Beach chalet stirs up village

8:31am Saturday 19th July 2008

Comments (0)   Have your say »

ANGRY West Bexington residents have hit out at planners for allowing a new beach hut to 'dwarf' a row of chalets dubbed among the most expensive in the world.

In April 2007 West Dorset District Council approved plans for number four chalet, Beach Road, to replace the previous one.

The new building is nearing completion, but some locals are upset that district council planners allowed its scale and fear it may set a precedent.

It is in a row of 14 that have been there over 70 years.

The village's heritage group has been among those against it.

It said that some chalets have been rebuilt, but "until now always sensitively" and that their nostalgic appeal is such that, although basic, they have changed hands for up to £340,000 each.

Resident Lester Cowling, speaking on behalf of the heritage group, said he had 'never known a village so angry'.

John Aldred, a village property owner, added that the new chalet "dwarfs everything along there."

The chalet's owner said he did not want to comment on the matter.

Anthony Edwards, chairman of Puncknowle and Swyre Parish Council, which covers West Bexington, wrote an open letter to district council director of planning Dr David Evans asking for an explanation, after parish councillors unanimously supported opposing the chalet in its current form.

In his letter, Mr Edwards said he felt the development 'fails to discharge' one of the objectives of the district council's design statement - to harmonise new buildings with those around them.

He added that the 'height of the actual build is totally at variance with that in the scaled plans submitted'.

But a district council enforcement officer has told the parish council that he had visited the site with a colleague.

He told them that the roof line was in accordance with approved plans and the enforcement case was considered closed.

Dr Evans replied to Mr Edwards last week that the enforcement officer had revisited the site on July 4 and taken further measurements, reporting that the development was proceeding in accordance with the planning permission.

Dr Evans' letter stated: "The fact that local residents and the Parish Council now take exception to the development is a separate issue.

"Procedurally, the district council's decision was correctly taken in accordance with its scheme of delegation."

Dr Evans added that the district council had not received any objections to the application from third parties or the parish council at the time.

The parish council, of which Mr Edwards was not chairman nor member for the West Bexington ward at the time, did not object last April.

But it did comment there was no base line on the plans and there were concerns on the building's height.

It also agreed a condition should be attached to any approval that there should be no further permitted development rights on the site.

Dr Evans stated that, had the parish council objected, or the local ward member requested the application to be determined by the district's planning committee, a different decision may have been reached.

He concluded: "The situation now is that a valid planning permission has been lawfully implemented and I am unable to take any further action in this matter.

"However, I have asked the case officer to seek the applicant's agreement to painting the timber walls of the building to blend in with its neighbours."

Dr Evans was also willing to discuss the case with Mr Edwards at a meeting.