Battersea Bulletin 28 – FoE claim Sime Darby, Malaysian co-owner of Battersea Power Station, involved in illegal logging

 Sime Darby, a member of the Malaysian consortium
which recently took over Battersea Power Station, has
been involved in illegal logging in the rain forests of
Malaysia and Indonesia, according to a 2010 report by
Friends of the Earth, ” ‘Sustainable’ palm oil driving deforestation. Biofuel crops, indirect land use change and emissions”, Friends of the Earth Europe, 2010

Download pdf Battersea_Bulletin_28

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Industrial heritage “As important as our country homes and castles”

A new survey from English Heritage has found that listed industrial buildings are at the highest risk of severe neglect. Around 3% of standard grade I and II* listed buildings in England are considered to be at risk, while a staggering 11% of industrial grade I and II* listed buildings are in the same category.

Grade I and II* industrial listed buildings in England cover a variety of structures from across the industrial spectrum including Battersea Power Station.

According the English Heritage the problem is not a lack of appreciation from the public. A poll of public attitudes carried out on their behalf shows that 86% of the public agree that it is important we value and appreciate industrial heritage and 80% think it is just as important as our castles and country houses.

Despite English Heritage’s obvious concerns about the future of listed industrial heritage sites, it seems that they have some problems categorising the status of some of these sites.

Their 2011 Heritage At Risk Register lists both Battersea Power Station and the Victorian Battersea Pumping Station as “Priority D”. This means “Slow decay; solution agreed but not yet implemented”. Which is ambiguously incorrect on both fronts.

Battersea Pumping station:

The report does correctly state that this historic Victorian Pumping station is going to demolished, despite widespread and authoritative opposition, after a planning application was approved by Wandsworth Council in November 2010. So what English Heritage really mean is, it’s going to be knocked down but it hasn’t been done yet. The pump station is crucial, the only reason to demolish it  is it allows the power station owners REO,  to maximise profits. Apparently completely ignoring Malcolm Tucker of the Greater London Industrial Archaeology Society  who previously made it clear “that it should be possible to incorporate the conserved building within the scheme.”

Battersea Power Station:

Again the report offers clarity by stating “fresh planning and listed building applications approved 2010 subject to legal agreement for restoration, extension and conversion of Power Station to provide retail, residential flats, business, cultural, hotel and conference facilities.”

There are two problems here: 1, “D” has been the status of the power station for decades now and little has changed. 2, the fact that legal agreement is required means that a solution has not been agreed.

Priority D is therefore the developers ideal status. Using the “big bang theory of redevelopment” implementation of the “solution” can be almost permanently postponed. Rather than phased conservation and restoration the heavily indebted REO insists their preposterous scheme to “save” the power station depends of a new tube line being dug, which of course will never happen.  They claim that their “solution” to restoration depends on the creation of a whole new urban area- a scheme that looked unlikely even in the height of the property boom.

Meanwhile the building falls into decay and eventually will require demolishing for safety reason giving the developer a clear conscience and nice clear piece of land to build on. Never mind that the nation loses one of its most iconic industrial buildings that are ‘as important as our castles and country homes”.

Of course the developers could “moth ball” both buildings until such time that a genuinely appropriate and viable solution comes along, but there is no need to speculate on why they won’t do that.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Befriend Spectacle.Docs on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Power Station owners REO stops paying interest due to creditors

The poor house

REO stops paying interest due to creditors

TREASURY Holdings-backed property group Real Estate Opportunities (REO) owners of Battersea Power Station did not pay interest due to a group of its creditors at the end of the August.

REO is apparently in “ongoing restructuring negotiations” with the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA), Lloyds Bank and others about its loans. The company announced yesterday: “taking into account the status of the negotiations, the company has determined that the interest payment due … will not be made”, a statement that seems to imply that REO could pay the interest if it wanted to.

It owes its banks around €2 billion and in June said it would not be in a position to repay a €450 million debt due in May 2011. It hired advisers to help it tackle this issue.

Perhaps they could cut back on luxuries and use their tea bags twice.

The future of one of UKs best loved buildings is in the hands of mega debtors who claim they will use “their own money” to build the “essential” Battersea tube extension.

