The Battersea Society: Planning Committee submission The Battersea Society website 

Planning Committee Submission

Submission to Wandsworth Borough Council
Added on: 12 June 2017 at 09:56:18

2016/5422: Redevelopment of Palmerston Court

The Battersea Society objected to the earlier proposals for redevelopment of Palmerston Court (view objection here). These revised proposals still suffer from similar issues. Our concerns reinforce those raised by the WCAAC and the Design and Review Panel (DRP). The reduction in the number of floors may make a slight difference to the profile as seen along some local sight lines; however these revisions do not address basic concerns on how the proposed site would work as an accessible and attractive place in which to work and live.

The principle failing is the continued lack of discussion and visuals of how the development addresses (and might realise the opportunities) of the topography of the site. For example how will street levels on Battersea Park Road relate to the different floors and the access points of each of the four buildings? Some of the drawings e.g. GOO GA have figures that may refer to differences in level but they are not explained. The designers do not seem to have realistically addressed the change in levels for the north elevations on to Battersea Park Road as indicated by the elevations on page 8, section 2.0 of the revised DAS (part 3 on the listed documents attached to the application) which suggest that the pavement could have steps half way along but there are no detailed visualisations of this frontage nor of the interaction with bus stops, pedestrian flows along Battersea Park Road etc.

The original landscaping appears to be little changed and includes several sets of steps across the site with attendant access issues. There appears to be little or no discussion of movement into and out of the site either on foot or by vehicle. The developer’s covering letter refers to a revised Transport Addendum but this is not attached. The DRP report mentions the importance of access through the site and to the near, but not adjacent, subway to the Power Station tube. Again, this issue is not coherently addressed.

Our position remains the same therefore as for the original application, the proposals for this key site in Nine Elms should be refused. 

To see full details of this application and other comments, or to make your own views known please click here