A new chapter has begun in the saga of Twickenham Riverside. After previous Tory and Lib Dem administrations’ unloved plans were dumped after they lost local elections, when the current Lib Dem lot took control of Richmond Council, we’ve seen slow but measured progress towards a new attempt to come up with a plan for the site that works in terms of design, function and finances. In recent months LBRuT, aka El Brute, have issued a design brief for the site and shortlisted five firms of architects off the back of a competition run through RIBA. And now, as autumn 2019 trundles towards us, we finally get to see what those five outfits have come up with. Progress? Possibly.
We’ve now got the big reveal and have entered a period of public engagement. Avid readers – and even non-avid ones – will recall that the consultations run by ‘the last lot’ generally ignored significant public feedback about moving car parking away from the Embankment river front to free up the space for people rather than vehicles. The process also saw the original ‘well wide of the mark’ Terry designs become blander and blander and the much touted ‘town square’ get smaller and smaller. It was all a bit of a mess. We all love a faceless committee but that’s no way to design a riverside development. OK, so it probably is but you get the gist.
The five shortlisted teams trying to woo Twickenham with their design flair are: Baynes and Mitchell; Allies and Morrison; Cullinan Studio; Hopkins Architects; Haworth Tompkins. And what of the new designs? We were hoping for clever ideas, innovative solutions to the parking conundrum and architecture which makes some kind of nod to Twickenham’s riverside heritage without being either too twee, too utilitarian, too overbearing or focusing on winning a design award with some kind of ‘BOLD STATEMENT’. Did we get them? Here’s what we reckon after a quick glance at the runners and riders (who remain unnamed on each set of plans). In a word, interestingish. Most of them start from a better place than where the previous design ended up. All of them place a strong emphasis on open space by the river. Parking and traffic is moved off the river front but whether the issue is truly ‘solved’ will require more detailed scrutiny. All contain a fair amount of building – that was always going to be the case – and some are more ‘blocky’ than others. Styles vary quite significantly but in essence, although none of them tick every box right away, there’s some good stuff to go on. Some folk will be disappointed there’s no lido although one design features a ‘natural pool’ which, we are told, is definitely not a traditional lido but nor is it a ‘Hampstead style pond’, but yes you can swim in it. That architect also features a big arch over a cafe which you’ll either quite like or hate. There’s lots to look through in more detail but surely there’s something in these five sets of plans that people can broadly support? Yes? Maybe?
What next? Well, from now until 2nd October you have an opportunity to tell LBRuT what you think about the designs and this, dear reader, we are told will enable the Design Panel peeps to take account of public views and help push things forward. In other words, it’s not a public vote but your views will (or at least might) be taken into account as part of the “detailed process of development and engagement”. The chosen architect team will be announced in November.
If you want to take a closer look then there is a lot more information about each design – more pictures and plenty of words – on the Council’s website and there also are four drop in sessions at Clarendon Hall, York House as follows:
Thursday 5th Sept – 12pm-8pm
Thursday 12th Sept – 6pm-8.30pm
Saturday 21st Sept – 10am-5pm
Tuesday 24th Sept – 6pm -8.30pm
So, whaddya fink?
LINKS:
- LBRuT Twickenham Riverside This site contains more information about the process and full details on all the designs. Deadline for comments is Wednesday 2nd October
Other links:
- Twickenham Riverside Park or on Twitter here.
- Twickenham Riverside Action Group (RAG)
- Twickenham Lido
- Twickenham Riverside Trust (Diamond Jubilee Gardens)
Does illiad really need to comment on every single post on here, sometimes multiple times? Too much #meerkrap
well how about getting more to comment???😁
One more day to comment on the Twickenham Riverside design competition! If you haven’t had your say please follow the links above to look at the five submissions, as well as the Council’s plans for parking and other aspects of the competition.
