|
|
 |
| |
Landmark court bid to halt luxury Heath home
Hampstead society risks £75k costs in ‘watershed’ moment
THE Heath and Hampstead Society is awaiting leave from the High Court to seek judicial review to halt the building of a multi-million pound modern glass house on the very edge of the Heath.
If it is given the go ahead to challenging planning permission granted in January by Camden Council for the new property, it will be the first time the society has gone to court since it was formed in the 19th-century to stop the then Lord of the Manor developing the whole of the Heath.
The eventual result was the 1870 Hampstead Heath Act to protect the open land as a “lung for London”, which has since been extended to more than 800 acres.
And in returning to the courts now, the society risks a potential legal bill of £75,000 or more if the High Court refuses to overturn Camden’s decision, which allows Garden House, in the Vale of Health, to be demolished and a substantially larger house built on the site.
The basis of the society’s claim is that the property is built on defined Metropolitan Open Land, which is governed by the fact that any replacement building cannot be “materially larger” than the existing property.
“This is the first time we have been driven to such a major and expensive course of action, but we feel confident that our members will support this important step in protecting the fringes of the Heath and the integrity of Metropolitan Open Land,” writes society vice president Martin Humphery in its latest newsletter.
“It has long been a scandal that there is no way in which individual citizens, or their representative groups, can challenge a grant of planning permission, except by this difficult and expensive route.
“In trying to protect our common heritage from indiscriminate development, we are pitted against Camden who are using our money, and a developer who stands to make huge profits.
“After all, we are merely seeking a decision by the court as to whether Camden’s decision is lawful.
“We believe it’s not, but, in any event, we seek no monetary compensation, just clarification of the law. That we should have to spend serious sums of money to achieve a decision in the public interest seems quite unjust.”
Despite objections from the society and from the City of London Corporation, Camden granted planning consent to the Vlachos brothers to erect what Mr Humphery claims is a new house “about four times the size” of the existing modest one, which, even so, is believed at the moment to be worth up to £2 million because of its privileged position.
“Your committee considers that this is a ‘watershed’ moment in our century-long fight to preserve the Heath and its surroundings from inappropriate development,” Mr Humphery tells members. “And we look for your support.”
The society had expected to hear within a month whether a judicial review would be allowed but three months have now passed without a decision being taken.
“It is considering launching an appeal to raise funds to cover the legal battle and/or insuring the society against defeat, in which case it could face a bill of £75,000 or more to cover its own costs as well as those of Camden and the developer.
“We have decided to bite the bullet and proceed with this case despite the risks,” said Mr Humphery. |
| |
|
|
|
