Re: Re: Dartmouth Square Disgrace

@Thomond Park wrote:

What are you talking about it is a public park with rights of lease renewal as long as the local authority wish to keep renewing. Due to the leasehold interest it must be valued as an investment and not a development property as its value relates solely to income streams. Finding the value of the income streams is nigh on impossible as it is impossible to establish comparable evidence for amenity lands within this or any postcode within a mile.

As the site is not zoned resi he has no right to build upon it notwithstanding the fact that he has no possession and will not be granted consent by the tenant.

The value of the site is probably in the region 25 times the annual rent which I am not familiar with

it would appear from the papers that the park is a private park and always was. It just happens to been made available to the public for 2 decades.

it would also appear that the council stopped leasing it some years ago altogether, which to my mind would greatly affect any claim for a renewal of the previous lease at this stage.

I think you’d have to agree that this poor man is having is constitutional right to property taken from him.