‘Council doesn't give a flying fruitcake about my listed home’
A SPENCERS WOOD resident has accused Wokingham Borough Council of “corruption”, and said its officers are letting “illegal activity” take place in her neighbourhood.
Gillie York is calling on the council to take action after nearby construction work on the Stanbury View housing estate allegedly damaged her Grade II Listed property.
However, Wokingham Borough Council strongly disputes these claims and said it has no power to intervene.
Ms York lives in Lieutenants Cottage, a protected building on Basingstoke Road which is set to become the site of Taylor Wimpey’s new estate.
In February, Wokingham. Today reported on Ms York’s concerns after vibrations from the building work allegedly caused cracks in the walls of her house.
Now, she said more damage has appeared, and has accused the borough council of failing to act.
“There’s a new crack going across the main beams and one of the ceilings upstairs looks as though it’s about to fall in,” Ms York said. “When the construction workers are digging or using the bulldozers, the whole house shakes.”
After contacting Taylor Wimpey about the alleged damage to her home earlier this year, the housebuilder installed a vibration metre on site and carried out a structural survey.
But the resident has since removed the metre, after accusing Taylor Wimpey of refusing to hand over the readings.
“My house has been shaking to buggery, but they are holding all of the data,” Ms York said. “I’ve cut it off now and the metre is just sitting there, because there’s no point having it if they won’t release the readings.”
A spokesperson for Taylor Wimpey said the housebuilder is aware of Ms York’s concerns, and is under no legal obligation to share the data.
“We are in an ongoing conversation to resolve the concerns raised with us,” they said. “We would like to assure Ms York that we will continue to monitor the vibration levels using the vibration monitors.”
The Lieutenants Cottage resident has also accused Taylor Wimpey of setting up a car park next to her house, something she said was never on the original planning documents.
“There are loud vehicles turning up early in the morning which I can see directly from my property,” she said.
And Ms York believes the car park is causing water to be diverted onto her land, as the weight of the vehicles suppresses a pipe below ground.
Now, she is worried this could cause rising damp in her home.
“My house was built in 1810 so it has no foundations,” the resident explained.
“Water is being pumped out at the top of my garden, to the point where my lawn is now covered in moss so it needs to stop soon.”
A spokesperson for Taylor Wimpey has disputed Ms York’s claims and said the area where its contractors are parking their vehicles does not sit on top of a drainage system.
“We have reminded our contractors of their obligations to adhere to the site operating hours,” the spokesperson added.
“Some workers will arrive on site prior to these times in order to start work promptly but we will do all we can to minimise noise disruption, and we apologise for any inconvenience caused.”
Now, Ms York is urging Wokingham Borough Council to “hold Taylor Wimpey to account” for what she calls “illegal activity”.
“It is illegal to damage a listed building, but the council hasn’t stopped the work,” she said.
“They don’t give a flying fruitcake and it makes me feel absolutely, utterly disgusted.
“Surely there should be some consideration for the people whose houses are being directly impacted by this.”
But Mark Cupit, Assistant Director Delivery and Infrastructure at Wokingham Borough Council, said the council does not have the power to intervene.
“The owner of the Listed property has already been advised by the council that this is a private matter between her and the developer,” Mr Cupit explained.
“However, council officers are aware of the issue and have been working with the developer to try and mitigate any impacts of their work on this property.
“Furthermore, we strongly dispute any allegations of corruption and it should be noted the scheme was approved by an independent planning inspector following an appeal.”