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.

Friday, 29 May 2015


Dear Members,

We apologise for all the alerts but it seems to be a very active time of year or it might be the developers are trying to “tidy up” before Mr Bore departs.

There are 2 pressing issues:

·       the current revised application and appeal against the refusal for the Odeon and old Post Office site
·       the appeal by the Candy brothers against the refusal for the demolition and replacement of Dukes Lodge, Holland Park.

The following is a summary of the Kensington Society’s objection to the Odeon application (PP/15/02618):

The new application reflecting the refusal in January now includes one cinema facility (no longer the Earl’s Court second cinema) with more than 1000 seats for 7 screens in the basement.  The entrance is through existing Odeon entrance but reduced in size.  There is a gate closing the site off at dusk and opening at dawn.   The Society welcomed the main changes made in response to the refusal of the last scheme in January, especially the cinema screens now being entered exclusively from the original/current entrance in Kensington High Street and the reduction in height of the main residential building.  However:

Points of objection:
·       Loss of active forecourt: We have always expressed our desire for an active use of the forecourt.  We have objected to the loss of the coffee shop which currently services  from 8am to 10pm and, thus, offering continuous activity throughout the day and provides a local amenity at this end of the High Street. This activity animates the forecourt of the cinema. The plans for the current application still shows tables and chairs on the forecourt - do not be deceived - there is no intention for a similar coffee shop/café.   A concession on one side of the cinema lobby shares the function with the tickets counter; this is not acceptable as it will only function during cinema hours; it is not visible from the forecourt; it is not readily open or accessible to the public and has limited means to serve the forecourt. The “wings” or corners of the façade where the cafe shop is now are to be used exclusively for a lift each. The previous versions including the consented scheme had retail units in each corner tower which is far more desirable.

Further loss of active space to luxury housing: We never envisaged the total loss of the Post Office to another entrance for the luxury flats. The entire ground floor of the former Post Office is given over to this grand entrance.  The luxury flats have a grand entrance in their own private forecourt and another entrance at this position results in the loss of the potential retail/commercial use which would help activate the forecourt.  The consented scheme had all the access to the luxury flats via the exclusive court at the rear of the site.  Why cannot all access be as already approved?  The loss of any active use on the High Street is opposed.

An additional issue is the way in which this application has been handled by the planning department.  406 objections were received for the application which was refused by PAC (planning applications committee) on a vote of 11 against to 1.  There is now an appeal against that refusal.  No one, including this Society, has received notification of the application nor the appeal.  This application has over 66 pages of documents with little or no clear description, many of which are over 6 Mb.  Councillors have even called us to help find the plans.  We have asked for a presentation to the public so that the public – you and the other 406 objectors – can assess for the proposal within this application.  We have not had a response.

If you agree with us, please write to the planning department and do not be put off by the date of the public consultation.  The department is required to consider all objections up until the decision.   You can still have your stay.   Send your comments to and cc the ward councillors ( and the cabinet member for planning

Dukes Lodge appeal (PP/14/06419, appeal number 3007991)
We are reviewing and assessing the developers rational for the appeal and will report back to you on our findings.

More to come.  Thank you for your support and please keep opening the alerts.

Yours sincerely
Amanda Frame
Kensington Society



  1. Seeing this makes one realise how tricky these applications are. Rich developers, with friends in the Hornton Street Planning Department, chasing £ billions of profit. Our only chance is to have the dedicated and forensic skills of organisations like the Kensington Society to smoke out these money grabbing cockroaches and their grubby little friends in Hornton Street. Watch out for the reptile Cllr Warwick, Chairman of the Planning Committee.

    1. Every Hornet reader needs to dial up the Council website, tick "Planning" and make an objection. We have made some progress but there is more to be done.

      Officers and developers need to understand that residents are an important part of society

  2. Why don't these vermin go away and do their developments in Patagonia and leave the residents of Kensington in peace?

    1. Because they know that crooked Arabs, Russians and Chinese like to park their money in central London property. It needs to be new, expensive central London property that they can leave empty. They have no need of somewhere to live in London. In fact, when they visit they stay at the Dorchester (owned by the Sultan of Brunei).

      And or pig ignorant politicians are not prepared to safeguard our culture. Prats

  3. It is a shame that councillors are not more in touch with their residents and gauge opinion and then reflect this in Hornton Street meetings. Unfortunately most councillors are disconnected from their their residents and have no interest in trying to represent the opinion of those who voted them onto the Council.

  4. The Chairman of the Kensington Society is pretty pointed about Mr Bore.

    Paget-Brown needs to get the reptile out the front door. And Mr Stallwood (Bore's replacement) needs to be prevented from developing a business "understanding" with Bores property consultancy company.


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.