The developers have overestimated local services, amenities and infrastructure. Kingston Council’s own documents identify Motspur Park and the local area as having a deficiency in green space and retail. Other infrastructure will come under stress with the cumulative effects of Sterling Place.

With c.1,300 new residents, this development will significantly worsen that situation across multiple services. This is made worse by the cumulative effects of Sterling Place, the massive nearby Tesco scheme which will double the amount of new residents.

The exageration of services and amenities in the planning application is substantial:

• There are few doctors in the area, so Berkeley has conveniently conflated chemists with surgeries. The two nearest surgeries are both 20 minutes walk.
• Green Lane School House is listed as a place of worship.
• The Old BBC sportsground is also quoted as a sporting facility despite being abandoned for thirty years.
• Back Green flood plain on Green Lane is labelled as a publicly accessible open space.
• King’s College Sports Ground is identified as a school.
• There is lots of green space and many sporting facilities, but they are mostly on private land and not suitable for public recreation.
• Worcester Park is stated as 1km from the southen tip of the site rather than 1.5km from the buildings.

There may be shops in West Barnes, but these are only convenience . Worcester Park has a better selection but is further away. For certain types of retail, you need to go to other town centres, however, the site has a low Public Transport Access Level and only 89 residents will have cars.

The same rationale applies to employment opportunities. There are no jobs in the area, and people will have to travel to work. However, while there is vague talk of increasing train capacity, this is not the same as improving connectivity to other locations. It is also difficult to increase the size of the weekday(7am to 8pm) K5 bus, as the route negotiates small side streets. There are no night buses.

The closest public park is Sir Joseph Hood Memorial Playing Field, already under considerable stress due to the lack of other green space elsewhere, and that has suffered much damage in recent years. An intensification of use across multiple users has not been properly considered.

Berkeley is not providing sufficient play areas on site for the increase in teens, instead prefering to claim existing facilities on Sire Joseph Hood, some of which require no improvements. It is the development that should provide NEW play space for the surrounding neighbourhood, not the neighbourhood who should provide it for the development and the expected 240 children.

While a c.£7m Section 106 contribution is proposed. Its actual impact on local services will likely fall well short of what is promised or required.  If you are worried about certain infrastructure, you should comment on where you would like money allocated for mitigation

The London Plan (Policy D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities) states:

“When a proposed development is acceptable in terms of use, scale and massing, given the surrounding built form, uses and character, but it exceeds the capacity identified in a site allocation or the site is not allocated, and the borough considers the planned infrastructure capacity will be exceeded, additional infrastructure proportionate to the development should be delivered through the development”