Apple's Plans for London Financial District Store Caught in Dispute Over Sunlight

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Sep 2, 2011.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]


    Reuters reports that Apple's potential plans for its first retail store in London's financial district have been thrown into question as existing buildings surrounding the site may see their protected access to sunlight impinged upon by the development. Apple is said to be looking to build its store on the ground floor of a 10-story building planned for construction at 100 Cheapside in London.
    The property's current owner has asked the city to use its power to waive the ability for owners of neighboring properties to seek injunctions against the project. Thirteen properties are said to be affected by the development, with impact to eight of them substantial enough that their owners are likely to seek injunctions against the project.

    Given that construction has yet to begin on the proposed building and the potential legal difficulties facing the project, it is unclear at this time whether Apple will seek other options for a retail store in the area.

    Apple has two flagship stores within a few miles of the proposed site, with its Covent Garden store lying approximately 1.5 miles to the west and its Regent Street store about a mile further to the west.

    Article Link: Apple's Plans for London Financial District Store Caught in Dispute Over Sunlight
     
  2. macrumors demi-god

    soco

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Location:
    NJ
    #2
    Wow. I'm always in awe over the architecture of Apple stores.

    Too bad vampire-haters had to mess this one up.

    Edit: That was a horrible sunlight joke. Move on.
     
  3. MultiMediaWill, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2011

    macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    Location:
    Illinois
    #3
    Is it just me or does this building look like the famous apartment building in new york that looks like a triangle?
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    #4
    Why should Apple be exempt from access to light regulations?
     
  5. macrumors member

    iphonesarecool

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    England, UK
    #5
    Yeah this looks really good. It's different from the new built stores in shopping centres but this looks really nice. It's totally different but still has the Apple style. I think it will be great to have a store in London's financial district.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    whooleytoo

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland.
    #6
    That building is freaky. I'm assuming that's an accurate representation, and not someone who got their perspective all wrong! ;) It looks like a relatively low-profile building, and in keeping with the building heights of the surrounding buildings... but the perspective of that shot could be deliberately misleading.
     
  7. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #7
    That is quite a concentration of Apple stores!

    ----------

    It's not Apple seeking this injunction, it is the developer of the building.
     
  8. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    #8
    Oh stop it before the Apple bashing starts. This has nothing to do with Apple. Apple is not the building or site developer or owner; it is a possible tenant in the ground floor of the proposed building. This fight is between the neighbors and the site owner, which happens to be the City of London! Complain about how London is seeking to use its sovereign power to exempt itself from access to right rules. Apple is a bystander, it is not involved in this fight.

    And if the City loses, all the better for it. This is a ugly and dull building. If you're going to use this sovereign power, use it to erect an interesting building, not beige boxes like this proposal.
     
  9. macrumors 68000

    0815

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Location:
    here and there
    #9
    looking at the rendering, it seems more like some other building on the other side is stealing the sunlight from the new store - there is a big shadow on the building

    anyway: the building looks great and I hope that get that issue resolved. Reading multiple articles about this issue it seems someone is in need of some millions and this looks like a good opportunity for them (and this 'right of sunlight' is often abused for that since constructions often continues after exchange of millions)
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #10
    Anyone else think its funny that this was on 100 CHEAPside drive?


    haha, made me chuckle :D
     
  11. ddarko, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2011

    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    #11
    You can't block or steal light from a building that doesn't exist. The law doesn't grant access to light rights to proposed or future buildings; it's for occupants of buildings that currently exist.

    The other side of the coin is that the neighbors are losing longstanding access to something valuable because of a new building. Indeed, their own property values may decline due to the loss of sunlight since all things being equal, a structure with natural light is generally worth more than one without (and the new building will presumably have sunlight, effectively usurping the light and the increased property value from the neighbors). Far from being an abuse, the payments to neighbors could be seen as fair and just compensation for loss of sun and diminished property value.

    It's not unreasonable; if your new construction is going to negatively impact your neighbors, maybe you should pay something to them.
     
  12. macrumors 68040

    Dr McKay

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Location:
    Kirkland
  13. ekdor, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2013

    Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
  14. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #14
    They need to get more stores up all over the UK in the big towns before they focus on more in London that aren't needed. At the moment my closest stores aren't too far, but some people have to travel a long, long way!

    For me I have a choice of London stores (a short 15-20 min train ride away) or Brent Cross (should take 20 minutes by car, but due to the entire UK highways agency being incompetent, it takes around 1 hour).
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
  16. macrumors 6502

    Manderby

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    #16
    I'm sorry for outing myself as a nerd, but this looks like one of my buildings in minecraft. :)

    No seriously, it's not really that pleasing to the eye, now is it?
     
  17. macrumors 68030

    baryon

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    #17
    Sunlight? In London? Don't make me laugh! There is no such thing.
     
  18. Stig McNasty, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2011

    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    #18
    Absolutely with you on this ddarko. It's not an 'Iconic' (Urggh!) building, but a pile of glass and stone boxes on top of a generic shop frontage. Dull as dishwater.
     
  19. ekdor, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2013

    Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
  20. macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #20
    Agree.

    For me it's a 40 minute car journey and hell to park, then hope they have the item in stock trip to Brighton on the south coast.
    Or a 40 minute train journey north to London, then underground train to get near a store and also hope they have something in stock.

    Just 1 store half way between London and Brighton please.
     
  21. The Great Boony, Sep 2, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2011

    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    #21
    It may surprise you ignorant yanks, but it's never grey and foggy here....

    Maybe get off your couch and visit place that doesn't sell fast food once in a while.
     
  22. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2006
    #22
    Or they could just build the entire building out of glass. ;-)

    Well, it only applies to windows over 20 years old. It's called the "Ancient Lights" law -- if you have a window that's been there for over 20 years that gets daylight, someone can't come along and cut it off. Probably pretty good for saving money on electiricity, these days, though the law dates from before there was electricity to save, and people really needed the natural light. In areas that are experiencing rapid growth, it's not a concern, since the new construction is probably getting built fast enough that the old stuff hasn't gotten that old yet. In places that are already built up, yes, it has the effect of making it difficult to put up anything taller than was there before.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #23
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheapside

    "Cheapside is the former site of one of the principal produce markets in London, cheap broadly meaning "market" in medieval English"
     
  24. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    #24
    Simple. They'll just build giant mirrors that reflect the sunlight where it used to shine on.
     
  25. macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    #25
    Hope the developer loses. That is one fugly mass of steel and glass totally out of keeping with the buildings in the area. It belongs in an industrial estate.

    Apple should choose more wisely. Central London is served well enough, already, as it is.
     

Share This Page