Forum Topics

Mayor's referral - Hammersmith Town Hall redevelopment proposal

Despite all sorts of tweaking I still can't respond to messages on the Forum, so have to start a new thread, as follows:The Mayor of London was due to consider the application yesterday. However, SOS received this message from the GLA this morning:'Hammersmith & Fulham Council has withdrawn the stage II referral until further notice.  It means that the Mayor is not required to take a decision at this time.  The application is still live and therefore it may be referred back to the Mayor at a future date.  This will be at the Council's discretion.'There is no strict timetable for the Council to follow. The only procedural requirement for the Council is that it cannot issue a decision notice on this application until it has referred the application to the Mayor. Once the Council has referred it the Mayor, he has 14 days within which he must respond. Now the GLA has confirmed that the Council has withdrawn this referral. This simply means that the process is on hold. The Council cannot issue a decision until it has referred the application to the Mayor, and the Mayor will not respond as there is no current referral for it to respond to.  One possibility is that the Council will refer the application again in the New Year.  A second possibility is that the Council spoke with the Mayor or GLA officers and learnt that it would direct refusal. The Council then decided to withdraw the referral, allowing the applicant to withdraw the application. This would prevent the GLA making its Stage II report public.Any material changes would require the application to be taken back to the Planning Applications Committee.

Rosemary Pettit ● 5408d3 Comments ● 5378d

Hammersmith and Fulham Council Withdraws King Street Plans

David Walters has consistently misrepresented (1) the number of people who responded to Helical Bar and Grainger's "consultation" - actually a carefully orchestrated PR exercise and (2) the nature and selling price of the proposed flats.(1) The number of respondents at a public meeting in a tent in Lyric Square in July 2010 was very, very small - about 400 in all. The visitors were shown three plans which looked very similar and asked to choose between them. They were not encouraged to answer separately: "None of the above". The "consultation" was a "box-ticking" exercise, in order to include a "Report on Consultation" with the planning application, as the developers are legally required to do.(2) Early on we found out that Helical Bar and Grainger were using as their model riverside developments by St George's at Imperial Wharf (Sands End/Chelsea) and at Battersea Reach next to Wandsworth Bridge. These flats are sold over the internet to buyers seeking to invest in Luxury Investment Properties (LIP in the trade!) for between 500K and £4M (see for example flats at Kew Bridge development - also St George!) The owners hardly ever visit them. Not at all the "regeneration" of King Street which Hammersmith Council has trumpeted!In order to attract these ultra-rich overseas buyers the proposal included the horrendous footbridge over the Great West Road: the owners of the penthouse flats were to be given the illusion of their own "private" access to "their" riverside gardens - This is actually Furnivall Gardens, a metropolitan  open space created in 1951 for the people of Hammersmith.Crucial elements of the development have been misrepresented. The developers hoped to get away with their deliberate "economies with the truth". They have not!

Una Hodgkins ● 5407d0 Comments ● 5407d