Read more in the Irish Times and Property Week.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Nine Elms Regeneration – involving local residents

The invitation to the information meeting at the R.O.S.E. Community Clubroom states: “It’s clear that the area will be transformed and we want you, as local residents, to be involved in this process.” As for the first part of that sentence, we cannot argue with this. It is clear that the decision have been made, where and by whom is not entirely clear. Maybe it was made by Transport for London, who want to build an extension of the Northern line. Or by the American diplomatic corps, who want to build their embassy in the area. Or maybe by Real Estate Opportunities, the troubled owners of the Battersea Power Station. One thing is clear though, it was not the local residents who made that decision. There were some presentations, a short Q&A and residents were invited to sign up for updates on the regeneration. These updates may concern them, but they certainly don’t involve them in the decision making process.

The event was well attended, with about 40 people filling all the available seating. There were some displays with impressive looking posters illustrating the plans. There were drinks and nibbles. The plans involve 15,000 new homes and 25,000 new jobs. Those numbers are impressive. There are also plans to build one elementary school and one library. 15,000 homes and one school, the numbers don’t exactly seem to add up. Either someone needs to go to school to develop their mathematical skills, or the calculations are correct and the developers aren’t expecting many children to be raised in their new flats. Perhaps these new properties are being built to house so-called DINKS, or Dual-Income-No-Kids for those of you less familiar with yuppy terminology. Walking through the neighbourhood of the R.O.S.E. Community Clubroom with large estates and a wealth of playgrounds, you can see why the DINKS wouldn’t want to live here.

As for the 25,000 new jobs, it is important to remember that there are already 12,000 jobs, mainly in the industrial area along Stewarts Road. In the presentation it was made clear that those industries would have to move. While at the same time vague promises were made to keep the industry in the borough (with no indication as to where it should go instead) and that an effort would be made “to preserve as much as we can”. Later in the meeting, discussing the lengthy period of 15-20 years the project is planned for, one of the reasons given for this extended span of time was the existing leases.

Reading between the lines, this seems to indicate that the local industry will disappear. And we can subtract most of those 12 000 existing jobs from the 25 000 planned ones. Now the two biggest prospective employees will be the American Embassy and the Battersea Power Station. The American Embassy will bring their own employees and looking at the plans for th Battersea Power Station with up-scale office spaces, one cannot help but wonder how many of the industrial workers will find jobs in the planned (and not yet existing) offices.

Now the construction itself will bring some work to the area. The number 40 000 floated through the room for a while, until a local resident pointed out that those 40,000 jobs refer to a period of 20 years in an industry where contracts usually don’t last any longer than 3 years. So this number is misleading, as it doesn’t mean there will be 40,000 jobs at any point in time. Also if you count each contract, one worker will be getting 6-7 3 year contracts. Each contract term is counted as a job, but calculating actuall employment numbers they are more likely to be around 6,000.

Besides the number games there were whole presentations which merely seemed to consist of quoting a number of “documents” and “frameworks”, including the London Plan including “designated opportunity areas”, the “Opportunity Area Planning Framework”, “Local Development Framework, “Site Specific Allocation Document” and many more. Not having read any of those, I ended up more confused than in the beginning with an unsettling feeling of disempowerment: There is no way I will find the time to read all those, even less understand their terminology. But if I don’t, I won’t understand what it is exactly that is being developed and proposed. Referencing this mass of documentation had one effect only: dispiriting an delegitimising any opions or critiques by local residents and raising a windscreen of referential material that is cited as authority. Here the event resembled an excercise in exclusion rather than any real attempts at involving local residents or trying to set up a democratic and accountable process to find a solution that will actually respond to the needs of and benefit the local population.

Thankfully there was some time for questions and they came plentiful. How the project was benefiting local residents, if their homes were due to be displaced was one of them. The councilor had never heard about this before. But as the petition to save Tideway Village states:

Now yet another very special London gem is under threat: Tideway Village and the Nine Elms Pier Boat Community may disappear forever, possibly as early as March 2011. Tucked away next to the Battersea Power station the 30+ houseboats with their inhabitants form a diverse vibrant community framed by old boats, water wildlife and nature, dearly loved and frequently photographed by passers by.

The current plans being submitted for the construction of ‘Tideway Wharf’ by St James (Berkeley Homes) proposes a development that would replace this special corner of London with cloned, soulless structures, erected in pursuit of profit at the expense of beauty and diversity.

You can find out more about Tidway Village on their website, and sign the petition online.

