The change sees funding decisions made every six months, with around £3 million available across the borough.

RBKC NCIL statement

NCIL is funded through contributions made by developers when certain developments take place in the borough. Some of this funding is used for infrastructure projects that benefit local communities.

This process was introduced in September and replaces the previous system of two six-week application windows. Residents and community groups no longer need to wait for a bidding round before putting forward a project idea.

The funding can support practical improvements to neighbourhoods, from cycle storage units to safer streets, CCTV instalments, pedestrian improvements and other community facilities.

Since 2021, the borough has helped fund over 250 projects through NCIL, including traffic-calming measures, community gardens, planting schemes and improvements to local facilities.

NCIL funded plant scheme

NCIL funded speed bumps

NCIL funded Oscar Wilde sculpture on Dovehouse Green

Projects must deliver a broad community benefit. Applications are assessed against the Council’s NCIL criteria and funding is not guaranteed. Applicants may be asked to provide evidence of community support, project costs and any permissions required. Funding decisions are made by ward councillors, and the amount available varies between wards.

Cllr Johnny Thalassites, Lead Member for Resident Services, Planning and Enforcement, said: “If you’ve ever walked past somewhere in your neighbourhood and thought of a way to improve it, NCIL could bring your idea to life. It might be a plan for a safer crossing, secure cycle parking, Christmas lights or a community space that needs freshening up.

“Residents know their areas best, and we want to help turn their good ideas into practical improvements that everyone can enjoy. And because those ideas don’t always arrive within a six-week window, we’re now welcoming applications all year round. Whenever inspiration strikes, we’re ready to hear about it.”

Further information about NCIL, including eligibility criteria and how to apply, is available on the Council’s NCIL consultation website. Applicants can contact the NCIL team at NCIL@rbkc.gov.uk or on 020 7361 3012.

The meeting was chaired by Ben Coleman MP and attended by a number of local residents and three RBKC councillors – Cllrs Heena Bellara and Laura Burns (Riverside) and former Deputy Leader Cllr Kim Taylor-Smith (Stanley). No council officers attended.

One resident reported that she had contacted the council and had been told that officers would not attend because they felt that the meeting “would simply be repeating discussions from previous meetings”.

In a private message to The Citizen from a senior member of the council on the day of the meeting, it was stated that officers would not attend because they had “not been given enough notice of the meeting” by Ben Coleman.  This “lack of notice” was disputed by both Mr Coleman and residents.

The issue on the agenda was the new hearting system (see previous Citizen report from September 2025) which has been an ongoing subject for several years. Phase 1 having taken place to replace old boilers, which were prone to failure, and Phase 2 having been paused as residents request more information from the council about the purpose, costs, and results of further changes. 

Ben Coleman and Cllrs Bellara and Burns who addressed the meeting

The plan proposed by the council would see a new communal heating system introduced. However, residents say that the council has not fully established the need for the new system, that it has not been made clear to them how this system would change their costs, or how vulnerable people will be protected if their bills increase. 

A spokesperson for the council told The Chelsea Citizen: “We understand that many residents are concerned about changes to the billing and metering of their heating. These changes are required under the laws and regulations which govern heat networks. The communal heating system on the Cremorne Estate is beyond its useful lifespan and needs to be replaced.”

They added that the number of repairs callouts related to pipework had increased by more than half between 2023 and 2024, and that the installation of individual heat meters is “required by law” when pipework is upgraded.

One resident told councillors in attendance that the proposed changes could increase some one-bedroom properties’ gas bills from an average of £1,000 per year to over £2,000. 

Cllr Kim Taylor-Smith pointed out that the new system is expected to bill houses more accurately, with properties being billed for the amount of energy they use. “Those people who are parsimonious will pay less,” he said. “Are you in favour of paying for what you use?”

This point was reiterated by the RBKC spokesperson, who said: “At present all homes on the network pay a share of the communal heating charge. In future residents will pay for what they use in their own home.”

One resident disagreed, addressing Cllr Taylor-Smith directly: “For every person who pays less, someone else must pay more, and who are those people on the Cremorne Estate? The elderly, the disabled, and the vulnerable.”

The meeting in May 2025 when residents began voicing their demands for more information about the need for a new heating system

Ben Coleman MP attempted to keep the arguing to a minimum during the meeting, asking parties to focus on identifying the information which the council needs to provide to residents.

One of the articles he has pushed for the council to provide is a detailed plan for how vulnerable residents will be supported if a new system increases their energy costs.

“This is getting a bit nuts,” he said. “They [RBKC council] don’t seem to want to respond.”

Over the course of the meeting, Coleman’s team identified multiple points still awaiting a response from the council, including reports, plans, and surveys.

