Share<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n A famous actor and a Labour politician’s wife are blocking development in North London <\/li>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Camden’s left-liberal Nimbys are keen to distinguish themselves from other, ‘bad’ Nimbys <\/li>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Blockers in an affluent London neighborhood aren’t keen on a small block of mansion flats <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n This time, Nimby Watch is once again heading to the leafy streets of Camden, in North London, where some extremely well-heeled locals are up to their antics\u2026<\/p>\n Okay, where are we this time? <\/b>No need to venture outside of London\u2019s zone 2 this week, as we\u2019re in a particularly nice neighbourhood on the border of Camden and Islington, called Dartmouth Park, inside the Prime Minister\u2019s very own constituency.<\/p>\n And why are we visiting here, exactly? <\/b>Well, as the property prices suggest \u2013 a two bed flat here can easily push \u00a31 million \u2013 it\u2019s a very nice place to be. This is not a neighbourhood that much needs to worry about gentrification pushing out longtime locals, because that happened long ago.<\/p>\n So\u2026 sky high property prices, locals already unable to afford the area \u2013 presumably everyone agrees it needs a lot of new housing, then? <\/b>You would think so! But huge swathes of Camden and Islington are blanketed with the kind of preservation orders that make the planning system in the rest of the country look downright permissive. If you want to update your windows in these parts, that often means a six-week planning notification period, with public notice. And on the quiet, that\u2019s how the residents seem to like it.<\/p>\n That feels like a statement you need to back up with some specifics. <\/b>Oh don\u2019t you worry, I\u2019ve got specifics. The project I\u2019m thinking of is a relatively small one \u2013 the developer HGG London is looking to demolish an existing two-storey property (on a street where most houses are four storeys high, including a basement) and replacing it with a small mansion block of flats. The designs are genuinely charming: big windows, balconies, the lot \u2013 this is clearly not going to be rented out to students or as starter homes.<\/p>\n I\u2019m guessing from your tone that the neighbours aren\u2019t taking this in their stride? <\/b>They are not. The proposed building is essentially a small mansion block \u2013 exactly the kind of housing most people suggest they\u2019d most like to see built near them. It\u2019s regularly being referred to as a \u2018block of flats\u2019<\/a><\/strong>, but it\u2019s five storeys and a basement, and barely taller than some of its neighbours. In short, it\u2019s the sort of project that should be rubber stamped in moments if London is ever going to be affordable again.<\/p>\n And what\u2019s happening in practice? <\/b>Well, the great and the good that live nearby are, of course, vocally opposing the development. But even in their planning objections, the left-liberal residents are keen to distinguish themselves from the bad Nimbys they\u2019ve heard so much about. Several point out they\u2019re not against any development, of course. Just this one.<\/p>\n Who\u2019s leading the charge? <\/b>Fairly or otherwise, coverage so far has focused on a couple of objectors. One of these is the environmental lawyer and High Court judge, Justine Thornton. She complains that the new plans are \u2018too tall, too bulky and too dense\u2019 for the area, but insists she has \u2018no objection to the principle of redevelopment into flats particularly in the context of the need of more housing\u2019.<\/p>\n Hmmm. Why do I feel like you\u2019re leaving something out? <\/b>Okay, fine: Justine Thornton is married to Environment Secretary Ed Miliband, who has on multiple occasion promised to stomp the Nimbys, not least by (rightly) asking people to accept huge onshore and offshore windfarms and solar installations. Now, Thornton is an accomplished woman in her own right, and not obliged to share her husband\u2019s politics, but if Miliband can\u2019t win the argument in favour of development for growth in his own household \u2013 or worse, if he privately agrees with his wife \u2013 that doesn\u2019t bode well for anything.<\/p>\n It does not. Is Thornton the only person up in arms about the new building? <\/b>She very much is not \u2013 she\u2019s not even the main reason it\u2019s making the headlines. While no small number of the locals are objecting, it\u2019s one neighbour in particular that has got the public attention: Sherlock Holmes himself, Benedict Cumberbatch, is against this development.<\/p>\n And Sherlock Holmes is a genius detective, so if he\u2019s against it\u2026 <\/b>Playing a genius on television doesn\u2019t automatically make you right, you know, as Cumberbatch\u2019s unfortunate objection somewhat highlights. The actor\u2019s consultation response<\/a><\/strong> poses a big question: \u2018Approval would set a precedent. For example, could I now demolish my property and replace it with flats and not require the same extensive planning approval?\u2019<\/p>\n So\u2026 if we densify this plot that might make it easier to densify other sites in the area? Benedict is very much threatening me with a good time, here. <\/b>Yes, it\u2019s a little bit strange \u2013 not least because having implicit planning permission to extend upwards would work wonders for local property prices, whether or not the residents concerned extended. You\u2019d think it would be a bit of a win-win all round, but the Nimby mindset is a force of nature.<\/p>\n If only there were some well-known phrase around obvious ideas that we could use as a pithy sign-off here. <\/b>No s***, Sherlock.<\/p>\n CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.<\/p>\n Columns are the author’s own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of CapX.<\/p>\n \t\t