The question about how Climate Change was swiftly answered, stating that the whole project would be build to highest standards. The question whether projects on such a scale can possibly be sustainable, remained unasked.

When Brian Barnes pointed out that he’d been promised work at the Power Station as a young man, and has been through three proposals, and now, after his hair has gone gray, he is still being promised work at the Battersea Power Station – in twenty years time…

The point was raised that the proposal did not mention affordable housing and that it looked like local people were being “re-developed out.” The Save Shaker Aamer Campaign asked that the local council stand up for Battersea resident Shaker Aamer who is still being held in Guantanamo illegally. The question was raised whether it was right to invite the US Embassy into the borough, as long as Shaker Aamer ist still not home.

The organisers had pointed out that the meeting was being recorded, and you could see quite a few staff sitting around the edges and scribbling hastily. They will be able to answer all questions and refute any criticism raised soon, it seemed like an excercise in preparing notes for future public debate, to be prepared for any objections that might come up.

notes: starbucks and other big corp chains coming in is bad for local business as well as atmosphere of area, artifical venues and retail outlets that won’t work, just as unreal and illusionary as any other proposal during the last 20 years,

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

The Victorian Society’s Objection Letter

The Victorian Society’s Objection Letter to the Battersea Power Station Planning Application.

Battersea Water Pumping Station, Cringle Street, Battersea: Application for Listed Building Consent for demolition (Grade II, 1840 & 1860)

The Victorian Society is one of many to write an objection letter in relation to the recent plans to demolish the former water pumping station at the Battersea Power Station.

The letter outlined the reasons behind the ‘strong objection’ of the Society towards the plan.

The Society highlights the water pumping station, as ‘an important historic building, the significance of which cannot be adequately appreciated once dispersed on and off the development site.’

The Society feels the applicants (with the exception of the Power Station) have approached the site as a ‘blank canvas,’  with no consideration that the pump station will be saved. The application states that the plans, ‘would bring substantial benefits for the community.’ The Victorian Society points out that there is nothing, ‘in the application to show that the same public benefit could not be brought about if the pumping station were incorporated within the new development.’

The letter also outlined, ‘The Battersea Power Station Company is a trust established in 2002.  One of its objectives is the preservation of the pumping station.  The company achieved charitable status in 2005.  They would be happy to take ownership of the building if the owner no longer requires it.  They would be happy to raise funds to repair the building.’

The closing statement of the Society ‘s Objection Letter:

‘We urge your Council to refuse Listed Building Consent for the demolition of the pumping station.  The applicant should develop a scheme that takes account of the significance of the whole site and all the listed buildings within it, not just the power station.’

The Victorian Society’s Objection Letter is just one example of many objection to the plans to demolish the water pumping station.

To read the full Objection Letter, click here and use the reference 2010/01/012.

For further information on the planning application and to read further objections click here

Read other planning applications by clicking here and using application numbers; 2009/3575, 2009/2576, 2009/3577.

Watch footage from the Power Station on Spectacle’s Archive Page

Learn about Spectacle’s Battersea Power Station Project by visiting Spectacle’s Project Page

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Power Station Community Group’s Objection letter

Below is Battersea Power Station Community Group’s objection to the planning applications.

You might find this useful reference when making your objections. The deadline for objections is 31 January. Please try and register your objection.

Battersea Power Station Community Group

16 DRCA Charlotte Despard Avenue

London SW11 5HD

Mr Bob Leuty

Planning Department

Wandsworth Town Hall

High Street

London SW18 2PU

26th January 2010

You Ref: 2009/3575/3576/3578

Dear Mr Leuty

I am writing to add comments to my original objection about Battersea Power Station and Battersea Water Pumping Station and the surrounding land.

Development of the surrounding land will be far too dense and completely obscure Battersea Power Station from views from the south of the building, especially by the application for all of the residential blocks around the Power Station being planned for up to 56 metres in height.

The buildings have the real effect of crowding the Power Station and not allowing the listed building the dignity of protected views. Battersea park road / Nine Elms Lane and Queenstown Road will be blocked off by the high buildings.

None of these buildings should be higher than the parapet of the Switch Houses of Turbine Halls A & B.

Views from the railway into Victoria Station will be obscured.

There is no indication about the percentage of homes that will be “affordable” We propose that this figure should be 50%.

