Save Orleans Riverside from Development

I cannot believe this is even being contemplated. Firstly whenever we visit family we go to this park with my son there are always people there using the park and I would think this is an invaluable little park for local families. Secondly how on earth do they think traffic is going to reach this location through the very small local roads?

A disgraceful vanity project for Lord True as Tory leader of the council and a terrible waste of taxpayers money when Richmond council under his leadership have cut so many services for and funds for the vulnerable and disabled in recent years. This is not to mention the fact that it will destroy a beautiful and peaceful part of the riverside that is heavily used by children, families and those seeking that rare moment of peace.

The proposed changes will ruin the area for residents

Walking along the Richmond/Twickenham riverside has given me so much pleasure down the years. It is a n experience truly unique to this borough. And this proposal will destroy this forever. And for what? This makes no sense to me it all.

It is clear that the Richmond Council was concerned that this project would be controversial and raise many objections on the grounds of environment and increase in traffic, human and motor, to a delightful and peaceful part of Twickenham. Orleans Road, already overun with traffic should not bear the brunt of a traffic increase because of this piece of vanity. That the plan goes to consulation now after the local election reveals the disingenous methods this Council is prepared to use for this and other future schemes: what else is being planned? While a River Park was spoken of in a press release in September 2013, there was no hint that Lord True and his merry band of duplicitous vandals planned to inflict a faux barge on the quiet, green gardens of Twickenham. Had the plan been made part of the election campaign people would have been provided with a real opportunity to vote for or against. People must ask themselves why the Tory Riverside Candidates kept this plan secret during their campaign and if they are fit people to represent residents. This floating folly built in 2012 boat is better housed, should it prove to be of historic value in the Greenwich Maritime Museum or at Hampton Court Palace - that neither establishments seems to be bidding for the 'honour' speaks for itself.

This is pure folly. If the Council believes £300K is an investment then let that be toward human services. People in this Borough were queueing up at the foodbank before Christmas because Cllr Geoffrey Samuel refused to release funds to help those in need. How dare the Council use our Council tax in such a manner. This should have been an election issue and I am wondering if the Tory Twickenham Riverside Councillors were aware of this plan at rthe time of the election? If so they should be de-selected.

Whether Gloriana should be in Twickenham or not it clearly shouldn't be in this proposed area. Access alone dictates that, let alone the spoilation of a beautiful quiet undisturbed spot.

Thank you for setting up this important petition. The local community has made it abundantly clear at tonight's meeting in Winchester Hall, that WE DO NOT WANT THIS SENSELESS AND RUTHLESSLY CONCEIVED PROJECT TO GO AHEAD. Please let as many people as possible aware of LBRUT's plans, and the amount of money already spent!
Maria

How dare the Council cut down trees to gain revenue from tourists

The proposal to site Gloriana in Orleans Riverside
Is an appalling intrusion in a beautiful park loved and used
by all local residents. It should never go ahead.

This is disgraceful behaviour from the council/government. Without putting this to a vote there really is no democracy. Why should we, the taxpayer, pay for one of our beloved green spaces to be destroyed?! UNACCEPTABLE.

I love this park, so many fond memories; Mini Marble, Heath Fest... This cannot happen.

park this overindulgent piece of pomp and circumstance in royal Richmond riverside, and leave us in Twickenham to our peace and quiet - that s how we like it.

The packed meeting at the Turks proved a number of things [1] The overwhelming number of attendees only found out about this project through the RTT [2] It was clear that even the local ward councillor was unaware of this project [3] It is irrelevant to point out that there had been a previous boat house on the site - it was so small if would not have accommodated a rowing eight let alone the Gloriana[4] It was made clear by the Director of Parks that there is no other building of the Gloriana size proposed anywhere else in the Borough in a similar location - not now or in the last 20 years [5] The feasability study is said to have rejected four other sites - [this study has not been made widely available]: no councillor or officer would be drawn as to whether the rejected sites were considered in the light of the estimated cost of £3m for the proposed site [6] This project has been under consideration by Lords True and Stirling for at least 18 months - if not longer [7] up to £30,000 [or even £40,000] of tax payers money has already been spend on this project. Is this the REAL face of local democracy??

This is a lovely community meeting space and would be a tragedy to take it away.

