Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation

Comment ID 514
Document Section Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75 View all on this section
Respondent Princess di Sirignano View all by this respondent
Response Date 01 Feb 2013

The reason being that once permissions are granted, the developers become a ‘law unto themselves’ and there is no way to control what actually transpires especially on large sites. Even if a developer submits an Construction Method Statement that the Planners accept, the developer is under no obligation to abide by it, in fact I have seen the opposite performed and there are no enforcements.


 Noise and Nuisance seem to be the only department that has any real enforcement powers. The Considerate Contractor Scheme is effectively toothless and the BO next door to us ignored the Condition to comply for one year.


One example of this ‘law unto themselves’ occurred last December when retained structures of Sloane Lodge, supposed to have been obliged by the planners to keep, were quickly cleared between a Friday to Tuesday.

These works under section 2 of the Party Wall etc Act 1996 should have had a Notice served prior under section 3 but were not.


The only way to stop such developments taking on their own set of rules where they do as they please is to stop them from the outset.


Such clever disregard for the rules means that adjoining neighbors must continually monitor their own properties to keep building owners from  aggressive actions which reminds us that we are out of our depths against developers employed by persons to serve their own ends which sadly contribute nothing to the community or local environment.