The development is so dense with over 3000 flats that it is pure greed that there are plans to build more flats as penthouses on the Boiler House and Switch Houses. This adds further insult to the Listed Grade II* building one of the top landmarks of London. We oppose the development of structures and extensions connected to the building to provide accommodation which will ruin the silhouette of the building

The proposal for a roof top swimming pool was only ever to divert criticism from the plan to build the original, monstrous, Vinoly tower. For this to be given credibility will show the whole scheme to be discredited.

All water features are on the land are irrelevant. The Thames flows past and Battersea Park has extensive lakes. The water just serves to make the land unusable by people who might want a place to walk and sit and the water further restricts movement around the site because most of the gardens will be denied to the public as they will be private gardens for the residents.

There should be public open space/park equivalent to the open space/park on the Riverside on the south side of the power station.

The Battersea Water Pumping Station should not be demolished. It is Grade II listed, older than the power station 1860 and a unique example of the London Water supply with the Largest Cornish engine ever built (no longer existing) The Pumping Station is a compliment to the Power Station.

Nearby are the railway arches used by A.V. Roe to build the Bulldog plane, the first plane to fly, and the gasworks where balloon flight became the prelude to powered flight. It is a shame that this industrial heritage is not protected because there is the same relevance as the Iron Bridge museum right here in Battersea.

The Water Pumping Station should have the protection of a condition that it can only be demolished when the detailed plans for new buildings are approved and there is a contract in place to build the new building on the site of the Pumping Station.

The riverside walk should be built as soon as it is possible to do so.

Battersea Power Station Chimneys

The report by Stuart Tappin and George Ballard shows that the chimneys can be repaired and that the proposal to demolish is not proved. Don Bianco of English Heritage agrees that the chimneys should not be demolished. Mr Bianco is the EH inspector who regularly checked the building every six months and abseiled from the top outside and inside the chimneys.

The previous owners claimed to have entered into an irrevocable letter of credit that guaranteed the funds to rebuild the chimneys in the event that they were unable to do the rebuilding. Parkview promptly left and there was no evidence that such a document existed.. Without this guarantee of sufficient funds from the current owners we believe that once the chimneys are demolished they will never be rebuilt leading to the eventual demolition of all of the building to be replaced by luxury flats.

Internally the proposal to remove to the switch gear in Annex B to a new location is opposed and should be kept in the original location with Control Rooms A & B open free to the public.

It appears that the listed status of Grade II* is being ignored by the proposal to create windows in the walls. It is a characteristic of the listing that the large areas of brick are integral to the building and by making more windows the whole effect will be changed to the detriment of the Power Station.

Tube Line

The plans for the tube extension from Kennington are at best confused and at worst “Humbug” as described by the Minister for Transport, Sediq Kahn.

There seems to be 4 different routes proposed but there is no intersection at Vauxhall tube.

Whereas the Waterloo and City Line taken towards Clapham Junction would allow a direct connection between the City and The Junction and reduce the load on Waterloo Station with many passengers seeking to travel in the direction of the Junction.

The Waterloo and City Line could easily reach Vauxhall helping to relieve some crowding on the Victoria Line. It would also relieve crowding on the Main Line and the City branch of the Northern Line, from Waterloo to Clapham Junction and Elephant and Castle to Stockwell.

Historically there have been three routes through SE London proposed as extensions for various lines:-

  1. Through Bricklayer’s Arms and Lewisham to Hayes/Bexleyheath

  2. Through Herne Hill and West Norwood to Crystal Palace and Beckenham

  3. Through Camberwell, Denmark hill and Dulwich to Streatham and Croydon.

The Victoria Line is built to the Crystal Palace alignment and its proposed extension to Herne Hill is along it. The Bakerloo Line was originally built to an alignment towards Bricklayer’s Arms. The Northern Line’s Charing Cross branch naturally faces the Camberwell route.

There are 3 lines and 3 routes for extensions to traverse.

Sendeng the Northern Line to Battersea would remove the future possibility of some part or all of at least one of the above routes through the South East being served.

Finance for the listed buildings

If the buildings were in a development trust they would be eligible for grants from the Sport and Heritage Lottery Funds.

Yours sincerely Brian Barnes MBE

Battersea Power Station Community Group

16 DRCA Charlotte Despard Avenue

London SW11 5HD

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Historic listed Pump House to be demolished

English Heritage have given their blessing for the Victorian Battersea Water Pumping House, on the site of Battersea Power Station and which once housed a 112 inch Cornish engine, one of the largest steam engines ever built, to be demolished.

