Since The Citizen aired the serious unease felt amongst residents in a story last month, the housing association charity has pledged to fast-track a solution — but has admitted that the problems are so extensive that it will take at least a year to solve.

Families have already endured four long years of relentless noisy works and have been trapped behind scaffolding and netting that has cast their homes into daytime darkness.

Peabody has finally conceded the works have taken “much longer than expected” and have promised a full-scale push, with contractors to be deployed inside and outside the building, as well as across multiple floors, at the same time to finish the job more quickly. But even that means the works will not be finished until “sometime in 2027”.

In a statement to The Citizen, Peabody said: “We’re very sorry that this has taken much longer than expected and for the impact this has had on residents. We know how difficult it is to live with this level of disruption, and we don’t underestimate how challenging it has been.

“This work is essential to make sure residents’ homes are safe and meet the latest standards. When we removed the cladding, we uncovered additional issues within the building. This has happened across the sector, as some problems only become visible once work begins. Where this happens, we make sure everything is fully put right so homes are safe.

“We’re continuing to stay in close contact with residents and will share clearer timescales as soon as we can. We’re focused on finishing this as quickly as possible, while making sure it is done properly and to the highest safety standards, and continuing to support residents throughout.”

The state of Kingsgate House on the King’s Road as photographed last Friday ©TCC

Sadly for residents, this statement echoes a familiar refrain. “Too little, too late,” is the verdict from inside the block.

Originally launched in 2020 to strip out dangerous cladding in the wake of Grenfell Tower fire, the repair project has spiralled into a catalogue of defects.

Kingsgate House is a mix of shared ownership and social rent flats that was built in 2014 as part of a Section 106 “trade off” for the construction of a luxury block of flats overlooking Kensington Park Gardens. It was supposed to be a modern success story, but once the cladding came off, a Pandora’s box of problems emerged.

Peabody admits the works uncovered serious hidden defects, including rainwater damage to the timber frame — forcing a complete rebuild of the top two floors and even the re-housing of residents to other rental accommodation. Other issues at Kingsgate House include: faulty, untreated wooden balconies, leaks through windows and bathrooms, persistent heating and hot water failures, and – arguably, worst of all – a lift outage of seven months, leaving wheelchair users trapped in their homes. 

Residents point the finger squarely at poor original construction — and question how the building ever passed inspection. “I used to be proud to live here,” said one. “Now it’s in a sorry state — and it’s not clear if it will ever be put right.”

There’s one bright note amid the gloom: Peabody says insurance premiums won’t rise further because of the works — and has pledged refunds for excess communal electricity charges. Peabody also insists fire safety checks have been completed and that homes are safe. That will come as cold comfort to residents battered by disruption — and soaring bills.

To add to their misery service charges have nearly doubled in four years, rocketing from £222 to £418 per month, driven largely by unexplained hikes in insurance and electricity costs. Then there’s the mystery of the building’s distinctive solar power panels that were once lauded as a great innovation and an environmentally friendly design. Residents claim that they have never seen a penny’s worth of energy from these “photovoltaic panels”. 

Peabody has admitted to The Citizen that the panels do not currently work and promises they will be fixed when the project ends. Notably, Peabody would not confirm the net energy value deemed from the panels since they were installed – or indeed if they have ever worked.

In the meantime, life goes on in limbo. “It’s like living on a building site,” said one resident. “The noise, the mess, the disturbance, the lack of security… the uncertainty.” Another added: “We can’t open windows properly or use our balconies. We live in darkness.”

Patience is running out. “They pretend to care,” said one furious tenant. “We are exhausted. It’s a never-ending nightmare.”

Angry families are now forming a residents’ association to demand answers— including clear schedules, proper communication, quarterly meetings and fully itemised service charges.

The Chelsea Citizen today pledges to stay on this story — until the last scaffolding pole comes down and the energy flows from those fancy solar panels.

Lawyers, planners, campaigners and residents lined up for the opening salvos in what promises to be an eight-day planning war over a scheme many fear will permanently scar one of south west London’s most historic riverfronts.

The development — known as One Battersea Bridge — was unanimously rejected by Wandsworth Council in April 2025 over its height, scale and impact on the character of the area.

Even before proceedings began – under the stern guidance of Inspector Joanna Gilbert – the scheme had drawn a roll-call of high-profile opposition.

Chelsea resident and Rolling Stones legend Sir Mick Jagger, 82, warned: “Another high tower in Battersea and Chelsea makes no sense and is wrong at every level.”

Inspector Joanna Gilbert

Actress Felicity Kendal, star of The Good Life, added: “The high rise is utterly monstrous and will wreck this part of Battersea.”

Their voices have echoed a wider groundswell of resistance from residents’ groups on both sides of the Thames led by The Chelsea Citizen. A petition set up by its editor Rob McGibbon in June 2024 attracted more than 5,000 signatures. But Rockwell is fighting back — and fighting hard.

Opening the case for the developers, Russell Harris KC set out a robust defence of the scheme, insisting it should be approved.

Russell Harris KC representing Rockwell Property

He reminded the inquiry the project would deliver around 100 new homes — half of them designated as socially affordable rents.

Framing the issue in stark terms, he said London faced an acute housing crisis and argued that: “a grant of permission for this proposal… would provide a clear signal the planning system is taking its role in promoting economic growth, confidence and the provision of housing and affordable housing.”

He also argued the tower would improve the area — describing it as a “landmark” building first conceived by the late, celebrated architect Sir Terry Farrell.

Far from harmful, he said, the design would enhance Battersea Bridge — calling the proposed structure simply: “elegant.”

But the council struck back. 

Douglas Edwards KC, representing Wandsworth, told the inquiry the scheme flies in the face of local planning policy.

Douglas Edwards KC representing Wandsworth Council

The site sits firmly within a designated mid-rise zone, where buildings should reach no higher than six storeys — roughly 18 metres.

Rockwell’s tower would soar to more than four times that height.

