A NEW wall adjacent to a Dorchester shop remains at risk of having to be demolished.

Dorset Council decided the new wall should not have been built without planning permission.

It belongs to the owner of a flat above the Kings Road One Stop store and was built as part of a scheme to tidy the area and create a new, small, garden. The structure is liked by many, including several town councillors.

An initial planning application was rejected by Dorset Council and now a second planning application, making changes by removing the timber fence topping and reducing the height of a gate, has now also been rejected.

Planning permission should have been sought to replace the old wall, made of stone and Broadmayne brick, because the site lies within a Conservation Area.

Instead the wall was torn down and replaced with a brick wall and a timber fence topping, before planning consent was asked for.

The company carrying out the work said they found the original boundary wall in an unsafe condition, leaning out towards the public pavement, telling Dorset Council planning officers: "During the landscaping works the wall was found to be unstable with no foundation and to avoid it collapsing fully it was taken down. Materials were set aside but they were not reusable due to their poor condition."

Planning rules covering all the town's conservation areas have been in place for several years to protect walls, railings and fences – in an attempt to stop people pulling down historic features, often to create parking spaces for cars.

A Dorset Council conservation officer report proposed the new wall be demolished because of the 'harm' it causes to the conservation area:

"The wall will need to be removed, if the original brocks and stones can be salvaged these will need to be reinstated. If not, a planning application will be needed to build a wall with matching bricks and stones as close as can be reasonably found. The fencing should also be removed and the modern gate."

Another council officer said the new wall creates "a visual juxtaposition against the attached neighbouring wall due to the differences in texture and colour of the modern materials used. The wall is not in keeping with the site, nor locality, and is in a relatively prominent position on a corner plot.

"It is clear that the original wall contributed to the character of the area and its removal and reconstruction using a modern style and materials does not preserve or enhance the special character of the conservation area."