Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
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, 6 November 2016

RBKC PLANNERS PAN AFFINITY SUTTON



SAVED...FOR THE MOMENT
Mr Stallwood has done the right thing. He has advised the Planning Committee to kick out Affinity Sutton's social cleansing plans for Sutton Estate.
Had Mr Stallwood not done so he would have played straight into the hands of the opportunists and speculators who run Affinity Sutton.

As one campaigner aptly put it, "Significantly, our planners have shown respect for Chelsea's heritage by rejecting mediocre plans by a third rate architect"
A HATED THIRD RATE SCHEME

The question the Dame is keen to know the answer to is this. Have RBKC at last broken ranks with other London councils who seem to be in the pockets of foreign speculators? 
If so, we should be proud that our council is at last thinking of what's best for residents, not greedy offshore developers.

You can read the background to the  recommendation to the Committee HERE 

It is recommended the Committee refuses planning permission (subject to receiving any Direction to the contrary from the Mayor of London) for the following summarised reasons (the full reasons are identified in Section 11 of this report): 
  1. The proposal fails to demonstrate that the maximum amount of affordable housing is being provided and the proposals would result in a net loss of social rented floorspace 
  2. The proposals are of insufficient high design quality and would not positively contribute to the surrounding townscape 
  3. There are no agreed s106 obligations to secure affordable housing and appropriate infrastructure required to make the development acceptable 

25 comments:

  1. Well done Mr Stallwood. Lets just hope the councillors follow there advice !

    ReplyDelete
  2. I cannot believe that this might actually get turned down .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good. Perhaps Affinity Sutton or whatever they are thinking of changing their name to ,can actually get on with the job of being a housing provider instead of a half assed developer. They should be looking to give the residents on the estate some respite from the constant threat of the place being knocked down ,and the council should be asking them to get a to d blocks back in operation instead of lying empty. This of course could have been achieved quite quickly had Affinity Sutton not sent people in to create wanton acts of social vandalism by smashing up the interiors of the flats in these blocks so they could be voided . I suspect they will put in another application to demolish blocks a to d claiming they are technically uninhabitable ,then they don't count as 'social' housing. You know they are up to something when Affinity Sutton continually fail to engage with local residents and tenants. Expect some spurious tick box survey by Affinity Sutton saying 99 per cent of residents think these buildings are in need of renovation and should therefore be knocked down . A bit like using a Chippendale for firewood and replacing it with something from Ikea ,and then expecting everyone to congratulate them on a new bold design.
    Watch you'll see. Affinty Sutton acquired the estate for zero. Thats right nothing nada ,zero. The reason given to residents was The William Sutton Trust could not afford the repairs. This was the whole basis for the stock transfer. Now Affinty Sutton claim the repairs are too expensive. I think a good investigative journo would be able to get an award for this. a good start would be with a Gentlemen called Paul Eastwood former CEO of William Sutton Trust. Even better the Serious Fraud Office .

    ReplyDelete
  4. At last some sense coming out of the council. Hats off to the campaigners who have had the yoke of this around them for 5 years.They should be recognised for saving the integrity of the area .

    ReplyDelete
  5. Can I err on the side of caution. The Councillors still have to vote on this. Councillors like 'Coke' Fielding Mellon ,Fatty Palmer ,Paul 'Terry Thomas ' Warwick and Nick 'Piglet ' Brown have never been fans of social housing. We will be watching to see in which direction the individual councillors on the planning committee vote .

    ReplyDelete
  6. How sad is it that even though the officers have recommended refusal , I still won't believe that this will actually be knocked back due to the previous behaviour on planning applications at the town hall . I'll be keeping my fingers crossed that the Councillors do the right thing .

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fair play to Mr Stallwood for his decision to reject the plans of what can only be Described as money grabbing property developers this Estate was obtained by Affinity for nothing and they stand to make a fortune (Half a Billion) they have constantly nibbled away at the community that is left there and i think it is a crying shame what they have have done to the Estate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Let's hope this sets a precedent for the appalling proposals for Silchester Estate Option 5

    ReplyDelete
  9. At last some decency coming from the Town Hall. Lets hope the Councillors follow suit. There are enough empty squares, offices and shops. Their 'cleansing plan' is killing the Royal Borough.

    ReplyDelete
  10. THE LORD COCKELL PUB6 November 2016 at 23:19

    Interesting that a mere housing manager can manage to earn twice as much as the Prime Minister. How on earth does Mr Keith Axford do it! I mean, he's getiing more than I manage to squeeze when I was around Hornton Street.
    And, another question.... I see he has a non executive board of 12. That's far more than Unilever! I expect they all get a good fat wedge and doubtless do Axford's bidding on everything. I expect they have even agreed a huge bonus on any profits he makes. And, to think this is meant to be some sort of 'socially conscious' enterprise. I am disgustedly envious.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Let's hope that the Councillors will follow. Frankly, I doubt. as far as the 'due process' any of you can get involved in having a closer look at what has happened. Since the abolition of the useless Audit Commission you can become an 'armchair auditor' and ask for all the relevant documents. This of course requires a thorough knowledge of the matter, elsewise you get led up the garden path. Let's have the National Audit Office to take charge of local government audit.

    ReplyDelete
  12. ... and often your Freedom of Information requests will be denied because they are "confidential"!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. or perish the thought be deemed 'vexatious'....

      Delete
  13. It seems that the Hornton Street planners are starting to get the message. Disaffected residents are fed up with being ignored. It is time for Councillors to start listening to their residents too.

    This morning we had a powerful message from across the pond. A complete political outsider is the next President of America. The disaffected swept him to power.

    Piggy and friends - take note

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Drain The Swamp" makes a good observation. Residents and voters are fed up and if they have the opportunity to deliver a protest and pursue change they will do so. Trump picked up on this in America and we just saw the result.

    Is there a personality who can stand against the Tories in Kensington and Chelsea?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Its a wide open opportunity for an Independent

    ReplyDelete
  16. Like the Conservatives, the Democrats have a formidable election machine on the ground with a legendary reputation for "getting out the vote". But Trump connected up and the disaffected turned out in their millions to get rid of the establishment. That was the ticket: "drain the swamp".

    In Kensington and Chelsea only 33% turn out to vote and keep the Tory establishment in power. There is an untapped 67% of voters waiting for the saviour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was the same with Brexit. Farage connected and nobody saw the earthquake coming. All the polls got it wrong. Silly Cameron was playing his "game" (according to PM May) but he got found out.

      Delete
    2. Tripped up, more likely

      Delete
    3. On average 30% for every ward of the electorate voted. Even if you had an average 40% turnout could scupper conservative majorities in their wards. Or at the very least win by a small margin which would put a cat among the pigeons.

      Stats are available here.

      https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/council/local-democracy-and-elections/election-results-archive/local-elections-may/election

      Delete
  17. Dame, There is nothing on the Council website about the Planning Meeting. Is there a decision on this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Dames Investigator10 November 2016 at 20:42

      The meeting of the Planning Committee is next week, on Tuesday 15th November at 6.30pm in the Small Hall. The Chairman will be Cllr Quentin Marshall

      Delete
    2. Cllr Marshall as Chairman of Planning??

      Delete
  18. Comment at the bottom of the article Evening Standard article on Sutton Estate

    "My family lived in Sutton Dwellings Chelsea from when they were built in the early 1900's until last year when my mother died in her flat. Since her death the flat has remained empty - like lots of others - clearly a deliberate ploy to run the estate down.

    Most residents do not want a rebuild as the buildings are extremely solidly constructed and only need modest refurbishment. Further, they are clearly going to become unaffordable to the vast majority. Modernisation or a rebuild however is not a bad thing per se but it is morally wrong to make so many available for private sale.

    When Charles Sutton bequeathed funds to build estates in London they were expressly for the 'honest poor of London' and were to be available to such at modest rents. Since the arrival of Affinity, the wishes of the founder have been unceremoniously dumped and Affinity clearly see the location of these flats as a potential cash-cow for their projects elsewhere.

    Like many objectors, I genuinely worry for the declining culture of Chelsea, as the long term residents find themselves pushed out and the borough becomes a mere portfolio investment for the super rich."

    To the point and apt

    ReplyDelete
  19. There is already an extensive planning proposal for the Chelsea Gardener site at the bottom of Sidney Street to provide yet more luxury flats and houses. What has happened to that? And what is happening about the proposals regarding the sheltered housing at Dovehouse Green? And of course there is the cross rail station proposal. Is there not enough construction planned for this small part of Chelsea without adding more?

    ReplyDelete

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.