COMPENSATION of £110,000 is being paid to Poole Council because the Dolphin Quays apartment complex was built beyond its agreed limits.
Balconies at the front of the building jut out up to two metres more than they should - encroaching above council-owned land.
The discrepancy was discovered after the complex was built and led to lengthy discussions as the council sought recompense.
Only when the issue was taken to mediation did the authority and PriceWaterhouseCooper, official receivers following the collapse of developer Orb Estates, reach a financial settlement.
The final sum has been described as "risible" by David Howard, of the Parkstone Bay Association, who has been quizzing the council on the matter.
But council chief executive John McBride is satisfied the authority secured the best compensation deal particularly when compared with an earlier prospect of getting nothing at all.
The overhanging balconies do not impinge on the public access along the quayside and the council has agreed to rent the narrow strip of land beneath the balconies for a peppercorn rent alongside the £110,000 compensation.
"I am very happy to see this reach a satisfactory conclusion that is for the benefit of council tax payers," said Mr McBride.
"I'm pleased with the advice and support from our barristers and the district valuer and pleased that we worked constructively with the other side to reach a satisfactory outcome."
Permission was given in 2001 for the building's underground foundations to stretch out beneath council-owned land on the quayside.
But it was only when the hoardings came down in 2003 as the building neared completion that it was found the balconies above were also impinging beyond the agreed planning permission boundary.
The discrepancy is an average of one metre, but in some places balconies are up to two metres out.
Mr Howard said: "I'm totally gobsmacked that no checks were carried out until the building was nearly completed."
Lew Wood, of the Alliance of Residents' Association, said: "If this had been handled properly from the outset we would not have got to this settlement, which - let's face it - is peanuts, and we would not have had all the expense of officer time used dealing with this and legal advice taken."
But Mr McBride maintained: "Had we agreed this at the time they were being built we would not have got a better deal."
First published: Oct 21
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article