She had fallen in love with her father’s humble accounting assistant, Pleb, angering her father . . He dismissed the young man and built a high fence around his palace, York House, to keep the lovers apart. Lord True was planning for his daughter to marry a powerful Developer. The Developer arrived by boat to claim his bride, bearing an architect’s concept as a gift. The wedding was to take place on the day the blossom fell from the willow tree.

      On the eve of the Riverside’s wedding to the Developer, Pleb, disguised as a servant, slipped into York House unnoticed. As the lovers escaped with the jewels, the alarm was raised. They ran over Eel Pie Island bridge, chased by Lord T, whip in hand. They eventually escaped on the Gloriana to the safety of Tagg’s Island, where they lived happily for years.

      But one day, Lord True learned of their refuge. Hungry for revenge, he sent his acoiytes, who captured the lovers and put them to death. The gods, moved by their plight, transformed the lovers into a pair of doves . .

      Or something like that.

  19. twickerman

    It’s not quite the same architects. El Brute’s secret design competition resulted in the selection of Quinlan & Francis Terry, largely based on Quinlan’s previous work (including Richmond Riverside) and his CV.
    Francis Terry alone would NOT have been selected based on El Brute’s criteria.

    It seems incredible that they’re plodding on with Francis as the chosen architect despite his lack of relevant experience and public condemnation of his first and second schemes.

    See below what he said to building design online (bdonline.co.uk in June. There are some very telling comments online too):

    “If a client pushed me in a more contemporary direction I would definitely be on for it. I can see that happening. But if I tried to do a stand-out modernist building it would be a bit embarrassing. I’m not experienced enough.”

    ‘He is looking forward to his work being more visible – “I have done so many country houses down leafy lanes that no one ever sees” ‘.

    His work would be considerably more visible in Twickenham. But, let’s not give him the opportunity to experiment with Our Riverside.

  20. Almost right. We have purchased the published electoral roll. So anyone on it gets s ballot paper. The only reason we asked people to register was to ensure those who had chosen not to allow their names to be sold by the Electoral Registrar could be included on our referendum database. An effort toward inclusivity rather than special arrangement. We even have Councillors who have registered and welcome they are too. All votes are anonymous so everyone can vote according to their private opinion.
    We live in a democracy after all.