“The proposed development is simply too high,” he said.

He warned it would create a “sharp and discordant relationship” with its surroundings and cause substantial harm “both localised and over a wide distance.”

While acknowledging the pressing need for housing, he concluded: “On the required balance, these benefits taken as a whole do not justify the harm caused or outweigh the statutory presumption arising from development plan conflict.”

Rockwell, however, countered that the Local Plan is out of date and should not be treated as a barrier to tall buildings. In fact, Wandsworth’s Local Plan was only rubber stamped in July 2023.

When the barristers sat down, it was the turn of local voices — and emotions ran high.

Speaking on behalf of a coalition including the Battersea Society, Chelsea Society, Wandsworth Society, Cheyne Walk Trust and Friends of Battersea Park, William Walton delivered a clear message: the tower breaks the rules.

William Walton representing the Civic Societies

He said it would be: “too large, too great in mass and too high for the site’s footprint.”

Resident Sir Christopher Edwards, who lives in the Thames Walk block of apartments that would share a party wall with the new development, warned of inevitable traffic congestion, adding: “We’re not objecting to the building — it’s just in the wrong place.”

Cheyne Walk Trust chairman Colonel David Waddell raised concerns about the impact of height and light pollution, saying the harm would be severe.

Another local resident, Nelson Riddle, questioned the very purpose of the scheme: “The question is why — what does it do to enhance the community? Why such a huge building? It is very difficult to see a common answer.”

Three members of the public spoke in favour of Rockwell’s tower, including Clapham resident Mark Littlewood, who made a “heartfelt plea” for the development to go ahead.

The afternoon session saw Rockwell unveil its star witness — architect Peter Barbalov of Farrells, a key figure behind the design originally conceived by Sir Terry Farrell.

Using a series of AI-generated images showing views from both sides of the Thames, Barbalov argued the tower would sit comfortably within a growing pattern of tall buildings along the river.

He said the scheme would help complete the regeneration of the Ransome’s Dock area — once industrial, now transformed into what he described as a “creative district” of high-end homes and commercial spaces.

At one point, tensions briefly spilled over when a member of the public gallery laughed during Barbalov’s presentation — prompting a swift rebuke from Inspector Gilbert. Barbalov will face cross-examination from the council’s KC later this week.

With eight days of evidence scheduled, today’s opening made one thing clear — this is a fight neither side is willing to lose.

At stake is not just a single tower — but the future shape of the Thames skyline in one of London’s most fiercely protected neighbourhoods.

The inquiry continues

Worth battling for: A view of Battersea Bridge on the evening after the first day of the inquiry

 All photos by Rob McGibbon      ©RobMcGibbon/TheChelseaCitizen

For more than four years, local people have noticed and questioned why a newly built residential block called Kingsgate House – known for its distinctive yellow and green solar shutters on its frontage – has been consistently covered by extensive scaffolding.

More often that not, part of the scaffolding netting on the six storey property has been proudly displaying adverts for luxury fashion brands such as Gucci and Prada.

Following extensive enquiries by The Citizen, we can reveal that the building has been in a vicious cycle of works since 2022, which started with the urgent removal of combustible cladding to make it compliant with post-Grenfell regulatory standards.

Since then, other urgent works have been needed, such as problems with the roof, internal leaks and repairs to the heating system and electrical network. Residents claim that the poor quality of workmanship during the construction phase has led to an array of problems.

The fallout from the works has created a “hell” for residents and many – especially those living on the top two floors – have had to move out entirely for up to FOUR YEARS.

Kingsgate House, which sits on the junction with Gunter Grove in SW10, is a housing association property owned and managed by the Peabody Trust. It has around 100 residents in 43 flats and was “awarded” to the borough as part of a Section 106 settlement from permissions for a luxury apartment block in De Vere Gardens, Kensington. 

It is believed that Kingsgate House cost £12m to build, but whatever happened during the construction of the block, the legacy of it is still being felt all these years later.

The De Vere Gardens property that led to the Section 106 funding of Kingsgate House

Some people have been shunted from one rental flat to another for years – often at short notice. Peabody has paid all the emergency rental income and has even handed cash payments to residents as compensation for the disruption they have had to endure. 

“This has been a living nightmare,” one resident told The Citizen. “The entire building was to have been shoddily built at the outset. Many windows can’t be opened fully, so the ventilation is terrible, and there have been problems with the heating and electricity systems. The internal lift didn’t work for seven months. The whole situation is intolerable.

“The scaffolding has ruined the natural light coming into the flats. It is so bad that people have bought powerful lamps to try to lift the gloom. Then there is the constant noise from workmen all over the place. It has been a very stressful and unhappy situation.”

Residents were told last October that part of the scaffolding would come down before Christmas, but that deadline passed by and there is still no sign of it being removed. Now, there is talk that some of the residents will have to wait until the summer to move back in. But the lack of transparency as regards the nature of the on-going problems and the timelines to resolve them is frustrating for residents and blighting their lives.

A spokesperson for Peabody said: “We’re very sorry that this work has taken much longer than expected, and for the inconvenience this has caused residents. We have stayed in touch with residents throughout and will share clearer timescales as soon as we can. Keeping people safe is our priority, and we’re focused on completing the work as quickly as possible while  continuing to support residents.” 

The Citizen is trying to establish which building company was responsible for the construction.

GRIM: Kingsgate House at night where the lights of the flats are barely visible behind the scaffolding netting

Transport for London has approved a sweeping, multi-million pound redevelopment for South Kensington Station, clearing the way for lifts, rebuilt platforms and a revamped concourse at the heart of the capital’s museum quarter.

TfL says the project will finally drag the Victorian-era station into the 21st century, delivering long-promised step-free access and modern facilities for millions of passengers.

But when The Citizen asked residents using the station what they thought, the verdict was swift — and savage.

“Anything that draws more visitors is very bad,” said Rita Charlton, 61, who lives nearby. “It’s already chaos at the weekends. This will just make it worse.”

