The High Court has allowed a second challenge to the proposed demolition of a Bishopsgate goods yard, but has indicated that any further delays could threaten the expansion of the East London railway line. Delays to the scheme have already increased costs by £1m, a figure that is increasing by more than £30,000 each day.
Last November, Battersea pensioner Keith Hammerton won a declaration that demolishing the goods yard would constitute a breach of planning permission. However, the relevant local authorities, Tower Hamlets London Borough Council and Hackney London Borough Council, subsequently decided that they would not take any enforcement action if London Underground proceeded without planning permission.
Allowing a challenge to this decision by local enthusiast Andy Prokopp, Collins J today ruled that although the councils were theoretically entitled to decide that no enforcement action should be taken, they were wrong to do so before London Underground had complied with all the relevant environmental conditions.
Prokopp has claimed victory, but the judge made it clear that the decisions should be “speedily reconsidered” and that, provided London Underground complies with the conditions, it would not be unlawful for the councils to reach the same conclusion.
The judge said that a statement produced by the scheme’s project manager, Alan Thornton, “paints a gloomy picture of the effects of any further delay”. He added that further substantial delays could, at best, pose a real risk that the whole scheme would be lost along with all the benefits that would flow from it.
The line extension is a vital element of the transport strategy for London, and is a key factor in the proposed rejuvenation of deprived areas. The development could be worth as much as £10bn to the people and businesses of north and east London.
Denying that he was selfishly trying to hold up this vital public service, Prokopp said after last month’s hearing: “I would like to see the line extension built as much as anyone else, but it is completely unnecessary to knock down the historic yard. They could perfectly easily build the line extension which is, after all, a light railway over the existing structure.”
References: PLS News 2/5/03
