Change of mind on land sale

•   Sheila and Colin Lovegrove …  happy block will remain open space.

By Tony Scott,
August 18, 2021

Bridport residents Sheila and Colin Lovegrove are among a number of locals relieved to learn that Dorset Council has decided not to proceed with a proposal to sell a block of land in Kent Place.

The council decided unanimously in June to prepare to sell the block at 4 Kent Place to take advantage of the “hot property market” in Bridport.

However, the required public advertising period of the proposal resulted in several objections.

There were 12 formal objections among submissions to elected council members and staff along with two expressions of interest from people wanting to buy the land.

Most of the objections focussed on the terms of the original creation of the block as part of a 33-block subdivision, started in the early 1980s and completed in 1992.

As was common at that time developers were required to make a contribution to public recreational space in cash or land.

Mrs Lovegrove said that’s how the land in the cul-de-sac, named for her husband’s uncle Reuben Kent, was reserved.

“That block was for open space and it would be pretty rotten of the council if they tried to sell it,” she said.

A walkway connecting from the land to Clarke Street provides a short cut used by pedestrians and cyclists, eventually linking to the school and the recreation ground.

The title for the block should have been obtained by the Council when the subdivision was completed in 1992 but was retained in legal papers by the developer, Steve Millwood.

When it was tracked down early this year, he also sought a covenant that the land be retained for recreational space, as originally intended.

In a report to the Council, general manager Tim Watson said the block “appeared to be a vacant parcel of land with no strategic purpose in terms of public open space and in the context of unprecedented demand for residential lots in Bridport, selling the land would seem logical on the part of Council.”

However, he said representations and verbal feedback to councillors made it clear local residents were not in favour of the land being disposed of.

Although there was no equipment provided, stories had been relayed about how the land was used for recreation like football and cricket games, particularly in school holiday periods

“The formal consultation process has, in this instance, proved to be a very effective instrument in gauging community sentiment and sentiment and consistent with this feedback it is not recommended that Council proceed with the sale of the land,” Mr Watson reported. 

Councillor Leonie Stein said she was happy to support the recommendation not to sell the block, agreeing with others that the public advertising had been a good process to inform those in the community who might have had a view.

“It certainly flushed them out.

“I was approached by approximately 22 constituents.”  

She had advised them to write a formal objection.

Some had and others had made their views clear via social media, which she said might not have been as effective.

Mayor Greg Howard supported the recommendation, but said the block was never intended to be public open space. It had been donated in lieu of cash in accordance with subdivision policy in effect at the time.

“A lot of the objectors mentioned that it was designated as public open space. It never ever was, it just turned out that that’s the way it’s been used and I have no issues with that.” The recommendation not to proceed with the sale was unanimously passed.