Cllr Taylor-Smith was adamant that the plan would benefit many residents, and repeatedly reminded residents of the Fair Funding Review which will cut over £100 million of Government funding from RBKC over the next four years. At one point he accused Coleman of voting for these cuts, which Coleman denied.

“My job really is not to opine on whether this is the right scheme or not,” he added. “Some residents have very strong opinions that it’s not. They’re worried about the extra costs for leaseholders and for elderly people and disabled people. My job is to make sure residents get a hearing and the reasonable questions they ask, they get an answer to.”

Speaking to The Chelsea Citizen after the meeting, Mr Coleman said: “What was helpful tonight was having three councillors there. Kim Taylor-Smith said he was shocked that the council officers hadn’t provided the information they said they would. I had the impression from him that he and the other two were committed to getting the answers.”

He added that he has been involved in this matter since May 2025, and has taken part in several meetings where council officers have promised answers that “didn’t really appear”, and that he hopes that the council can now give residents the answers they need.

Cremorne Estate

Map of the estate

The ‘To Do List’ that has not – allegedly – been completed by the council in nearly a year

Looking striking in a black designer suit, with white gloves and a Panama hat, Jagger cut a distinctive figure as she rose to address more than 150 residents packed into St Cuthbert’s Church in Philbeach Gardens last night.

Striking: Bianca Jagger addresses the gathering at St Cuthbert’s Church          Photo: Remo Knecht

The audience fell silent as she spoke passionately about the threat she believes another round-the-clock gambling venue would pose to children and vulnerable people in the neighbourhood.

“This is the wrong place for another 24-hour gambling venue,” she said.

Speaking not only as a human rights campaigner but “as a mother, grandmother and great-grandmother”, Jagger told residents: “My concern is how it will impact our community. How do we protect our children and vulnerable people from harm? How do we prevent crime and disorder? How do we protect the safety and wellbeing of the people who live in our communities?

“And, perhaps most importantly, do local people and their elected representatives actually have the power to say No when they believe that their community is at stake?”

Thursday night’s meeting was the latest round in a long-running campaign by Earl’s Court residents against Silvertime Amusements’ plans for a new Adult Gaming Centre (AGC) at 177–179 Earl’s Court Road.

Silvertime already operates a smaller venue at 169 Earl’s Court Road and wants to move into the much larger former Lloyd’s Bank premises, opposite the station on the corner of Hogarth Road. Silvertime owns that site after buying it for £3,450,000 in 2024 from a businessman – revealed last night to be “Mr C.D Patel”.

The panel against Silvertime (L/R): Joe Powell, Will Prochaska, Francesco Zibellini, Bianca Jagger, Tom Bennett, Linda Wade      Photo: Remo Knecht

Cllr Linda Wade has been leading the charge to save Earl’s Court            Photo: Remo Knecht

Cllr Tom Bennett re-assured residents that RBKC will fight any legal battle ahead “robustly”          Photo: Remo Knecht

The company suffered a major setback in April when RBKC’s Planning Applications Committee overwhelmingly dismissed its application following a campaign which generated around 1,000 objections.

But in July, a separate council Licensing Sub-Committee granted Silvertime a new Adult Gaming Centre premises licence for its proposed new site, subject to a series of conditions. One requires the existing licence at No.169 be surrendered before gambling begins at the new premises.

Silvertime is seeking to overturn the planning refusal, meaning the wider battle is far from over.

Jagger told the meeting: “Earl’s Court is already becoming a gambling hub, with betting shops and Adult Gaming Centres located within a very small area. At some point, saturation has to mean something.”

The intense row has taken on national significance following Government proposals to strengthen the hand of councils and communities in deciding where gambling businesses can operate.

A gathering storm: Residents pack the pews of St Cuthbert’s                     Photo: Remo Knecht

The Government has announced plans to scrap the controversial “aim to permit” approach to gambling licensing and introduce Gambling Impact Assessments aimed at giving communities greater power to challenge concentrations of gambling premises.

Jagger said: “Local people know their neighbourhood. They know where children walk to school, where older people feel unsafe, where antisocial behaviour occurs, where people experiencing addiction seek help and where public services are already under pressure.

“Their experience must not be treated as secondary to a technical licensing process.”

The meeting also heard from Kensington and Bayswater MP Joe Powell and councillors Linda Wade, Liberal Democrat member for Earl’s Court, and Tom Bennett, Conservative member for Redcliffe.

Powell told The Chelsea Citizen that if a planning inspector overturns RBKC’s refusal, he will ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Angela Rayner, to intervene.

“It’s not a step frequently used on something like an adult gaming centre and it may be a first,” he said. “I feel confident, given the rapid change in Government policy, that we can use this case as an example to demonstrate what the new policy will look like.”