The plans had been warmly welcomed by senior politicians, with council leaders hailing the move as a long-overdue breakthrough.

Royal Borough Tory leader Cllr. Elizabeth Campbell said: “Making South Kensington Station step-free has been a key priority of mine since I became Leader. I am delighted to say that it’s one step closer to becoming a reality.

“This will mean a revamped station concourse and step-free access to all lines. South Kensington is an internationally important station and this Council is creating something that matches that status.”

And Labour MP for Kensington and Bayswater Joe Powell also lined up behind the scheme, pointing to hard numbers. “South Kensington is London’s 13th-busiest station, with around 30 million passengers a year,” he said. “TfL estimates another 500,000 journeys are lost annually because it isn’t step-free.

“This isn’t just a local issue — upgrading the station benefits the whole country.”

Despite the political fanfare, residents told a different story.

In The Citizen’s (less-than scientific) poll of ten locals in the station concourse, not one backed the scheme.

“You won’t find anyone around here who thinks it’s a good idea,” said Chris Finnegan, 32, a City worker who lives in Thurloe Place. “The station is already overcrowded. We don’t want even more people funnelled through it.”

TfL insists the station’s historic character will be protected and that all work will follow strict planning rules.

But angry Marsden Hospital patient Margaret Huff, 52, added: “Oh what a shame. We should be preserving our old stations — not ripping them apart.”

At the heart of the project are new lifts from street to platform, refurbished tunnels, brighter lighting, clearer signage and upgraded safety systems. Engineers will also tackle infrastructure that dates back more than 150 years.

Above ground, TfL has also approved changes that could include new retail or commercial units — helping pay for the works, but fuelling fears of over-development.

No start date has been confirmed, but once contracts are signed passengers are warned to expect years of phased disruption, with the station kept open when possible.

For TfL, the message is clear: South Kensington Station will get its makeover — whether locals like it or not.

And for the millions who battle the stairs every year, however, it can’t come soon enough.

Disturbing new figures reveal flat prices in the Royal Borough have plunged by up to 17% in just a year, wiping hundreds of thousands of pounds off homes once seen as rock-solid blue-chip investments.

The average flat in Chelsea and Kensington is now selling for under £950,000 — down from almost £1.15 million a year ago. And for many owners, it is far worse.

Across the borough, three in every ten flat owners who bought in the past 20 years and sold last year lost money, even before inflation is factored in.

And anyone who bought a new-build apartment in the past two decades is now highly likely to sell at a loss, according to estate agent Hamptons. In 2025 alone, two in five new-build flat owners across London sold for less than they paid.

Price falls are most savage in prime central areas. City of London: prices down 18%, Kensington & Chelsea: down 17%, City of Westminster: down 16%.

In Westminster, the average flat has crashed from £946,000 to £791,000 in a year. Even traditionally solid Victorian and Georgian conversions aren’t escaping the slump.

Experts say a toxic cocktail sent prices into a tail-spin – including sky-high service charges, the end of Help to Buy, fewer high-paying City jobs and higher taxes on overseas buyers and non-doms.

Many flats still come with punishing ground rents that rise with inflation or double every decade, turning once-manageable costs into long-term liabilities buyers are desperate to escape.

The result? A flood of sellers cutting their losses — and prices tumbling further as desperation feeds the downturn.

What was once London’s safest bet now looks like its biggest property gamble. And in Kensington and Chelsea, the crash is no longer theoretical. It’s already arrived.

But on a brighter note, one canny estate agent told The Citizen: “With falling prices – there’s never been a better time to snag a bargain!”

Wandsworth Council threw out Rockwell’s plans for a tower of mostly luxury apartments last year, branding it “grossly unacceptable” and warning that it flew in the face of its planning policy. Officers added that the scale of the scheme would devastate the area, as well as the lives of residents.

Now Rockwell is taking its case to the government’s Planning Inspectorate, triggering a full public inquiry — and reigniting one of south-west London’s fiercest planning battles.

The proposed tower would loom over Battersea and Chelsea and “scar” the riverside vista ©Farells/Rockwell

The campaign against what has become known as the “toxic tower” has drawn heavyweight backing. A petition led by The Chelsea Citizen’s editor Rob McGibbon attracted more than 5,000 signatures, with support from celebrities including Sir Mick Jagger, Eric Clapton, Felicity Kendal, Harry Hill and Lord Browne of Madingley. The involvement of such a glittering array of stars led to widespread media coverage across the national press.

After hearing of Rockwell’s appeal, Chelsea resident Mr McGibbon said: “It is hugely disappointing that Rockwell has launched this appeal. It will cause great expense for Wandsworth Council and the government – money that could go to better use in the community. A fortune will be spent on legal advice to fight this appeal and the council is even having to post out thousands of letters telling people about this hearing.

“Wandsworth’s planning committee, its officers, multiple distinguished groups and thousands of residents clearly explained why this tower is totally unacceptable. It is the wrong scheme, in the wrong area, and yet this company has dismissed all the evidence and criticism to forge ahead. It’s as if they think that they are beyond any rules.

“Regardless of the time and effort it will take to fight this appeal, our campaign goes on and we intend to win.”

Ben Coleman, MP for Chelsea and Fulham, also weighed in against the scheme. He said: “I hope the Planning Inspectorate upholds the unanimous decision by Wandsworth Council to reject the scheme.”

Rockwell lodged appeal just days before the expiration date and a hearing will begin at 10am on 17th March at Wandsworth Town Hall. It will last EIGHT DAYS at huge expense to the public purse and will be chaired by Inspector Joanna Gilbert.

The controversial proposal would see the 1980s six-storey Glassmill office block bulldozed and replaced with a 29-floor block of flats and a extensive “shoulder” building rising to ten storeys. Both would loom over Battersea and Chelsea.

