Hazelhurst, Freshwater: ‘Right To Wreck’ Covenant Surprise

Hazelhurst, Freshwater: Right To Wreck CovenantThe proposed development of Hazelhurst in Freshwater, diagonally opposite Dimbola Lodge, has cause a lot of consternation in and around Freshwater.

We covered the planning committee’s discussion of the case live at County Hall (complete planning meeting, Hazelhurst specific), where the planning permission was approved, on the developer’s third planning application.

Just when you thought it was all over, it looks like there’s another potentially significant twist in the story.

Brief background
Over 200 letters of objection were written to the IW council planning department during the last planning consultation process.

The planning committee, with the recommendation of the council planning department to accept, made the decision to allow the developer to demolish the current building and build nine new flats in its place.

There’s considerable frustration locally, to put it mildly, that this application was passed.

What’s new
There’s a lot of will from the people in the West of Wight to make sure things are done properly – driven largely by their desire to retain a strong community there.

This community ‘will’, combined with some digging for information, has turned up a number of covenants covering not only Hazelhurst, but all of the buildings along that stretch.

The most interesting and controversial is one containing a “Right to Wreck” clause.

‘Right to Wreck’
Old Land Registry plans showing Right to Wreck LineBack in the mid-1900 a group covenant was put in place in order to ensure that all of the homes in that row of houses were able to retain their view of Freshwater Bay.

It did this by all of the house owners agreeing not to build anything above four feet tall in front of the shared building line. If any of the buildings were to infringe this, the neighbours who lost their view have a clause, that in legalese is known as a ‘right to wreck,’ ie legally pull that part of the building down, if they give the owner 14 days notice.

These days a right to a view is not, what they call in the trade, ‘a material planning consideration,’ so is not a reason to reject a planning application. Having it in the covenant protects it outside planning law.

The area that this covers is 50 feet deep at the north of the site, widening to 69 feet at the bottom, shown in pink on the plans.

More to come
We’ve got more details on this one to come, stay tuned.

Thanks to those who helped out with this story.