Tonight:
4°c
Westminster takes dim view of tower across river
Elizabeth Hopkirk, Evening Standard30 Sep 2008
A legal challenge has been launched against a planned tower which objectors claim would ruin historic views from St James's Park.
Westminster council and English Heritage want to force developers to redraw plans for the Doon Street Tower scheme - even though it is across the river in Lambeth.
The 143-metre high residential block was approved by Communities Secretary Hazel Blears earlier this year and would contain 329 flats, the sale of which would fund a 25-metre swimming pool and leisure centre in a deprived area of the South Bank.
But the objectors argue it would blight a number of important views, including those from Waterloo Bridge, Somerset House and from St James's Park towards Whitehall.
Lambeth council initially approved the plans but, after outcry over the height of the block which would tower over the National Theatre, the planning inspector revoked its decision.
In August, Ms Blears in turn overruled her own inspector on the grounds that the objections were outweighed by the development's community benefits.
Now the council and English Heritage have lodged papers at the High Court challenging her decision.
They argue she failed to consider whether the benefits could be provided by a different, lower-rise scheme.
It is the first time English Heritage has launched such a challenge and only the second time Westminster has objected to a scheme in a different borough.
A court judgment could take up to a year. But the protesters hope Ms Blears will instead redraft her decision, which could allow the GLA to reopen the public inquiry into the tower. English Heritage and Westminster believe Boris Johnson may object to the project which was approved under Ken Livingstone.
Simon Thurley, chief executive of English Heritage, said: "We urge the Secretary of State to respond positively
to this challenge and to look again at the ways in which this scheme can be delivered which avoids harm to one of London's greatest assets - its heritage."
Westminster council's deputy leader, Robert Davis, said: "The preservation of St James's Park, one of Britain's most beautiful parks, is far more important than creating monstrously tall towers which will destroy London's historic skyline for generations to come. We are not against the principle of tall buildings ... but the impact this building will have on some of London's most popular visitor attractions is nothing short of architectural vandalism." But Lambeth argued that the views of Westminster and English Heritage had already been taken into account.
A spokeswoman said: "This legal challenge will block progress by adding uncertainty and delay. The application has already been through an extremely rigorous planning process which has taken in the views of Westminster council and English Heritage, and the Secretary of State already acknowledged their concerns." A Communities Department spokesman said: "We have not yet received formal notification of a High Court challenge but we understand that one will be made. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this stage."
Developer Coin Street Community Builders, was unavailable for comment.
Reader views (15)
Wonder if it has views in to Buckingham Palace and Gardens in which case it raises far more issues!
- Tony Islander, Denham, Herts, 30/09/2008 21:46
Report abuse
What rankles about this tower is that the land was given to Coin St Community Builders out of public funds, and now it's being used for speculative profit, with the tiniest figleaf of a small swimming pool as 'community' gain. All the flats should be for the homeless, or Boris should compulsorily repurchase the land for the original cost price It's a perfect example of 'pulling up the ladder' by one generation against another, once they've gained a position of privilege themselves.
- Mdj, Leyton, e10 london, 30/09/2008 17:46
Report abuse
Totally agree the city should change and evolve - but now with a growing number of developments on "hold" in central london, should they first be best used for social/community rather than build anymore. Do think River Side buildings should add to London's iconic status and I can't see how this does. Its not the wheel, its not the National Theatre, its not even the IBM building.
And don't people want to live in low rises!
- Sarah, se1, 30/09/2008 16:01
Report abuse
Well Blears approved it - doesn't that say it all??
- Alex Balfour, Hong Kong, 30/09/2008 15:18
Report abuse
This is an uninspiring design offering little social benefit, when social benefit should not be allowed as an excuse to build such inappropriate edifice for the financial gain of the developer anyway. These buildings should be looked at in their own right, then if they are right, approved with a caviat of social benefits.
Keep these towers in the existing clusters and leave the rest of the cityscape alone.
- Stephen, London, 30/09/2008 13:59
Report abuse
Why is it any worse than the IBM tower it's next to, or the other tower next to the millennium wheel? A bit taller, but so what? Frankly, if you want views without skyscrapers in the distance, then don't live in London.
Can't we build a few more towers in Lambeth or Southwark, in exchange for demolishing some of the ugly low-rise clutter between St. Paul's and the river? That would be a long-lost view well worth rescuing!
- Nigel, London, 30/09/2008 13:13
Report abuse
The people from Westminster and EH should really try and understand that most Londoners (who are probably not as privileged as they are) really need community assets of this type. It is folly to think that most of us would be bothered by seeing a slither of the top of a building if we positioned ourselves at the correct point on a bridge in St James park or we bent over backwards whilst entering the courtyard of Summerset House… these people need to ‘get real ‘and stop wasting tax payers money pursuing some self-righteous, pretentious, pompous ideals.. After all if English Heritage had been around in the dark ages we would all still be living in mud huts!!! Cities grow and cities change….
- Ade, London, 30/09/2008 13:07
Report abuse
The South Bank is the most ugly and run down part of Central London.
The propsed tower block would not make the appearance any worse than it already is.
Any change there would be an improvement.
- Weddigen, London SW6, 30/09/2008 12:16
Report abuse
To the people at 'English Hertiage': Surely the London Eye has 'destroyed' the 'Historic London Skyline? Imagine what London would be without it today. Please let this city evolve and be dynamic. The contrasts and clashes of the old and new are what truly make this city great.
- Carsten, London, 30/09/2008 12:07
Report abuse
I feel sorry that the London skyline will be assaulted by this monstrous carbuncle. We had the same up in Scotland when the Labour government forced through a horrendous visitor centre at Urquhart Castle, Loch Ness decimating the historic view. Just as in London it simply overruled the view of local objectors and thousands of visitors from around the world. Sheer indifference and arrogance.
Stop them Boris; find a way!
- Mikko Takala, Drumnadrochit, Scotland, 30/09/2008 11:40
Report abuse
Never mind the national theatre, the views from the other side of the river will be decimated - not only St Jame's Park, but also spoiling the view from the Courtyard of Somerset House. Glad there is going to be a high court challenge. Ms Blears has a number of things she should be ashamed of doing, this being a primary one!
- Julia, London, N16, 30/09/2008 11:37
Report abuse
I may be mistaken, but the last time I checked the South Bank does not lie between St James's Park and Whitehall.
The view from St James's Park to Whitehall will still be preserved - this tower would solely be in the background.
By extension of this argument, you might as well obstruct all of the construction in Canary Wharf, as it is 'spoiling' the view from Blackfriars to Tower Bridge, as the cluster lurks in the background.
- Mark Lee, Vauxhall, 30/09/2008 11:34
Report abuse
The Tower is an absolute eyesore and should not be allowed. The Dome is even worse and looks like a giant mushroom. Awful architecture.
- Wq (Ex-Pat), Frankfurt, Germany, 30/09/2008 11:03
Report abuse
This just surmises the Labour Party's attitude to voters, "we know best, don't argue with us!"
- Bob, Cheam, 30/09/2008 10:23
Report abuse
One of London's strengths is the fact that it grows and changes all the time. It's hilarious that a tower block is objected to because it will loom over the National Theatre - a building that would never have been constructed if the heritage lobby had prevailed in the 1960s. We're in danger of trying to preserve this city in aspic instead of allowing it to evolve. And that will damage our competitiveness as a financial centre at a time when we can ill afford to do that.
- Tony Mcmahon, London, UK, 30/09/2008 10:09
Report abuse