Residents have voiced fury over the tower’s scale, warning it would overwhelm a constrained site, clog local roads and scar the skyline. They also fear that the construction phase could damage Battersea Bridge itself and the river wall, as well as cause traffic chaos for five years at one of London’s busiest and most vital bridges. It is not even clear who would foot the bill if any damage is done to the Grade Two listed bridge during construction.

Under planning rules, objectors who have already lodged comments with Wandsworth Council do not need to re-register. However, campaigners are urging residents to speak up again and file fresh objections to ensure that they are heard. People who support the tower can also post their views.

Comments should be filed to the government portal HERE – citing the reference number 6002127 – by midnight on 27th January.

Interested parties can also apply for what is known as “Rule 6 Status”, which allows people or groups to give evidence at the inquiry and cross examine others. Full details on how to request Rule 6 Status are HERE.

Rockwell say that the scheme will deliver 110 flats, including 54 “affordable” homes, plus workspace, a restaurant and a community hub. Wandsworth’s planning committee noted the Rockwell offered no guarantee that the affordable housing would be delivered, as completion hinged on future viability tests. They added the tower would make only a modest dent in Wandsworth’s housing needs. During the planning application phase, it was also revealed that Rockwell’s flats for social rent would be subsidised by the GLA to the tune of £470,000 per unit.

Council officers also pointed out the site sits in a mid-rise zone under the borough’s Local Plan, where six storeys is the maximum height allowable. Labour councillors Jessica Lee and Jamie Colclough said residents wanted to send a “loud and clear message” that profit-driven schemes ignoring local character “aren’t welcome in Battersea”. Conservative councillor Ravi Govindia dismissed the plans as “grossly unacceptable.” The decision to refuse permission was later backed by the Greater London Authority, which ruled there were no planning reasons to cause intervention by the Mayor.

Regardless of the weight and breadth of opposition to the design, Rockwell is digging in for a full-scale fight that will be led by KCs and high powered legal teams on all sides. In a statement to The Citizen, Managing Director Nicholas Mee said: “It is very disappointing Wandsworth Council refused to support this great opportunity for high-quality homes, designed by the world-renowned architects, Farrells. This brownfield regeneration project includes 50% much-needed affordable social rented homes that exceeds Wandsworth’s adopted policy targets. 

“The plans would transform an underused site and replace a building no longer fit for purpose. If London is to meet its housing targets, developments in sustainable locations like this (which attracted 1,900 letters of support) need to be granted without having to go through lengthy appeals.”

Critics have repeatedly questioned the credibility of Rockwell’s letters of support. Following an investigation by The Citizen, it was revealed that many – if not all – of the letters were submitted by an agency paid by Rockwell which had despatched canvassers to, predominantly, the Battersea area to solicit signatures.

It is claimed that many people who “signed” were not actually given clear and explicit details of the project that they were supposed to be backing. Many people were also enticed to sign via direct email, or adverts on social media platforms. This may explain why countless “supporters” hail from addresses far across the UK – such as Hull – who will clearly have no direct knowledge of the Battersea area. As part of its obligations to the appeal process, the council has been posting letters, at huge expense, to everyone who registered a comment. This applies to the 1,900 “supporters” scattered across Britain that were submitted by Rockwell’s canvasing company.

The planning inquiry will see a dramatic showdown between developers and Wandsworth Council, which has vowed to fight the appeal robustly. Council Leader Cllr Simon Hogg, said: “The Planning Committee were unanimous about the harms of a 29-storey tower in this location, in breach of Wandsworth’s Local Plan which sets out acceptable heights for the area. The Council will robustly defend the decision to refuse planning permission at the upcoming Public Inquiry in March.”

The Friends of Battersea Riverside group also fought strongly against the application and its members have vowed to do whatever they can to ensure the development is rejected. In a statement, a spokesman said:  

“Six months ago, at planning committee, Wandsworth Council refused Rockwell’s application for The Glassmill. This was not a marginal decision. It was unanimous. Not a single vote was cast in favour of this unnecessary building which, if built, would contravene planning guidelines. Rockwell clearly believe these rules are irrelevant and not applicable to them.

“The consequence of this is that Wandsworth CC will now be forced to defend this appeal, a process that will cost the taxpayers huge amounts of money, money that should be spent on public services to the benefit of local residents. Rockwell, however, clearly has no social conscience and will use the best legal team that money can buy to try to win a battle that benefits no one but themselves, all funded by an American hedge fund which does not give a damn about the damage this development will do to a community that fought to prevent it.

“We are appalled that Rockwell is prepared to show total disregard for the democratic process that produced an unambiguous refusal for a development for which there is no support.  We will do everything in our power to support the Council in its fight to defeat this appeal and show Rockwell that money alone should not be allowed to abuse the will of the public.”

Other news coverage on this story…

Daily Telegraph broke the appeal story on 22nd December 2025

The long-awaited regeneration scheme will sweep away several much-loved, but outdated Victorian commercial buildings – including the popular former Lots Road Auctions warehouse – and replace them with new homes, community facilities, and workspaces.

Developer Mount Anvil will deliver 156 private homes, alongside 53 homes for social rent and 65 extra-care flats, also for social rent, aimed at helping older residents live independently.

The specialist care homes are designed for people over 55 who already receive home care, allowing them to live in their own flats with 24/7 on-site support available when needed — a model the council says will help residents stay rooted in their community.

RBKC says the scheme is a key plank of its ambitious new homes delivery programme, which aims to build 600 homes across the borough, with 300 for social rent and key workers. 

Lots Road South alone will deliver a significant chunk of that total, with the council purchasing the affordable homes, workspace and new community centre. The development will include 2,038 square metres of non-residential space.

Greenery, the developers say, is a central feature of the project, with a new community square, nearly 50 new trees, and biodiverse green roofs across the site.

