Tag Archives: design

Battersea Power Station Pop-Up Park ‘pops off’

Posted on by
Reply

IMG_9991

Last May, the Battersea Power Station developers opened what they announced as a Pop-Up Park, that would receive visitors from all over the world every weekend and host several events. The so called public park, that was even added to Google Maps, ( how did that happen?) soon ‘popped off’ and in late September closed its doors.

The Power Station is one of the few obstacles preventing walkers from strolling along the south side of the Thames Path. For years this path has been blocked– a fading sign claimed it was a “construction site” even though really it was a very agreeable and exclusive river front office for construction company Berkeley Homes. The Berkeley Group (Berkeley, St James, St George, St Edward ) are responsible for ”delivering” many of the ugly and soulless developments despoiling the south bank.

IMG_9990In a new sign hanging on the now closed door, the developers claim the reason why they are shutting access to the park is related to the beginning of restoration works of the Power Station. In fact phase 1, which has barely started, is the building of monstrous flats in the slither of land along the rail track, forever obscuring the wonderful views from the west. “Restoration” (or desecration depending on your view of art deco architecture) of the power station is phase 2.

The sign also states that they have had “a great time hosting over 55,000 guests” in the pop up park. Are they are including in that number the more than 30,000 people that visited the building during the London Open House weekend? If so the pop up park was already closed then. Or do they count those attending the numerous events they have hosted, regardless of the alleged danger of the chimneys falling, on the south side of the site?

Finally it suggests you write to zkelly@bpsdc.co.uk if you would like to discuss putting on an event- It would seem danger from the chimneys only affects the non-paying public but not private, paying guests.

Perhaps “PR Park” would be a more appropriate name than “pop-up Park”.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Battersea Power Station -masters of spin

Posted on by
Reply

The new owners of Battersea Power Station may not know much about property development, but they do have excellent PR. The hugely successful Open House London day attracted tens of thousands of visitors who queued for hours to catch a brief glimpse of this much loved building.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

However, in PR terms, it was a bit of an own goal. As only a few days later, the World Monuments Fund listed Battersea Power Station as an endangered world heritage site. See our blog on this.

This very significant listing was hardly commented on in the media. Despite its big PR it was’nt even mentioned in the very slick newsletter of the owners. The inclusion was only visible in some mainstream media:

”Battersea Power Station ‘at risk’ says the heading of an article in the Times. And according to the the Express:

”The Grade II listed London landmark is among 67 heritage

sites that are at risk from natural, economic, social and political forces according to The World Monuments Fund (WMF). The decommissioned coal-fired power station was joined on the list by the beautiful Italian city of Venice and the little known Hong Kong village of Pokfulam.”

The Local Guardian on the inclusion:

”WMF have said they aim to keep a spotlight on the current redevelopment plans for the station, particularly focusing on the re-building of it’s four chimneys.”

Noticeably, they claim it to be one of the best-loved landmarks of the capital.

The Evening standard did not mention this embarassing listing either. Since they recently made Battersea Power Station a front cover image as part of their association with “The Power 1000 – London’s most Influential People” critical reporting of Battersea Power Station from the Standard, which was always weak, has been significantly lacking.

See our full article about the owners’ pro – active approach to media management.

Interestingly, the owners were unable to provide visitors with updated information about the new phasing of the demolishing of the chimneys. This was left to a small group of local volunteers of the Battersea Power Station Community Group.

Watch our video about the demonstration against these plans during London open house.

The owners have also not mentioned their plans to make a bio fuel power station. If you think bio fuels sounds good, look at this chart. And then there’s the PR problem with main partner Sime Darby’s significant role in deforestation and the extinction of the Orang u Tang.

Despite these obstacles, they are still winning the PR – war as many people believe they are going to start to renovate the Power Station “at last”. However, phase 1 is only building ugly greedy soulless flats for investors that will block most of the views. And phase 2 involves demolishing the chimneys and, they claim, replacing them with replicas.