I think it would be excellent to have Gloriana based in the Borough, but NOT, NOT, NOT on this lovely unspoiled site. I would like to see the background detail that justifies the choice of this site as the most suitable; I would like to know WHY so much preparatory work has been done before anyone heard about the proposal (and how much of our tax money it has cost so far) and I would like to know why it wasn't part of the Conservative's published plans in the recent local elections. And anyone who expects our Ward Councillors to take up the cudgels on our behalf should remember the fate of Scott Naylor after he stood up against the Council's proposals for the development of Twickenham Station. We're probably on our own here.....

This is suited to adding to the HRP estate at Windsor, Hampton Court, or Greenwich, not siting it in a space that's a park, undeveloped and wild. Let it go on public display by all means, but at a suitable venue and one that's already developed and linked to Royalty. But not in this park, not at the expense of the space, nature, recreation and enjoyment of locals and visitors alike.

Its obvious that Lord True has offered this to Lord Stirling-who serves to profit, and to their pet architects.In their eyes its a done deal. The spin on it is that any clod who doesn't support the development just doesn't understand the idea. Its about our stupidity not their criminal and underhand plans. The council questionnaire is the most biased document I have ever seen. Most of the questions are on generalities and aspects of the new building.(eg:"Do you agree that bike racks are a good idea?") Nowhere is there the option of saying you don't want the development! Any resident filling it out would be counted as being in agrement with the plan no matter what they put in the comments box.The spin is also used to present the the destruction of the riverside and the enormous building as a "restoration" of a Georgian boatshed. (The Georgian boatshed was a small, low, wooden structure just big enough to fit a rowing skiff.) Councillor Flemming is tying herself in knots to say its not a done deal but that the scheme "will be" great and the playground and meadow "will be" demolished, sorry, moved..somewhere.Oh, and at the protest meeting the councillors presdent tried to suggest that A. this will be a huge tourist attraction but B. there will be very few people coming in, no need to worry about traffic etc. (Teleporters?)Please everybody get your objections in! We have to say we don't want any development or they will make a couple of slight changes and go ahead.Do you know the local disabled children have had their holiday outings programme slashed on the grounds that there are no funds-and £30,000 has already been spent on the glossy council advertising put out to try to market this turkey to us?

Orleans Riverside is a beautiful development, open to the public and contributing to the scenery of the river. We don't need another cafe! Keep our open spaces!

I feel sure there are many other spots up and down the Thames where a dry/wet dock can be built for the Gloriana without defacing our beautiful unspoilt 'arcadian' area. it is yet another 'urbanisation' of the very few leafy areas people can enjoy in this historical area.

I'm concerned that this proposal got so far down the line without involving local people in the decision making process. I don't think housing the Gloriana in this particular location is right because of the impact of development on the character and scale of this neighbourhood area. What we don't need is another fancy cafe or indeed an overwrought enclosure like the Cutty Sark.

This is a ludicrous location. Riverside access is via a B road along which 2 cars may not pass. The pavements are so narrow and at such an angle that locals habitually walk in the road. It is a residential street and the noise and disruption caused by the works and subsequent vehicular traffic is an abhorrent intrusion. There is limited parking and the train stations are a good 15 to 20 mins walk away. The playground and amenities at orleans gallery are loved and utilised by locals. Art clubs are run in the gallery courtyard and a forest school is run in the beautiful natural gardens. We treasure the Orleans Gallery grounds where children are playing the play ground that their parents played in. It is a tranquil and safe spot for dog walkers, cyclists, runners and family outings. Do not destroy our amenities. Other locations, such as Hampton Court, which are better suited to this enterprise should be investigated.

This is a terrible idea. It will destroy an area of natural beauty enjoyed by local residents and children for generations. There must be a more sensible location for the Gloriana than this.

Orleans Gardens is the wrong site for this. If we have to have it in our borough a more suitable site would be the Young Mariners at Ham. Better still let it go to a borough that needs a tourist attraction. Not this LITTLE Park. Ahh but then only the chosen few [school children] will be able to visit it.

Crazy, poorly thought out scheme. Losing a well used open public space and playground. Poor parking in area already without adding extra visitors and cars. Why not find a home for it on the other side of the river near thames Young Mariners where there is already parking?

There are certainly far better sites than this - live the desolate Twickenham Baths Site for instance....