Powell has previously raised Earl’s Court in Parliament as a case study in communities resisting the growth of Adult Gaming Centres, highlighting the area’s existing gambling businesses as well as hostels for people with complex needs and methadone-dispensing pharmacies.

The proposed site will be ten times the space of Silvertime’s existing shop a few yards away       Photo: Rob McGibbon/TCC

Demonstrators voice their objection to Silvertime at a demo’ in March 2026         Photo: Rob McGibbon/TCC

Silvertime’s existing shop is a short distance from the former Lloyd’s bank building now owned by the gambling giant        Photo: Rob McGibbon/TCC

Will Prochaska, from the anti-gambling campaign group CEGA, launched a fierce attack on Silvertime, describing it as “a seriously predatory firm”.

“They pick locations in seriously deprived areas,” he claimed. “People in these areas are less likely to gamble, but they are more likely to be harmed by gambling.”

He also claimed: “Silvertime makes 60% of its profits from 5% of its customers.”

“The content they’re selling on their machines is highly addictive and that is their business model,” he said.

His claims were made at the public meeting. The Chelsea Citizen has not independently verified the figures.

Prochaska said the turnout at the meeting demonstrated the strength of feeling in Earl’s Court: “People have just had enough of it.”

Cllr. Bennett stressed that opposition to the proposal crossed party lines and promised campaigners on-going help and information as the planning appeal progresses. He also underscored an earlier pledge by RBKC Leader Cllr Elizabeth Campbell that the council will dig deep to pay for any legal challenge that comes from the well-resourced Silvertime. He revealed that  legal fees will cost a minimum of £100,000 and could raise significantly.

Cllr. Wade said the closure of the Earl’s Court Exhibition Centre had badly affected the neighbourhood, stripping away trade and hotel business and contributing to economic decline.

She argued that the resulting deprivation had created fertile ground for gambling businesses seeking to expand in the area.

The Earl’s Court Society – led by Francesco Zibellini – promoted Thursday’s meeting. It has been campaigning alongside residents against the expansion of 24-hour gambling in the neighbourhood. More than 70 people also attended the April planning meeting at which Silvertime’s application was rejected.

Jagger urged RBKC not to give up the fight.

“The Council now has an opportunity to send a clear message,” she said. “It can say that local communities matter. It can say that cumulative impact matters. It can say that the wellbeing of residents must be taken seriously.

“And it can say that there comes a point when enough is enough. I believe we have reached that point in Earl’s Court.”

The Chelsea Citizen spoke with the representative for Silvertime, but the company is refusing to release a statement. request for interviews with the two directors of the family-owned company that has operated since 1995 were also rejected.

Campaigners out in force against Silvertime last March

WARNING: Distressing Content – The Chelsea Citizen asked A.I what it thought the new Silvertime AGC might look like

Council leader Elizabeth Campbell has urged residents’ associations and the people they represent to rally behind a formal challenge to Westminster.

Cllr Campbell’s appeal letter on the RBKC website

The council plans to use the Sustainable Communities Act to demand that the Government reconsiders its Fair Funding Review, which changes how money is distributed between local authorities.

But Council chiefs say they need residents to demonstrate the strength of opposition before the challenge can go ahead. In a letter emailed to residents’ association chairs today, Cllr Campbell urged people across the borough to respond to an online consultation and make their voices heard.

She warned that Kensington and Chelsea stood to lose more than £100 million over four years—equivalent to more than 40 per cent of its controllable budget. Cllr Campbell described the threat to the council as “existential” and said residents would ultimately pay the price through service cuts and council tax rises.

“This Council has consistently opposed Fairer Funding,” she wrote. “I believe that it is both unfair and unreasonable.”

The Conservative-run authority is already developing a multi-million-pound programme of savings, transformation and changes to service levels. But Cllr Campbell said those measures would not be enough to fill the financial black hole.

The council says it is already one of Britain’s leanest local authorities, pointing to its recognition by local government publication The MJ as the country’s most productive council earlier this year.

Its proposed challenge will argue that the funding reforms create a barrier to the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of local people. Cllr Campbell said she wanted to exhaust every possible avenue before imposing cuts and tax increases.

Residents can join the fightback by responding to the Council’s online consultation before it closes on Sunday, 4th October. https://consult.rbkc.gov.uk/communities/fairer-funding-review/

The RBKC council has not yet revealed which services could be cut or how much council tax may rise.

The Conservative-run council, which Labour lost control of in May, is understood to be considering the extraordinary increase after warning that its government funding is set to fall by around 40%.

Town Hall chiefs say the borough is facing the highest planned borrowing in its history, while its reserves could be exhausted within three years unless urgent action is taken.

