Wandsworth Council unanimously rejected a controversial 28-story riverside tower proposal in Battersea.
The One Battersea Bridge proposal, led by Rockwell Property, had been subject to fervent debate and would have seen the construction of a 28-storey residential and commercial building situated adjacent to Grade II-listed Battersea Bridge.
But the committee meeting held on Thursday 24 April rejected the proposal in line with a comprehensive recommendation to refuse by council officers.
Friends of Battersea Riverside member Peter Morley said: “We’re relieved and delighted that Wandsworth’s Planning Committee has refused Rockwell’s application.
“A huge thank you to local councillors and everyone who campaigned against this tower, which clearly broke local planning rules.”
While the proposal gained 1,887 comments of support on the council’s planning website, doubt was cast over Rockwell’s canvassing techniques with some residents feeling misled and not fully informed.
The proposed height of the tower was decisive in the council’s refusal as well, as it vastly exceeded Wandsworth’s 2023 Local Plan.
Guidelines state buildings on the riverside should not be out of proportion or visually intrusive, up to six storeys high, with an adjacent tall buildings zone capped at 12 storeys.
Nearby resident and The Chelsea Citizen editor Rob McGibbon led a year-long campaign against the tower, and his Stop One Battersea Bridge petition drew over 5,000 signatures.
He said: “This planning application had more flaws than floors and I am delighted that the council saw through it.
“This was a vote for common sense and for people power.
“I congratulate the committee on their unanimous decision and huge credit must go to the officers at Wandsworth Council who prepared a highly detailed 132-page report that forensically tore this scheme apart.”
Rockwell stated 50% of the building would be dedicated to social housing, far exceeding Wandsworth Council’s required policy of 35%.
The developer made references to the project’s role in addressing homelessness throughout the campaign, too.
However, councillors cast doubt on whether the social housing would be delivered as it was “subject to viability”.
They believed it was possible that, after completion, Rockwell could argue inflated build costs made it unaffordable to fulfil their promise.
They also highlighted poorly thought-out elements such as single-aspect social housing units which could lead to low-standard living conditions and limited community use.
Area resident of 20 years Caroline Gardiner said: “Somebody needs to start explaining the difference between social housing and affordable housing because there’s a difference.
“The developers need to understand what that involves.
“So, don’t come back, Rockwell, unless you’ve thought this through because we don’t want you unless you invite us all to sit and talk about how you can change The Glassmill for the better.”
Rockwell managing director Nicholas Mee said: “Wandsworth Council has made the wrong call, one that shuts the door on urgently needed homes.”
A Rockwell spokesperson added the developer is taking the time to properly digest the council’s decision and ensure any next steps remain in the best interests of residents, businesses, and the wider community.
Campaigner Morley said: “We strongly support a realistic redevelopment that genuinely includes affordable housing and community facilities.
“We now hope a trustworthy developer will genuinely engage with us and other residents to deliver a plan that benefits the whole community.”
Picture Credit: Wandsworth Council Planning Committee Report
Join the discussion