The Battersea Society: Planning Committee submission Welcome to the Battersea Society website 

Planning Committee Submission

Added on: 28 September 2020 at 09:27:23

Access Storage Site, Mendip Road

Battersea Society Response to Consultation

The Battersea Society has now considered further the proposals for the redevelopment of the storage facility in Mendip Road Battersea which were presented at the webinar in August.

We welcome full retention of the storage capacity within the development, the retention of an important tree and the amount of green space proposed.  However we have a number of concerns about the project as a whole:

1 Relationship to adjoining sites

  • We felt that too little attention had been paid to how the proposed redevelopment related to adjoining existing uses and future pipeline developments locally. For example how might the proposed development at the adjacent service station on York Road affect these proposals? 

  • We found it surprising that there was no discussion of how this co-living offer sat beside the approved Collective development immediately opposite, in Chatfield Road.. Are they both aimed at similar markets? Is there no opportunity for complementary services and/or common  use of some of the public access areas across the two developments  to provide added value to residents? There is a further application for co-living at Haydon’s Way relatively nearby in St. John’s Hill.  Will this lead to over-provision? 

2.  Design and massing 

  • While there was a fuller analysis of how the massing on the site had been arrived at we consider the height and placing of the tallest block next to the tiered Battersea Reach blocks would create an overlarge and dominant tower near to the river. 

  • The proposed design of the main elevation onto Mendip Road appears rather bland and more could have been made of the opportunity to introduce greater variation on colour and articulation of this highly visible element. 

  • The addition of a light colour at the top the tallest building will emphasise the height and we do not accept this will be desirable 

  • There is a suggestion that part of the podium open space should be ‘family’ space’. Given the nature of the mixed uses and residential tenure within the blocks (and the very small proportion - 10%/12 units of the  largest 3 bedroom units) we are unsure whether this is a development suitable for young children.

3.  Access to the river

  • While the podium level open area would have narrow views across to the river, more specific information on pedestrian circulation around Mendip Road and Chatfield Road and access on foot to the river frontage is lacking. There is an implication that there would be a link to the river from directly opposite the site, although there is no such through way at the moment. This would be desirable but the detail needs to be clarified 

4.  Affordable Units

  • There is no indication what level of affordable units would be provided across the site and this is a major omission.  More detail of proposals for both residential and office should be provided.

5.  Transport

  • Public transport in the area is already operating at above capacity in the rush hour and beyond.  This at a time when the majority of major proposals for York Road, Lombard Road, Winstanley Estate – and others – have yet to be built/occupied.  

We hope these points can be  addressed before submission of the final application and look forward to further engagement with the consultation and application process