The extraordinary prospect of council tax rises of this magnitude in Wandsworth have raises a worrying question closer to home — could RBKC Council eventually be forced down the same road?

RBKC is facing its own financial crisis after warning that changes to Government funding will cost the borough £108 million over four years to 2029/30 — a reduction equivalent to more than 40% of the budget it directly controls.

Labour politicians in Wandsworth have seized on the new figures, accusing the Tory administration of “planning Britain’s biggest ever council tax increase”. But the Tories have hit back, blaming both the Labour Government and the previous Labour administration for leaving the borough facing a financial cliff edge.

A Wandsworth Tory spokesman said: “The Labour Government is slashing 40% of Wandsworth Council’s funding, leaving us with the worst cash loss of any council in the country. At the same time, the last Labour administration in Wandsworth had spending plans that would have used all our reserves and bankrupted the borough within 18 months – leaving us with a staggering budget gap of £137 million.”

The main council chamber at Wandsworth Town Hall

Wandsworth has traditionally enjoyed some of the lowest council tax bills in Britain, with residents currently paying around 0.1 per cent of the value of their homes each year. But those historically low bills, combined with mounting pressure on council finances, have left the new administration contemplating a rise on a scale rarely, if ever, seen before.

The row comes amid wider concern across London over changes to the way Whitehall distributes money to local authorities. London MPs have warned that the reforms could leave capital boroughs particularly vulnerable as they struggle with rising costs and increasing demand for services.

The looming battle over Wandsworth’s finances will also intensify the political row over Andy Burnham’s plans for local government funding, with London boroughs warning they could lose out heavily under the new system.

For Wandsworth residents, however, the immediate question is much simpler — just how much more will they be asked to pay?

Cllr Campbell has ramped up her campaigning efforts by creating a powerful cross-party group of councils – duly dubbed “The Rebel Alliance” by The Citizen – to join forces with RBKC in challenging the Government to “pause” its plans for the High Value Council Tax Surcharge (HVCTS) on homes worth more than £2m.

The three other councils are the City of Westminster, Wandsworth, and Richmond upon Thames and this week they sent a stinging letter – under the banner of four council mastheads – to new Chancellor of the Exchequer John Healey pulling apart the fundamentals of the new tax.

In a strongly worded and emotionally charged two-page letter, dated 5th August, the council leaders dismiss the scheme as “a badly thought-out policy” which will have “a hugely disproportionate impact on our residents”.

The letter claims that their residents will be unfairly hit by the tax due to the exceptionally high property values in their boroughs. It states that “around £270 million” will be collected from its residents, which will account for 50% of the TOTAL revenue extracted from across Britain. 

“Few groups of boroughs are as directly and disproportionally affected by these proposals as we are,” the letter declares.

RBKC Leader Elizabeth Campbell

In a direct rebuke to Prime Minister Andy Burham’s Government, the four leaders accuse it of being “disingenuous” about the tax, not least because it is being labelled a “council tax surcharge” – yet NO funds will be spent on local services. Instead, the revenue will be dispersed by central Government to “deprived” areas, mainly in the North.

The letter claims that many families who are ‘property rich, but cash poor’ face losing their homes, or accepting a high interest debt with the Government that will erode equity and, thereby, any future inheritance from property sales for families.

The letter lambasts the Government for the way the scheme has been set up, most markedly for its property targeting method, which the leaders dismissively say is based on “a desktop valuation exercise carried out by the Valuation Office Agency”.

The letter continues: “A home is the centre of family life, not an untapped tax stream…It is simply wrong to assume that everyone living in these homes is wealthy. Many are not, and under this proposal, some will be forced to sell the family home simply to meet the tax…If the Government’s intention is to make the wealthy pay more, this is the wrong way to achieve it.”

Only last month, Cllr Campbell detonated the first blast of her campaign to stop the HVCTS by writing to the Chairs of all RBKC residents associations urging them to get their members to file complaints to the Government about it.

That letter sparked a furious backlash from Labour MP Joe Powell who accused her of “scaremongering” and for getting the figures all wrong. 

As well as “The Rebel Alliance” letter, Cllr Campbell also wrote this week to the RAs in equally emotive language. She said: “Four councils, united across party lines, sending one message: this policy is wrong, and it risks our residents losing their homes.”

The press statement from the four council asserts that the calculations for its criticism of the HVCTS are based on figures of “presumed mansion tax liabilities” from a study by Tax Policy Associates.

The Citizen will contact the Government for a response.

Cllr Campbell’s email to RA Chairs

Dear RA Chairs,

I hope you are well.

