Which type of planting would you like to see around the new flood alleviation scheme

B. Wildflower

What would you like to use this space for?

Opportunities for informal play

Art

Which type of materials would you like to be used within the Upper Level?

Wooden

Which sorts of informal play do you think would work best in this space?

Logs

Overall how do you feel about the proposals?

Mostly negative

Please use this space for any comments or other suggestions you may have.

1. Have not seen any cost-benefit analysis / ecological impact assessment for the new basin area. This will be important as there is a risk that the scheme takes away green space in the field with little or no flood benefit (and potential disbenefit given recent drought) More widely the master plan has nothing about 1) playspaces for older children, especially with the new development 2) too much focus on revamping team sports areas, which are of least benefit to local residents, and more benefit to people living further away 3) nothing about revamping/ totally renovating children's playground despite shocking state.

Which type of planting would you like to see around the new flood alleviation scheme

C. Formal

What would you like to use this space for?

Opportunities for informal play

Seating

Other

If Other, please specify what you might like to see in this space

picnic or bbq area - which would serve more diverse communities.

Which type of materials would you like to be used within the Upper Level?

Wooden

Which sorts of informal play do you think would work best in this space?

Carved imaginative play

Logs

Overall how do you feel about the proposals?

Mostly negative

Please use this space for any comments or other suggestions you may have.

It's not clear that there is a solid needs basis for the intervention. It would be helpful to ensure a robust cost benefit analysis of the project. It's also not clear that the SUDS will necessarily stop the field area getting waterlogged - a key objective of the project at the outset, and one that is of most concern to Park users. The park is quite small, and it's not clear that thought has been given to the maintenance and upkeep costs of the site, especially regarding the more elaborate planting schema. Could a more holistic approach be considered, involving Thames water as a partner (and co-funder)? Could the scheme increase canopy cover and plant more trees (which doesn't appear to be currently considered)

Overall how do you feel about the proposals?

Mostly negative

Please use this space for any comments or other suggestions you may have.

I am a local resident. I am feel the scheme has been rushed. With not much thought about the maintenance.

Overall how do you feel about the proposals?

Negative

Please use this space for any comments or other suggestions you may have.

As a new comer to the "The Friends of Chestnuts Park" I have read the formal response of the group, explaining their inability to support the flood alleviation project in its current form at this stage, and I must agree with it. I share their concerns about the rushed planning process, the disproportionately large size of the proposed retention basin, and the lack of alternative options presented. They highlight the project's experimental nature, the absence of a funded framework for evaluation and modification, and the risks posed by extreme drought conditions and potential misconnections in the water drainage system. I also share the doubts about the council's capacity to maintain and improve the project, given staffing and funding constraints. It's very clear there is a need for more comprehensive planning, adequate resources, and greater collaboration between departments. Chestnuts Park, as a small green space already facing future developments, is not the most suitable location for such a substantial scheme, and there is a need for much farther dialogue, regarding the plans for the park, before taking such a problematic project forward.

Please use this space for any comments or other suggestions you may have.

Like other members of the Friends of Chestnuts Park (writing here in my personal capacity) I am doubtful about how this proposal will work. There is only one 'option' and that does not appear to have been fully researched. It would take up a very large space in our small park, reducing the area of a field which is currently well-used by children, young people and dog-walkers. Originally it was envisaged as a ditch rather than a large area and the water was to come from the brook under the park. I understand this is not now possible and the water will come from road run-offs and rainwater drains in Cranleigh Road and La Rose Lane. I also understand there is a question of possible misconnections feeding into this source which could make this water contaminated and thus pose a possible public health hazard. I was not able to visit Albany Park but I understand that is at least partly fed by a brook rather than road run-off and surface water drains. I am very concerned, first that we only have one 'option' proposed. Second, that does not seem to have been researched fully. Third, it will take a relatively large area of our small park.Fourth, there is a possibility that it could become a health hazard. If that turns out to be the case, the amount of money needed to rectify it would entail a huge waste of public resources, and no doubt large parts of the park, if not all of it, would be unusable by the public while it was being sorted. Please think again.