• Welcome to the LOSRA Website

    Welcome to the LOSRA Website

    The Lower Sunbury Residents' Association Read More
  • Become a Member

    Become a Member

    We invite anybody interested in the issues facing Lower Sunbury to subscribe Read More
  • View Our Newletters

    View Our Newletters

    You can find all the recent LOSRA Newsletter available to download Read More
  • LOSRA's Aims

    LOSRA's Aims

    To optimise and enhance the quality of life for Lower Sunbury residents by all appropriate means Read More
  • Sunbury As It Was

    Sunbury As It Was

    Visit the LOSRA Gallery for images past and Present Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Tuesday, 26 May 2015 06:57

Inconsiderate Parking at London Irish Mini Festival, 26th April

Rate this item
(8 votes)

Residents living in the vicinity of the Hazelwood Training Centre will have noticed the thoughtless and inconsiderate parking by many of the visitors to the London Irish annual Mini Festival on 26th April. After receiving a number of complaints the Association raised the matter at a meeting with the Chairman of the Organising Committee.

Before discussing steps to be taken to minimise disruption next year, the Chairman was anxious to point out the measures they had taken to prevent parking congestion before this year's event and it is only fair to point these out:

  • informaton pack sent out to attendees 3 & 1 weeks before the event;
  • made clear that no parking was available at Hazelwood;
  • made clear that consideration for the club's neighbours is needed;
  • all visitors guided to use coaches where possible, or public transport;
  • all car users guided to use Kempton Park Race Course and shuttle bus service.

The L. Irish Amateur RFC investigated multiple options for car parking and rented 2 separate locations together with a shuttle bus transfer service at a combined cost of £1,800:

  • Kempton Park - approx 650 cars parked, 5 double-decker buses used for transfer;
  • St. Paul's School - approx 200 cars and 11 x 50 seat coaches parked;
  • 52 car park marshals volunteered for the day's event;
  • marshals used in shifts, primarily in the early morning peak period before the 10am start to the Festival and situated at 7 locations between Kempton and Croysdale Avenue;
  • marshals, despite not being legally empowered to prevent visitors from parking, appealed to the goodwill of visitors not to park in the local area but to go to Kempton and use Park and Ride service;
  • local police had been informed of the event in advance in order that dangerously parked or obstructing vehicles could be ticketed.

Despite these measures, 'residents parking only' signs at the top of roads parallel to Croysdale were destroyed beyond repair by vandals in the days before the Festival; some visitors chose to ignore pre-festival communications or ignored car parking marshals "as they are entitled to park as they pay road tax like anyone else".

It should be stressed that this is the first year that Hazelwood has hosted the Mini Festival and it's not surprising that there are lessons to be learnt for future years. One identified weakness is that visiting clubs did not adequately communicate to their members the information packs issued by London Irish. The Chairman has undertaken to be much more forceful in his communications to visiting clubs next year whilst accepting that this is unlikely to deter the awkward minority who have no regard for the inconvenience caused to local residents.

Next year's event is scheduled to take place on 24th April and the Chairman has agreed to communicate with LOSRA beforehand in order to alert residents through this website.

21 comments

  • Comment Link Alan Doyle Tuesday, 09 June 2015 15:10 posted by Alan Doyle

    Again, re Johnny Smith's comments on the siting of the entrance/exit to Lendy Place.

    1. The Highways Agency was not involved at all in this application. All local roads in Sunbury and elsewhere in the country are the responsibility of the local transport authority, in our case, Surrey County Council Highways.

    2. Surrey County Council Highways were indeed in favour of the entrance being on Green Street. This preference, however, was not based on safety issues or anything else except that a Green Street entrance would be closer to the bus stops further up Green Street and on Church Street. As it happens, there is a pedestrian entrance/exit to the site on Green Street in any case, which dealt with that particular issue. That Green Street access point also deals with the need for a secondary access point for the emergency services.

    3. The siting of the entrance/exit in Thames street also meant that the Green Street triangle was not turned into a large triangular roundabout, which was the only objection residents made to the siting of the entrance/exit.

    4. The upshot is that Surrey County Council Highways had no particular preference one way or the other as regards the safety or appropriateness of either the Thames Street or Green Street entrance/exit. If they did, they would have said so. This is not merely a matter of my assertions. It is all well documented.

