The weight of opposition

When two and a half thousand people sign petitions against...
When one hundred opponents swarm in the Market Square...
When five hundred letters reject...
When twenty groups oppose...
When twelve oppose at a Council meeting on a rainy night...
When sixty minutes of opposing reasons are spoken...

                                  ...yet our Council is ready to say yes?

Kingston Councillors - wake up!       You can not say yes to this.

Our Council is poised to give consent to over-develop the sensitive Old Post Office site in central historic Royal Kingston Upon Thames: Despite knowing the proposal will be too tall, too dense, with too little justification for the many and significant policy contraventions, they will pave the way for developers to walk all over this historic town.

2574 signed petitions against

Over 2500 signatures oppose the development, across 6 petitions 
  • 1079 signatures: Change.org / reject plans for high rise buildings in Kingston 
  • 744 signatures: KRA Save Kingston's Skyline,
  • 400 signatures: Kingston Upon Thames Society petition,
  • 284 signatures: Petition created by Rebekah Moll,
  • 48 signatures: Petition objecting to the overdevelopment of the site & 21 storey block,
  • 19 signatures: Petition objecting to more restaurants and cafes in central Kingston

512 sent rejection letters

Click here for more details...
"There's nothing wrong with building and everything wrong with ugly building. These guys must be stopped"
- Alain de Botton
 Click here for more notable support...

20 groups oppose

  1. Historic England (Built Environment) REJECT 
  2. Kingston Town Neighbourhood Conservation Areas Advisory Committee:  REDUCE
  3. Historic Royal Palaces: CONCERN 
  4. Design Review Panel (Design South East): CONCERN 
  5. St John's C of E Primary and Nursery School: CONCERN
  6. Kingston Upon Thames Society: UNACCEPTABLE
  7. London and Middlesex Archaeological Society: HARM
  8. The Victorian Society: HARM
  9. Friends of Richmond Park: INTRUDE
  10. London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames: OBJECT
  11. Richmond Society OBJECT
  12. Mill Street Residents' Association: REJECT
  13. Riverside Residents' Association: OBJECT
  14. Knights Park Residents Association: INAPPROPRIATE
  15. Kingston Residents Alliance: REJECT
  16. Housing: CONCERN
  17. Neighbourhood Engineer: OBJECT
  18. Thames Water: CONCERN
  19. Sport England: OBJECT
  20. CQRA (Landlord for Charter Quay): CONCERN
  21. Salmon (SHP Opportunity Fund Ltd: Owner of Surrey House/ BoConcept/Hippodrome Nightclub/NCP Car Park/Lever House): OBJECT

Click here for more details...
 - extract from Kingston Town Planning Sub-Committee Meeting 14 May 2015 Report & Appendix B: Late Material and Development Control Committee  2 and 23 June 2015 agenda reports
Historic England (Built Environment) encourages the Council to reject these proposals:

"...failing to meet the statutory test to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of locally and nationally designated heritage assets." 

"...cause unnecessary and undesirable harm to the setting of Richmond Park, Bushy Park and Hampton Court Park and Hampton Court Palace which is of international significance, by increasing the prominence of built form of Kingston town centre and reducing the sense of openness of these historic landscapes, in particular due to the proposed tower with its light box tip. The harm has not been justified." 

"The proposal does not meet the Council’s detailed guidance for development on this site and should be in accordance with the Eden Quarter SPD." 

"Insensitive post war developments have undue dominance in near and distant views in Kingston. Regretfully the tower would surpass these buildings in height." 

"if approved, this application would have far reaching consequences for the future character of Kingston; its identity and sense of place."

"The 13 storey tower competes for attention and is of a very different and alien scale compared with Ashdown Road."

"we do not agree with the applicants about the urban design and architectural merits of their proposals"
 
"Disagree that the proposals represent distinctive architecture that respond to the prevailing rhythm and articulation of the historic and modern buildings in the surrounding area, as the proposal is similar to other developments across London."

"...we would encourage the Council to reject these proposals and encourage the developer to return with a scheme that respects its context and the unique identity of Kingston."