The Battersea Society object strongly to the limited consultation on the proposal to close so many ticket offices and to the obscure manner in which that consultation has taken place.

The Battersea Society acknowledges that this application follows an extant permission for a major development on this site, 2018/3776. We objected to that application on the grounds of excessive height at 20 storeys (see attached letter).

We are finally getting towards the end of the processes involved in Wandsworth’s producing a new Local Plan, to replace the one which was published in 2016. The process began for us more than four years ago, when we commented on a Local Plan Issues Document issued by the Council in December 2018.

The Battersea Society objects to these proposals in relation to: affordable housing proposals, poor daylight and sunlight measures, low BREEAM rating, the manner in which the entrance pavilion blocks the open space and the fact that despite major design changes no Design Review has taken place since an initial review by CABE in 2014.

The Battersea Society objects strongly to this application for an extension of Go Ape to provide a 'plummet feature' as part of its operation within the Grade2* historic Battersea Park.

The Battersea Society objects strongly to the proposed amendments to the roof profile which are detrimental to the listed building and should be referred to the Wandsworth Conservation Areas Committee before any decision is taken by the Planning Applications Committee.

This response relates to the routes in the Central London Bus Review of significance for those living within the area covered by the Battersea Society; that is the former borough of Battersea.

Scarcely had the ink dried on the Queen’s Speech than Michael Gove’s Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill (LURB) hit the streets.

The latest version of the Local Plan was published for consultation in January. It aims to set policies governing the development of Wandsworth over a period of 15 years from 2023.

The Battersea Society objects to these applications to replace telephone boxes with “Street Hubs”.

There is much that is laudable in this strategy and little with which we would disagree.  We are disappointed, however, that while the targets for changes in behaviour on page 12 are set in precise terms, most of the actions to be taken by the Council are highly generalised and non-specific.

The Battersea Society objects to this application. As we set out in detail below with regard to the Mendip/Chatfield Road pathway and the garden alongside it, both the current situation and the changes proposed in the application are in conflict with the policies relating to the riverside

The Battersea Society maintains its objection to these revised proposals which are proposed to be built so close to the roadway along both Nine Elms and Ponton Road as to leave inadequate space for drop off, servicing and essential parking.