During the debate, Chelsea Riverside councillor Laura Burns (Con) warned the Lots Road scheme could bring traffic chaos to locals’ doorsteps. She told the chamber that residents were deeply worried about construction lorries, noise and day-to-day disruption — and demanded a strict traffic management plan be nailed down before planning permission was signed off.

Mount Anvil’s representatives claimed they have a “strong track record” of controlling construction traffic and working closely with neighbours to minimise disruption during major builds.

Rounding off the debate Planning Committee Chairman James Husband (Con) said “the need for new housing in the Borough was urgent and that tips the balance in making a decision.”

Councillors unanimously approved the scheme, subject to residents and developers agreeing rules on demolition and traffic management. 

Mount Anvil’s Marcus Bate told The Chelsea Citizen that the development would deliver 45% affordable homes and almost half of the council’s housing target. “We’re keen to get on site by the end of March to create a new neighbourhood that residents of all ages will be proud to call home.”

Richard Jacques, Chair of the Lots Road Neighbourhood Forum, has followed the consultation and planning process meticulously for years, spoke against aspects of the plan at last night’s meeting. In a statement later, he hit back at the granting of planning permission:

“It is bitterly disappointing that RBKC Councillors and planning officers have yet again favoured vested interests over the concerns of those who live and work in our area. While we can be proud that community pressure has achieved significant changes to the original scheme proposed by Mount Anvil, this is a missed opportunity to create a development we could all be happy with. 

“It is a tiny consolation, but at least the Planning Committee accepted our argument that the Demolition and Construction Management Plans must return to the Committee if Mount Anvil and the Lots Road Neighbourhood Forum cannot reach an agreement on how to manage the development’s construction phase. 

“Our focus must now shift to the construction Lots Road South and how we can minimise the inevitable disruption that yet another major building project in our area will cause to this conservation area.”

It was noted at the meeting that representatives from Heatherlys School of Fine Art and from the Chelsea Academy spoke up in favour of the development. Both of these Lots Road institutions have recently received funds from Mount Anvil’s social action fund.

Part of the development falls within the boundary of Hammersmith and Fulham Council and still needs its approval, but the future of Lots Road South has finally been decided.

Cllr Emma Will, lead member for property, said: “Securing planning approval for Lots Road South means we can move forward with delivering high-quality homes, including much-needed extra care housing for our residents – creating yet another amazing space in our borough. This development will make a real difference to people’s lives and to the local community.

“As a result of this scheme, there is quite understandably some concern over the level of disruption during construction and the longer-term impact to residents. We have been working hard with Mount Anvil to ensure we have captured residents’ feedback and have adapted the designs to take into account these comments throughout the process. We will continue to work closely with residents and local community groups as the scheme progresses to do all we can to minimise disruption. We cannot forget that London is in the middle of a housing crisis and this development will help many residents secure a safe and affordable home.”

The Royal Borough’s Planning Committee gave the green light last night to the long-awaited rebirth of Earl’s Court* — a vast 40-acre site left eerily empty since the iconic Exhibition Centre was bulldozed a decade ago.

Members of the public packed the public gallery and heard that the site was once home to world-famous shows, pop concerts and motor expos, but closed in 2014 and was flattened in 2015, leaving a derelict wasteland and a giant hole.

Developers revealed that hole is about to be filled — and in spectacular fashion.

A masterplan from the Earl’s Court Development Company (ECDC) promises over 4,000 new homes, a giant park bigger than Trafalgar Square, and thousands of new jobs as the area is transformed from a dead zone into a buzzing new neighbourhood. Building works will take 15 YEARS to complete, with the deadline for delivery set at 2041.

The site — straddling Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham — has been described as central London’s most significant redevelopment opportunity. H&F Council granted planning permission two weeks ago.

ECDC rushed out a pre-prepared publicity statement following last night’s meeting that described the Earl’s Court development dreamily as “Discover Wonder”.

Wondrous! The masthead of the publicity material from the Earl’s Court developers

Warwick Square – Elevated

But not everyone agrees that the plans are wonderful. Before the committee voted, angry locals, residents’ associations, charities and even a sports club lined up to slam the controversial mega-development — branding it “too big, too dense, too tall.” Many residents also criticised the development team and council for failing to listen to their concerns during the lengthy consultation process.

“This development rides roughshod over local people,” one campaigner told The Chelsea Citizen. “It’s simply too much, in completely the wrong place.”

Another resident, who has lived in Earl’s Court for 24 years, added: “In the end, they just didn’t listen to the majority of local residents at all. They’ve pushed through buildings up to 27 storeys high, despite the local plan limit of 20. There is no strong evidence that the infrastructure – such as water, road, and Tube – can cope with a three fold increase in daily population. 

“The developers and the council have made zero changes despite all our concerns. There are over 1,000 residents whose properties will be blighted by lack of light because these towers will loom over their streets. None of these people were listened to at all. This development is a disaster waiting to happen on so many levels. I am very angry and worried about the future of Earl’s Court.”

The Table Park Aerial

Earl’s Court Councillor Linda Wade (Lib Dem) raised concerns about an massive increase in traffic and pressures on public transport especially, West Brompton station. 

Campaigners also warned the scheme would dump years of misery on the neighbourhood, with gridlocked roads, endless noise from construction lorries and mountains of waste generated by what they say is a crammed housing estate. Residents told planners they feared their streets would be turned into a permanent building site, ruining daily life for years.

One charity sounded the alarm over the impact on Brompton Road Cemetery, warning the towers would scar views and damage the historic setting of the much-loved burial ground.

In a speech to the committee, Earl’s Court ward councillor Hamish Adourian (Con) said: ‘Last November, I broadly welcomed the overall vision set out by this application, but set out a range of concerns around family housing, parking, architecture, density, affordability, vision drift, and several other areas.

‘All of those concerns are still valid today. However, I have had to ask myself whether these concerns, either individually or collectively, are so overwhelming as to compel me to argue for a pause or indeed to send this back to the drawing board.

‘There are times when it is right to say no, to hold out for something better. But it is also my responsibility to think of the risks – of leaving the site fallow for longer, of having the GLA impose amendments which we would find unfavourable, of leaving Earl’s Court without the inward investment it needs, and of sending a signal that we are not open for business. 

‘We must also consider the many benefits of the application – from the housing mix, the open spaces, the cultural venues, childcare facilities, and many other things that may well make it work.

‘A development of this scale and duration will be subject to many conditions and future planning applications and revisions. Today is not the end of a process, but merely the starting point. So, on balance, I ask the committee to approve this application and help get Earl’s Court moving.’

Only 40 per cent of the land – a quarter of a million square meters – will be built on, with the rest given over to landscaped piazzas, tree lined streets, public gardens, play spaces and a huge central green known as “The Table”, built on the footprint of the former exhibition halls. Developers boast the scheme will be “climate positive”, going beyond net zero and featuring the UK’s first large-scale zero-carbon energy-sharing network.

And it’s not just luxury flats. ECDC says 35 per cent of the homes will be affordable, with the project creating up to 15,000 jobs as Earl’s Court becomes a hub for green tech, research and innovation.

Four planning committee councillors voted in favour of the mega development: Cllr. James Husband (Con) Cllr. Will Lane (Con) Cllr. Sam Mackover (Con) and Cllr. Lloyd North (Con). Councillor Toby Benton (Ind) abstained.

Asked for his reaction to the Council’s approval of the colossal development, ECDC chief executive Rob Heasman declined to speak to The Chelsea Citizen saying he was “busy”. The PR company acting for ECDC released a statement later in which Mr Heasmen said:

“Our plans will restore Earls Court (sic. ECDC’s material does not use the apostrophe) as a global destination, a place for ingenuity, for the extraordinary, and for people to wonder. Projects of this scale require ambition, partnership and patience to bring forward, and our ambition has been shaped by four years of engagement, listening and working in collaboration with our community. 

“Our focus from now turn firmly to delivery, working collectively with the public sector to secure the range of homes, jobs and public benefits which this site can deliver for London and the UK. Earls (sic) Court will be the next chapter in London’s evolving story.”

The site was bought from previous owners CapCo in 2019, after years of false starts and furious local debate.

Behind the scenes is a heavyweight design line-up, including three Stirling Prize-winning practices. Hawkins\Brown and Studio Egret West are leading the masterplan, with SLA designing the public realm. 

Phase one architects include Sheppard Robson, Serie Architects and dRMM, while Haworth Tompkins and Maccreanor Lavington will deliver the first homes in Kensington and Chelsea alongside a major cultural centre.

So, after a decade as London’s biggest building site, Earl’s Court’s iconic Exhibition Centre is finally on track to rise again, although many in the Borough are not happy.

Cllr Elizabeth Campbell, Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, said: “Earls Court is a welcoming, vibrant community with a rich cultural past. Once the home of the Brit Awards and events at London 2012 Olympics, we’re so excited about what the future now holds: not only a new cultural centre but crucially a major neighbourhood providing more than 1,400 homes which are so desperately needed in our borough and across London.”

The Citizen will be following this development closely as the project unfolds in the coming years. Stay in touch…

 * The Londonist states:

Facing a packed — and at times heated— public meeting, CEO David Richmond tried to calm nerves. “Let me make clear — we have no intention of seeing people move out of their properties,” he declared.

But worried families aren’t convinced. They fear the estate owner Royal Hospital Chelsea and social-housing giant Peabody are deliberately dragging their feet on lease-extension talks — paving the way to knock down three blocks known as Chelsea Gardens Estate and Wellington Buildings, in Ebury Bridge Road, and replace them with luxury flats for the wealthy buyers.

One furious resident, who asked not to be named, told The Chelsea Citizen: “We believe we’ve been lied to for years. We don’t trust the Royal Hospital or Peabody.”

The showdown, hosted at the nearby Energy Garden on Wednesday evening (19th November) by local MP Rachel Blake, was standing-room only. Residents demanded straight answers about the stalled negotiations — and what will happen to them if the lease deal collapses.

Then came the moment that caused surprise: Savills’ consultant Andy Smith revealed that if Peabody and the Royal Hospital fail to strike a new agreement, the Royal Hospital itself would become the tenants’ landlord, an announcement that sparked a flurry of questions over possible rent rises.

As background to this long running saga, the socially responsible Royal Hospital — home of the iconic Chelsea Pensioners — is itself under strain. 

According to its latest annual financial report, it received almost £14 million from the Ministry of Defence. Charitable donations and lease extensions and rents brought in another £13 million. But the report bluntly warns: ‘The outlook for the next few years is challenging.’

The Hospital insists it doesn’t want to squeeze income from social housing — but admits financial pressures are forcing it to look everywhere for savings.

Chelsea Gardens and Wellington Buildings sit side by side, Victorian tenements once home to Chelsea’s working poor. With protected social housing rents — some tenants, from 68 countries, pay just £700 a month — it’s a world away from the swanky neighbours across the road: the £2.5 billion Chelsea Barracks super-development, where a two-bed flat commands an eye-watering £22,000 a month.

Suspicions that demolition was on the cards hardened when residents unearthed minutes of a 2017 Savills’ meeting attended by 15 of London’s biggest housing associations, including Peabody.

The session discussed ‘stock rationalisation’ — code, critics say, for selling off or redeveloping social homes in prime-value postcodes. Attendees debated whether social housing in areas like Chelsea should be sold off to fund new development in cheaper outer boroughs. Opponents say it’s a fast-track to wiping out affordable homes in central London.

Those notes may not have been official policy — but they offered a rare, unsettling glimpse into how some of London’s most powerful housing bodies view estates in ultra-valuable neighbourhoods.

Despite last night’s assurances, Chelsea Gardens and Wellington Buildings’ tenants remain worried that Royal Hospital’s failure to agree a new lease with Peabody could lead to their eviction and the bulldozing of their homes.

