Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Garden Bridge faces new High Court challenge

Garden Bridge, south landing site
  • 1 Comment

Lambeth resident instructs lawyers over recent Lambeth Council decision on South Bank land use

London’s proposed Garden Bridge is today facing a fresh High Court challenge after a Lambeth resident instructed lawyers over a recent decision on land use made by the local council.

Lambeth Council decided last month to vary a lease of the public open space to enable the construction of the South Bank landing site for the Heatherwick Studio-designed bridge.

However, Jenny O’Neill, who lives close to the site, argues the local authority failed to properly consider the loss of the public open space or its status as an Asset of Community Value (ACV), a new designation under the Localism Act intended to protect such assets from disposal.

A year ago, fellow anti-bridge campaigner and Waterloo resident Michael Ball dropped his High Court application for a judicial review of the Garden Bridge after reaching an agreement with the council to deliniate the land as an ACV.

Jenny O’Neill

Jenny O’Neill

Jenny O’Neill

O’Neill, a member of Thames Central Open Spaces (TCOS), a group formed to campaign against the Garden Bridge, said: ‘The impact of the Garden Bridge will be devastating on local residents, on the South Bank, and on London.

’The best views of the City and St Paul’s will be compromised from Waterloo Bridge and entirely blocked along the South Bank, one of the great promenades of Europe and London’s most popular walking area.

‘With football-match sized crowds blocking the riverwalk, and long queuing times predicted, even Transport for London admit it will become ‘very uncomfortable’ on the South Bank, and could end up dangerous.

‘But it is the absolute loss of 30 mature trees a beautiful piece of green open space opened by the Queen that I object most to.’

O’Neill said she also strongly objected to the fact that one Lambeth councillor took the decision in private ‘despite numerous promises that this would be a public decision taken at a public meeting where the public could make clear their opposition’.

She has instructed Bernadette Hillman, London head of planning at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau, which is understood to have sent a pre-action letter to the council ahead of an application to the High Court.

Hillman said: ‘We are asking the court to quash the decision and to send the project back to Lambeth Council for much more careful consideration. This needs to happen before significant changes are made and actions that have been based on inaccurate information and insight become irreparable.’

Construction on the £175m bridge, which would be managed by the Garden Bridge Trust, was due to start last year but has been delayed by sustained political opposition and numerous setbacks including a £32m funding gap on construction costs.

A spokesperson for Lambeth said: ‘Lambeth council is confident of its robust decision making process regarding the Garden Bridge, which includes planning, Asset of Community Value designation and the ongoing lease negotiations with Coin Street Community Builders.’


  • 1 Comment

Readers' comments (1)

  • Jenny O'Neil clearly doesn't subscribe to the notion that a privately promoted vanity project (prompted, apparently, by the inspirational Manhattan 'Highline', but imposed on London as a much less subtle bit of new-build 'look at us' in the form of a novelty bridge spanning the Thames) is such a spiffing wheeze that absolutely nothing should be allowed to get in its way.

    The fact that the thing itself 'gets in the way' - bigtime - has yet to be understood by the gang of luvvies, political fixers on the make, opportunistic design egos and shady sponsors who are pushing it.

    They still think that they can get away with getting in the way of one of the most memorable cityscapes in the country.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.