A small parcel of land on Love Lane in Bembridge has gone on the market, as developers behind a controversial holiday lodge plan walk away from the project – but locals say there are still a number of issues that need resolving.
In 2021, the land on the secluded Love Lane site had been earmarked for 2x 1-bed eco-holiday lodges, by the company Love Lane IOW, which caused uproar in the local community. There had been 300 objections to the plans.
The planning application was determined by the government’s Planning Inspectorate as the Isle of Wight Council missed its statutory deadline to do so. Both authorities agreed, however, the application should be refused due to the impact on the rural character of the area.
But now, after a challenging planning history with the plans very clearly refused, the land has been split into 2 plots and is up for auction.
Listed with land and property auctioneers Clive Emson, each plot has a guide price of £30,000 and above. The land was previously purchased as 1 lot for £13,500 and was listed for sale in July last year with a price tag of £150,000 – around 10x more than it’s actually worth.
Both plots — 0.19 acres and 0.17 acres respectively — claim to have vehicle access to Love Lane and electricity and water connections. However, it is argued by local residents that in fact no planning permission has been granted for such access.
Island Echo is told that tree replanting requirements have not been completed with residents now asking the Isle of Wight Council to enforce this, as well as enforcing the removal of temporary structures from the site. It’s understood that this is being looked into by the local authority and action is imminent, with hopes that the re-planting of trees will prevent vehicular access.
1 resident has said:
“This property has been comprehensively rejected for residential planning (1978, 1998 and 2022) – the vendor is trying to recoup money on a failed speculative development which met with massive local opposition as it would destroy a very old copse by the side of the coastal path.
“It is important that any unsuspecting potential buyers be warned of the real situation of these lots”.
The complaints against the scheme have been branded as an ‘organised campaign’ that ‘bordered on mass hysteria’ by the planning agents, Plan Research. It’s said that Police were called to the site 8 times during the planning process.
Perhaps the local residents will take the opportunity to buy the land as it means so much to them.
If I could I would buy the land, pant more tress, and just leave it, and if possible get the trees protected.. We need more green area than we do houses, beach huts or similar !!
It does make you wonder why Bembridge is given what seems like protection from development when other areas of the Island are threatened by more and more housing?
I’m not saying I disagree with planning being refused on this piece of land, but just that the perception is that Bembridge seems to get preferential treatment. Compare it with areas of Ryde, for instance, where the Council seems determined to override local opinion and build hundreds of homes for thousands of people.
I wouldn’t like to suggest that it’s anything to do with the wealth and status of the local residents to this scheme in Bembridge, but it does make you wonder, doesn’t it?
Catherine, with respect, this woodland was sold as that, woodland. It was the home for red squirrels, badgers etc. All the trees had protection orders on them. The land is off a VERY narrow lane and had no vehicular access to the site. The developer, from the mainland, allegedly did not even view the land before they bought it. The application went through the proper planning channels, through the planning appeal process where a member of the planning inspectorate, a professional in their field would not have any issues with “Bembridge”. You certainly have suggested it is do do with wealth and status of local residents. It is nothing of the sort. It was an inappropriate application, nothing more or less.
Please, wonder no more, Bembridge has one of the Islander main destruction families of green spaces living there, so as we know, even Bears don’t pass motions in their own woodland.
Especially so if those Bears are apt at doing funny handshakes.
Why not let someone build 2 properties , there, access is there as there are 2 other properties along that road