Think the Capital Cooridor Law is difficult, check out this 900 year old London law

JAM · #1 Posted **Apr 23, 2012, 2:19 AM**

Quote:

Real estate developers have long dealt with arcane construction rules and zoning restrictions. Builders in Britain have a particularly vexing challenge: a 900-year-old requirement that any new construction maintain a candle’s worth of sunlight for neighboring properties. U.K. landowners have had rights to natural light from the oft-overcast sky since the 12th century. In 2012, developers are paying dearly for casting shadows on nearby structures after a 2010 court ruling that the part of a building obstructing a neighbor’s natural light could be torn down.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...a-heavy-burden

cvalkan · #2 Posted **Apr 23, 2012, 5:21 AM**

Not sure if it's codified, but they consider effects on hours of sunlight in parks in San Francisco when deciding on permits for some (highrise?) construction.

wwmiv · #3 Posted **Apr 23, 2012, 4:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cvalkan

Not sure if it's codified, but they consider effects on hours of sunlight in parks in San Francisco when deciding on permits for some (highrise?) construction.

I do think that that is codified.

MichaelB · #4 Posted **Apr 23, 2012, 5:02 PM**

I love it!

priller · #5 Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 6:43 PM**

Whereas, here in Austin, I would want new buildings to create the most shadows possible. We got too much sun. Give me more shade!!

But I understand where they're coming from. I'm visiting my daughter in Wales next month. Been looking at their weather, almost every day it's low 45, high 55, and rain. Every day!

BevoLJ · #6 Posted **Apr 29, 2012, 4:13 AM**

The sun only comes out like twice a year, so... it is quite the big deal.

hookem · #7 Posted **Apr 29, 2012, 7:21 AM**

In Texas, it almost seems we have the opposite problem:

http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_Maga...no.aspx?page=1

austlar1 · #8 Posted **Apr 29, 2012, 10:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hookem

In Texas, it almost seems we have the opposite problem:

http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_Maga...no.aspx?page=1

That is an incredible article. Sometimes building a skyscraper,especially one made of the wrong materials, is just not a good idea. I wonder who will blink first? The Museum Tower developers or the Nasher folks. I am rooting for the Nasher because it really is a special place that deserves to be protected.