send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Sunday, 11 January 2015


"For years Mr Bore has been telling the Planning Committee what to do:for years it meekly followed his line.
But the worm turned: last night the Committee kicked out these two ugly, money grubbing schemes.
The Kensington Society, on behalf of residents, put up a forensically driven objection of such persuasiveness the Committee had to take notice and do the right thing. 
Congratulations to the Kensington Society, and all those who made their voices heard. 
And congratulations to the Planning Committee for listening.

When the Candy's and Ritblat's-between them worth billions- decide they want something the results are predictable....
The planning committee, usually led by the nose by soon to retire planning chief, Jonathan Bore, generally grovel at the feet of super rich developers.
We will doubtless see an example on Tuesday, 13 January. 
This is when the planning committee consider an application by the Candy boys to knock down Dukes Lodge, a charming pre-war mansion block in Holland Park. 
As is usual the Qatari backed lads plan to replace the building with a massive building containing less flats, but with a hugely expanded 'footprint' taking in the single story garage site; the lodge site and the undeveloped garden south of the site. 

There will be less flats but a 40% increase in developed space.
In order to do all this the facade will be nearly doubled to
280 ft.
Now here's the interesting get Mr Bore slavering in anticipation the Candy boys have offered the Council £12 million as part of a sweetened deal to obtain planning permission.
The Council will meet to decide on Tuesday, 13 January at 6.30pm at the Town Hall.
If you cannot make it please write to these councillors and make him/her understand that you object strongly.

This proposal is totally contrary to planning policy, including the hard won basement policy, loss of housing, harm to Holland Park Conservation area and development of virgin urban land.
Residents need to be there to show their intense opposition- not just to this unwanted, money driven development, but that planned by Jamie Ritblat for the Odeon in Kensington High St and Earls Court Road.
It is not enough to leave protest to the Kensington Society; residents need to vent their anger by being there-so please be there, even if you get there a little later than 6.30pm.
We need to show we care..... 
Little by little the Royal Borough is being despoiled by greedy developers building to satisfy dodgy offshore investors whose money comes from countries you would not want your gap year children sending postcards from..... 



  1. Lets's see whether the committee are sheeplike or show some spirit that they displayed not so long ago

    1. What will that hopeless duo (Chairman Cllr Warwick and depressed Deputy Chairman Cllr Mackover) do when they are asked to rubber stamp this outrage? Residents should not hold their breath. Both are poodles in awe of developers. Warwick will smile at himself in his cracked mirror in his Chelsea solicitors office and get a little charge from the thought "I rubbed shoulders with candy today". And a mogodon for the other one.

  2. I thought that Cllr Paget-Brown would clean up the Royal Borough and stop giving handouts to developers (eg Cockle's £3 million interest free loan from taxpayers to rich Conran for the Holland Park Design Museum) and stop taking kickbacks from the Candy twins for £12 million. Anyone doing business in Eastern Europe knows that "permissions" to do deals routinely require a large donation to "Party Funds". Quite so. But not in the Royal Borough please.....

  3. If this story had not come from the Kensington Society I would not believe it. Does the boring Bore have any idea what kind of perception this creates with residents and tax payers? Is the silly man aware that he is kicking democracy in the face? Does he have any idea what 21st Century society should like? How it should behave?

    The sooner this calamity leaves Hornton Street the better

  4. Not A Labour Supporter13 January 2015 at 06:13

    The Tory group should be ashamed of themselves. They have reduced Kensington and Chelsea to a tin pot, third world, corruption ridden administration. Bare faced prats.

  5. What a pathetic set of blogs. Funds are urgently required to fund Holland Park Opera. £12 million will keep foxy in Clover for a decade.

  6. United Nations guidance is that it is equally wrong to give a bribe or to take a bribe. It takes two to tango. Hornton Street should have none of this. And the Candy pair should be declared unfit to do business in the Royal Borough.

  7. For 8 years RBKC delayed granting full planning permission for a tiny rebuilding project in Notting Hill. Final permission was forthcoming only when it was proved that officers had destroyed the public record. By way of contrast, tonight residents can witness RBKC falling over itself to grease the wheels for the Candies.

    1. Kensington Resident14 January 2015 at 06:30

      What happened at the Planning Meeting, Dame?

    2. The Dame has written that it was kicked out. Details uncertain

  8. There is a rump of independently minded members on Planning currently, which is exactly as it should be. The four Labour members led the way on some objection issues, the Conservatives had equal and some additional concerns, and there was wide accord on the main points that were in contravention of our Core Strategy and even the London Plan - AND our new Basement policy.

    This is how Planning Committee should work.

    Both schemes were criticised for elements of over-development, poor design, un-neighbourly overlooking, and what one referred to as 'segregated housing'. The vast sums offered in lieu of providing affordable housing on site were side-stepped, and many members - and the vast majority of the public who attended - objected strongly to the widening gap between super-rich and 'others' embodied in both these designs.

    The Odeon application was criticised for the 'greedy' penthouses and its gated design, while social rented housing was shoved onto Earl's Court Road with no access to community facilities. There was huge concern over the 'poor door' cinema spilling onto Earl's Court Road while the 'bespoke' cinema was accessed through a posh coffee shop. The provision of bicycle parking for the 'elderly' housing (on the street I think) but lack of access to car, motorbike or mobility scooter parking was derided.

    A victory for the community of Kensington, who have been outraged by so many recent applications in contravention of our own policies.

  9. I was there. It was magic. The small hall was packed. Councillors, regardless of political party, asked endless pointed questions and openly criticised officers' slanted statements. There was near universal condemnation of the appallingly divisive nature of both applications. Each twist in the argument was met with applause or groans from the public. The Kensington Society was heroic.

    At the very end Mr Bore warned the committee that by saying the current application was an improvement on the previous one, the Council would lose an appeal. Rather than being cowed, councillors reiterated the profound differences between the two applications and Mr Bore blinked first.

    Overall it was 6 hours of high drama that left the developers speechless. Doubtless a few mega bonuses are forfeit.

    1. A comic interlude was provided by the architect of the Odeon scheme, Mr Squires, who gave a quite bizarre and irrelevant speech. His developer buddies cringed, while the public gallery commented loudly, and the committee tried to keep a straight face. He seemed quite insane.

    2. He is insane


Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.