Forum Topic

WATERMAN'S ON THE RIVER - what a venue!

I have been very concerned for several years now about the plans to move Waterman’s and destroying a large section of the sunken gardens.   I see that at last some people living in Brentford are becoming a bit more vocal on the subjectAs has been pointed out - Waterman's present location was gifted to the people of this Town. Not to the borough to hawk off.    We could have a unique Waterman's on the River Arts Centre with a vibrant small theatre, state of the art cinema,  riverside restaurant/cafe/bar and gardens with stunning views across to Kew Gardens.Brentford must keep the existing Watermans site and redevelop it.   It’s a wonderful position right on the river looking across to Kew Gardens and has the long sunken gardens at river level as well.     It seems such a waste to let this asset be gobbled up by developers of yet more expensive flats blocking out the light and river views,  consigning Waterman’s to a faceless concrete residential tower in a side street with no parking.  Developed properly Waterman’s on the River could be a sensational must visit venue – what a waste to let it go.  I’ve emailed various Councillors – Cllr Lambert (Labour Brentford) posts regularly on this Brentford site but so far hasn’t shown many if any teeth!  I’ve also emailed my local Conservative Councillors and both Mary McLeod and our current MP Ruth Cadbury.Our Councillors and local MP need to help the people of Brentford to whom this beautiful riverside site was gifted, keep Waterman's on its riversite site.   It could be the jewel in the Crown.   Along with the Steam Museum, the Musical Museum, the lovely river and its canal, dreary new build Brentford could be transformed to a unique, must visit venue for locals, Londoners and foreign tourists, thus bringng much needed revenue to the entire Brentford area.   Come on Councillors, get some imagination - help develop a new Waterman's on the River - the people already have the site so go for it Hounslow!     

Jennifer Selig ● 3056d28 Comments

Read Mike Brent's post about how vibrant Waterman's used to be until:-"Unfortunately,--------- Waterman's changed tack and decided to chase Arts Council funding for more esoteric “cultural” projects – as a result, much of what is currently on offer at the centre is of little interest to most local people. To be honest, if Watermans closed for good tomorrow, the vast majority of Brentford residents would be unlikely to notice. "That statement says it all - Waterman's MUST be used and supported by LOCAL people - the current management are only interested in ramming so called "culture" down our throats in effect multi-culturalism/LTGXXXs in an attempt to force us into what they think appeals to the masses of Hounslow.Well they have the Paul Robeson Theatre in the Trinity Shopping Centre, Hounslow (part of Hounslow Arts Centre) to cater for their cultural needs. That centre is barely supported so why try the same with Brentford, these distant residents could care less about Waterman's whatever events it puts on.Waterman's needs to forget about chasing Arts Funding - the management needs a complete over-haul back to the original concept mentioned in Mike Brent's post above with local Brentford people heavily involved.  However, should WATERMAN'S on the RIVER become a proper venue, you never know those disinterested people further west of Brentford might suddenly wake up and make the trip east to this vibrant and wonderful venue.  Have a horrible feeling all this is just wishful thinking and Waterman's on the River will never come about and neither will the new proposed development.    Money from the "concreteers" will win out and more bland unaffordable flats will rise to loom over Brentford, the river, Kew and Strand on the Green.  Its called "Progress".

Jennifer Selig ● 3055d

Sorry Guy, but I'm afraid I totally disagree completely with you.I've regularly used the place since the day it opened. It was never a perfect building. A rather fudged design and funnily enough, the same sorts of people who are advocating a move, ignored the criticism of the building design. Those who raised concerns were sidelined but time proved them right as far as the building was concerned.Nonetheless, for the first decade or so, it was a huge success and a good all round venue. And right across the range of ages and tastes.What happened next is more down to interference to suit ideologies than anything else. But it has come back from the depths of a few years back.It could be so much better, but the will is not there. Yes it might cost ££££s but it will cost even more £££££s moving and with no facilities and no bigger and minus the river view. How can a river walk with couple of benches and no doubt the detritus of the local addicts be a substitute for a venue with a view?  Where noise and activities cannot affect anyone? The claims by the management do not add up and have no solid substantiation and I understand no proper long term business plan. What happens as with now when the funding runs short?How can giving up part of the Park for a Marina and now, for a Cycle Superhighway be OK ?How on earth can you or anyone local support that? I for one ( and I know there are others )  believe strongly that this place is in the right location and this site and the park were left for recreational use of the citizens of Brentford. Not for Steve Curran's or anyone else's  Swap Shop mentality .Sorry Guy but this is going to be a huge loss to more than just Brentford and in all probability a White Elephant in the making.It should be incorporated into a modest development that won't damage the riverside which was a long and hard earned gift from the industrial wreckage that preceded it.

