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

Wilkinson Eyre and Purcell to restore Grade II* Battersea Power Station

Wilkinson Eyre and Purcell have been appointed to refurbish Giles Gilbert Scott’s iconic Battersea Power Station in south London

 A £100 million programme of repairs, led by Buro Happold and Purcell, will start in October exactly 30 years after electricity production stopped inside the Grade II*-listed brick masterpiece.

The project includes repairs to the façade, wash towers, steel frame and windows alongside replacement of the four distinctive white chimneys which could happen simultaneously under controversial proposals by the developer.

Planned to complete in 2016, the works pave the way for eventual redevelopment of the disused behemoth which is at the centre of Rafael Vinoly’s £8 billion vision for the prime riverside site. The project was purchased by a Malaysian consortium for £400 million in September.

Wilkinson Eyre has meanwhile been chosen to work on detailed designs for the power station interior.

Battersea Power Station Development Company Chief Executive, Rob Tincknell, said: ‘We have assembled an outstanding team to handle the restoration of this iconic building. 

‘Their engagement marks the point at which we are delivering the inspiring work of Rafael Vinoly and constructing the world-class destination he has mapped out. 

‘The reconstruction of the iconic chimneys is an essential part of the refurbishment and will be undertaken with great care and precision so that they remain a landmark on the London skyline for decades to come.”

Last week Carillion was appointed contractor for the regeneration’s first phase featuring 800-home designed by Ian Simpson and dRMM. The 102,200m² scheme next to the power station starts on site this summer and is scheduled to complete in 2016.

Last month the developer behind the high-profile power station project announced a string of planned changes to the outline consent.

One of amendments sought to alter the planning consent for the demolition and rebuilding of the chimneys from a phased programme to a simultaneous one which the developer argued would ‘speed up the delivery and opening of the restored power station.’

Transport for London (TfL) has meanwhile applied to the Secretary of State for Transport for planning powers for a £1 billion extension to the Northern Line serving Battersea Power station.

The Transport and Works Act Order, if approved and the project secures funding, will allow TfL to start building in three years and open the two new stations at Battersea and Nine Elms by 2020.

Gardiner & Theobald is cost consultant for the repairs and Turner & Townsend is project manager.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Readers' comments (4)

  • So Rob Tincknell says: “The reconstruction of the iconic chimneys is an essential part of the refurbishment and will be undertaken with great care and precision so that they remain a landmark on the London skyline for decades to come”.

    That’s all right then. Well, yes, except that the chimneys do not need to be reconstructed at all. A engineering report commissioned by the Twentieth Century Society and others in 2005 found no evidence to support the proposition that the chimneys were “beyond repair” and concluded that they could be repaired by conventional techniques.

    The report can be seen here: http://www.batterseapowerstation.org.uk/press/chimneys_report_23.09.05.pdf

    As far as I am aware, no new information has come forward since 2005 to alter the assessment that the chimneys can be repaired by conventional techniques. Indeed I attended meetings at Battersea Power Station in 2009/10 when staff working for Rob Tincknell agreed with the assessment that the chimneys can be repaired.

    So why is Rob Tincknell claiming that the reconstruction of the chimneys is “essential” when everyone knows they can be repaired. Why indeed would a commercial developer insist on carrying out such a difficult and expensive operation when a more straightforward and cost-effective solution is at hand?

    Furthermore, why would this same commercial developer wish to increase the difficulty and expense of this task by seeking to demolish and rebuild all four chimneys at one time, rather than sequentially?

    I think I know the answer to these questions.

    Keith Garner
    020 7585 0421
    keithwgarner@btinternet.com

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • The report I refer to above is in fact here:

    http://www.batterseapowerstation.org.uk/press/chimneys_report_23.09.05.pdf

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • The report I refer to above is in fact here:

    http://www.batterseapowerstation.org.uk/press/chimneys_report_23.09.05.pdf

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • The report I refer to above is in fact here:

    http://www.batterseapowerstation.org.uk/press/chimneys_report_23.09.05.pdf

    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