The five submissions are all solid entries with interesting approaches to the site, and are definitely worth a good look. It’s important that the Council get as much feedback as possible on the plans so that we can all feel confident that we will end up with the plan Twickenham wants, needs and deserves!
well lets just hope we get a *nice* Christmas present!! 🙂
a simple way to make sure people discover the new twickenham riverside.. 🙂
yes, its very rough, but you get the idea….
https://ibb.co/LhHwSzv
Ie put bus stop back where it was before council spent a fortune on York stone paving to achieve not very much.
go to gmaps street view, and click the date, select a year, and click pic to see. 🙂
the old bus stop was actually outside starbucks/natwest, so not so good..
if they get off *right next* to the new development, people would SEE it..:P
Architects 1 and 3 seem to have captured the overall want and need to make the space a multi-use environment that enriches the river and it’s frontage. The river at twickenham has long been a site for Anita-social behaviour so by bringing the location back into the community with multiple uses for leisure, residential and visitors we have together nailed it.
This with the developments in nearby Marble Hill would make the riverside at Twickenham a destination location. This would in turn help some of the run down restaurants and shops that only make a return when the rudby is on. Not a fair situation who’s residents would like to spend their weekends (and money) in their location community. In turn creating a hub for businesses, jobs and growth.
Sorry to interrupt a good’ol rant but there IS suitable alternative parking for you car-free-islanders!
– All along the East end of the Embankment that ElBrute intend to convert to mostly resident and business use.
– PLUS up to 40 spaces in the architects’ proposed schemes.
– PLUS retention of the service bays by the bridge.
Next I imagine you’ll be complaining about being able to see pesky people enjoying themselves on the riverfront, where once you had a lovely view of the car park!
As a resident of Eel Pie Island I will fight these plans in anyway I can. It is frankly ridiculous to suggest a whole island community has their parking removed without suitable replacement. There are many families with small children, elderly people, self employed tradespeople and businesses on the island who require parking and vehicular access. Not to mention the myriad delivery companies that service the islanders 7 days a week.
Any street in Twickenham or anywhere could be made more aesthetically pleasing by removing parking spaces but that is not the world we live in. We need the parking spaces as much as any other resident in any street needs there parking space.
no one can claim parking rights on the public highway.
Local yocal see “anonymouse – September 30, 2019 at 3:16 pm”
Well, Local yocal, how are the “many familes with small children, elderly people, self-employed tradespeople and businesses” currently managing to get by on their car-free island? Presumably they are able enough to walk over the bridge and along the path to their properties? What’s another couple minutes’ walk, really?
The Council has planned to replace all of the residents bays currently on the Embankment with an equal number of spaces within 400m of the bridge. If that is not bending over backwards to accommodate the wishes of a tiny, incredibly loud minority I don’t know what is. You should congratulate your resident activists — they have been extremely successful in representing your interests.
Given the fact that Eel Pie Islanders don’t have any actual right to exclusive parking on what is a piece of public land, I think the council have been amazingly helpful to you in reproducing all of your parking and your loading areas. Please read the introductory documents carefully and I’m sure you will agree.
Fight? As in get the ear of Councillors and then support their proposal to lose the opportunity to make this riverside area an assett to the community forever by building a boring, cheap and nasty (and probably not even profitable) residential development on the site, just to keep the parking on the riverside so that islanders have a marginally shorter walk to their cars? The islanders and Ms Horatio Burningham aka various other identities to amplify her voice, supporting the indefensible at the Planning Committee which approved the last plans really was not a very edifying watch, even the Conservative Councillors admitted the plans were mediocre and uninspiring in the face of the evidence from those that opposed it (it is still available to watch on webcam if you are in need of a cringe). Thank goodness there was an election soon afterwards that gave the majority of the community a chance to vote for a party that promised better.
There will still be a drop off zone and parking that all islanders can reach, so what exactly are you fighting for? A return to the above?
Too right RV… 🙂 I dunno about the ‘McD arch. though….
Illiad – Twickenham Museum, Eel Pie Island Museum, World Rugby Museum – all in Twickenham.
now count.. how many did I say 😛
Illiad. You are totally forgetting why people from outside CPZ D come to the town. It is to visit the shops, cafes, museums, maybe attend a funeral, wedding or church service, or a function in the rowing club or pubs and clubs in the town. These businesses are the life blood of the town. Our beautiful river is a bonus but not what makes the town tick.
shops??? not many.. most have gone out of business due to high taxes..
I am sure people look out from heath road bus stop to see closed shops, and carry on to the green..
