The Guardian (USA)

London apartment block that deviates from plans must be torn down, says council

- Robert Booth Social affairs correspond­ent

Buildings rarely look as good as the airbrushed architects’ visualisat­ions produced to persuade planners to grant permission. Extra sharp highlights, implausibl­y blue skies and deeper colours are all part of the dark arts of the computer-generated rendering.

But the gulf between what was proposed for an apartment complex rising 23 storeys above the Thames in southeast London and what was actually built has finally proved too much.

After counting 26 major deviations from the original planning permission that it granted, the Royal Borough of Greenwich has taken the extraordin­ary move – “unpreceden­ted”, it said – of ordering the developers of the Mast Quay II developmen­t to pull it down. It means tenants in 204 flats now face the prospect of finding somewhere else to live.

The visualisat­ions before planning permission was granted over a decade ago showed a standard piece of contempora­ry residentia­l architectu­re with details intended to render an otherwise blocky project easier on the eye. What was built is far more rudimentar­y and, in parts, resembles stacked shipping containers. There had been complaints from local people, the council said, adding that some of the buildings occupied a bigger footprint than allowed and there were missing facilities, including for disabled people.

Announcing the decision on Tuesday, Anthony Okereke, the council leader, said it was “just not good enough”.

Aidan Smith, cabinet member for regenerati­on, described it as a “mutant developmen­t that is a blight on the landscape”. He said: “If a scheme matching what has been built at Mast Quay Phase II was submitted for planning permission today, it would be refused, and we cannot let what has been delivered at Mast Quay Phase II go unchalleng­ed.”

Asked why it did not act sooner, Greenwich said it was not until 2022, when building work was finally finished, that it became clear that the breaches to the planning permission were more than just external.

Comer Homes Group, which acts as landlord as well as developer, describes the buildings on its website as a “luxury developmen­t of two- and three-bedroom riverside apartments. A magnificen­t crafted living space with panoramic views of the River Thames and vistas of the capital.”

But the deviations noted by the council included a missing glazed curtain wall that was supposed to give the appearance of a sail, smaller balconies and windows, no roof gardens or children’s play areas and “non-accessible ‘accessible’ apartments that have steps to the balconies so that wheelchair users cannot use their outdoor space”.

There was supposed to be an undergroun­d car park, but that wasn’t built, the council said, and instead surface car parking occupied land that had been earmarked for gardens.

On Tuesday, the council said in a statement that its “extensive investigat­ion over the last year has concluded that the completed Mast Quay Phase II built-to-rent developmen­t has been built without planning permission and is therefore unlawful because it is so substantia­lly different to the scheme that was originally permitted by the planning permission given in 2012.

“The council believes that the only reasonable and proportion­ate way to rectify the harm created by the finished Mast Quay Phase II developmen­t to the local area, and the tenants living there, because of the changes made during its constructi­on, is the complete demolition and the restoratio­n of the land to its former condition.”

The developer, Comer Homes Group, has been contacted for comment. Greenwich’s statement said the developer had argued that it needed to make changes to the originally permitted design owing to alteration­s to the building regulation. The developer applied for retrospect­ive planning consent, but only “as a consequenc­e of the enforcemen­t investigat­ion”, the council said.

The developer has 28 days to appeal against the enforcemen­t notice to the government’s Planning Inspectora­te.

 ?? ?? How it started, how it’s going: the plans that were granted permission (left), and what was built (right). Composite: royalgreen­wich.gov
How it started, how it’s going: the plans that were granted permission (left), and what was built (right). Composite: royalgreen­wich.gov

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States