CONTROVERSIAL plans to replace two Mudeford bungalows with two two-storey houses are set to be approved by councillors next week.
More than a dozen people have written in opposition to the redevelopment of the site next to Mudeford Sailing Club, saying it would “dominate” the waterfront.
Despite this, BCP Council planning officers are recommending that the application be approved when it is considered by members of the planning committee next week.
PLANS: The proposed new houses in Mudeford
First submitted in September last year by landowner Joan James, the proposals are for the demolition of all existing buildings on the site to allow two houses to be built in their place.
“The proposal for two high quality bespoke waterfront properties represents a significant enhancement of the existing site,” a statement submitted with the application says.
“These two buildings are sensitively designed to keep the appropriate scale, massing and character of the harbour waterfront.
“[The scheme will] remove several dilapidated and redundant outbuildings to produce two well-considered designs.”
However, 17 people have written to the council in opposition to the application, raising concerns about the impact it would have on the conservation area and the “inappropriate” design.
David Nutlands, who lives in Mudeford, said: “[The development] exceeds the existing buildings considerably and will dominate the waterfront and have a detrimental impact on the shoreline.
“The existing bungalows have a low visual impact because they are single-storey dwellings that have been built in tandem rather than side by side.”
Echoing their concerns, former Christchurch councillor Claire Bath called the application for consideration by councillors.
As a result, it will be determined by members of the committee on Thursday (September 5) with a recommendation from planning officer Kevin Chilvers that it be approved.
“The proposed layout and design of the scheme would result in less-than-substantial harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area and nearby locally-listed buildings,” his report says.
“The public benefits of providing replacement flood resilient housing in a sustainable location which improves the stock of housing is given weight as well as the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel