The chair of the house group has written to the chair of the RCC:
___
{to the chair of the RCC}
In accordance with your request, we circulated the information about the City’s proposals for car park use and charges to Ben Jonson House residents but, as I am sure you will understand, the official timescale for responses was very short. As a result I have not been able to meet the deadline of 16th May and there may well still be responses to come from residents. However, at the BJH group committee meeting yesterday we were in complete agreement in terms of our objections to these proposals. Our objections relate to three aspects in particular.
1. The proposal to let stores to non-residents
We see this as a real risk to our security. The stores will be available to people unknown to our CPAs and they would be able to acquire easy access to all the residential parts via the doors to the staircases. (In the interests of fire safety these doors can be opened without an ASSA key.) The use of stores by strangers would also present an opportunity for terrorists. Has police advice been sought on this proposal?
We are also concerned about the extra duties required of the CPAs in order to monitor the increased use.
2. The proposed increase in charges for stores and car parking
The level of increase for car parking is exceptionally high and the rates do not bear market comparison with local commercial car parks (£800 pa on London Wall). In the case of the stores, the proposed increases are frankly exorbitant, with the large baggage stores at almost 4 times their current rate. Residents with smaller flats are very dependant on their stores and we know of at least one who would be priced out.
3. The function of the car parks
A clear definition is required. As most residents understand it, the car parks were originally built as an integral part of the Barbican blocks to provide secure, off-street car parking for residents and their visitors. In other words, they exist as an amenity for residents. The CoL website states that Barbican car parks are also staffed with 24 hour concierge to maintain resident and visitor safety. On the other hand, the City of London appears to have defined the car parks at some point (when?) as an asset which they should use to generate profits.
2. The proposed increase in charges for stores and car parking
The level of increase for car parking is exceptionally high and the rates do not bear market comparison with local commercial car parks (£800 pa on London Wall). In the case of the stores, the proposed increases are frankly exorbitant, with the large baggage stores at almost 4 times their current rate. Residents with smaller flats are very dependant on their stores and we know of at least one who would be priced out.
3. The function of the car parks
A clear definition is required. As most residents understand it, the car parks were originally built as an integral part of the Barbican blocks to provide secure, off-street car parking for residents and their visitors. In other words, they exist as an amenity for residents. The CoL website states that Barbican car parks are also staffed with 24 hour concierge to maintain resident and visitor safety. On the other hand, the City of London appears to have defined the car parks at some point (when?) as an asset which they should use to generate profits.
The purpose of these new proposals is to maximise profit from charges made to residents and others in order to raise funds for use anywhere in the City of London, including the Barbican. The charge thereby effectively includes a tax, which we understand needs authority from Parliament. Normally, local authorities are not entitled to charge more for a service than the cost of providing it.
We request the RCC to respond robustly to these proposals from CoL and to make recommendations to the BRC which take full account of the concerns that we have as residents.
Kind regards,
Chair, Ben Jonson House Group
We request the RCC to respond robustly to these proposals from CoL and to make recommendations to the BRC which take full account of the concerns that we have as residents.
Kind regards,
Chair, Ben Jonson House Group
No comments :
Post a Comment