Beer Road field decision coming soon – proposed fence could harm their prospects on appeal

Posted on

The controversial planning application to build a house in the field at the top of Beer Road (20/1775/OUT) is likely to be decided soon, Planning tell me.

I have been reflecting further on the owners’ outrageous additional proposal, to erect a 2-metre-high fence along the Beer Road frontage and block the view, about which many people have expressed concern.

As reported here before, they have obtained a certificate that they can lawfully do this as ‘permitted development’.

However it seems to me that the impact of carrying this out could be to make planners – and, if they refuse, appeal inspectors – even more likely to reject their case. It is not at all clear what they would hope to gain by implementing this proposal.

As a first step, the West Seaton and Seaton Hole Association should now write to the owners to ask them not to go ahead with this, as should the Coastal Path Association. We should exhaust these steps before residents chain themselves to the fence! (Let me have your thoughts by email.)

3 thoughts on “Beer Road field decision coming soon – proposed fence could harm their prospects on appeal

    Karen Curnock said:
    May 11, 2021 at 12:51 pm

    Dear Martin Yes, please do whatever you can and what you feel will be most effective. You know more than I do, that’s for sure about processes. Thank you Karen PS my suggestion about a pop-psychology questionnaire on how people vote was not to treat politics as a game, but a way to engage people with the process and to encourage awareness about how they make decisions. Just in case your comment was directed at me!

    On Tue, 11 May 2021, 12:18 Seaton & Colyton MATTERS, wrote:

    > Martin Shaw posted: ” The controversial planning application to build a > house in the field at the top of Beer Road (20/1775/OUT) is likely to be > decided soon, Planning tell me. I have been reflecting further on the > owners’ outrageous additional proposal, to erect a 2-m” >

    Like

    Martin Shaw responded:
    May 11, 2021 at 2:05 pm

    No, not directed at all at you, and sorry I didn’t comment on your very relevant points (too much going on). More directed at those who thinking building their party is more important than winning power from the Tories locally.

    Like

    naughtymagpie said:
    May 12, 2021 at 10:44 am

    To be honest, every rich effer has built a house along there, theirs is the last field standing. There is a total precedent of being able to build there. Big fancy houses, not for the likes of you and me. I think they should be allowed if its not a national park, why single them out ?
    BUT it must be low rise, small and turf roofed.
    They have every right to build a 2m fence, it can’t be one rule for one and not for another.
    No good getting on your high horse cos it does not suit you.
    They should be able to build a partially underground dwelling of architectural merit.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Karen Curnock Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s