The current agreement is that they have permission to take down one, and that is including the art deco brickwork on the top. They will rebuild the first one to 25 meters, which is about halfway. When they have reached that point, they can take the other three chimneys down and then they will continue rebuilding the first.
So it’s essentially one plus three. Now at some point down that route, if there’s a default, the developer either refuses, or claim they ‘cannot put them back up’ or they run out of money, the chimneys, like the roof, will not be put back. The cost of putting back three and a half chimneys is massive- far more than the “bond” being asked.

BPSsavethechimneys

They are also not keen to draw attention to their recent request to dismantle the two listed cranes that are disgracefully being allowed to rust away, in order to provide a jetty for taking underground extension tunnel soil out via the river. They have a very long water front it is typical that they should insist it can only work by demolishing the cranes.

To us and any one interested, except English Heritage and Wandsworth council who collude in the hidden master plan, the owners are pursuing a policy of demolition by stealth.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Letter to Architects Journal on Battersea Power Station phase 3

Posted on by
Reply

Keith Garner‘s ( architect and member of the Battersea Power Station Community Group) non-edited letter to the Architects’ Journal.  A critical look at Foster and Gehry, the chosen designers for phase 3 of the Battersea Power Station:

                       BPS_NewPlan_1

”Your report about the appointment of Foster and Gehry to the Battersea Power Station project hits the nail on the head.  (AJ web site 23rd October.)   New buildings on the Battersea Power Station site would certainly be highly visible “… from passing commuter trains”.  The one thing you won’t see of course will be Battersea Power Station itself,  which would be  obscured by thousands of new flats in blocks up to 18 storeys high, to be built as part of the Viñoly master plan.

This would be a very great shame given the evident pleasure that commuters and visitors to London derive from  seeing  Battersea Power Station from the train:  certainly  to judge by the number of people who take photographs as they go by and then post them on  Twitter and Instagram.

The truth is that the Viñoly master plan is fatally flawed.  This is because the quantum of development it foresees will destroy Battersea Power Station’s significance as an urban landmark.   It really doesn’t matter how distinguished the architects are who design individual buildings. No good will happen at Battersea until the master plan itself is ditched.

Indeed, rather than allowing new commercial buildings to proceed before Battersea Power Station  is repaired,  nothing should happen on the site until the future of the Grade II* listed building is itself secured.  In that regard, Foster & Gehry would be better employed working alongside Wilkinson Eyre on Battersea Power Station itself, rather than in designing new buildings adjacent.

Part of the reason why the current scheme for Battersea Power Station is so wildly off beam is that its underlying premise is to fund the repairs to the listed building from the proceeds of surrounding commercial development.  But if the resulting over-scaled buildings destroy the significance of Battersea Power Station as a urban landmark – as they surely will – then what’s the point?

It would be far better to transfer ownership of Battersea Power Station to a public interest trust and to repair the building with funds from the Lottery.   Rob Tincknell should agree to this: it relieves the consortium of the responsibility of looking after the listed building – something they are plainly not interested in – and lets them get on with the job of making a return for their investors.

The consortium would develop the surrounding site (in a manner that respects the monumentality of the listed building and preserves key views e.g. from the railway viaduct) and would have a lease from the trust for use of the unlisted parts of Battersea Power Station itself, i.e. most of it.   As a quid pro quo for the use of Lottery money, the public would have free access to the listed interiors which could be used for any number of educationally or culturally uplifting pursuits.

This seems like the basis of an equitable settlement to me. What is needed is an organisation to take it forward.  For too long, English Heritage has stood on the sidelines whilst the situation at Battersea Power Station has descended in to black farce.   As the government’s advisor on the historic environment, it should be their responsibility to rescue the building from the fate that currently awaits it and to pursue a civilised alternative based on trust ownership.

Incidentally, the AJ hasn’t – as far as I am aware – reported the news that the World Monuments Fund had just added Battersea Power Station to its list of world heritage in danger for 2014.  This is the second time Battersea Power Station has been added to the list – the first was in 2004 – and reflects the World Monuments Fund’s ongoing concerns about the situation at Battersea and the motivations of the current owners.”

BPS_NewPlan_3

See Merlin Fulcher’s original article that provoked Keith’s comments.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter