Celebrities including Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton have succeeded in stopping plans for a 29-storey residential tower beside the River Thames in southwest London after a planning inspector upheld the local council’s rejection of the development.

Get today's headlines by email

The proposed 100-metre building, planned for the south bank of the river near Battersea Bridge, had been put forward by Rockwell Property. The project would have created more than 100 flats and commercial space, but faced strong opposition from local residents and high-profile figures who argued it would harm the character of the area.

Planning appeal rejected

Wandsworth Council had previously refused planning permission, citing the scheme’s “excessive height and scale”. The council said the tower would cause an “unacceptable and incongruous” change to the surrounding area and damage the skyline along the Thames.

The decision was later supported by the Greater London Authority.

Rockwell Property appealed against the refusal, prompting a public planning inquiry lasting eight days. However, planning inspector Joanna Gilbert concluded that the tower would harm the appearance of the neighbourhood and rejected the appeal.

In her ruling, Gilbert said the building would have “adverse effects on the character and appearance of the local area” and would appear overbearing in the landscape.

She added that the structure would stand out significantly compared with nearby buildings and would dramatically alter views along this stretch of the Thames embankment.

Objections from local residents

The plans attracted opposition from a number of well-known residents, including actor Felicity Kendal and comedian Harry Hill, who joined Jagger and Clapton in challenging the development.

Jagger, frontman of The Rolling Stones, has lived on the north bank of the Thames since the early 1960s. His bandmate Keith Richards has also lived in the area.

The singer previously said the tower made “no sense” and was “totally wrong on every level”. Speaking earlier this year, he warned that allowing the building could encourage further high-rise developments along the river, permanently changing the character of the riverside.

Clapton also voiced concern that approval of the project could open the door to similar developments. He argued that other developers might follow with additional towers along the Thames.

Development plans and ruling

Rockwell Property’s original proposal was for a 34-storey tower containing 142 flats. The scheme was later revised to a 29-storey building with 110 flats, including 54 designated as affordable housing. The development also included underground parking and a mix of commercial spaces.

The developer said the project was intended to address London’s need for new housing and would deliver high-quality homes.

However, the planning inspector concluded the building would stand out as taller and bulkier than nearby structures. She said it would not fit within a cluster of tall buildings but would instead appear isolated in the skyline.

Gilbert also said the design was “not exemplary, extraordinary, remarkable or distinctive, just tall”, adding that it would not enhance London’s skyline.

In a statement following the ruling, Rockwell said it was disappointed with the outcome but maintained that it believed in the regeneration project. The company said it had made several changes to the design in response to public feedback and had commissioned the internationally known architects Farrells for the scheme.

Despite those changes, the inspector concluded the development would harm the surrounding townscape and dismissed the appeal.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 May 2026

View full article

Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton stopping new apartments?

Looks like they finally found some satisfaction…

Boomers pulling up the ladder behind them

IMHO, this is indicative of the English mentality, particularly in London, that nothing new should be built. The Victorian-era row/terraced houses are both an eyesore and very uncomfortable to live in as you hear your neighbour's TV and even convserations, people banging up the stairways in the converted flats, drafty, etc. I know, I lived in one.

Victorian housing should not be given special status or heritage etc. Knock them down and build modern flats. They don't need to be high rise. Midrise and lowrise would be fine.

How dare they create housing that ruins the view of the elites.

Musicians and actors no less. National treasures. Allegedly.

Unthinkable. Build more flats around the poor people.

Another all too common example of NIMBY.

People were saying that Trump wanted to put up a tower there too if this one went through.

10 hours ago, JonnyF said:

How dare they create housing that ruins the view of the elites.

Musicians and actors no less. National treasures. Allegedly.

Unthinkable. Build more flats around the poor people.

45 minutes ago, philipsharpe said:

Another all too common example of NIMBY.

A sensationalist headline. It's the building inspector, the local council, that's rejecting the project.

22 hours ago, stevenl said:

A sensationalist headline. It's the building inspector, the local council, that's rejecting the project.

Under pressure from celebrity elites.

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Under pressure from celebrity elites.

Under pressure was by Bowie and Queen

28 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Under pressure from celebrity elites.

Good to see you side with the guardian. Miracles do exist.

50 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Good to see you side with the guardian. Miracles do exist.

Yes they've even been criticizing Starmer recently so thats 2 things we agree on.

Common sense finally breaking out at the Pravda, sorry I mean The Guardian?

Or perhaps the last few diehards have stopped buying their commie propaganda rag?

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Yes they've even been criticizing Starmer recently so thats 2 things we agree on.

That's the difference between the right and the left. The left will criticize other left if they feel it justified, while the right will defend the right no matter what.

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

That's the difference between the right and the left. The left will criticize other left if they feel it justified, while the right will defend the right no matter what.

Swap right and left around and that statement would be true.

9 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Swap right and left around and that statement would be true.

Hence the criticism of Trump from the right. LOL.