Museums??? I think you are lazily looking at tripadvisor, where most of the ‘museums’ are OUTSIDE Twickenham!!
only 2 or 3 of these are *actually* there.. unless you are a rugby fan..
sounds like you are a travel agent pushing your glossy untruths… how richmond is very close to twickenham, and how a marvelous castle is ‘only 10 mins away by bus or car’..
What shops would those be, then? one greengrocer, a decent stationer (not WH Smith), a book shop that seems to regard actual books as a bit of a nuisance and any number of vape, mobile phone and charity shops.
There is much talk about the “reallocation of parking” on Twickenham Riverside. The Council is only talking about Resident/Business parking. 117 Pay and Display parking bays from Wharf Lane to beyond the Church on Riverside are being removed and not replaced. Visitors to the town who don’t live in CPZ D (which covers only the centre of Twickenham) will have to park in either Holly Road or Arragon Road car parks if there is space.
Perhaps visitors from outside Zone D will enjoy the chance to enjoy the views of the river from one of these designs rather than dumping their cars there because it is marginally closer to Boots ? There is going to be parking on the site for the disabled as well as Eel Pie residents (who let’s remember have chosen to live somewhere where they have to walk some distance to their cars even when they are parked next to the bridge) . Town centre developments are in any case car free as the flats here will be. So a stroll to Aragorn Road or Holly Road for the able bodied is not exactly onerous.
I haven’t noticed the Riverside in Richmond suffering from the fact you have to walk there from distant parking, and indeed that the amount of parking within the vicinity has been substantially reduced. People often having travelled by public transport are attracted to the nicer environment.
Exactly, and they aren’t making this clear hence why I say they are being duplicitous. People are so gullible. They’ll learn!
as do visitors to Richmond and Kingston town centres and riverside.
“visitors from outside Zone D” will mostly be those living near to twick stadium ( and rugby fans..), and those that work in zone D.. the rest have the far more attractive Radnor gardens and Orleans gardens..
The natural swimming pool in 3 looks interesting (the open air pool at Hampton is well used) pity that a marked cycle route has steps.
I like the undulating greenery in 2.
Architect 4 implying that a block of flats is equivalent to a villa like Marble Hill is just silly and comes across as very grey.
Wharf Lane is an important cycle access route from Heath Rd/Cross Deep so improving the existing substandard lane is critical. 1 seems to have shared use of a narrow footway.
I LOVE design 3. I think the covered market hall is striking and boId and will give Twickenham a new visual signature, as well as a useful community space — and doubly useful with a roof over it. I also love the natural pool in that design. It’s better than a lido and will bring the river into our lives in a wonderful way, as will the floating pontoons.
I also really like the reclaimed and low-embodied energy materials in architect 2’s plan, although the design itself is not to my personal taste. But I would like to see some of that eco-friendliness brought into the final design by whichever architect is chosen.
Plan number 4 doesn’t have enough green space for my taste. Numbers 1 and 5 are fine, and I would be happy with either of those, but neither has the pizzazz of number 3 in my view – and why not shoot for some pizzazz?
I will be very interested to see what the results of the consultation are and hear what my neighbours think of the designs. Will anyone else like the market hall arch? The important thing is for everyone to take a good look and give useful feedback via the online consultation or in person. The council seems to really want opinions from as many residents as possible to inform their decision about which architect to choose and adjustments to be made to the plans before final designs are prepared.
All in all I think there are a lot of great ideas to work with here and I am optimistic that we will break ground on something great in the next year. At last!
So please,
This is a lesson in duplicity when it comes to the parking issue.
Are they providing a number equal to the total number of spaces lost, no they aren’t. At best we are given the ones only immediately next to the development, weasel words indeed. Then factor in that spaces are presumably not being provided for the flats, or if they are, then the spaces reprovided will be used by the flats.
This is how the war on anyone who wants to use their car, not matter how clean and electric etc is waged. Alongside weasel measures on car parking, including so called car free developments (or flats where you can’t aspire to having a car after spending half a million on a box, more fool you if you work shifts when public transport is bad), lots of new and unnecessary cpz, with resistance broken by allowing them to be done street by street to shift demand and create need for them. Not to protect residents but to restrict the use of personal transport.
No one is being stopped from using their car, only from parking it within the area of the development. As for restricting ‘personal transport’, most of the schemes provide ample cycle parking and access.
