• “I APPROACH this committee with an open mind,” was heard at the Camden planning committee on February 2.

Personally I think the truth was anything but. Councillors voted as people across West Hampstead knew they would. To resolve to approve an application which would deliver cash into council coffers that they had already spent on their new council offices.

A fitting use for public land and a site with such potential as 156 West End Lane? Absolutely not.

If the whole deal hadn’t been about maximising cash receipts and had started instead with the question “how can this public land be best used for the benefit of the community around it?”, everything would be different.

Most of all a scheme preserving real jobs – not “phantom” ones that may or may not exist in future – could have been shaped.

Most of all a scheme providing up to 100 per cent affordable housing could actually have been delivered.

But Camden Council said “no” to its responsibility to listen and do something for the community and “yes” to the developer’s dollar. Those that came in the hope that their voices would be heard left disappointed but not surprised.

What would they expect when the council’s “technical experts” had already recommended approval of the application in spite of it being against their own policy, objected to by the GLA, and counter to the new neighbourhood plan, the very thing that was supposed to help local people to shape growth and development in their area.

What difference do 1,000 local people saying “no” make when the most important noise is the sound of the development windfall cheque dropping into the bank?

So the council has decided to flog off another precious piece of the family silver leaving the community to count the cost and live with the consequences.

“I approach this committee with an open mind…”

It seems to me that the decision was made a long time ago.

MICHAEL SHIELDS
Branch Manager, Travis Perkins West Hampstead