When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
1:00pm Friday 30th July 2010
DEVELOPERS have won a long battle to transform the site of an historic cliff-top cafe into a two-and-a-half-storey block of flats.
Harrison Developments appealed against a decision by Bournemouth planners to refuse permission for the Point House Cafe in Southbourne to be bulldozed and transformed into seven self-contained apartments with basement parking.
The Harbour Road cafe – a favourite haunt for many, including Bournemouth’s Alex James from ’90s chart-toppers Blur – was the subject of a third appeal hearing on June 8.
Protestors have tirelessly fought against the plans to demolish the cafe and develop the site, claiming it would “destroy that bit of coastline”.
The borough’s head of tourism Mark Smith also opposed the development claiming it would “damage the appeal of Bournemouth’s tourism”.
Protestors won support from Bournemouth East MP Tobias Ellwood, who described the plans as “totally inappropriate for the seafront”.
After dismissing one of two unsuccessful former appeals, on the grounds that the development “would harm the character and appearance of the surrounding area”, inspector Richard Marshall allowed an appeal against a failure to give notice, within the prescribed period, of a decision on the planning permission.
The inspector described the appeal site as “a fairly isolated cliff-top position” adding: “The building that would be demolished is of no great architectural merit,” “out of keeping with its attractive coastal location” and “an unwelcome intrusion in the views towards the sea.”
He added: “It appears to have been extended over time and there are some notably unsympathetic single-storey extensions.
“Far from detracting from the character and appearance of the site, the proposed development would be an improvement.”
Planning board vice-chairman Cllr Ron Whittaker told the Daily Echo: “I am taken aback by this approval.
“I cannot believe the inspector has approved these plans for a more bulky development closer to the cliff edge than the existing building.
“This section of the cliff-top should be part of our tourism core area which would give it greater protection when we are fighting appeals.”
eyesropen, bournemouth says...
1:58pm Fri 30 Jul 10
divingdave, Southbourne says...
2:00pm Fri 30 Jul 10
Huey, says...
2:54pm Fri 30 Jul 10
divingdave wrote:Being realistic, whoever owns the land isn't going to clear it and leave nothing there, as it was clearly bought as an investment.
Totally agree with you eyesropen. It's an isolated position there, so it'd be much better to have nothing there at all and open up the views.
Glashen, Christchurch says...
3:28pm Fri 30 Jul 10
divingdave wrote:Is it right that you get your way by allowing a building to decay and fall into disrepair. The most that should have been permitted is a same size replacement.
To be fair, the current building is in a terrible state. It's very run down with parts of it crumbling away. It's an eyesore at present and made this little bit of cliff-top look quite messy.
I'm not in favour of the flats, but it hasn't been open as a cafe for a very long time so something did need to be done with it.
GB916, christchurch says...
4:38pm Fri 30 Jul 10
jobsworthwatch, Bournemouth says...
5:15pm Fri 30 Jul 10
madfromdorset, Bournemouth says...
5:37pm Fri 30 Jul 10
jeebuscripes, Westbourne says...
6:11pm Fri 30 Jul 10
Corrupto, Boscombe says...
8:35pm Fri 30 Jul 10
Bob49, Bournemouth says...
9:31pm Fri 30 Jul 10
dribble, Boscombe says...
10:14pm Fri 30 Jul 10
Bob49 wrote:My thoughts exactly. Seems, according to the report, the appeal wasn't won over the development itself but on a technicality over the failure of the officers and members of the council to deal with it in an appropriate timescale. Questions need to be asked about this...
"inspector Richard Marshall allowed an appeal against a failure to give notice, within the prescribed period, of a decision on the planning permission. "
.
So who failed to give notice "within the prescribed period" and on what basis is this inspector allowed to over ride that failure ?
.
Could the Echo clarify this bit please ?
.
Corrupto, Boscombe says...
8:12pm Sun 1 Aug 10
s-pb2, Boscombe says...
1:08am Mon 2 Aug 10
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Search for jobs with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Find the right person for you with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Search for homes with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
Search for cars with the Daily Echo
Search Now »
divingdave, Southbourne says...
1:40pm Fri 30 Jul 10
I'm not in favour of the flats, but it hasn't been open as a cafe for a very long time so something did need to be done with it.