BEACH hut owners in a UK coastal town have won their fight against a seaside bar whose customers were treating the town like a “beach rave in Magaluf”.
Locals of the Dorset Beauty Spot have won their battle for restrictions on alcohol service and music at a waterfront restaurant after punters wrecked the area with their “loutish” behaviour.
Residents complained that the quaint Christchurch harbour had been blighted by “foul language, arm-wrestling and vomiting” from customers at the open-air Beach House restaurant.
The quiet, family-orientated beach was overrun by noisy customers, many complained about people urinating against beach huts and lounging on the decking of their beach huts that are worth up to £500,000 each.
But according to the owner of the restaurant, Kim Slater, many are showing signs of “blatant snobbery” as he accused them of taking part in a with hunt against him.
Mudeford Sandbanks Beach Hut Association (MSBHA) which represents hut owners, applied for the premises’ licence to be reviewed.
The group claimed the seaside bar was not upholding the prevention of public nuisance, protection of children from harm and public safety.
A nearly five hour long meeting was held with members of the public, the beach hut association and the restaurant voiced their concerns to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole councillors.
Hut owner Tony Webb fumed about the “loutish drunken behaviour of the day-trippers treating the place like it’s a beach rave in Magaluf”.
He added that the noise had become “unbearable” and when the punters were challenged “they become menacing, threatening violence.
“Some have threatened to burn my hut down. As all hutters, I am happy to share the beach with day-trippers as long as they behave in a civilised manner.”
The beach now felt “like an Ibiza rave” said resident Jojo Higgins.
Another in favour of a review said if the behaviour was allowed to continue it was “only a matter of time before there is a serious accident”.
She claimed that customers would go on boat trips “with alcohol blood levels that would result in a hefty fine if behind the wheel of a car”.
Paul Owen, complainant, said: “I have witnessed foul language, arm-wrestling and vomiting, even while queueing with young grandchildren for an ice cream. This is not what the sandbank is meant to be.”
Mudeford Sandbank is a remote sandy spit that can only be reached by private boat, ferry or small train as cars are forbidden.
The 350 beach huts are some of Britain’s most expensive and the Beach House is the only restaurant.
After a fire destroyed the original building in 2018 the owners got permission for a temporary set up which consisted of three shipping containers.
Seven years later and there is still no permeant structure due to issues with funding from Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council.
Gary Grant, a lawyer for the beach hut association, told the council meeting: “When a venue goes from what was an enclosed, sit-down, food-led restaurant to a packed open-air music and alcohol-led beach party venue with DJs,
“And begins to wildly damage what is a very special location, then it’s time for the licensing sub-committee as custodians of the sandbank to step in and safeguard it for future generations.”
Gerald Gouriet KC, acting for the restaurant said the footage submitted as “evidence” showers “no hint of disorder or crime“.
He continued that the sandbank was not under private ownership but rather “open to the public at large, who come in their thousands to enjoy it”.
Owner, Kim Slater added that this was the first time in 45 years his ability to run a licenced premises had been questioned.
The beach hut associations requested the licensing committee restrict alcohol sales to tables with no food, remove the open-air bar service, impose conditions to control noise and waste and impose defined consumption areas.
Salter countered that the measures were “draconian and disproportionate”.
The councillors ruled that the restaurant would stop serving alcohol at 11pm, 90 minutes earlier than previously, on the basis that it was not upholding its objectives in terms of preventing public nuisance.
A noise-management plan would be drawn up with environmental health officers to put a stop to excessive noise from music and customers.
The committee found “no evidence of undermining public safety or protection of children from harm”.