Last month, I wrote to you about the potential impact of the Government’s plans for a Mansion Tax. I promised that the Council would fight the Government hard on this, and I am pleased to say that I have brought the London boroughs of Richmond, Wandsworth and Westminster together in a joint letter to the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, attached, asking the Government to change course. Four councils, united across party lines, sending one message: this policy is wrong, and it risks our residents losing their homes.

Please do share the letter with your residents if you think it would be useful.

I know that many of you responded to the Government’s consultation in July, and I am very grateful for your support. I will keep you updated, and let you know of any future consultations.

Best wishes,

Elizabeth

The four signatories of the letter to the Chancellor issued these press statements to accompany the letter

Cllr Elizabeth Campbell, Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, said:

“I have brought together the leaders of four London boroughs that will bear the brunt of this tax because the scale and deeply disproportionate impact of these proposals cannot be ignored. Our residents alone could be forced to pay more than half of the national bill.

“This is not a tax carefully targeted at the very wealthy. It lacks nuance and will hit pensioners, families and long-standing residents whose homes have risen in value while their incomes have not. People should not be punished simply for staying in the communities they have helped to build.

“The Government is calling this a council tax surcharge, but our council will not keep a penny of it for local services. It is a national tax, disproportionately extracted from a handful of London boroughs, and it is badly designed, costly to administer and fundamentally unfair.

“We are speaking with one voice – the Government must pause, listen and think again.”

Cllr Robert Morritt, Leader of Wandsworth Council, said:

“Many people living in these homes are normal families, pensioners and long-time residents who have lived in the same property for years. They now face additional taxes simply because house prices have risen around them.

“This is an unworkable and misleadingly named policy. Government should be honest about it rather than presenting it as an extension of council tax.

“Wandsworth Council won’t get to keep a single extra penny raised. This is an unfair attack on well-run councils like ours, with Wandsworth residents hammered to pay for those elsewhere.”

Councillor Gareth Roberts, Leader of Richmond Council, said:

“Many Richmond residents have lived in the same homes for decades, raised families, contributed to their communities and grown older locally and, in many cases, the value of their homes has risen dramatically, while their incomes and personal circumstances have stayed largely the same or even declined.

“What the government is doing is adopting a quick fix approach to try to solve the broken system of Council Tax. If the Government is serious about addressing the issue of local government funding they need to reform the whole system; messing around with a blunt approach such as this helps nobody, particularly given that the entirety raised with this new tax will go to the treasury and not a penny will go to fund services here in Richmond.

“Essentially, the Government is seeing Richmond residents as cash cows that they can milk to fix funding gaps elsewhere in the country, irrespective of whether they can afford to pay this new tax.”

Cllr Paul Swaddle, Leader of Westminster City Council, said:

“Westminster does not support the surcharge, either in principle or design. It would fall especially heavily on Westminster, where high property values do not always translate into high household incomes, and it risks creating unfair outcomes for residents whose property value does not reflect their ability to pay, including long-standing residents in high-value homes, leaseholders, tenants who may see costs passed through rents, and homes that do not fit neatly into the Government’s assumed model of wealth.”

]]> https://thechelseacitizen.com/exclusive-residents-rally-to-save-la-famiglia-from-disaster-as-one-angry-neighbour-complains-over-garden-noise/ Fri, 17 Jul 2026 08:41:50 +0000 https://thechelseacitizen.com/?p=8303 Iconic Italian restaurant La Famiglia has been a delicious dining fixture of Chelsea for 51 years and has attracted a sparkling guest list of celebrities and powerbrokers.

Everyone who’s anyone has at one time or another graced its beautiful blue and white tiled room on Langton Street, from Princesses Diana and Kate, to Placido Domingo and Mick Jagger, to Kate Moss and Felicity Kendal.

Above all, it is a homely, family-run restaurant serving Tuscan cuisine that has been adored by local residents ever since it opened its doors in 1975. That is, except for one neighbour.

The Citizen can reveal that La Famiglia has been in the grip of a long-running feud with a local man for more than 18 months that has escalated to the point that it threatens the very future of this elegant, discreet venue. Now, celebrities and locals are rallying round to support its owners and staff.

“The situation has got out of hand and now we are all concerned for what lies ahead,” said one worried regular. “The word has gone out that La Famiglia needs its family, so everyone is doing what they can to help.”

The row centres around noise coming from the garden dining room, which was opened in 1982 and was extended a few years later. It has 80 covers and has operated successfully without any complaints from residents ever since.

The garden backs onto multiple residential properties where the disgruntled neighbour in question lives. By some irony, he is an Italian man in his 30s, who began renting a flat in the area in November 2024. In January 2025, as the restaurant celebrated its golden anniversary, he started lodging complaints.

