HALF a million pounds for affordable housing was dangled in front of a city council committee this week as a developer saw a housing extension scheme rejected for the third time.

A raft of objections had been lodged to plans to build extra floors on mansion blocks in the Maida Vale Conservation Area.

Parkcity, freeholders of the blocks in Lauderdale Road, told a planning meeting on Tuesday the lump sum donation showed “the public benefit was clear” from its proposals.

A version of the application was rejected by the council almost 10 years ago in a decision that was backed-up by a planning inspector on appeal.

The current application – lodged two years ago and including fewer units and altered designs – had been recommended for approval by Westminster’s officers.

But councillors refused once again on issues design grounds, chiefly adding fire escapes.
Chair, Conservative Cllr Jim Glen, said: “We must be careful of refusing on planning grounds that stand a chance of upholding on appeal.”

The applicant would likely appeal, and “that appeal is likely to be successful if we refuse on valid grounds that have not already been decided by the planning inspectorate. I am prepared to accept my colleagues’ view that the public benefit does not outweigh the harm to the conservation area. As I see it, that harm more or less entirely rests to the fire escapes to the building. They represent an unacceptable addition to this building of merit. This is tricky… because national policy looks favourably on upwards extension of one storey. It is a peculiar case.

“A lot could have been achieved by talking to the leaseholders. This is not the best scheme in this location.”

Labour Cllr Adam Hug said: “I am not satisfied the public benefits are outweighed. There are substantial concerns that lie beyond the realm of this committee, for example issues of subsidence.”

Tory Cllr Barbara Arzymanow also said the “positives do not outweigh the negatives” while Labour Cllr Iman Less said it failed on conservation terms.

Nermeen Varawalla, on the board of the management company, speaking on behalf of 79 residents and leaseholders, had told members: “Our mansion block has a long history of subsidence issues. It has been made clear by the insurer that increasing the load-bearing will compromise the structural integrity of the block. We will struggle to find insurance.”

The service charge would “increase further.” She added: “During this prolonged distressful period, the freeholder has not consulted us once.”

Christopher Griffiths, for the Lauderdale Mansions West management company, spoke about why the scheme should be rejected on heritage grounds. “So many developments are harmful to the host building and the wider conservation area. It will be material and permanent.”

Labour’s Geoff Barraclough, Maida Vale councillor and former planning chair, |urged a “review”. He had followed the case since 2018. “The impact is considerable,” he said

Supporting the project, Charlotte Yarker of Daniel Watney Partnership, which had brought the application, said it was submitted in November 2024. “It has been rigorously scrutinised. We have provided numerous clarifications. During the period the council has adopted the small site affordable housing policy. The proposal meets with policy and regulatory req-uirements. It will generate half a million for the fund and is one of the first small sites to do so. The public benefits are therefore clear.”