A landlord claimed he owned land he shares with neighbours so he could build an extension (Image: Joe Coughlan/LDRS)
A “bloody battle” threatens to erupt after a man was given a green light for an extension despite not being the outright owner of the land he wants to build on.
Thanks to a loophole Greenwich Council on Tuesday approved the plan for a coach house in Woolwich, south-east , to be extended and turned into a one-bedroom flat.
The applicant is reported to be the owner of a ground-floor flat at a Victorian townhouse where he wants to build. There are three flats in the building, according to .
Neighbours previously raised concerns the applicant wasn’t the only owner of the site, as had been claimed in an original application. But the local authority gave the scheme the green light due to its having to focus solely on the merits of the application.
Tenant, Folake Olaitan, speaking for her landlord, said the lease for the house divided the building and back garden proportionally between three freeholders and the proposal would encroach on her landlord’s part of the site.
Ms Olaitan told Greenwich Council on Tuesday: “It is, in short, a stealthy land grab which you will be permitting with this proposal.”
Labour councillor, Gary Dillon, told the meeting of Greenwich Council’s planning chiefs he had been falsely reassured during a site visit that the applicant owned the land.
Rachel Laurent, who lives next door, said she didn’t have much confidence in the project.
She told the meeting: “Unfortunately, because [the applicant] has not sought any sort of consultation with anybody, this will come to a head. This will be a nasty and bloody battle.”
A second Labour councillor, Calum O’Byrne Mulligan, claimed the applicant’s conduct was “mind-blowing”.
Don’t miss… [VIDEO] [REPORT] [REVEALED]
He noted the planning committee’s hands were tied by having to focus only on the material planning considerations of the scheme.
Peter Swain, a designer at Proun Architects speaking for the applicant, said he was involved with the design of the extension but didn’t want to participate in the project if it wasn’t legal.
Mr Swain told the meeting he recommended his client should speak with the other owners and get their agreement. He added: “I was hoping that would be in place before we got back to this committee.
“Obviously, that is not the case but here we are at this committee for a resolution on the application that sits before you.”
According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, the designer said it wasn’t uncommon for people to get planning permission to build on land owned by others and that the resolution to such disputes was a civil matter.
Mr Swain said he didn’t have the authority to commit to a revised agreement for the proposal on the applicant’s behalf.
The scheme was approved after three members of the council’s planning committee voted in favour. Mr Dillon said he was “lost for words” at the situation, which he claimed highlighted a major loophole in the planning system.
He apologised to the residents who joined the meeting and said construction at the site could not be legally carried out unless all leaseholders were in agreement.
Mr Dillon said at the meeting: “I don’t appreciate being lied to and I’ve been lied to by the applicant to my face, so I’m not happy with that…
“I think he’s been very sly with this application. The item is approved, subject to the residents (the other leaseholders) moving forward.”
Express.co.uk has approached the applicant via Proun Architects.