Applause and cheers rang out across Kensington Town Hall last night as residents welcomed two planning decisions — both the subject of sustained coverage by The Citizen.
First, councillors refused gambling operator Silvertime’s application to open a 40-machine slot and bingo venue, plus two flats on upper floors, opposite Earl’s Court Underground station. The decision followed this week’s protest on Earl’s Court Road attended by residents and campaigners, including Bianca Jagger and MP Joe Powell.
Objectors argued the proposal — to convert the disused Lloyd’s bank — would draw vulnerable people into an area already under pressure, citing nearby schools, rehab’ facilities and existing crime concerns.
The Planning Applications committee meeting at the Town Hall ©RM/TCC
Councillors were blunt in their assessment. Cllr Hamish Adourian (Con/Earls Court) described the scheme as an “appalling application” and said the local view was “absolutely clear – the answer is NO”.
Cllr Linda Wade (LibDem/Earls Court) said it would “fail to support high street vitality and undermine the development of new businesses,” warning it risked creating a concentration of gambling premises within a short stretch of the Earl’s Court Village Conservation Area.
Cllr Gerard Hargreaves (Con/Riverside) added: “This is not just about planning, anti-social behaviour, the size of the shop front, gambling, it’s about all those things together meaning this development is not fit for this area. It has the whole package of issues.”
Residents reinforced those concerns. Francesco Zibellini, chair of the Earl’s Court Society, accused the company of targeting “young and vulnerable individuals” by relocating to a larger site.
For Silvertime, Andrew Woods, argued the new venue would create jobs and that customers would “get the benefit” of an improved facility — notably the restoration of the exterior of the Lloyd’s building. His remarks prompted ripples of laughter from the public gallery.
Earl’s Court residents cheered when Silvertime’s application was dismissed ©RM/TCC
When planning chair Cllr James Husband confirmed the refusal in line with officers’ recommendations, the gallery – a crowd of around 40 – at the rear of the council chamber broke into loud and sustained applause and cheers.
Asked afterwards whether Silvertime would appeal, Mr Woods declined to comment, but assured The Citizen that he would inform us if the company decided to appeal the decision.
Earlier in the week, Council leader Elizabeth Campbell (Con/Royal Hospital) had pledged to protestors that RBKC would be prepared to defend any legal appeal “100%” – despite wider financial pressures currently facing the Council.
The committee then turned to a very different — but long-running — case in Ifield Road, SW10.
Residents there have spent years complaining about the condition of a property owned by former Conservative councillor Nicholas Halbritter. Among the issues cited were extensive Japanese knotweed growth exceeding 12 feet, vermin, persistent water leaks, and foxes occupying parts of the building.
Ifield Road residents Nik Hoexter and Christine Hastings after the committee’s ruling ©RM/TCC
-
- Mail on Sunday cutting. Previous coverage of the scandal by The Citizen drew national newspaper attention
Frustration was directed not only at the owner but at the council’s handling of the case. Neighbour Nik Hoexter – flanked by another despairing resident, Christine Hastings – told councillors: “The man’s a menace.”
He added: “We have spent so long trying to get action. During tortuous complaints we have even had to go to the Information Commissioner to get the damning evidence used in court.”
Planning chair Cllr Husband acknowledged what he termed “masterful inactivity” on behalf of the Council and indicated that further enforcement action was now warranted.
Council officer Julia Drzewicka confirmed a new Section 215 notice could be served. If ignored, the council would have the power to step in and carry out the works itself. Mr Hoexter, however, criticised the officer’s report as “disgraceful and directly dishonest”.
The committee voted unanimously to issue a new Section 215 Notice, which means Mr Halbritter will be duty bound to complete works to restore his house to reasonable order. However, a similar notice was issued in 2016 – followed by court action – but he ignored all enforcement efforts.
Following the hearing, Mr Hoexter accepted that the residents were back where they were in 2016 and added: “We’re not optimistic that anything will be different this time. Unless the Council is prepared to use real powers rather than notional ones, he won’t give a damn.”
Local MP Ben Coleman, who attended the hearing to support the Ifield Road residents, also urged decisive action: “The only thing that I think will be satisfactory is if the Council then goes further if he (Halbritter) refuses to take action – and goes in there and clears it up. I am going to stick with the residents through this. Thick and thin.”
Both decisions mark significant moments for residents — but, as several residents made clear, the real test will be what happens next. What happens if Silvertime appeals? And what next for Ifield Road if Mr Halbritter fails to comply with the 215 Notice – again?
The Citizen will be covering these two stories, every step of the way.