The man –  whose identity The Citizen is not revealing – claimed that loud chatter from guests and serving noise from staff  – the moving of cutlery and glasses – was waking up his baby daughter, who is now two. He even noted that celebrating diners singing Happy Birthday was a particular issue that vexed him.

La Famiglia has held a licence to serve in the garden until midnight for decades. Despite this, it agreed to restrict service to 11pm to appease the neighbour. The owner – Marietta Maccione – also directed a member of staff to act as ‘Noise Marshall’ every night, telling customers to quieten down if things became too rowdy.

The elegant garden room of 80 covers that is at the centre of the row

Those two measures hit profits considerably, but the compromise was not enough and complaints continued. Last October, the restaurant even went to the extraordinary extent of banning the singing of Happy Birthday – insisting that guests move into the front area if they wanted to sing that tune.

Restaurant managers preferred not to issue a statement to The Citizen, but a local with knowledge of the situation revealed:  “The complaining got ridiculous. No matter what the restaurant did to keep him happy, this man kept coming back with more issues and gripes. Even closing earlier and stopping anyone singing Happy Birthday was not enough.”

The neighbour started reporting his complaints to the council and began demanding that the garden close at 9pm Monday to Saturday and by 8pm on Sundays. His complaints have now triggered a licence review. On 7th July RBKC served a public notice announcing a review will be held by the Licensing Panel on the grounds of ‘Prevention of Public Nuisance and Protection of Children from harm’.

The notice is now in the window at La Famiglia, but The Citizen has redacted the complainant’s name to protect his privacy. His identity will become more public once the papers for the hearing are finalised and published by the council on its website.

It has become clear that if a stringent change in the licence such as closing the garden at 9pm comes into force it would have serious consequences for La Famiglia. It is understood that this would mean it losing the option of a “second sitting”. Takings would be affected so sharply that as much as 50% of its 60 staff could face being laid off, or having reduced hours. Fewer customers will also have a dramatic impact on a network of local suppliers who provide fresh produce and goods to the restaurant.

A local added: “If this man wins and the council changes the licence to close the garden at 9pm, it will be catastrophic for La Famiglia. The hospitality business is in a fragile state generally and such a restriction on a small family restaurant would make the entire operation unviable. It will cost a fortune in lost revenue and so many of the loyal staff will lose their jobs.

“It all feels so unfair. The flat where the man lives was extended by its landlord owner in the mid-1990s, which is the reason why it is so close to the garden. That was the choice of the freeholder, with full knowledge that La Famiglia had a dining room there.

“The people who run the restaurant have always been very respectful of their neighbours. In all these decades there have never been any complaints or disputes. Everyone loves the restaurant. It is an iconic character of Chelsea. The family who live right next door have raised their children here and have never had a bad word to say about the garden and its noise. This man is renting a flat and was here for only a short time before he started complaining and he has not stopped ever since. He is determined to cause chaos for La Famiglia.”

RBKC states that postal letters or emails (to licensing@rbkc.gov.uk) concerning the review must be lodged by 4th August. This has prompted a flurry of notes from supporters. The Citizen understand that many celebrities and notable locals have emailed the Licensing Authority to emphasise that they have eaten in the garden room over many years and can vouch for it always being orderly and well run by staff.

The Citizen has asked La Famiglia for comment and will be contacting the neighbour.

Redacted public notice from the council has been placed in La Famiglia’s window

Legendary La Famiglia founder Alvaro Maccioni and his daughter Marietta, the current owner

Richard Eden of the Daily Mail has picked up on The Citizen’s exclusive story

The scene…

For more than a century Stanley Studios in Park Walk has provided creative workspace for generations of artists, including celebrated sculptor Dame Elizabeth Frink. Now neighbours fear one of the borough’s important reminders of its artistic heritage could disappear forever.

Residents living in Stanley Mansions in Park Walk and The Sandhills in Limerston Street that flank the studios have launched a determined fight against the scheme, arguing it would destroy valuable artists’ workspace, overshadow neighbouring homes and erode their privacy while doing little to preserve Chelsea’s unique character.

They are urging Kensington and Chelsea Council to reject what they describe as a “ruinous development” in favour of a heritage-led scheme that would protect the studios while allowing sensitive redevelopment.

Stanley Studios now

The proposal by Squire & Partners would convert the Victorian complex into two three-bedroom and three four-bedroom houses. The architects say it would preserve the historic façade and carry Stanley Studios “into the next century with renewed purpose”.

Resident Philip Challinor said: “This is not intended to be a ‘not in my back yard’ campaign. Chelsea has to evolve and new homes are needed. The real question is whether we can find a more responsible way of shaping change.”

