Campaigners fear plans to preserve an historic view of central London from Richmond do not go far enough.

Mayor of London Boris Johnson published a consultation with the aim of ensuring 10 different viewing corridors between St Paul’s Cathedral and the Palace of Westminster are not obscured or spoilt by development when seen from specific points across the capital – including one from King Henry VIII’s mound in Richmond Park.

However, the Friends of Richmond Park (FRP) and MP Susan Kramer believe the draft guidance may still fail to stop a development in Victoria, which it is claimed will obscure the 200-year-old view.

Richmond’s sightline will be widened from 70m back to 150m at the cathedral so developers and planners must restrict the height of new buildings built within these corridors. Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone reduced the width before he left office, but Mr Johnson pledged to counter the move.

But FRP chairman Ron Crompton said: “This is still only a draft proposal and we earnestly hope it will be adopted as soon as possible.

“Until it is, we are very concerned that Land Securities’ proposed development at Victoria may still get the green light – this is a massive building which would obscure part of the view.

“Boris directed Westminster City Council to refuse planning permission back in March, but said he would reverse it if the developers offered a financial contribution to Crossrail.

“If would be odd if this development goes ahead, just as the view is being tightened.” Ms Kramer, MP for Richmond Park, said people would not accept claims the view had been saved if it fits a very narrow technical definition of protection, but was actually damaged in the eyes of anyone viewing.

Westminster gave the go ahead for the Victoria development, a mixture of office, retail and residential space, in February.

Its planning and city development committee is due to meet next tuesday, and will likely agree a payment of £1.2m towards Crossrail, as requested by the mayor, “should not be opposed”.

A spokesman for Land Securities claimed the development would not feature buildings taller than those already in the area.