Talk:Surbiton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.

I removed the stuff from freelist.com as it is copyright according to their website: FreeLists.com established 1996 © online 1998 All rights reserved. Mrsteviec 06:57, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Some mention should be made of the constantly shifting unofficial boundaries of Surbiton. I've just read in an Estate Agent's window 'Beautiful Apartment on the outskirts of Surbiton - directly opposite Tolworth Station'!!

Well technically all the towns around here are part of the borough of Kingston, so technically it's actually on the outskirts of Kingston, but split hairs, etc. --62.49.128.77 05:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC) Andreus

I agree about the shifting boundaries. I've got an idea that the name "surbiton" actually means "southern grange", and on the earliest Ordnance Survey maps of the early 19th century, the built-up area of Surbiton extended no further south than the northern end of what is now Maple Road. There was definitely a village at Long Ditton, and at Tolworth, but the area around Waitrose and the railway station was just fields.

It seems that Surbiton was simply a farm at the south of Kingston, which belonged to the manor of Kingston, and unlike Tolworth, it was not a separate village from Kingston. Although the name "Surbiton" has been around since medieval times, it appears that Surbiton did not develop an identity as a separate community from Kingston until the railway came along in the 1830's.

So it seems odd that Tolworth might be considered an outskirt of Surbiton! Although I think the name of Surbiton pre-dates the name of Tolworth - I think the current location of Tolworth predates the current location of Surbiton by several hundred years. I'll try to nose out more sources, though. Squashy 23:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Railway myth

According to Julie Sampson's "The Kingston Book" ISBN 1905286058 there was never a plan to put long distance railway lines "through" Kingston. The original plan was to skirt the bottom of Surbiton Hill - I guess she means somewhere around where the Assembly Rooms and Maple Road is now.

Thinking about it, this makes sense - because if the South coast line ran much closer to Kingston than the Assembly Rooms - or Penrhyn Road at a push - then it would either have to cut through Kingston Hill/Coombe Hill, or it would have had to cross the Thames twice, either of which would have involved very significant groundwork and construction.

Reaching Kingston but avoiding Kingston Hill and the Thames would mean a very sharp turn. But I'm not enough of a railway buff to know what turning circles trains can do. They plumped for a cutting through Surbiton Hill instead, though. How did that happen, and why?

We don't want the article to perpetuate myths. But there's no doubt that the railway expansion was significant to Surbiton, so I'm not suggesting we don't mention it at all. Okay, you could say the same thing for practically all London commuter belt suburbs, but I think there are things that make Surbiton different. For example, the railway expansion enabled the Victorian-era wealthy middle classes to make one-way leisure boat trips on the Thames, and Surbiton was particularly well placed to take advantage of this trade.

Point is, there are conflicting sources, and I don't know how to word it to make the known facts clear. Squashy 02:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)