How the studios would look if they developed into five townhouses

One of the biggest flashpoints is the proposal to create five new rear doors opening onto The Sandhills estate is that they back directly into the studios. Residents there say that little, if any, consideration has been given to how the new scheme negatively impacts upon their homes.

Residents say the doors, described in the plans as fire exits, would destroy long-established communal planting beds whilst also destroying their privacy and creating serious security concerns.

One resident told The Citizen: “Those beds were put in by the council years ago so residents could grow vegetables and flowers. Now they will be destroyed to make way for what are described as fire exits.

“We believe they are really back doors to the new houses. They will invade what little quiet garden space we have left. It is a terrible and thoughtless plan.”

The entrance in Park Walk

Leaseholder Mussie Mulugheta said: “My lease specifically gives us the right to use the communal garden, but this application completely ignores that.

“They are not building social housing or a major community development. They are building five private houses that will affect a great many people without providing any real benefit.”

Mr Mulugheta also criticised the consultation process. “My biggest concern is security. Removing the existing wall to create access at the rear would leave residents feeling far more vulnerable.

“We also received very little notification about the application and have had to work hard to make sure our neighbours even knew what was being proposed.”

Plans are to create an exit through the side wall to the rear of the houses

Residents argue the council’s statutory consultation failed to reach many of those most affected because the planning notice was displayed in Park Walk while the main entrances to The Sandhills are in Limerston Street and Winterton Place.

They also argue the scheme would remove protected creative workspace and are urging the council to back an alternative that would retain artists’ studios alongside new homes.

Squire & Partners say the plans have been shaped by community feedback and would preserve key features of the Victorian complex, including its original 1890s façade and distinctive double-height studio spaces, while avoiding the need for a basement excavation.

A Kensington and Chelsea Council spokesperson told The Citizen: “As with all planning applications, we have followed a defined consultation process to ensure that anyone interested in the proposal for Stanley Studios can comment and that all relevant considerations are taken into account.

“This includes publishing site and press notices. We have received 86 comments regarding the application, which gives us confidence that local people are aware of the plans and have been able to make their views known. Each of the comments received will be carefully considered before any decision is made, including any concerns raised about the information submitted with the application.”

The Chelsea Citizen approached both the landlord and Squire & Partners for comment but had received no response by the time of publication.

The future of one of Chelsea’s last purpose-built artists’ studio complexes will now rest with Kensington and Chelsea’s planning committee.

View the planning application HERE

A few of the many Objection letters to the council

Amazon-owned Whole Foods, which opened on the King’s Road in March 2025, has been at loggerheads with residents whose homes back onto the store for more than eight months.

Residents in Elystan Place – particularly those in a block of flats called Thackeray Court that borders the entrance – say deliveries by HGVs and vans have turned their quiet one-way back street into a daily ordeal of noise, congestion and disruption.

Often, their early mornings are interrupted by loud beeping from lorries reversing at a snail’s pace towards a downward slip road that leads to the basement loading bay for the supermarket.

Whole Foods before it opened last year

“That someone hasn’t been killed is a miracle,” one resident told The Citizen. “It’s not safe. Where else in London are you seeing articulated lorries driving down tiny, narrow one-way streets?

“They are enormous. They are damaging our buildings, hitting lamp posts and mounting the pavement. The drivers often get out and leave their engines running whilst they work out how to reverse into the access point. It is ruining our lives around here. Please, someone help make it stop!”

The problems stem from the fact that deliveries cannot be made at the front of the King’s Road store because zig-zag markings protecting the nearby Zebra crossing must be kept clear. Instead, lorries and delivery vans use the narrow Elystan Place to access the supermarket’s basement.

Drivers must reverse into the slip road and down the slope because it is too difficult and dangerous to reverse OUT and back up the slope. Automatic beeping comes on whenever the lorries reverse, which adds to the disturbance for residents. This is compounded by idling engines which produce air pollution. Residents say that the impact on their lives has been relentless and “an unending nightmare”. “There’s going to be a serious accident here one day and Whole Foods will be accountable,” said one despairing homeowner at Thackeray Court.

Road route down Elystan Place to rear entrance to Whole Foods

Among concerns raised are the safety of pedestrians and cyclists sharing the narrow street with large delivery vehicles, damage to buildings and street furniture, and items allegedly falling from lorries onto the pavement.

Residents also claim the store receives up to 30 deliveries a day, including around five by vehicles more than 10 metres long, which struggle to negotiate the street safely.

“No one recognised how successful the shop would be when they were agreeing the delivery schedule with the Council,” said another resident. “It’s turned out to be a gold mine – but this has meant more and more deliveries.”

