A controversial plan to build a 29-storey tower at the foot of Battersea Bridge was unanimously rejected by Wandsworth’s Planning Applications Committee last night, following passionate public opposition and a scathing critique from councillors.
The proposal from developer Rockwell—known as One Battersea Bridge—would have replaced the six-storey Glassmill office block with a mixed-use high-rise including 110 flats (54 for social rent), workspace, a community hub, and a riverside restaurant. But councillors found it wholly inappropriate for a mid-rise area, with several branding the scheme “a joke,” “tick-box planning,” and “grossly unacceptable.”
The verdict marks a dramatic climax to a month-long battle that drew over 2,100 objections, a petition with nearly 5,000 signatures, and near-unanimous condemnation from Battersea residents and ward councillors.
“This is just too big, too tall, in the wrong place,” said one councillor. “There’s no minor change that could make it acceptable.”
Why it was rejected
Officers had recommended refusal, stating that the scheme’s 29-storey height—in a zone limited to six storeys under the 2023 Local Plan—would cause significant harm to the area’s character and heritage. The tower would have loomed over 6 Hester Road, a Peabody-run affordable block, and altered views of Battersea Bridge, Albert Bridge, and multiple conservation areas on both banks of the Thames.
Crucially, officers said the public benefits, including affordable housing and a community centre, did not outweigh the harm.
Planning officer Nigel Grainger also pointed out that the project failed to provide clear guarantees around affordable housing viability, lacked adequate public realm, and raised doubts about the practicality of the site’s steep, constrained riverside location.
Viability officer Debbie Turner warned the council had no formal financial data to verify whether the 50% social rent pledge could be upheld, leaving councillors to take the offer “on trust.”
Public and political pressure
Public opposition was spearheaded by residents’ groups, conservation societies, and campaigners like Rob McGibbon, editor of The Chelsea Citizen. Local councillors branded the scheme “an insult” to Battersea and a test of whether the council could uphold its own policies.
Another condemned the tactics used to collect letters of support—many of which were found to be template-based, lacking awareness of the scheme’s full details, and misleadingly framed around support for affordable housing in general. “The consultation didn’t play fair,” they said. “People weren’t told they were backing a 29-storey tower.”
Déjà vu: the Swandon Way paradox
The rejection has sparked fresh debate over planning consistency, coming just weeks after the council approved another 29-storey tower at the former gasworks site on Swandon Way—a decision that broke multiple planning policies and triggered outrage across Wandsworth.
Several councillors voiced frustration with the mixed messages the council is sending to developers. While the Swandon Way site was labelled a “special case,” some weren’t convinced.
“Developers look at this and think our Local Plan is meaningless,” said Councillor Humphreys. “We have to be consistent, otherwise it’s no wonder we’re seeing proposals like this.”
Councillor Govindia went further, suggesting the developers of Glassmill were trying to “recover their investment by jacking up the height,” knowing full well the site had never been designated for tall buildings.
Chair Tony Belton acknowledged the elephant in the room, noting that Swandon Way sits next to the mouth of the Wandle, amid heavy infrastructure, while Glassmill is flanked by heritage riverfront and dense residential communities. “To compare these sites is wild,” Belton said. “This would’ve been a dangerous precedent.”
What’s Next?
While the Glassmill proposal was formally refused, the battle may not be over. The scheme will be referred to the Greater London Authority (GLA) for review, and Rockwell has six months to appeal.
But for now, campaigners can breathe a sigh of relief. The tower, dubbed a “toxic monolith” by critics, has fallen—at least for now.
Putney.news will continue monitoring the case and any appeal proceedings from Rockwell or intervention by the Mayor.
Putney Planning Round-Up
While the spotlight was on Battersea, the committee also approved a series of smaller planning proposals in Putney:
166 Upper Richmond Road (East Putney)
Approved unanimously. The redevelopment of a commercial unit into new offices and two flats passed despite eight objections. Officers cited improved public realm and compliance with sustainability targets. Borough and Mayoral CIL contributions totalled £110,000+.
151 Elsenham Street (West Hill)
A roof extension and rear terrace for an upper-floor flat was approved. Despite minor neighbour objections, councillors deemed the design in keeping with the area and not disruptive.
40 Skeena Hill (West Hill)
Decision deferred after a neighbour only received notice on the day of the meeting due to an administrative error. The application, for a side/rear extension and basement, will return next month.
Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs)
Confirmed for two significant trees:
- A mature Magnolia at 27 Deodar Road (Thamesfield)
- A London Plane at 43 Upper Richmond Road (East Putney)
Other Decisions
The Lodge, 100 Tooting Bec Road (Tooting Bec)
A Grade II-listed building, vacant for over 17 years, will be converted into a funeral director’s office with a small café. Councillor Sheila Boswell opposed the scheme, citing heritage concerns and enforcement history. It passed by majority.