Cllr James Chard. Why did you not put removal of parking and Embankment thoroughfare in your Manifesto? It wasn’t made “crystal clear” to the residents of the Borough.
Hi Fairplay. We prominently set out our view on removal of parking from the Embankment in leaflets that went out across Twickenham Riverside ward, and we discussed it on the doorsteps with both supporters and opponents of the proposal.
I understand some people disagree with that proposal, but saying we were not clear on it with residents simply isn’t accurate – indeed, it was one of the leading issues of our campaign.
Hi James,
I agree, you made your intentions to remove/relocate parking from the riverfront very clear, and I fully support that.
Now it would be great to know how ‘parking will be reprovided elsewhere’? I believe your parking plans have been presented to the Stakeholder Group, so let’s all see them. It might just appease the ‘car parking is king’ die hard fanatics that are posting on here.
#ParkNotCarPark
Looks like a parking lot in front of a factory
The Council is removing more than 120 Pay and Display Parking places from Wharf Lane, along the Embankment to beyond the Church on Riverside. These are the Council’s own figures. Visitors to the town will be directed to either Holly Road or Arragon Road car park, whether they are attending a rugger match, a funeral, a wedding, a party in the Rowing Club, visiting the shops or the artists’ studios, the Twickenham Museum, Mary Wallace Theatre, restaurants and shops in Church Street – or even visiting the residents of the new flats that are proposed on the Development site.
Just in case you missed it from the Councillor down thread and the “fake news” approach wasn’t deliberate 🤔. “ T – Each design re-provides some of the spaces removed from the immediate Riverside elsewhere on the site, and these include disabled bays for less mobile people. They differ in the amount re-provided, so do please comment on that. More broadly, Council officers have been doing substantial work on creating additional spaces and re-balancing between resident, business and pay-and-display in the vicinity.“
Definitely not 3,1 and 5 don’t look too bad.
Thanks to all who attended today’s drop-in session at Clarendon Hall.
In terms of listening to the public, Gareth Roberts as Council Leader and I as Twickenham Riverside councillor are both Design Panel members and were both there almost all day (I needed to pop out for a meeting re: Twickenham Yacht Club at one point, but seven out of eight hours isn’t bad!). We were joined by other Design Panel members, and by fellow ward councillors Julia Neden-Watts and Roger Crouch during the day. We tried to speak with as many of the 200+ people through the door as we could.
We aim to do the same again in the further drop-ins this month, and at special sessions we have arranged (Julia is going to St Mary’s School this week for example). We will also consider all the online responses.
The vast majority of visitors were positive about the designs as a whole, but had preferences and suggestions about how to improve individual designs. That’s ideal – it helps us chose, and to work with the chosen architect to get to a final design based on comments.
We had opposition councillors and former councillors attend, and thanks to them for engaging in the process and sharing our determination to get this done.
I look forward to the remaining drop-in sessions (Thursday 12th, 6-8.30pm, Saturday 21st, 10am-5pm, and Tuesday 24th, 6-8.30pm).
I visited yesterday and it was good to see the councillors actively engaging in discussion. In addition to the displays of the designs there was some interesting facts and figures provided which listed the usage of space (sqm), public space (sqm), no of residential units etc for each design. These numbers can be quite revealing as it is often not easy to ascertain such detail from the drawings. This is also available online in the document titled ‘Essential Design Information’
Having had only a quick look on the website, I’d say in reverse order of preference:
2 – Very boxy, don’t like it at all.
4 – Landscaping looks OK but don’t like the looming big white building.
5 – Like the basic idea, and namechecking Shrewsbury old market hall is good, but pictures aren’t immediately exciting.
3 – Not sure about the arches, and there’s a lot going on here, but it looks quite fun.
1 – Nice and open, doesn’t look like it’s trying too hard.
Discuss…
Yep, I’d go with 1. Looks to be a more flexible space which can be adapted as needs and fashions change.
I like number 3, there are more pictures and detail on the council website, link above. It looks very ambitious
Yes there is a lot in these designs that I can support, especially moving the cars parked on the riverside and replacing them with an environment that makes the best of the riverside as an asset to the town and to attract in visitors. The designs have lots of good ideas within them, especially the use of water. I don’t suppose we can pick and mix….
