The 1920s entrance to Wimbledon Chase station in south London could be replaced with a block of flats if plans by the developer are approved.
The station is on the Wimbledon to Sutton railway served by Thameslink, and the station, which is built up on an embankment, opened in July 1929, with an appealing, if now rather shabby modernist curving frontage leading to a corridor that takes passengers up to the platforms. The original station entrance featured a large booking hall, a large luggage and a parcels office. The station is now unmanned and these facilities are long gone.
Wimbledon Chase station – Google Street View
The proposal is for a building which steps from 4 storeys to 9 storeys, providing 83 dwellings on upper floors and a new station entrance and retail space and residents communal facilities on the ground floor.
To fit this in, the developer, Newbridge Group wants to demolish the existing station entrance, and also owns two houses behind the station to form a larger block of land. The new building would occupy the entire site, also removing the small forecourt in front of the current station entrance, and moving the station entrance around the side slightly to a corridor next to the railway bridge.
Proposed development – from the planning application
The proposed building is pretty generic, and anywhere else would probably go through on the nod, but railway station redevelopments are usually carried out with an eye to improving the railway station as well, and here, the station appears to be relegated to a corridor, and no improvements to the rest of the station are offered.
More problematic is that all this work will be carried out, and at the end of it, the station will still lack any form of step-free access.
The local John Innes Society objects in part because they call the design a “hotchpotch of protuberances”, but also because it doesn’t include the provision of step-free access up to the platforms. The Wimbledon Society also objects, and also cites the lack of step-free provision in the proposals, and also the lack of space for taxis and disabled access.
There is an option to add step-free access by digging a new tunnel underneath the platforms next to the station entrance and adding a lift there. However, the developer says that it cannot afford to add that, but it could be added later by Network Rail if they wanted to. Earlier this year, an application for step-free access funding under the government’s Access for All scheme was made, but that is unlikely to be decided before the block of flats are built — assuming they get planning permission.
There’s also an issue of affordable housing, and the developer says that the new build cannot afford to provide any, which is far below the 40% normally required. If the development goes ahead, it seems to lack any meaningful benefit for the station passengers, who lose an appealing, if in need of restoration 1920s station frontage.
Greedy developers. They say they can’t afford improvements to station access and can’t afford to include any affordable housing. Looks like they couldn’t afford an appealing design. 84 flats might mean that many children, so what s.106 obligation is there to fund increased local school provision?
What is the expected profit? Perhaps they just can’t afford to do the project at all.
To be fair, perhaps, it’s little different to fellow Zone 3 station Gunnersbury, which is found “Via Chiswick Tower Underpass” on the A315 and doesn’t even have a visible station entrance from the main road.
Developer “can afford” to build a massive ugly block of flats, but “can’t afford” some basic community contributions.
How long are we all going to put up with this nonsense?
I wonder if the current 20s entrance has been allowed to become shabby on purpose? I’m sure it shouldn’t look like that.
Perhaps I’m wrong but I thought that the planning gain s.106 was non-negotiable: you want to plonk some rabbit hutches in our borough, you make sure the area benefits too; quite often before anything else.
Whilst it could be open to abuse by a nefarious council in theory, in practise, it’s obviously the other way around.
The planning system seems to be being abused here. There do not seem to be many advantages to this new block of flats.
Funny how this developer wants to build what is likely a very profitable low risk residential building but claims there is no capacity to provide any community benefit whatsoever, be it a generous new station and/or affordable residential units, or any built heritage conservation. One would also assume that this development is built on station land so its curious that there was no deal done to require a developer to build in step-free access to platform level or to ensure a generous station entrance hall. Lets see what Wimbledon’s planners support and what the planning committee decides.
The apartments should be perhaps 1 floor higher than the others just above Tesco. Instead of destroying the piece of history that is the current entrance they should let an architect play around with it as long as it maintains its structure. The open area that is currently in front of the entrance needs to serve the public – mini square with some plants/trees/benches and a couple of spaces for cars only for extra-accessibility needs. Regarding the station it needs step-free access and it needs proper bike parking infrastructure to encourage sustainable transportation.
Do they even consult an urban designer for any of this? Just cramming the max amount of apartments on a spot of land is such a lazy approach. I have no problem with extra apartments, just do it properly.
The steady crawl vertically upwards will see a historic late Victorian residential railway suburb increasingly overlooked. The ultimate example being the Tolworth tower that stands like a forlorn gravestone at the open spaces of surrey. Thank goodness that horror was a one off.
Wimbledon Chase looks all take and no give. They’re either very naive or there’s some tidy handout for the council. Perhaps it’s just the initial stance with room to manoeuvre.
The style does look very lazy.
I find it amazing that a development such as this could even be contemplated without including step free access. The excuse that “we can’t afford it” is nonsense. Step free access to the station would add only a small amount to the price of an individual flat.
Equally arguable though is that people buying possibly their first home shouldn’t have to pick up the costs of adding step-free access to a railway station they live next to.
I am all for developments that add a burden to a locality to fund some of the offset — such as doctors, schools etc, but things that should be paid for by wider society shouldn’t be dumped onto people who are already struggling to afford a home.