Tonight:
4°c
Now US embassy scheme falls foul of architecture watchdog
Mira Bar-Hillel and Peter Dominiczak5 Aug 2009
The official design watchdog has joined the Mayor in criticising plans for a new high-security US embassy building at Battersea.
The Government's Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment says it cannot support draft designs for the £275 million building known as “The Iceberg” near the south bank of the Thames.
Mayor Boris Johnson has already threatened to veto plans for the high-security building between Chelsea and Vauxhall bridges.
The US government has earmarked the 2.15 hectare site near the New Covent Garden Market and wants to move from its current base in Grosvenor Square in Westminster for security reasons.
But the advisory body on architecture and urban design has a series of concerns with the draft plans for the building. These include the way it will be built alongside Nine Elms Lane, the main road separating it from the Thames, and the design of public spaces outside its four-metre-high perimeter wall. The watchdog says it is unable to support the draft application which has been submitted to Wandsworth council.
The views of the watchdog — whose commissioners include architect Piers Gough and Jason Prior, who drew up the London 2012 masterplan and Olympic Park — are likely to be influential when the scheme comes before councillors for approval.
In a letter to Wandsworth today, it said: “We call into question several key urban design principles of the site layout: The relationship of the development to Nine Elms Lane, the nature and deliverability of the public realm elements are proposed outside the site boundary and the form of the site footprint in relation to new road layouts and adjacent sites.”
The embassy site would be protected by a 30-metre “blast zone” and a detachment of US marines. Security is so tight that only US-based architects are allowed to design it.
Last week the Standard revealed that Mr Johnson had threatened to reject the final proposal which did not include a £2.5million contribution for the £16 million Crossrail link, a condition sought by City Hall from major developers in central London . Mr Johnson says the building, which will be up to 97 metres high, will “turn its back” on the Thames and be partly concealed behind a giant mound of earth.
The embassy would form a central part of a transformation of north Battersea, with a redeveloped Battersea Power Station and new branch of the Northern line. Work transforming the area is to begin in 2013 and the US hopes to move to Battersea by 2016.
Reader views (9)
I would not object to the removal of the US embassy in Grosvenor Square. It's a hideous building, totally out of proportion and style to other buildings in the square and surrounding streets. The effect is exacerbated by the extraordinary and ugly security structures which have been erected since the US declared war on the islamic world.
The other day I was looking at the old Battersea power station, adjacent to the proposed US embassy site, and it occurred to me how neatly the old chimneys could be transformed into minarets to create a massive showpiece mosque for a focus for British moslems.
Now wouldn't that be interesting!?
- Mick Ryan, London , England, 23/09/2009 07:00
Report abuse
Such a genuine representation of the Americans' view of how they see the world and how the world sees them. This monstrosity could never be called an embassy, resembling as it does an innovative blend of military camp, prison and V.I.P. nuclear bunker. And how appropriate that we are being inflicted with this hideous eyesore, the Capital of their supposed "greatest ally".
- Kate, London, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
They want bomb-proof, they should build it underground. By definition this would not be an eyesore. What more needs saying?
- Nigel, London, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
Seems to me that the Media, the Mayor and everyday people are all actively reacting all too soon to 'non-designed' Embassy 'plans' and 'sketches'. The project seems to be in an early 'discussion phase' which is used to initialize, study and flush-out city planning issues about a Future building on a potentially massively Future Developed zone, all based on London's own 'London Plan'.
Keep in mind that there is no real Embassy Building 'Design' or Site 'Design' there there yet; there is no architect yet! Announcing displeasures about a non-Designed bulding seems a bit premature.
Seems to me that there are four very distinguished and talented Architects all competing to make real 'Designs' on a very usual site and most likely based on well documented London City codes, Plans, issues and requirements.
Seems to me we should all step back, take note of the date and the issues, then see what several smart and responsible people might really dream-up and create for all of us. Plenty of time to be 'talking heads' when the time is right and a Design is presented.
- Isaac, Sunny Florida, USA, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
Are they mad !
How dare they think they can just come over here and throw their weight around and tell the UK citezens to accept this foul construction.
No we don't want a garrisson of marines in a tourest capital, no we don't want a necular blast bunker built as part of this concrete monstrosity, no we dont want any more buildings that wreck teh viwe of the river, especially if some jumped up forigen power demands it, look at teh mess they are leaving behind north of teh river.
Do we want them in out capital - no, put them (not ask them) in Northern Ireland, lets face it they all appear to claim Scottish or Irish connections so let them be near to their relations. I note very few, if any, claim an English relation.
We dont want them, their buildings, their culture, their globalisation or their legislation destroying this capital any more than it already has.
- Judith, London, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
While I can only speak for the Americans I know, I think it's safe to say that most Americans would agree with C.Nichol from London.
And as an American, I have to take issue with Kate proclaiming that she (and she alone, apparently, because God knows the actual Americans can't even agree on a recipe for meatloaf, let alone a unified world view) 'knows' how all 300,000,000 of us see the world.
Iqubal Saleem-Choudry: As an American, I would prefer that we not have an embassy in the UK at all. It would save the taxpayer considerable cash to let 'em all videoconference their official meetings and you can save your spleenjuice for some other target.
Judith, I have no Scots or Irish ancestry. Sadly, nor do I claim to be 'part' Cherokee, Italian, Russian, French, German, Polish, any variety of African... Do the world a favour, Judith, and stay in the UK where you're happy.
- Dale, Chicago, US, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
The US could do what the British Empire did. They could just take control of London and do what ever they want to do.
- Jenifer, Springfield USA, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
"The embassy site would be protected by a 30-metre “blast zone” and a detachment of US marines". Rather than design and build a Hitler-style bunker, how about modifying US foreign policy so that they need as much protection as the Swiss embassy - http://tinyurl.com/n94oc5
- C.Nichol, London, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
Why don'yt they build out of of London, loads of space and old industrial estates, around our capital.
- Iqubal Saleem-Choudry, London, 23/09/2009 06:00
Report abuse