Parking is not going to be taken away, it is going to be moved because at the moment the convenience of islanders is being put before the amenity of the whole community, and their cars are enjoying our views, whilst the islanders enjoy their views without that blight, on the pedestrianised island they chose to live on. As far as I can see there is a turning circle or potential for a turning circle for pick up and drop off so what we are talking about is islanders having to walk to and from their cars once parked. Presumably as with the last development that can be undercroft parking so 400m is over egging it.
‘Their cars enjoying our views’ ? Our views of what? Houses and back gardens on the island. The view is up and down the river not out over it, and the view is the same parking or not.
Could not agree more RiversideVoter… move the cars. We will soon live in a world where car ownership is discouraged anyhow.
T I don’t think this hyperbole does your cause any good. Of course the views from our riverside are 360 degrees, and cars dominate those views, how much better for them to be in the context of these designs. Not just that but there are views along the river from elsewhere, such as Radnor gardens. Currently from Radnor you look back at a traditional townscape with the pubs and St Mary’s church, and a load of cars, eighteenth century meets the 1960s.
sure, remove the cars… but think carefully on that..
now suppose you buy a giant kitchen suite, a giant 70 inch TV, or a full modern installed bathroom??? (with all tech controls)
what would happen when they find how far way they have to carry all that stuff??
and and what happens when you find Waitrose et al have run out of certain heavy things like dog food, milk (and they cannot delever)??
The boss of my office often orders large stuff (£10 for 20 Kg cat litter), but the delivery guy only manages to take it the 10 Meters to the front of the office block and put it inside the door, not even bothering to look at the lifts to the 2nd floor..
This council is a joke. The reduction in parking is ridiculous. Why make it harder for people to visit, live and work here. Nice looking designs shame they missed out replacing the lost parking from the waterfront.
I think you’ve missed the point. The council IS relocating parking from the riverside to elsewhere in the town centre, not removing it.
But, since you’re not the first to comment about it, they probably need to do a better job of explaining what their parking plans are.
Perhaps ‘Red Robbo’ would like to comment?
It’s a net reduction in parking capacity so yes it is removing parking. Plus they need spaces for the new flats.
Oh dear, oh dear HJJ,
Relocating is not removing. It’s moving it elsewhere in the town centre. They’re also gonna be redesignating spaces for residents and businesses where necesssary.
If you actually look at the designs and the supporting Essential Design Information the architects have included an additional 10-40 parking spaces in their schemes. That’s a NET GAIN in parking capacity.
So sorry if I’ve contradicted you’re ill-informed rant with facts.
I live nearby Water Lane and park in this location, but fully support removal of parking. I’d much rather a slightly longer walk with a vastly improved riverside amenities.
The Riverside is a key asset for Twickenham. Community Parking Zone permit parking is not a guaranteed right outside your house, and the wider benefit to the vast majority should be considered. If you require parking, don’t live on a pedestrianized island!
With respect the island is, as it has been for a very long time, a working island. The issue is not the proposal to make the riverside accessible to the wider community but that parking is going to be taken away and not suitably replaced.
very nice, but what happens when deliveries fail to turn up, due to lazy people…
Hello T
On the contrary, parking will be reprovided elsewhere and new signage (the X number of spaces here type) will be deployed to advise visitors to the town where spaces exist in main car parks such as Arragon Road and Holly Lane.
However if your concern is regarding an ‘already dying High Street’ then I think the key word there is ‘already’. Something needs doing as the status quo is a major contributory factor to the decline.
Hello Gareth Roberts,
Oh yes, parking will be reprovided….. up to 400m away. A struggle for an able bodied person to carry 4 shopping bags let alone an elderly or disable person. May I ask what percentage of spaces in Arragon Road and Holly Lane are currently under-utilised each day? As far as I’m aware both car parks are near or at full capacity and removing and ‘reproviding’ residents to these carparks will over subscribe them. And before get the obligatory ‘You moved to an island with no cars, its your own choice’ comment arrives, yes I moved to Eel Pie but I knew I could park within 100m of where I lived. What would be the reaction be Mr Roberts to the council turning up one day and saying,’ Sorry, you can no longer park outside your house, we want to turf your road and put a playground in. You can now park 400m away……’
I fear running my small business is now going to be near impossible if no parking is provided near to the island. As someone dependent on carrying large amounts of equipment to jobs can someone please explain how I am to get this to and from a car parked 400m away and that is if I am lucky enough to get a space.
