A MASSIVE housing development in East Acton has been put on hold after the Mayor of London vetoed the planning proposals.

Ken Livingstone caused uproar when he rejected the plans by Hammersmith & Fulham Council to redevelop the Prestolite Factory site in East Acton last week.

The borough had referred the project to the Mayor after reducing by more than a third the number of low-rent housing association houses in the planned block.

The council claimed it was justified because the ward in which the development was located had more rented properties than the London average.

Even though the building would have held more than the statutory number of low rent homes required under the Mayor's London Plan, Mr Livingstone called the reduction "scandalous" and stepped in to force the council to reject the planning permission.

He said: "It is completely unacceptable for any council to turn down the offer of desperately needed affordable rented homes - especially when this contravenes planning policies.

"There is now a grave danger that all over London borough councils are tearing up previous affordable housing policies and driving down the supply of affordable new accommodation."

This Christmas there were more than 2,000 homeless families living in temporary accommodation in the borough, which neighbours Ealing.

The original application from Genesis Housing Group for the East Acton redevelopment, referred to the Mayor in July 2006, included 148 affordable rented homes, 33 per cent of the total.

Following council intervention this number was cut to just 65.

When the Housing Corporation refused to fund a scheme on this basis a further change was made, increasing the number to 92 low-rent homes, still a third down on the original application.

Officers at the council had supported the original plans, but on October 10 last year, the number was cut two days before going to committee.

Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush MP Andy Slaughter said the council should be investigated for its "improper and immoral" conduct.

"No one could possibly defend this decision," he said. "This is a blatant abuse of the planning process with the aim of limiting the amount of homes available to those in greatest need.

"Why would a council leader not want extra low-cost housing to be provided?

"This should not be seen as the Mayor versus the council, but the council versus its own residents."

Mr Slaughter added: "Why is political interference behind the scenes allowed against officer recommendations?

"The council's conduct is both improper and immoral and is a matter for the Standards Board for England which I shall be taking forward."

But Hammersmith and Fulham Council leader Cllr Stephen Greenhalgh accused Mr Livingstone of "riding rough-shod" over the local planning process.

He said: "It is a shameful abuse of his powers to interfere in local planning decisions for purely political purposes. It is political sour grapes and flies in the face of his own officers' advice.

"The decision will deny several hundred ordinary, hard-working people the chance to get a foot on the property ladder."

The planning report from the Mayor's own officers showed that "on balance, the application will deliver substantial numbers of affordable homes, significantly above the overall strategic target for boroughs".

In all, 65 per cent of homes in the new development would have been affordable housing.

Of these, 43 per cent were for "shared ownership" where people can part rent and part buy houses.

"In Hammersmith and Fulham people want help to gain a stake in their community by owning their own homes," Cllr Greenhalgh added.

"We have the fourth highest average property prices in the country, so people on lower incomes who do not have access to social rented housing are struggling to own a stake in their own homes.

"This development would have helped low income families but, by rejecting it, the Mayor has left this borough with nothing but a derelict shell.

The Mayor said he would withdraw his veto only if a scheme with "more affordable rented housing comes back".