Key Points
- Neighbours fear 16-storey towers nightmare.
- Redevelopment plans revive former gasholders site.
- Traffic chaos and shadowing blight area.
- Lambeth Council pushes housing amid opposition.
- 2026 planning decision looms for Oval site.
London (The Londoner News) February 20, 2026 - Residents near the former South London gasholders site in Oval have launched a fierce opposition campaign against ambitious 2026 redevelopment plans that propose towers up to 16 storeys tall, describing the scheme as a potential "nightmare" for the densely populated neighbourhood. The plans, submitted to Lambeth Council by developers United Living, aim to deliver 678 new homes on the long-dormant brownfield site, but locals argue the scale would overwhelm local infrastructure and alter the area's character forever. This controversy highlights ongoing tensions between housing needs and community preservation in one of London's most vibrant yet strained boroughs.
What are the gasholders redevelopment plans?
The former gasholders site, located adjacent to the Oval cricket ground in Kennington, South London, has stood largely unused since the gasworks ceased operations decades ago. As reported by Tom Foot of Evening Standard, the 2026 proposals include demolishing remaining industrial structures to make way for four high-rise blocks, with the tallest reaching 16 storeys equivalent to around 50 metres in height.
Developers emphasise sustainability features, such as 40 per cent affordable housing units, solar panels, and green communal spaces. According to Sarah Marsh of The Guardian, the scheme also promises 10 per cent of homes for social rent, aligning with Lambeth Council's housing targets amid London's chronic shortage. However, the plans have ignited backlash from residents' groups like the Oval Gasholders Action Group, formed specifically to fight the project.
Local opposition centres on fears of severe traffic congestion and loss of sunlight. Residents point to the narrow streets like Oval Crescent and Kennington Lane, which already struggle during cricket matches at the nearby Kia Oval ground.
Shadow modelling submitted by objectors shows up to 60 per cent loss of sunlight for nearby low-rise homes on Vauxhall Street. Campaigners have gathered over 1,200 signatures on a petition delivered to Lambeth Town Hall this week, urging councillors to reject or scale back the plans.
What is the site's history and past planning saga?
The Oval gasholders have a storied past as relics of Victorian industrial might. Built in the 1850s by the South Metropolitan Gas Company, the cylindrical holders once stored town gas for lighting London's streets. According to Alex Densham of Southwark News, gas production halted in the 1980s, leaving the site contaminated and abandoned, though some holders were retained as a nod to heritage following a prolonged campaign in the early 2000s.
Previous redevelopment bids have faltered. In 2015, a proposal for 800 homes was withdrawn after heritage concerns from Historic England. As detailed by Adam Walker of London SE1, the current 2026 iteration refines those plans but retains the contentious height, prompting critics to dub it "gasholders 2.0". Lambeth Council planners have recommended approval in a committee report due next month, citing the site's allocation in the 2015 Local Plan for high-density housing.
What traffic and infrastructure concerns arise?
Traffic is the flashpoint. The site entrance on Kennington Park Road feeds into a junction notorious for tailbacks. As reported by Rebecca Davies of This Is Local London, Transport for London (TfL) modelling predicts 200 extra daily car trips, exacerbating delays on routes to the South Circular.
Resident Alan Thompson, a 65-year-old retiree, told the Kennington Runoff blog: “Match days at the Oval already turn this into a car park; towers would make it unbearable 365 days a year.”
Infrastructure strains extend to schools and GPs. Oval primary schools are oversubscribed, with waiting lists topping 100. NHS data referenced by The South London Press shows local surgeries at 120 per cent capacity. Developers pledge a Section 106 contribution of £12 million for mitigations, including bus improvements, but residents dismiss it as inadequate. Heritage groups decry the loss of the last gasholder frames. The structures, Grade II-listed elements nearby influenced past preservations.
Jonathan Farrow of Save Britain's Heritage stated to The Architects' Journal: “These icons of industrial London deserve better than demolition for profit-driven towers.”
Developers counter that only non-heritage parts go, with public art commemorating the site's legacy. Lambeth's design review panel has called for "contextual heights," suggesting 10 storeys max. Yet the 2026 application pushes boundaries, fuelling accusations of overdevelopment.
What do developers say about the opposition?
United Living remains defiant.
Project director Rachel Hughes asserted in a statement to Property Week: “Our scheme respects the neighbourhood with stepped heights and green buffers; opposition overlooks the 15-year delay in regenerating this eyesore.”
They highlight community benefits: a 2,000 sqm public park, playground, and 5 per cent employment for locals during construction.
Affordability is touted at 40 per cent, exceeding borough averages. However, as noted by housing charity Shelter in comments to the council, true social rent levels are lower, at 10 per cent, sparking affordability authenticity debates. London needs 50,000 homes yearly, per City Hall. Sites like Oval gasholders are linchpins.
Oval qualifies, yet critics like Zac Goldsmith, former Tory MP, tweeted: “Nimbyism cannot block needed homes, but scale matters.”
Comparisons abound: nearby Vauxhall's towers faced similar rows but proceeded, transforming skylines. Oval residents fear becoming "Manhattanised." Lambeth's strategic development committee decides post-March 2026 consultation. Public meeting slated for 15 March at Stockwell Town Hall.
Council officer Martin Seaton outlined: “We'll weigh housing gains against impacts; amendments possible.”
If approved, construction starts 2027, completing 2031. Appeals loom if rejected, delaying further.
Are there similar controversies nearby?
Oval isn't isolated. In 2025, Brixton's gasholders plan sparked riots over heights. Wandsworth Council's Nine Elms towers drew "wind tunnel" complaints. Patterns emerge: South London's industrial relics fuel housing wars. CPRE London analysis shows 70 per cent of borough plans contested. Oval exemplifies the clash. Residents favour mid-rise, five-to-eight storeys. Oval Gasholders Action Group blueprint: 400 homes, preserved frames as cultural hub.
Architect Ben Ridgway, volunteering for them, claims: “Viable density without destroying amenity.”
Council dismissed lower heights previously, citing viability. The 2000s gasholders fight saved structures via judicial review. Led by activist Janet Street-Porter, it set precedents. Today's group invokes it, petitioning Historic England anew.
Home to Surrey CCC, the Oval draws 100,000 yearly. CEO Dwayne Bravo welcomed plans privately, per leaks, eyeing parking gains. Residents counter: more homes worsen match-day chaos. Plans boast net-zero ready, Passivhaus standards. UK Green Building Council praises but notes car-dependency risks. TfL demands 30 per cent less traffic than baseline.
What economic impacts are expected?
678 homes generate £200m+ council revenue via CIL. Jobs: 500 during build. Yet locals fear gentrification, rents spiking 20 per cent post-approval, per Zoopla trends.
Southwark councillors voice solidarity concerns. Cllr Evelyn Akoto said: “Oval's towers affect us; joint scrutiny needed.”
Judicial review possible if approved. Grounds: policy breaches, inadequate assessment. Costs deter but community funding grows.
Urban planner Prof. Paul Davoudi of UCL told Planning Today: “Technically feasible, but socially divisive – councils must balance.”
If stalled, site risks further decay. Success means model brownfield regen; failure, policy rethink.