Presumably some strictly time-limited loading periods near the footbridge wouldn’t be beyond imagination? There’s a difference between necessary, temporary vehicle access and unnecessary, permanent parking, isn’t there?
George and K – all designs include loading/servicing bays for businesses and households, immediately beside the EPI footbridge as specifically required by the brief. Please do look at that provision in each design and provide your comments on each proposal.
T – Each design re-provides some of the spaces removed from the immediate Riverside elsewhere on the site, and these include disabled bays for less mobile people. They differ in the amount re-provided, so do please comment on that. More broadly, Council officers have been doing substantial work on creating additional spaces and re-balancing between resident, business and pay-and-display in the vicinity.
Ultimately, we made a judgment (and were crystal clear about it at the local elections last year in literature and in person) that the best thing for Twickenham as a whole (to draw people into the town to work, shop, and socialise) was to make a feature of our beautiful riverfront area rather than keeping it as a car park. I know not everyone agrees with that, but it’s the right thing to do and one of the bases on which we were elected.
I’m very happy to have a constructive dialogue with anyone on options for alternative provision elsewhere on the site and nearby – and had several such discussions yesterday at the drop-in session – but, as to retention of the immediate riverfront as a car park, that ship has sailed.
What a fantastic result for Twickenham. No matter which design moves forward all of them return the use of the land to people and not cars.
To the vocal selfish minority who complain about the lack of parking, I hope in time you come to realise that what you’ve lost in convenience has been for the greater good and enjoyment of the many including yourselves.
Good piece as always and some very interesting designs. Some arguably more interesting than practical?
It might be worth explaining that there’s much more detail (5 big pages) of each of the designs on El Bruté’s website.
Best comment on twitter so far, possibly from a non-native: “Bloomin’ ‘eck they look good!”
Comment added pointing out that more is online.
yes, lots of PDFs to download, BUT!!
there is info missing.. PLEASE GO TO York house and talk about it!!
– some forget that ‘affordable’ is NOT AFFORDABLE by many that cannot afford the Half Million pound price…
– the joke is that *whole houses* and flats ARE available for less!!
‘social housing’ may sound bad, but it is what most can afford.
So, every single design has ignored the residents and workers of Eel Pie, the people who actually live and work there, and removed the parking? This not only with have a devastating effect on the island, but have a town centre with even less parking will be a death nail for the already dying High St.
Yes parking must be a consideration but to hear some in the Eel Pie community (lucky in their own riverfront disposition) comment on wanting to park inches from the waterfront is pretty depressing and not exactly forward thinking.
Whilst parking is a necessity and should be addressed a balance is needed for the benefit of the wider community. Until the release of these latest plans the value of Twickenham’s waterfront was consistently overlooked by the needs of vehicles over recreation.
High street struggles? The loss of these few spaces will not impact Waterstones and their neighbour’s revenues any further, you’re better off turning your attention to Jeff Bezos (as you wait for your Prime next day delivery to arrive)!
Dare I say a fully thought out ‘go to’ destination waterfront in TW1 would be a larger draw for visitors, in turn benefiting the high street.
Hey-ho, let’s see what the consultation brings…
It looks like many have forgotten about the children’s play area…
also big shops like Waterstones and boots have no problem, and most of their staff do not live in the area..
The lack of any bus stops in view of the entrance to the riverside means many do not even KNOW there is a riverside, and due to the lack of real shops(shut down due to excessive rates), just pass on through to the green, or Richmond / Kingston..
Uh, no, T. I would say every single design has (like the brief) bent over backwards into a snail shape trying to accommodate the loud demands of Eel Pie Islanders. You are getting your loading zone at the bottom of the bridge. You are getting your protected residents’ parking bays nearby. But with any of the five plans the rest of Twickenham will, quite rightly and at last, get some riverside amenity too.
Your concerns have been more than catered for. I think everyone on Eel Pie Island owes the Council a giant Thank You.