By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Battersea Power Station phase one submitted for planning

The first phase of Battersea Power Station’s £8 billion redevelopment by Ian Simpson and dRMM has been submitted for planning. The Twentieth Century Society has criticised the proposal for blocking views

Planned to start on site next year and complete by 2013, the 102,200m² scheme features retail, a theatre and 800 apartments.

The project includes a large glass-clad building designed by Ian Simpson which shares a podium with a smaller dRMM-designed timber-clad block.

The Twentieth Century Society has already raised concerns about the proposal – which will sit between Giles Gilbert Scott’s Grade II*-listed brick masterpiece and railway tracks – claiming it would ‘obscure cherished views’ of the landmark from nearby Chelsea Bridge Road.

In a statement the society said: ‘The Twentieth Century Society remains concerned about the height of the proposed building to west of the power station which rises to 17 storeys. It will obscure cherished views of the power station from Chelsea Bridge Road, and other long distance views.’

It added: ‘In terms of works to the power station building, we see the four chimneys as absolutely fundamental to the building’s historic importance and iconic status.

‘They remain the most recognisable element of the structure and a key part of London’s skyline. We urge the new owners to take this unique opportunity to change their strategy and ensure that these historic chimneys are retained as part of the forthcoming phase 2 works to this grade II * listed building.’

The overall 940,000m² masterplan for the crumbling building, designed by Rafeal Vinioly, includes 3,500 apartments and a 2.4 hectare park and is planned to complete by 2024.

 

Postscript: Comment from the Battersea Power Station Development Company

 

The 2011 Masterplan has been approved, which included a Townscape, Conservation and Visual Impact Assessment (TCVIA), including an assessment of the potential impact that the proposed redevelopment will have on the surrounding townscape character and views. Key views from central London relating to the London Management View Framework SPG as well as important local views were tested in relation to each option: conclusions regarding harm or otherwise to the setting of key historic assets, including the Power Station itself, were reached in the context of relevant national, regional and local planning policy, and these were shared with all the statutory consultees including English Heritage.

In addition, a TCVIA was submitted as part of the Reserved Matters application; the architects [Ian Simpson Architects] and dRMM have closely followed the Design Codes and massing parameters set by Rafael Vinoly Architects and have arranged the forms and materials of the buildings in this submission so as to build on the design objectives established in the 2011 Masterplan.  

The chimneys will remain a prominent landmark in views from all directions.

 

 

Subscribe to AJ for £3 per week

Subscribe today and receive 47 issues of the magazine, 12 issues of AJ Specification and full access to TheAJ.co.uk and the AJ Buildings Library

Are you a student?

Students can subscribe to the AJ for £8 per month or £1.60 per week! Click here to start receiving the most recommended magazine for architecture students

 

Readers' comments (3)

  • It’s not a question The Twentieth Century Society “claiming” that the proposed buildings by Ian Simpson and dRMM will block important views of Battersea Power Station. They most definitely will.

    In fact the view of Battersea Power Station from Chelsea Bridge Road (and Battersea Park) was lost years ago when Wandsworth Council approved a massive residential scheme on the old Battersea Wharf site on Chelsea Bridge Road.

    What is at issue now is the spectacular view of Battersea Power Station seen from the railway viaduct as the train approaches Victoria Station. This view has been enjoyed by commuters and visitors to London since the building was completed in the fifties. But not for much longer, if the new owners - SP Setia and logging company Sime Darby - get their way.

    The new buildings will stand between the railway viaduct and Battersea Power Station. So all you will see from the train will be the back wall of the Simpson and dRMM buildings. Quoting some meaningless planning blurb supplied by the owners doesn’t make what is about to happen any less of a tragedy.

    What you should be showing of course is a photograph taken from the train as it is now, and another as it would be after the two buildings have been built. Then your readers will actually be able to see what is being proposed and could come to their own view.

    Of course there is no chance at all that Wandsworth Council will turn down this scheme. (Disgracefully already approved in outline.) Still less any chance that English Heritage, the government’s so-called “advisor on the historic environment”, would intervene.

    So one of the key views of one of the most famous buildings in the capital (an icon of London celebrated in the Olympics closing ceremony, remember) is to be lost.

    If these new buildings were needed to satisfy some over-riding public benefit - hospital or some social housing perhaps – there might be a case for it. But this is being done so a Malaysian consortium can build an oversized block of luxury flats for non-doms that mostly won’t be lived in.

    Not that you would expect the AJ to report that!

    Keith Garner
    020 7585 0421
    keithwgarner@btinternet.com

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • It’s not a question The Twentieth Century Society “claiming” that the proposed buildings by Ian Simpson and dRMM will block important views of Battersea Power Station. They most definitely will.

    In fact the view of Battersea Power Station from Chelsea Bridge Road (and Battersea Park) was lost years ago when Wandsworth Council approved a massive residential scheme on the old Battersea Wharf site on Chelsea Bridge Road.

    What is at issue now is the spectacular view of Battersea Power Station seen from the railway viaduct as the train approaches Victoria Station. This view has been enjoyed by commuters and visitors to London since the building was completed in the fifties. But not for much longer, if the new owners - SP Setia and logging company Sime Darby - get their way.

    The new buildings will stand between the railway viaduct and Battersea Power Station. So all you will see from the train will be the back wall of the Simpson and dRMM buildings. Quoting some meaningless planning blurb supplied by the owners doesn’t make what is about to happen any less of a tragedy.

    What you should be showing of course is a photograph taken from the train as it is now, and another as it would be after the two buildings have been built. Then your readers will actually be able to see what is being proposed and could come to their own view.

    Of course there is no chance at all that Wandsworth Council will turn down this scheme. (Disgracefully already approved in outline.) Still less any chance that English Heritage, the government’s so-called “advisor on the historic environment”, would intervene.

    So one of the key views of one of the most famous buildings in the capital (an icon of London celebrated in the Olympics closing ceremony, remember) is to be lost.

    If these new buildings were needed to satisfy some over-riding public benefit - hospital or some social housing perhaps – there might be a case for it. But this is being done so a Malaysian consortium can build an oversized block of luxury flats for non-doms that mostly won’t be lived in.

    Not that you would expect the AJ to report that!

    Keith Garner
    020 7585 0421
    keithwgarner@btinternet.com

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Yet another example of views of a fine historic building being ruined by mediocre glass things. (The Shard, for example, spoils the views of almost everything around it). What happened to modest, reasonably priced and useful housing for the people who really need it, with some usable open space rather than cavernous wind tunnels?

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters