The decision to grant permission for 13 houses and replacement harbour facilities at Bembridge Harbour looks likely to be challenged in the courts.
Bembridge Harbour Trust (BHT) is seeking a judicial review of the Isle of Wight Council's decision to allow the development of the harbourside, claiming it will damage the environment and the profitability of the harbour company.
The trustees also believe issues of dredging and moorings maintenance have not been addressed by the harbour authority and will lead to the harbour becoming non-viable within ten years.
BHT is a charity dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of Bembridge Harbour, which has long been in conflict with harbour owners Malcolm and Fiona Thorpe.
Its chairman is well-known local resident Jeremy Gully and IW Council members Cllr Phil Jordan and Cllr Jonathan Bacon are among the trustees.
The Isle of Wight Council has declined to comment because of the proposed legal action and Mr Thorpe also declined to comment until the papers had been served on the Isle of Wight Council.
BHT contends that the proposed development, granted permission under Enabling Development planning provisions (where a public benefit can only be achieved by overriding normal planning policy) delivers no such benefit to the statutory harbour authority (SHA), while creating avoidable environmental harm and additional cost for it.
It says the applicant company is not the harbour authority but a separate property company also ultimately owned by Mr and Mrs Thorpe, via a third company.
Read more: Harbour users' dismay over groyne delays.
BHT also anticipates also filing a parallel application for a judicial review of the harbour authority itself for its failure to meet its statutory responsibilities, while prioritising the interests of other companies ultimately owned by Malcolm and Fiona Thorpe, over the interests of the SHA.
The board of trustees said: “The way, and degree to which the directors of the SHA have disregarded their responsibilities within the SHA has regretfully led us to the necessity of this action of last resort. "Thankfully, there are opportunities for the parties to agree ways forward during the process, when the challenges can be withdrawn, thus avoiding excessive costs.
"BHT have openly shared all expert advice with the planning authority so that at any stage a consent could have been granted that helped the harbour and was not challengeable.
"Likewise, BHT have openly shared expert advice and questions with the SHA such that the second legal challenge would have been unnecessary.
"Without this action the harbour is likely to fail as a viable port within a decade or so - a devastating blow to Bembridge and St Helens.
"We have been overwhelmed by the recognition and support we are now receiving from the public, who have contributed with great generosity to raise the considerable sums needed to progress these cases.
"The public has shown how much it cares — it is time for the owners of the harbour and Isle of Wight Council to listen.”
House Rules
We do not moderate comments, but we expect readers to adhere to certain rules in the interests of open and accountable debate.
Read the rules here