Officers want the Memorial Gardens ball court scrapped: 74% of 760 consultation replies opposed it. Councillors decide on 10 September, and the money was never there.
Spelthorne Borough Council’s officers have recommended that the proposed multi-use games area in Staines Memorial Gardens should be abandoned. The report going to the Environment and Sustainability Committee on 10 September asks councillors to agree that the scheme “should not progress in its present form and location”.
The reason is the consultation. It ran from 11 May to 21 June 2026 and drew 760 responses. Nearly three quarters of them were against.
What the 760 people said
The report sets out the numbers question by question:
- 74.47% were unsupportive or very unsupportive. 19.08% were supportive or very supportive.
- 74.74% considered the proposed location, the green next to Riverside car park, unsuitable.
- 79.08% said they or their family would not use the facility.
- 64.08% said a games area would provide no benefits at all.
The split on the headline question was sharper than the totals suggest. 444 people, 58.42% of everyone who replied, chose “very unsupportive”, the strongest option available. Only 88 chose “very supportive”.
Respondents could pick more than one concern. Loss of green space was the commonest, named by 575 people (75.66%), followed by appearance (435), location (424) and noise (389). Only 106 said they had no concerns.
The police backed the idea and objected to the site
One of the more striking passages in the report is the response from the police. They supported the principle of providing a multi-use games area. They objected to where it was going.
Their concern, as the report records it, was that the site “is not easily visible to the public and is close to the town centre, where anti-social behaviour already occurs”. They said surveillance, access arrangements and crime prevention design would be essential.
That distinction runs through the whole consultation. Officers note that the opposition was aimed “not only at the principle of a MUGA, but particularly at the proposed location, its impact on green space and the character of Memorial Gardens”. Respondents suggested Lammas Recreation Ground and Staines Park as alternatives.
The money was never there
The financial section is the part the council has said least about in public, and it is blunt.
| Item | Position |
|---|---|
| Indicative total project cost | Up to £500,000 |
| Staines wards local CIL pot | £293,435 |
| Planning application and further studies | About £30,000, and CIL cannot pay for it |
| Other identified funding | None |
The scheme depended on Community Infrastructure Levy money, the charge paid by developers on new building. The Staines wards pot holds £293,435 against a build cost of up to £500,000, so the CIL Board would have had to top it up from the strategic pot. The £30,000 of planning and survey work could not have come from CIL at all, and the report states plainly that no other funding source has been identified.
A demountable version was suggested during the consultation, so that Staines-upon-Thames Day could keep using the green. Officers say that would be less robust, would cost money every year to take down, store and re-erect, and would shorten the facility’s life.
The lawyers’ warning
Both the council’s statutory officers have put comments on the record, and they point the same way.
The Monitoring Officer says that failing to give due weight to the consultation “could constitute a breach of the Council’s statutory Best Value duty under the Local Government Act 1999, expose the Council to the risk of judicial review, and undermine public confidence”. The Section 151 Officer, the council’s finance chief, says pressing on “would expose the Council to a challenge of not delivering Best Value”.
Spelthorne is already under government intervention, with Commissioners appointed to oversee it. The report records that the Commissioners “have confirmed their agreement for this report to be submitted”.
What councillors are actually being asked
The committee has three options in front of it, and officers recommend the third:
- Approve the current scheme anyway. Officers warn this would need “clear, robust, evidence-based, and legally defensible reasons”.
- Reject it and stop there.
- Agree the current proposal should not progress, but keep open the possibility of a future report on other sites or lower-impact improvements.
Option 3 is the recommendation. It would kill this scheme at this location without closing the door on providing something for teenagers somewhere else.
Even that door is narrow. The report notes that with Surrey’s local government reorganisation under way, “any materially different proposal is unlikely to be developed, approved and delivered before Vesting Day”, and would fall to the new West Surrey unitary authority to decide.
Residents have already tabled a question about it
The same meeting will take a public question on the subject. The Riverside Residents (Staines) Coalition Partners have submitted two questions, the second of which points out that Memorial Gardens sits in the town’s conservation area and is “the only open green space in town for quiet reflection”. It asks councillors directly whether, if opposition proves overwhelming, they agree the proposal should be rejected.
Their first question is about something else entirely: groundwater flood risk. They say a Royal Holloway researcher who led 2024 work on groundwater flooding in Staines was told he would be part of the group writing the council’s new policy on below-ground structures in new developments, and that this has not happened.
What it means for you
If you replied to the consultation, the report is the answer to it, and it is public now rather than after the vote.
- The meeting is Thursday 10 September, 7pm, in the Council Chamber at Knowle Green, Staines-upon-Thames TW18 1XB. It is open to the public.
- Nothing is decided yet. Councillors can reject the officers’ recommendation, though the legal advice in their own papers argues against it.
- The green next to Riverside car park stays as it is if the recommendation is agreed.
- The CIL money does not automatically move. The report is explicit that the existing bid is specific to this scheme, and any different project would need a fresh bid through the CIL process.
Related
- Staines masterplan consultation: the wider plan for the town centre and the riverfront.
- Parking in Staines: including Riverside car park, next to the site.
- Staines planning news.
- Things to do in Staines-upon-Thames.
Sources
- Spelthorne Borough Council, Public consultation response to proposed MUGA in Staines-upon-Thames, report to the Environment and Sustainability Committee, 10 September 2026, for every figure, the options appraisal, the financial position and the officers’ comments.
- Spelthorne Borough Council, Environment and Sustainability Committee agenda, 10 September 2026, for the meeting time, venue and item list.
- Spelthorne Borough Council, public questions to the Environment and Sustainability Committee, 10 September 2026.
Have your say