A pensioner has accussed a council of costing him £2million after they told him he wouldn't be allowed to demolish his home – only to then grant the new owner permission to do so.
Stephen Bailey put his late parents' harbourside home on Sandbanks, Dorset, up for sale two years ago after he and his three sisters inherited it.
Like most waterfront properties on the exclusive peninsula, the plots of land are generally more valuable than the houses on them.
Mr Bailey, 70, put the large detached house on the market for £8million thinking it would be straightforward for the buyer to get planning permission to knock it down and build their dream home in its place.
After all, most of the neighbours have done the same, including former Premier League manager Harry Redknapp and wife Sandra who live next door.
Mr Bailey said he submitted a pre-application advice request to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) Council seeking assurance that the new owner would be allowed to bulldoze the arts and crafts-style house.
But he said the response from planning officials was that permission was unlikely to be granted because the 115-year-old property is in the Sandbanks Conservation Area.
Crucially, he claims potential buyers were given the same message which put them off making offers.
Stephen Bailey, 70, put his late parents' harbourside home on Sandbanks, Dorset, up for sale two years ago after he and his three sisters inherited it
Mr Bailey has accused the council of costing him £2million after they told him he wouldn't be allowed to demolish his home before granting the new owner permission to do so
After two years with no sale, Mr Bailey reduced the asking price of the six-bedroom house which eventually sold for £5.7million in February.
But within a few months of moving in new owners David and Heidi Nash submitted their own application to demolish the house and replace it with a modern mansion.
Although the council's heritage officer objected, the planning department overruled them. This is the same department Mr Bailey claims told him the house could not be lost, yet they granted the Nashes permission.
Mr Bailey said: 'How two-faced of them. That has absolutely cost us between £1million and £2million.
'The offers we got when buyers thought they could get planning permission were much higher than what we ended up selling it for.
'We did a pre-application advice request and the council told us that it should be fine to demolish it.
'After the Redknapps nextdoor, ours was the only house in that area that hadn't been rebuilt.
'But they later came back and said it wouldn't be granted because it is in a Conservation Area.
'We would have got between £7million to £8million for it, but in the end we accepted under £6million.
'I just feel resigned to it. It is typical planning. They let people who have enough money do what they like but make it as hard as possible for the older residents.'
In reaching her decision, council planning officer Claire Moir said that most other houses in the Conservation Area had been demolished so losing one more wouldn't make a difference.
She said: 'The Conservation Area relates specifically to a small number of buildings which contribute to its character and have a positive impact.
'The proposals relate specifically to the loss of one of these properties identified as contributing to this character.
Like most waterfront properties on the exclusive peninsula, the plots of land are generally more valuable than the houses actually on them
Mr Bailey is furious at the council, who he accused of being 'two-faced' after they rejected his planning proposals
'It is noted that many of the original buildings have been altered or replaced, some with more modern forms of architecture.
'To date, it is estimated that over 50 per cent of the original buildings have been replaced or extensively re-built and extended to the harbour edge.
'As such the character of this part of Panorama Road and the shoreline have evolved significantly and the character has changed dramatically with regard to the built form.
'The neighbouring modern property [the Redknapps] was recently replaced with an Italian-style villa, as the modern house it replaced had no heritage status.
'It is considered therefore that given the buildings which have already been approved or altered... the loss of this building would not result in harm to the significance of the heritage asset and would be acceptable.'
The Nashes' planning agents, Pure Town Planning, boasted on social media: 'We're delighted to have secured planning permission for a stunning replacement family home.
'This was far from a straightforward application. The existing 1911 property sits within the Sandbanks Conservation Area, and the proposal faced strong heritage objections.
'But with a clear strategy, robust evidence and an exceptional project team, we successfully navigated the challenges — securing approval at the first time of asking.'
BCP Council said they were unable to comment on the matter.
Mr Bailey and his sisters inherited the three-storey property from their late parents who had lived there since 1949.
Before them the property belonged to Mr Bailey's grandfather, the camping tycoon Oswald Bailey.
Source link