Neglected and scheduled for demolition the listed Battersea Water Pump Station

Neglected and scheduled for demolition the listed Battersea Water Pump Station

The current planning application submitted by Real Estate Opportunities ( Opportunities for them no doubt) includes plans to delist and demolish Battersea Water Pumping House. In fact in all their models and plans the building has been swept away- pre-empting the permission. It is outrageous that English Heritage have swallowed, hook line and sinker, REO’s argument that one listed building ( The Pump House) needs to be demolished in order to save another ( The Power Station). English Heritage know nothing of business and should be a little bit savvy about the tricks of property developers who nearly always want to rid themselves of any listed buildings that interfere with maximising profits.

Listed building consent for the demolition of the building was previously given in 1997 and renewed in 2002.  Battersea Power Station Community Group made objections on both occasions and also 1n 2002 opposed the demolition (on spurious “health & safety” grounds) of the boiler house of the pumping station.

Since 2002, Parkview’s scheme has collapsed and there is a different developer, with a new scheme.  The justifications given in 1997 and 2002 that the loss of the pumping station as a necessary sacrifice in order to achieve the greater good of saving Battersea Power Station has therefore been proved to be false.

The pumping station is of great interest, in particular in terms of its industrial archaeology.   It is quite clear therefore that the pumping station should be incorporated within the current masterplan for the site. The Historic Building Record prepared by CgMs consulting on behalf of Parkview, the then developers of the whole Battersea Power Station site (Document JL/3184) show there is a “void” beneath the Pump station up to 20 feet deep. CgMs suggested that this need not be be further investigated and it was back filled, however research by members of the Battersea Power Station Community Group of drawings held at the London Metropolitan Archives suggest the giant 112 inch Cornish engine (or remnants of the smaller engines) may still be in this void.

If REO/Treasury no longer requires the building, then it should be transferred to a trust.   PPG 15 requires trust ownership be considered before an application for listed building consent to demolish can be given.

The Battersea Power Station Community Group will be very happy to take on ownership of the building if REO/Treasury no longer requires it.  We would be able to raise funds to repair the building, using the Heritage Lottery Fund and other sources.  There are any number of socially useful purposes to which the building could be put, such as a boating club or an annex for the Kew Bridge Steam Museum?

If you would like to object to the Battersea Power Station plans you have until January 31st 2010 click here for more details.

For more information about Spectacle’s Battersea Power Station project including video interviews.

To read more blogs about Battersea Power Station

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Power Station Planning Application deadline 31st January

Objections to the Battersea Power Station Planning Application must be in by 31st January and there is plenty to object to.

Battersea Power Station obscured by tall ugly buildings

Battersea Power Station to be obscured by tall ugly buildings

The developers REO/Treasury Holdings want to:

Demolish the historically interesting and currently listed Pumping House.

Demolish the chimneys and replace (yeah right) with some kind of plastic replicas.

Build some of London’s ugliest and greediest office monstrosities.

Privatise large sectons of land around the power station.

Knock windows into the Power Station so they can build “luxury” flats.

The vast planning application contains many real hidden horrors, obscured by red herrings such as the Battersea extension of the Northern Line which is never going to happen and the ridiculous roof top swimming pool added to the model at the last minute.

You can register your objections on-line

Details of the Power Station project application can be found on the Planning pages of Wandsworth Council’s website by searching the applications database using reference numbers below or follow our links:

Ref: 2009/3575  Battersea Power Station Site / Offices Exhibition Suite and Premise

Click here to object/comment on 3575

Ref: 2009/3576   Alter or Extend a Listed Building, the demolition and reconstruction of the chimneys, new windows and other openings.

Click here to object/comment on 3576

Ref: 2009/3577    Repair, restoration, installation of structures on, and other works to the jetty in association with its conversion to provide pedestrian access and a river transport facility

Click here to object/comment on 3577

Ref: 2009/3578   Demolition of Battersea Water Pumping Station a listed Building

Click here to object/comment on application 3578

We will be updating this blog this week with more information on the planning application and suggestions for model letters.

For more information about Spectacle’s Battersea Power Station project including video interviews.

To read more blogs about Battersea Power Station

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca