Jump to content

Required to Demolish in Salcombe in AONB


Ferdinand

Recommended Posts

One of the two founders of the White Stuff fashion chain seems to have build a tennis court, pavilion, and skate doodah on the cliffs near Salcombe without any PP whatsoever, and has been told to demolish them.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-49878737

 

_109024946_apex_white_stuff_boss_plannin

 

_109024874_apex_white_stuff_boss_plannin

 

_109024944_apex_white_stuff_boss_plannin

 

Rather outrageous. Personally I think he probably needs his nuts roasting for that.

 

I am not sure what the basic building is - demolish and replace or is that a Martello Tower? Looks a bit like an accommodation block at a ski resort.

 

Apparently White Stuff are fashionable; that will be why I have never heard of them.

 

 

Edited by Ferdinand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

Apparently White Stuff are fashionable; that will be why I have never heard of them.

I was at a shop and saw a jacket I liked in a sale.  So took it to the counter where the girl got the concept of 70% off the price wrong.  So go the jacket for less than 20 quid.  she discounted the discounted price.

It was a White Stuff one and everyone was impressed just how fashionable I was.

I found my Converse flipflops in a carpark, another 50 quid 'saved'.

Today, I shall put on my jeans from Poundland, they cost a fiver, T-Shirt from Sports Direct was 3 quid, fleese from Mountain Whorehouse was 6 quid.  Socks 2 quid a pair.

So clothed for 16 quid.

Walking jacket and boots adds on about £300 to that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

I was at a shop and saw a jacket I liked in a sale.  So took it to the counter where the girl got the concept of 70% off the price wrong.  So go the jacket for less than 20 quid.  she discounted the discounted price.

It was a White Stuff one and everyone was impressed just how fashionable I was.

I found my Converse flipflops in a carpark, another 50 quid 'saved'.

Today, I shall put on my jeans from Poundland, they cost a fiver, T-Shirt from Sports Direct was 3 quid, fleese from Mountain Whorehouse was 6 quid.  Socks 2 quid a pair.

So clothed for 16 quid.

Walking jacket and boots adds on about £300 to that.

 

Naturism is so much less expensive...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salcombe is one of the those places that’s become the reserve of the rich and second home owners. House prices are eye watering. I don’t know that particular property but even a fairly average 4 bed detached with a sea view will cost you a couple of million. 

 

In the summer you can smell the money walking around the town and harbour. In the winter it’s deserted! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Barney12 said:

 

In the summer you can smell the money walking around the town and harbour. In the winter it’s deserted

Yes, it is good. The few remaining locals can charge such a premium that they can do nothing for 8 months of the year.

Controversial viewpoint I know, but what else is Salcombe good for these days.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Barney12 said:

Salcombe is one of the those places that’s become the reserve of the rich and second home owners. House prices are eye watering. I don’t know that particular property but even a fairly average 4 bed detached with a sea view will cost you a couple of million. 

 

In the summer you can smell the money walking around the town and harbour. In the winter it’s deserted! 

According to the Rich List the 2 founders sold the business for 30m each in 2008 or so.

 

F

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What irritates me the most about all of this, and yes the skipping of PP annoys me, but possibly not as much as this, is the waste. 

 

The environmental price tag on that development and it could all just end up a pile of broken masonry and twisted metal. That is sad.

 

I assume they can keep the tennis court - can't see that harming anyone, well maybe, if the players get tennis elbow.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the area I live there is a bit of an epidemic of things being build without consent (or built very differently to an existing consent) and then retrospective consent is applied for.  In the vast majority of cases the local council planning team wave through the application.  Having spoken to one of the local councillors about this I suspect that the issue is that most of the applications are by developers or individuals with deep pockets who have made it clear they will appeal a rejection and the council just doesn't have the resources to fight all the appeals.  Our local Parish Council is getting very exercised about it but is powerless to do anything, they suspect that anyone with deep pockets is now being advised by local architects and planning consultants to take this approach as a retrospective application is more likely to get approved than applying for consent before doing the work.

 

I am pleased to see that at least some councils appear to be willing to take on those who may think the size of their bank balance means the rules are different for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With our fight for planning permission to replace a bungalow with a cottage, the planner, when she refused a third time, told me I would probably win if I went to appeal , then fought the appeal. The appeal officer passed ours with no conditions but noted the council were not even abiding by their own policies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joe90 said:

With our fight for planning permission to replace a bungalow with a cottage, the planner, when she refused a third time, told me I would probably win if I went to appeal , then fought the appeal. The appeal officer passed ours with no conditions but noted the council were not even abiding by their own policies!

Did you manage to get costs awarded against them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Randomiser said:

Did you manage to get costs awarded against them?

 

No, you can only claim costs if you prove they have done something wrong, interpretation of planning guidelines are not deemed wrong just opinion (they did get a rocket from the appeal office tho!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...