PLANS to build Camden’s tallest residential tower block – a 24-floor skyscraper in the middle of Swiss Cottage – hang in the balance after council chiefs were swamped by a flood of objections. 

The scheme was targeted by scores of furious objectors as soon as a consultation survey was opened by planners at the Town Hall, with warnings that developers would be making the area look like New York. 

Developers want to demolish a 1980s block – currently home to the Ham and High newspaper – to clear a space for the new tower. 

Among the deluge of angry messages, Daily Mail journalist and LBC Radio presenter Andrew Pierce said the tower was “enormous, too high, too obtrusive, bulky, and will overshadow an important conservation area”. 

The journalist – jokingly referred to as “Tory Boy” when he reviews  newspapers on Sky News – added: “With reference to the above planning application, are you completely mad? It seems you are proposing even more elitist property in a borough which will probably have one of the highest ratios of mansion tax rate properties in the country. What happened to more social housing?” 

His objection is the tip of the iceberg with the council’s inbox full of fury. Developers Essential Living plan a further five to seven-storey building on the site. It includes 148 privately rented homes, 36 affordable homes and space for shops and restaurants. The owners are also offering space for The Winch community centre to use at a subsidised rent. 

One of the current building’s original architects, Issy Benjamin, told the New Journal that he was horrified. 

Among a host of protesters, Ruth Brandon, who lives nearby, wrote that the tower would “totally dominate” nearby children’s play areas, green spaces, Hampstead Theatre, and the grade-II listed Swiss Cottage Library. 

She added: “The planning application cites local schools, transport and other amenities. But the schools and transport are already crowded to capacity. How could they possibly cope with this huge new influx? As far as I can see, the proposed plans make no mention of car parking.” 

It is understood that construction work could take more than two years. 

Many of the objections mentioned the need for a higher proportion of affordable housing, closer to Camden Council’s 50 per cent threshold for social housing in new developments. 

Nicola Anstey, another objector, said: “The only players who benefit from this proposal is Essential Living, who will make millions from this development, and the few wealthy individuals who will be afforded extraordinary views over all of London.” 

A spokesman for Essential Living said: “The overall investment brings £100million to a site that is recognised by Camden Council and the Mayor of London as a prime opportunity for regeneration. High quality new accommodation for private rent, with 25 per cent of the overall total provided as much-needed affordable housing, will introduce a new population whose annual spending power is estimated at £2million per annum. 

“Aside from the creation of an estimated 44 full-time construction jobs and training opportunities, the proposed new shops and restaurants will provide an additional 45 new jobs. Significant subsidised community space is being provided to meet the needs of local children, young people and families.”