Whole Foods was served with a Breach of Condition Notice by the Council on April 20th this year following alleged breaches of its Delivery and Service Management Plan, which governs how deliveries should be carried out. The 28-day compliance period expired on May 18th.

Failure to comply with the notice is a criminal offence and, if the Council concludes there is sufficient evidence, it has the power to prosecute. Any fine imposed by the courts is – in theory – unlimited.

The Breach of Condition Notice focused on three alleged failings: multiple delivery vehicles arriving at the same time and obstructing the highway, vehicles failing to reverse correctly into the service yard before unloading, and drivers wheeling pallets along the public highway.

Whole Foods insists it has responded to the Council’s concerns and said in a statement: “We take our responsibility to our neighbours seriously. We’ve been working closely with the local authority to address delivery concerns raised by nearby residents. We’ve made changes to our delivery scheduling and logistics, and we’ll continue to refine our operations. We’re committed to being a good neighbour in Chelsea.”

A RBKC Council spokesman said: “We have been meeting regularly with Whole Foods, reviewing evidence from residents, and requiring the store to take steps to improve how deliveries are managed. We are also increasing monitoring in the area and where concerns relate to dangerous driving, we will continue to liaise with the police, who are responsible for enforcing road traffic offences.”

The Council has rejected suggestions that the zebra crossing on the King’s Road could simply be moved to create more delivery space. “The zebra crossing links directly to a public space and affords access to the supermarket on foot, and it is also a parallel crossing that cyclists can use which forms part of a designated cycleway.

“It’s effectively a choice between servicing on a busy high street with pedestrians, cyclists and several bus routes, or servicing off-street within a purpose-built loading bay, so the latter is the preferred option.”

No further enforcement action has yet been taken following the Breach of Condition Notice while the Council continues discussions with all parties and monitors the situation. Whole Foods has also stationed a traffic control marshal at the rear service area to oversee deliveries and prevent vehicles arriving before 8am.

Residents, however, say they will only be satisfied when a permanent – and more peaceful – delivery solution is found.

Battle lines were drawn after Conservative Cllr. Campbell wrote to residents’ associations last week claiming 53% of properties in the borough could be affected by the proposed annual levy on homes worth more than £2 million — a story The Citizen exclusively revealed.

In an astonishing broadside, Labour MP Mr Powell then accused the Council Leaderof using a “false” figure by confusing council tax bands with actual property values.

He stormed: “RBKC have once again shown they either can’t count or are prepared to lie to their residents for political purposes.

“Their claim that 53% of properties in the Borough will be affected by the new high value property tax surcharge is entirely false scare mongering.”

As background to the row, the Labour Government is proposing an annual surcharge on residential properties valued at more than £2 million and Mr Powell accepts that 53% of homes in Kensington and Chelsea do fall within the top three council tax bands — a genuine council tax statistic.

But, he argues, that is not the same as saying those homes are worth more than £2 million – many Band F, G and H properties fall below that threshold and therefore would not be liable for the surcharge.

The MP also points to Land Registry sales data which, he says, shows only around 15% of properties sold in recent years changed hands for between £2 million and £5 million, suggesting only around one in five properties would be affected.

He described Cllr Campbell’s claim as being “wrong by a factor of 150%” and accused the Conservatives of exaggerating the impact of the proposed tax to alarm residents.

Colville ward Cllr. Jack Reason (Labour and Co-operative) also waded into the row and challenged Cllr. Campbell’s figures. Responding to a post on Instagram by The Citizen flagging up its story, he wrote: “This isn’t an accurate analysis of the homes that would be affected by this surcharge.”

The Citizen asked Cllr Campbell to address Mr Powell’s central allegation that the Council had wrongly conflated the proportion of homes in the top three council tax bands with the proportion worth more than £2 million. Sidestepping that specific point, the Council Leader defended the council’s methodology.

She said: “Of course the local Labour MPs want to play down the impact of the Labour Mansion Tax. However, our estimate is based on information and guidance provided by their government. It outlines the properties most likely to be impacted in April 2028 when this regressive new system is likely to be brought in.

“Our residents would like to see their local representatives campaign against this punitive tax, not quibble over the number of homes it’s likely to hit. I believe our estimate is correct, based on all the information to hand, and we will be publishing our figures and how we got to them on our website in the coming days.

“Rather than lying, or hiding the truth, we are being completely open and transparent. We will continue to stand up for residents, providing updates to help them understand what is being proposed.”

The war of words shows no sign of cooling. A furious Mr Powell hit back: “Instead of wasting taxpayers’ money on fake letters, the Council leadership should focus on sorting out their painfully slow response to the cyber attack and get their systems fully back up and running, so residents can engage again with their local authority on planning, licensing and council tax administration.”

To be continued…!

Cllr Campbell’s letter