A jubilant Labour council has celebrated the defeat of a contentious housing proposal in Peckham, as plans to construct 800 new homes were quashed following a fervent campaign against the development. This opposition was notably supported by comedians Nish Kumar and James Acaster, who lent their voices to the cause.
The proposal, put forward by Berkeley Homes, aimed to develop 867 residences on the site of the Aylesham shopping centre and market in Peckham, located in south London. However, the initiative quickly became a lightning rod for controversy, particularly after the developers reduced the promised affordable housing from 35 percent to a mere 12 percent in December 2024.
This reduction incited significant discontent among local residents, who argued that the developer’s true target audience was investors and buyers seeking second homes, rather than genuinely addressing the need for affordable housing. The move was seen as prioritizing profit over community welfare, sparking a groundswell of opposition.
The conflict intensified last May when a schism developed between Berkeley Homes and Southwark Council. Frustrated by what they perceived as the council’s sluggishness in assessing the proposal, Berkeley Homes bypassed local proceedings entirely, escalating the matter directly to the government’s Planning Inspectorate for a decision.
In a decisive outcome, the Planning Inspectorate delivered a firm rejection of the proposal, marking a significant triumph for the coalition that opposed the development. This diverse group comprised local residents, council members, MPs, and high-profile figures like Acaster and Kumar, all of whom had rallied against the project to safeguard their community. Their collective efforts have now culminated in a victory that many hope will protect the character and affordability of Peckham.
Yesterday, the Planning Inspectorate issued a resounding rejection of the scheme in a victory for the coalition against the housing development – which included residents, the council, local MPs and celebrities such as James Acaster and Nish Kumar.
The comedic duo also performed at a comedy show organised by the Aylesham Community Action – which raised more than £46,000 in opposition to the project.
In its rejection of the development, the Planning Inspectorate said that the impact of any housing proposal must factor in the ‘heritage assets’ of the area adding that the 800 flats spread across multiple apartment blocks would be ‘out of scale, visually intrusive and unduly diminishing’.
Comedian James Acaster (pictured) performed at a comedy show in support of the campaign to stop the housing project
Comedian Nish Kumar (pictured) has faced backlash for his opposition to a massive housing project
A CGI image of the proposed redevelopment of Aylesham shopping centre in Peckham. The plans, submitted by Berkeley Homes, would see 867 homes built, have been rejected by the Planning Inspectorate
While the local Labour Council gloated that the decision was a ‘great day for Peckham’, it sparked a backlash online with many people pointing to the acute housing crisis affecting areas such as Peckham.
More than 18,000 people are on a waiting list for housing in Southwark, a borough where approximately 22 per cent of residents live in poverty, and it takes more than five years on average to secure a council house.
Speaking to the Daily Mail, Build for Britain – Britain’s largest centre-right campaign for house-building – said Labour had ‘more talk’ and ‘no action’ accusing the council of preferring zero homes to 874.
On X, formerly Twitter, Sam Dumitriu from the economic think tank Britain Remade said: ‘Labour were elected on a pledge to get Britain building again, but their councillors (Planning Chair btw) block 850+ homes on brownfield land in the most expensive city in the country.
‘Labour are unlikely to outbuild the last Government, let alone build 1.5m homes.’
Another in reply to the council wrote: ‘“A great day for Peckham”?! What is wrong with us?’
X user Rich said: ‘What is the actual reason for blocking this. It’s not countryside, it’s a run-down shopping centre in an age where they are of very little use. You need more housing. Streets of it have other houses. I genuinely don’t get it.’
While others sneered at the claim from the inspectorate that the homes would be harmful to the area’s ‘heritage assets’.
While the local Labour Council gloated that the decision was a ‘great day for Peckham’, it sparked a backlash online with many people pointing to the acute housing crisis affecting areas such as Peckham
Fred de Fossard from the Prosperity Institute said: ‘There are no “heritage assets” in the Aylesham Centre to protect.
‘Sadly this kind of thing will not and cannot be fixed at the local level. We will need a national government to use Canary Wharf-style methods to redevelop much of London.’
While Ben Harris wrote: ‘”Beloved Aylesham Centre”. Won’t somebody please think of our generic derelict shopping centre.’
The report also has the support of many people. Reginald Popoola – Green councillor in Southwark – describing the decision as a ‘fantastic day for residents in Peckham!’.
‘The Planning Inspector has ruled against Berkeley Homes… building affordable homes, not luxury flats, is the only way we can tackle the housing crisis,’ he added.
Councillor Sarah King, Leader of Southwark Council, said: ‘This is a great day for Peckham and we welcome the planning inspector’s decision to dismiss Berkeley Homes’ appeal for the Aylesham Centre.
The decision has been praised by those against the development including local Green Party councillor Reginald Popoola
‘I’d like to personally thank the community who spoke loud and clearly about their concerns.
‘We shared those concerns and strongly argued at the public inquiry that the scheme was poorly designed and our position has been vindicated.
‘We will read the appeal in detail and carefully consider our next steps.’
A spokesperson from Build for Britain said: ‘Labour would rather have zero homes than 867 homes in Southwark, which barely hit 43 per cent of its completions target in 2024-2025.
‘More talk from Labour, no action. Not very Build Baby Build of them…’