Raymond Havelock ● 3055d

The Neighbourhood Plan proposed for a small part of Ealing is nothing new or unusual, the ability for local residents and businesses to prepare a Neighbourhood Plan has existed for several years now, as set out in the link below :https://www.gov.uk/guidance/neighbourhood-planning--2The biggest challenge facing neighbourhood plans however, in my opinion, is the requirement that "they support the strategic development needs set out in the Local Plan and plan positively to support local development" because the people most interested in producing a neighbouring plan tend to want to head in a very different direction to the adopted local plan and national planning guidance.Not that I personally want to see the existing Watermans site developed into residential, but I think there's a rather rose-tinted spectacles view of the current Watermans, and whether we like it or agree with it, given the never ending cuts Local Authorities have to contend with, we can hardly be surprised that the Council want to make the most financial profit out of previously developed land.I've been quite vocal about the cycle superhighway on other threads, but one thing I would respond to is that to me, cycle superhighways are primarily to encourage the use of bicycles as a recreational option, the lycra lot (including myself) tend to avoid cycle superhighways as I don't want to be thrown into a crowded cycle lane with children, old dears on boris bikes etc.  Which is admittedly another problem, others suggest bringing in such lanes and then making it mandatory for all cyclists to use them, which would be deeply unpopular with cyclists like myself.If anyone thinks cycle lanes are so great, try riding on the one adjoining the A4/Great West Road.  Every minute or so you'll have to either slow down or stop to look to your left or right to check whether or not a vehicle is turning into a side road or retail park entrance, and whether a vehicle is joining the A4 from the site road or retail park.  Sometimes that crossing will be some yards back from the A4, so motorists on the A4 aren't necessary aware of you.  It is inherently dangerous.Conversely, if you cycle on the A4 then you're always visible to motorists and there's no uncertainty/confusion  when you come to a side road - you're on the main carriageway so you have right of way and don't always have to be looking to your left or rather rather than focusing on the road infront of you.Sadly that isn't understood by most motorists, like the 'friendly' Italian who I recently encountered who clearly doesn't know Section 63 of the Highway Code and seemed rather upset that his attempts to wind me up failed to have the desired effect and left him so speechless that his final insult was the rather bizarre statement that I'm a "bitch" !.

Adam Beamish ● 3055d

I am backing the Watermans management and board, who wish to move to the proposed site in the town centre. They haven't been leant upon by anybody. They believe, as do their advisers, and as I do, that it will be a better site both for the arts centre and for the town itself as its redevelopment continues.This is not to say that the current plans for the redeveloped sites have my backing - as a member of the planning committee I'm anyway obliged to hold my counsel until the proposal reaches committee. The proposals as currently submitted do at least provide a decent riverside walkway for the public which if things pan out as I hope will soon get to be an uninterrupted riverside walk from Watermans Park to Morrisons. There will also bee some visibility of the river from the High St: more than now, though far less than I would prefer. The Watermans issued the recent press release, I believe, to marshall support amongst its supporters and the local community for the redevelopment of the centre. There is a short term opportunity to seek additional capital funds to turn what is currently proposed - a new, slightly larger centre built to Watermans' specification - into something bigger and (in their words) 'World Class'.To do something in the current location would need yet more £Millions and would result in an arts centre which the people who run it, and consultants, believe is the wrong place. Frankly, it's a red herring and pursuing this as an aim will only detract from the chances of getting the funding the Watermans are so keen to access.If you really support the Watermans, support what they ask you to support!

Guy Lambert ● 3055d