A MUM whose sea views have been blocked by an illegal 6ft concrete wall has been left furious after a developer applied to replace it with frosted glass.

Liz Bates, 42, said the latest development has left her “extremely frustrated” after the towering brick wall was slapped in front of her family home in the affluent Southbourne area of Bournemouth, Dorset.

A mum whose sea views have been blocked by an illegal brick wall has been left furious at the developer’s attempt to keep it Credit: BNPS

Vivir Estates has now proposed to replace the wall with a frosted glass screen Credit: BNPS

The extended wall, that screens a new roof-top terrace, has knocked an estimated £50,000 off the value of her first-floor seaside apartment by obstructing her view.

Developer Eddie Fitzsimmons, director of Vivir Estates, has already been refused planning permission to keep the wall by the local authority.

Sign up for the Money newsletter

Thank you!

His appeal has also failed, after a government planning inspector delivered a scathing verdict on it.

But in an extraordinary twist, Mr Fitzsimmons has submitted another application to replace the wall with an opaque glass screen rather than admitting defeat and demolishing it.

SUN SAVERS
Four ways to eat out for just £1 – including burgers, pizza & bottomless brunch

BEST IN CLASS
My daughter gets £30k private education for free – here’s how you can too

She previously enjoyed an idyllic vista of Poole Bay from the balcony of her first floor apartment Credit: BNPS

The developer was previously refused planning permission to keep the wall in front of Liz’s property Credit: BNPS

To prevent “mutual overlooking” between the properties, the glass would need to be frosted therefore keeping Mrs Bates’ sea view hidden.

The application states this would “not create any harmful impact…on the living conditions of the occupiers of any neighbouring properties”.

But Mrs Bates has slammed the developers and said any kind of wall or terrace was illegal and will harm her living conditions.

She urged BCP Council to carry out enforcement action to make sure the wall is swiftly knocked down and not rebuilt in another form.

She is one of about 100 residents who have claimed their lives have been “ruined” by the development of four cliff-top apartment blocks of 27 flats in front of their homes.

Mrs Bates, a property inspector, said: “It’s like hitting your head against a brick wall dealing with this developer.

“The terrace will just be slightly smaller but still in the same position, albeit a couple of metres further away from us.

“They obviously seem to think that two metres will make all the difference to sound and smells travelling.”

She added: “I am extremely frustrated that we are once again having to respond to a retrospective planning application for something the developer was explicitly told by the council to stop building when the wall was first started — yet he chose to ignore that advice and continued regardless.”

“For me, the most important issue now is that the council must properly take into account the planning inspector’s findings, particularly the very serious concerns raised about the effect of the terrace in this location on noise and nuisance to my property.”

The construction site on the left with blocks the view of the residential building on the right Credit: BNPS

Liz Bates says she it’s ‘like hitting your head against a brick wall dealing with this developer’ Credit: BNPS

Mrs Bates said the findings “cannot simply be brushed aside” adding “we have already endured a huge amount of stress and disruption”.

She called on BCP council to “stand firm” and “consider the actual harm being caused to existing residents”.

“I want the council to look at the full history of this matter, including the developer being told to stop, his decision to carry on regardless, and the planning inspector’s findings,” she continued.

“If the development is unacceptable in planning terms, then I believe the council needs to have the resolve to act accordingly.

“After everything residents have been through, we are simply asking for the planning system to be respected and for the protection of existing residents to be taken seriously.”

In February BCP Council refused retrospective planning permission for the wall, with the developers soon thereafter lodging an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

The developers claimed the wall was necessary to prevent “mutual overlooking” between the new apartment and Mrs Bates’ balcony.

But Inspector David Kay said that the wall had a “harmful overbearing impact” on Mrs Bates’ home and the size of the roof terrace “far exceeded what could be reasonably described as modest”.

He added that the terrace could be used for large parties which would cause “significant levels of noise and disturbance” to Mrs Bates.

He highlighted the risk of “overheard conversations” and said that while the apartment’s new occupiers would be aware of the “privacy” issues before moving in, Mrs Bates could not have known as she already lived there.

In their latest application, Mr Fitzsimmons’ Vivir Estate company said they will shorten the terrace so it is no longer large enough to host parties.

They said the glass screen would “not result in an overbearing impact” upon Mrs Bates.

The new application states: “Following the Inspector’s decision, the applicant instructed their architect to prepare amended plans for a substantially reduced roof terrace which would feature a glazed balustrading and a 1.8m high obscure glass privacy screen facing [Mrs Bates’ home].

“The privacy wall is no longer proposed and the existing wall will be removed as part of the revised proposal.

“Given its limited height and the separation distance, the proposed glass privacy screen would not result in an overbearing impact upon [Mrs Bates].

“It is recognised that the outlook from the neighbouring terrace would change, but change does not equate to material harm in planning terms.

“Given the minor nature of the proposed changes, the amendments to the approved scheme would not create any harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area nor the living conditions of the occupiers of any neighbouring properties.”

The two and four-storey blocks in the main development are being built on a former council car park in front of 24 existing properties.

BCP Council put the Southbourne Crossroads Car Park site up for sale in 2017 when it was underused but changed their minds and denied two planning applications for the site.

They were overruled after Vivir Estates launched an appeal and a planning inspector sided with them despite 1,500 locals objecting to the plans.

The Jattvibe has contacted BCP Council and Vivir Estates for comment.