The Royal Hospital’s CEO David Richmond ©Supplied

But, after the meeting, Royal Hospital CEO David Richmond doubled down, telling The Chelsea Citizen: “We don’t want to become a social housing landlord. I’m pretty confident we can reach an agreement with Peabody.”

Pressed on the sticking point in negotiations, he admitted: “We need to save some money and make a modest increase in income… we’re under the same pressures as any household. We need to close that gap somehow.”

And Peabody’s Matthew Foulis added: “Residents have an understandable level of frustration. We’re not there yet, but there’s goodwill on both sides.”

MP Rachel Blake promised to help mediate and arrange another meeting in the New Year: “I think we are getting closer to an answer for residents, but both parties still have a lot of work to do.”

As the meeting broke up, families headed into the night no clearer — and no less suspicious — about what’s coming next. One resident summed up the mood:  “I’m still very sceptical. It’s watch, wait… and see.”

The Royal Hospital was contacted for an official statement.

Photos by John Cookson

A determined legion of residents and local groups have parked their tanks on the lawns of developer London Square and the National Army Museum (NAM) in opposition to an estimated £240m joint venture that – if approved – will totally transform Tite Street in SW3.

Tite Street is a much-loved corner of Chelsea, thanks to its rich cultural history, its remarkable artists’ studios and its collection of Blue Plaque properties. Oscar Wilde lived there, as did iconic painters James Whistler and John Singer Sargent. The presence of such creative luminaries helped establish the area as a beacon of artistic Chelsea during the19th century. Wilde once described Tite Street as “The street of wonderful possibilities”.

If London Square and NAM gain approval for their development, the Tite Street canvas will carry a dramatically different image. In a planning application filed with RBKC council, the developers have outlined plans to demolish the disused St Wilfrid’s Convent and replace the entire length of the existing building’s footprint of some 3,000 sq/m, as well as its garden, with a mansion block-style of flats. This will rise to six storeys (23.3m / 76.6ft) and will comprise of 42 one-to-three bedroom “family homes”.

As part of the development, the NAM’s underground car park will be transformed into a new exhibition space. Sitting on top of that will be a new garden for visitors, to be created by award-winning garden designer Andy Sturgeon. The development could take up to three years to complete. If, as proposed, works start next summer, it would be completed “some time” during 2029.

‘If this goes ahead, it will be nothing short of architectural and historical vandalism,’ raged one local resident to The Citizen. ‘This scheme is a disaster on so many levels. It will entirely disfigure and wreck this important street, which is why it should be dismissed outright by the council. If the developers are serious about building here, they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with something else.’

Residents and campaigners have dug in for a long fight by launching a dedicated website entitled Friends of Tite Street. In a series of articles on the site, its creators have drawn attention to various aspects of London Square’s plan that they oppose. Key parts to the objections are:

• The scale and “massing” of the building
•  The design of the block, which they say does not chime with the arts and crafts heritage of other significant buildings, as created by the revered 19th century English architect Edward Godwin
•  The prized “townscape gaps” that currently exist will be obliterated by over-bearing high buildings that will lead to the loss of light and destroy the outlook from properties on the west side of the street
• The scheme does not provide any social housing or care facilities in compensation for the loss of St Wilfrid’s, nor is there any significant Section 106 compensation off-set in the scheme for RBKC council
• The development flies in the face of restrictions already in RBKC’s Local Plan, such as the stipulation that heights of new builds should not exceed 21 metres
• The small garden facing Royal Hospital Road will be lost in the development and only a small section of the garden to the south of St Wilfrid’s will survive – where it butts up to the grand studio home once inhabited by Sargent.

Campaigners urge supporters to object

Residents told The Citizen that they enthusiastically took part in consultation events and various workshops with London Square during the past two years to provide extensive suggestions as to how the scheme could be improved. They accept that it’s best for St Wilfrid’s to be re-developed – and they wholly support an expansion of the Army Museum – but residents say that they now feel exasperated that precious little of their feedback was taken on board.

‘We don’t feel that we have been listened to at all,’ said one Tite Street homeowner. ‘The developer knows exactly why we are opposed to this building, yet it has ploughed on and submitted a planning application regardless. The key things that we deplore are still in the plans. The changes they have made are cosmetic when put into the context of the overall impact of this plan. They seem to be tone death. Now the gloves are off and we are ready to fight every aspect of this appalling development until it is dead in the water.’

In a statement, London Square hit back and claims that it has taken on board feedback from residents and amended the scheme “significantly”. It says that it held three large scale community consultation meetings and six smaller discussion groups with the Tite Street residents.

It says that it has “revised the massing”, lowered the main building from seven storeys to six, and reduced the scale by introducing a town house at the southern end of the area. The company has loaded a video to its website that illustrates the changes to the scheme from July 2024 to September 2025.

London Square was acquired for £230m in 2023 by Aldar, the Abu Dhabi-based real estate investment giant that is backed by the country’s sovereign fund. The St Wilfrid’s site was bought for £54m in March 2024 and is now one of Aldar and London Square’s flagship UK projects.

One influential property manager with expert knowledge of the area, believes that London Square overpaid for the site and estimates that its real value should have been £25-30m. He says that the GDV (Gross Development Value) is driving the scale of the project. He said: ‘Basically, they have overpaid and now they’re having to overbuild to make the numbers work. London Square has not altered the basic design since the consultation period because that affects the bottom line. If they reduce height and massing, they lose money, and the project does not make a return on its investment.’

The Citizen has heard that campaigners are considering taking their case direct to the ultimate owners of London Square in Abu Dhabi in the hope of high level intervention similar to the one that King Charles orchestrated in 2009 when he told the emir of Qatar that he was vehemently against the design for the redevelopment of Chelsea barracks. That led to the sudden abandonment of the scheme, which at the time was led by the Candy Brothers and the late architect Richard Rogers. Court action followed.

