Thursday 5 June 2003 8.01am
I posted a while back that at Metro Central heights ( the very large blue and white Erno Goldfinger building nr the Slavation army building and E and C roundabout ) was having plans submitted by St George to build a 13 storey block on the residents car park. The proposed building will be 15 - 20 metres away from the existing building ( 1m away formt he railway track ) and completely remove light from these flats whilst the noise during buildiing ...well it needs no explaining. The council refused the planning on grounds of two of their amendments 1) loss of light is unacceptable and 2 ) the overshadowing of this building by its very close nature is not acceptable.
It dumbstrucks me this day that a developer can propose such a greedy and miserable idea. The tate had a refusal and that building was across the road.
However, the plans then went to the Planning Comittee for a second and final review ( St.george had already logged their appeal before the previous Council decision ? ) and the results will be annouced middle of June. I do not know why the Planning Commitee got involved and why the council did not have final decision ( and who knows what goes on behind close doors ) but I am asking for help from any lawyer here because there must be a legal stance that the residents can take.
The only legal points I can think of are
1) Loss of light
2) Noise is unnacceptable
3) Although this is not a council parameter when owners bought the places or anyone renting they have the right to park. At the moment parking is on a first come first served basis but the planning of the place allows for everyone to park comfortably.
However if they start building this will displace many spaces and the newly erected building will have parking for it but the net loss is 35 spaces which means that a lot of people will not be able to park.
When people bought their flats the deeds state that the parking is for the sole use of the residents - if thats the case how can they build on it ? If they alos remove the right to park for some people isn't that infringing on the initial contract. You can understand that whilst the reduction in price of your flat is not an acceptable arguement in this scenario, the loss of an intial right you had surely is.
If there is anyone who can help us or advise if we have a chance pls remit something as you can understand taking on one of Londons largest developers in court would need a vast amount of money and thats why they do these things,