Forum Topic

Watermans Park Community Design vs Council Marina Proposal IN A NUTSHELL

The Community DesignDoes not:1. Steal Park Land to give to Private boat Owners for their Carpark2. Stop Bikes and Wheelchairs cycling from one end of the park to the other3. Fill the riverbed with in excess of 17,000 Tons of Concrete4. Drive 938 pilings into a very toxic Riverbed threatening the local ecosystem  ( The toxicity is from the former Gasworks which occupied this site for decades)5. Backfill in a significant part to the Park, almost to the road level, destroying one of the park’s best features of being much lower than one of the busiest roads in Brentfod.6. Evict a long standing community, many of which will need rehousing in a borough which has one of the worst homeless problems costing the Council yet more money7. Reduce the Children’s Play Area by 40%8. Make the Park a Building Site for Years 9. Remove Attractive mature trees in the Park10. Cost £5.4 million for the benefit of a few Private boat OwnersBut Rather:1. Extends the Boardwalk to provide a better viewing experience for the public.2. Provides a Public Pontoon where families can get down to the river and enjoy the proposed floating gardens3. Install a minimal number of Pilings (70 vs 938 ) so as to minimise ecological damage from the toxicity in the Riverbed4. Allow the existing boating community to remain as well as providing additional affordable commercial moorings to mitigate the development cost5. Carryout the entire development in 6 -  9 months during which time the public can continue to use the park with minimal disruption. This is a massive point - Before the first of the Court Cases the Council are wasting taxpayers money on even gets to Court, the Community Design would be finished !!!6. Deliver the Project for a massively lower cost saving the people of Brentford Millions whilst delivering a nicer Park7. Renovate an eclectic group of boats to make the Park attractive and interesting and above all a Community Space..www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk UNLEARN THE COUNCIL LINE ON THIS DREADFUL PROPOSAL !

Nick Day ● 3389d70 Comments

You sound a decent sort Stephen but I still maintain that the community of boaters' concern with the wider public only surfaced when the threat to them became apparent. As I've said in the past, I for a good while (admittedly a long time ago) stopped going down the park because of a particularly shoddy boat which was moored there which had a generator with accompanying fumes on the deck thud, thud, thudding all day long and no doubt all night too. I spoke to a child of about ten down there once who said that she lived on the boat, didn't go to school (a tutor no doubt provided by LBH came to her) and so on and so forth. In the end the boat was abandoned and left to rot on the riverbed. This is not the only boat which has met this fate over the years.As I've also said in the past, I have seen cars which have been driven by boaters into the park more than onceover the years - how else did those hulking great logs pre-chopping get into the park anyway? Then there is the matter of the man swinging an axe chopping wood on the main walkway - I have witnessed this myself and the 'shooter' of the video in favour of the boats staying (otherwise quite persuasive) scored an own goal by including the harmless country-folk image of one of the boaters swinging an axe to chop wood on self-same walkway.My overall view is that the boaters have actually taken away from the community as one can barely see the river any more along that stretch. It may well be now that the Council only had the idea of the marina because the boaters put the idea into their heads! The last time I walked along the park I saw that one of the boats has a gate up at the railing end of the walkway warning against trespass. I don't know but I would consider the placing of steps to get over the railings and wood piles on the walkways a bit of a trespass myself.Finally, I've asked before, exactly how is the black water from the boats at Waterman's Park disposed of? I've asked this a number of times and there has never been an answer other than it is disposed of in the right manner. Maybe it is but I would like to know the answer. Also, how do the boats get their electricity - just asking 'cos I really don't know. Presumably they do have electricity ...Okay, I said 'finally' and this is final - how are relations with boaters along other stretches of the river, particularly in Brentford? If you are so convinced of your case, would a few of them not speak up on your behalf?

Anne England ● 3364d

Of course the moorings should not be subsidized a fair mooring fee should be paid by all as well as Council tax.We are in this case talking about a Community that have lived in Brentford for many years. Why is the presence of the Watermans Park Community any different from The Hollows or Victoria Steps Quay. They all take space on the River to the exclusion of other vessel and all were, so called 'squat' moorings in the beginning before being regularized. Boats that are lived on cannot move about constantly. Although that is stating the obvious.This is not an issue of 'bagging a mooring' as you put it, it's about a Community of people with families and all that it entails, Schools, hospitals etc. etc.In the end it's also an issue of the human right to family life.It is well established that permanent moorings exist where appropriate on the River Thames. At Watermans Park you will know that it dries out so that there are limited times when navigation by other boats is possible. It would thus seem to me to be a perfect place to establish house boat moorings. It is clear the Council agrees with this.So why should the established Community at Watermans Park not be taken in hand by the Council and helped to become a part of a new development of the marina.Instead the Council is making moves to force the existing boats away. Why not be inclusive rather than destructive just to make the moorings exclusive. The remaining 15 boats could easily be refurbished, repainted, surveyed, brought up to standard at the owners expense and accommodated.Although again I find myself stating the obvious. The obvious, most humanitarian solution seems to be beyond the intellect of this Council. Or is there another dynamic driving all of this.

Stephen Alexander ● 3373d

Yes you are right I have possibly overstated my point. But lets have a closer look at the plans going forward.1. The Sequestration of Park Land to give to Private boat Owners for their Car park.Public land into private pockets? Who will this benefit? The wealthy new boat owners.Not the public who use the Park every day. The area in question here is now a very quiet and peaceful corner of the park where many people sit and think/meditate away from the noise of traffic etc.. This will be gone if the plans are accepted.2. Stop Bikes and Wheelchairs cycling from one end of the park to the other.This Park contrary to the Planning document is not a circulatory Park but a thoroughfare. Most people using it traverse from one end to the other. I have watched it, I know this is the case with 80% of users.3. To back-fill in a significant part to the Park, almost to the road level, destroying one of the park’s best features of being much lower than one of the busiest roads in Brentfod.This is designed to create a convenient access for the Travelodge visitors primarily. It serves very little other purpose. Consider the works that will be involved in a landfill operation on such a scale.4. To evict a long standing community, many of which will need rehousing in a borough which has one of the worst homeless problems costing the Council yet more money. The purpose here is to attract millionaire boat owners. In spite of lip service, none of the current community will have a chance to remain. With all the new building of apartments Tell me how it is that the availability of affordable housing in the Borough is falling short year after year.5. To move and reduce the Children’s Play Area by 40%. Consider the unnecessary works this will involve. A perfectly designed playground for children is well designed and enjoyed as it stands. What a waste of money.6. Make the Park a Building Site for Years.Coupled with the inevitable road widening scheme which will overhang the Park and the inevitable retail that will follow, the Park I suspect is destined to become no more than a garden area for the new moorings.7. The removal of trees in the Park. It is clear that most of the existing trees, some of which are now mature are to be cut down in the current proposals. Yes this implies a total re landscape of the Park.8. The over engineered Proposal for moorings is catastrophic to state it mildly. This will be, if successful, an unimaginable ecological disaster. The project requires the driving of more than 900 piles into a toxic River bed. The wildlife now thriving in the area will be significantly culled by the toxins released. Not to mention the danger to human health of the people who canoe or skull or fish along the River.The emphasis with this plan by the Council is clearly ideological. A gentrification generating, private profit and revenue streams. Not Community, people or public amenity for local people. I say shame on the Labour Council.We will in ten years probably revisit what has happened to this Park. My guess is that it will be gone, as we know and love it. We will think back with regret and wonder how we let this happen.This is why I urge all concerned to look at the brilliant alternative being offered at www.watermansparkmoorings.co.uk

Stephen Alexander ● 3387d