‘Going to the Abu Dhabi owners is the nuclear option,’ set one campaigner. ‘But we are curious to know if the powers-that-be in the Middle East actually know what London Square is doing with this project. Do they really want to be associated with this kind of architectural vandalism of a significant area of London? We very much doubt it.’

Since London Square lodged its official application in September, RBKC’s planning portal has received (at the time of publication) 117 objections, compared to six notes of support and four neutral. The Citizen understands that the local ward councillors for Royal Hospital Ward will be objecting to the scheme.

John Thalassites, RBKC’s lead member for environment and planning, said in a statement: ‘We have received a planning application for a redevelopment on Tite Street. I am aware of the strong resident feeling on this application, and I have met Tite Street residents – with Cllr Emma Will – to discuss the scheme in the past few months. I would encourage local people to have their say during consultation. I want to see development that enhances this special part of Chelsea and will work with residents and applicants to achieve that.’

The Chelsea Society has been in close contact with residents since the development first came on the radar and was highly active during the consultation meetings. In a damning rebuke on its website, the Chelsea Society states of London Square: ‘Their final plans show little change from the previous version which we saw and do not, in our view, pay sufficient attention to the pre-planning advice which they have received from Council officers.

‘They are not, for example, proposing to include any element of care provision or other community use in their scheme nor are they offering any on-site affordable housing. These were all issues highlighted by Council officers in their previous consultations with London Square and it is disappointing that they have been ignored. While we support the provision of extra exhibition space for the National Army Museum which London Square are proposing to build, we do not think that this should involve the sacrifice of other local community facilities.

‘The building’s design also fails to reflect Council officers’ advice. It is higher than would normally be permitted in an area of this kind and it envisages the retention of only part of the vitally important garden and townscape gaps.  Tite Street is one of the most iconic streets in Chelsea with a rich artistic and historical heritage. We hope therefore that in assessing this application RBKC will be scrupulous in applying its own policies and will demand the necessary changes to it.’

The Cheyne Walk Trust is preparing an objection statement, as is the Lots Road Neighbourhood Forum. Its chairman, Richard Jacques, said: ‘This is yet another example of a developer riding roughshod over previous advice and guidelines in pursuit of overdevelopment. The building is too tall and too monolithic, and will result in the canyonisation of Tite Street. Moreover, the scheme has no element of care provision, little or no community use and no on-site affordable housing, leaving developments in other parts of the borough to bear the burden of this provision.’

The existing view of St Wilfrid’s from Royal Hospital Road            ©RM/TCC

The proposed design stretches from Royal Hospital Road for approximately 60 metres down Tite Stree

American Lee Muller, who has lived in Tite Street for two years and loves the area, said: ‘This is a monstrous development that will overwhelm and completely alter the historic character of this street. If the residents are expected to support it, then the design must change dramatically.’

One resident who lives directly opposite the “light gap” added: ‘Our home will go from having an uninterrupted view of the sky and of Sir Christopher Wren’s Royal Hospital, to a massive red brick building with the balconies and windows from flats looking directly into our living room. The whole project is an appalling prospect. We all accept that St Wilfrid’s is ugly and run down and some kind of development should take place here, but we’d far rather live with that old mess than this disaster.’

Tite Street was first established in 1877 and became synonymous with artists. Painter James McNeil Whistler was an early inhabitant and built what he called The White House there, although his property has long-since been demolished. Tite Street is known for fabulous studio houses, such as Singer’s and the one at No.44, which was designed by renowned architect Godwin. A simple one-bed flat in the street costs £700,000 and the most significant houses are worth in excess of £30m.

In an official statement, The Tite Street Association said: “The proposal for St Wilfrid’s would destroy the character of one of London’s most distinctive historic streets – a place where art, architecture and community have coexisted for more than a century. London Square replaces a varied and finally detailed roofline with a monolithic block that ignores the character of Chelsea’s conservation area.

‘It would fill important townscape gaps, canyonising the street and overwhelming its human scale. We are not opposed to development, but it must enhance, not erase, what makes this street special. It is deeply disappointing that London Square – one of the few developers with the resources and reputation to do this properly – has got it so wrong. What drives this scheme is not respect for place or heritage, but the pressure to justify an inflated land deal. Chelsea. deserves better.’

Side view that will almost entirely fill the “gap”

Mark Smith, Development Director for London Square, said in a statement issued to The Citizen: ‘We have always understood the importance of this prominent site, not only for its location in the Royal Hospital Conservation Area but also for the rich heritage and quality of architecture found in Tite Street. Our design team has spent over a year meeting with near neighbours, local stakeholders and the Council to inform the plans. These meetings, visits to neighbours’ homes and the wider community consultation have all been invaluable for our team to listen , learn and respond to feedback.

‘We greatly appreciate the time invested by everyone in this process which, we believe, has created a beautiful scheme complementing the street’s rich architecture and that can bring considerable benefits to the area. The submitted planning application documents reflect the level of detail, thought and consideration that has been gone into this very unique site.’

Justin Maciejewski, Director of the National Army Museum, commented: ‘Our mission is to engage and inspire people with the stories of our Army and our soldiers, creating understanding of their vital role locally, nationally, and globally. In today’s world, our mission is more important than ever.

‘This proposal is a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform our offer, doubling capacity for learning and engagement, creating 40% more gallery space for values-based storytelling with a global reach, and fulfilling the work that was begun when we first came to Chelsea in 1970. We appreciate all the support we have received from so many in our local community over the years and for our plans to extend the museum.’

Comments to RBKC’s planning portal about this scheme are due to close on 14th November, but The Citizen understands that the council is obliged to take all comments into consideration right up until the day that the Planning Committee. After the deadline, interested parties can email views – quoting reference PP/25/04989 – to: planning@rbkc.gov.uk.

Essential links

RBKC planning application

London Square / National Army Museum designs

Friends of Tite Street

Now

When

The “evolution” of the design during the past year…

Aerial view of the proposed development location