  • Comment Link Johnny Smith Tuesday, 09 June 2015 10:44 posted by Johnny Smith

    As I understood it the Highways Agency surveyed the site & concluded that the original dispersal road was an appropriate position given the proposed(revised) no. of dwellings, at this stage there was a local campaign to re-site this access point onto Thames St due to the the perceived bottle-neck of traffic leaving the development during peak hours and using the one way system. Given the planning process it's a given now that developers have to bid up the number of units in the knowledge that whatever they submit will be revised down, as a consequence I doubt the 60 units Mr Doyle alludes to would ever have been envisaged as the final build. Either way, I don't think this should be used in anyway to counter that the current positioning on Thames St as anything but a terrible fudge. Linden Homes didn't want to become bogged down in the planning process and with one eye on the Environment Agency site took the quite unusual step of letting a third party tweak their plans with the future brief of working with LOSRA/local community to create an amicable development at the EA site. As LOSRA stated on this site during this process a desire for 'the greatest number of family units' we are left with two developments that short-change those with other needs(single owner occupiers, down-sizers/ladder jumpers, lower income, etc).
    My only hope now is that the proposed re-classification of the Green Belt will potentially lead to a free-ing up of land at Kempton East to more adequately accomodate the requirements of a changing socio-economic local demographic.

  • Comment Link Alan Doyle Monday, 08 June 2015 13:58 posted by Alan Doyle

    Re Johnny Smith's comments about the entrance to Lendy Place.

    I was closely involved with the objection to the original Application for 48 (then subsequently 44) dwellings, and the support for the Application for 28 dwellings.

    As a matter of fact, Surrey Highways had no objection to the siting of the entrance on either Green Street or Thames Street. The developers claimed that Surrey Highways had raised objections to it being sited on Thames Street, but when we asked Surrey Highways, they said this was untrue. In fact, they wrote to Spelthorne and asked them to amend all references to this spurious objection on their website and elsewhere. (This is a matter of written record, which I have copies of.)

    Sad those it has been to lose the parking spaces on Thames Street, there would have been an equivalent loss of parking spaces on Green Street if the entrance/exit had been sited there. But the reduction from an original conceptual no. of dwellings of over 60 to the 28 actually built means that parking pressure generally in the immediate locality could have been much, much worse, as such a high number of dwellings would have precluded having a sufficient number of parking spaces on site.

  • Comment Link Johnny Smith Monday, 08 June 2015 10:54 posted by Johnny Smith

    I stand by my comments made earlier & highlight the revision to the plans for the positioning of the access road onto Mendy Place as short-sighted localism leading to inferior town planning. Despite a study by the highways agency re-inforcing the legitimacy of the access onto Green St as meeting both the functional dispersal needs of traffic from the site whilst ensuring both safety for other road users & pedestrians, this was ignored. We are now have an unsafe junction on Thames St 15'' from a round-a-bout and have lost the 5/6 parking bays due to highways agency requirements on clear sightlines at this junction(bays used by the less mobile to access the public riverside opposite btw). The visual impact of the reconfiguration of Mendy Place onto Thames St is an aesthetic mess, where the original plans retained the rising lawn of the police training HQ we now have two mismatched pseudo Georgian blocks & a disproportionately wide red block paved entrance. For such a prominent site in Lower Sunbury I'd have hoped from the developers, local town planning councillors & petitioners(LOSRA) a far better result than what has been delivered.

  • Comment Link John Hirsh Monday, 08 June 2015 08:24 posted by John Hirsh

    HP. Please accept my profound apologies. ED

  • Comment Link HP Saturday, 06 June 2015 16:46 posted by HP

    Thank you Elleke. I've been quite upset that these rude in some cases and unsubstantiated comments would have been attributed to me. I wouldn't have posted if I'd thought for one moment my post could have been read in this way. Good to know you didn't and I guess John Hirsh didn't have time to read all the posts. As I said I support LOSRA 100%.

  • Comment Link Elleke Saturday, 06 June 2015 13:30 posted by Elleke

    Hi HP, just to re assure you I read your original comment in the spirit you intended and I feel sure a genuine mistake was made.

  • Comment Link HP Friday, 05 June 2015 18:50 posted by HP

    John - You have totally and utterly misunderstood. I wrote:
    ‘The local residents & LOSRA have been spoiling for a fight to prove the planning decision was wrong, it was evident in the NIMBY comments at the planning stage & …’(Johnny Smith). ..... this means Johny Smith made this comment not me - I could not disagree more with this comment. I have nothing but praise for LOSRA and the hard work you and the other members put in for the residents of Sunbury.

    In case others have made the same mistake - at which I am horrified - all the text in quotes and with a name in brackets afterwards are quoting other peoples comments and my comments follow them

  • Comment Link John Hirsh Thursday, 04 June 2015 22:27 posted by John Hirsh

    HP states that LOSRA has been "spoiling for a fight to prove the planning decision was wrong". Evidence of this claim would be appreciated. Ed

  • Comment Link Tina Wednesday, 03 June 2015 21:56 posted by Tina

    Lots of views here. See you all at the LOSRA AGM 1st of July, Should be plenty to talk about in "any other business" but would like to get home before midnight!

    PS The planning decision was wrong!
    Even the secretary of state said so at first application stage and the application was not in his back garden.

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

Subscribe for 2024

Sunbury Ferry

Hedgehog Project

Join Our Mailing List

Latest Local News

21 May 2024