Latest news with #planningPermission
Irish Times
a day ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Minister seeks to ease fears of Airbnb hosts over new short-term letting rules
Minister for Housing James Browne has said Airbnb hosts on the west coast will have 90 days per year where they will not need planning permission under a new law. Mr Browne claimed that many people in parts of Kerry, Clare and Mayo who will come under new short-term letting rules this weekend live in the homes that they are renting out and so will be unaffected by a new law. Earlier this week The Irish Times revealed that when Rent Pressure Zones (RPZs) become national, popular tourist destinations that had not previously required planning permission for short-term lets now will. It prompted concern from Minister of State Michael Healy-Rae, as all of Co Kerry will now require planning permission for Airbnb-style accommodation when it did not previously. READ MORE Mr Browne told RTÉ radio's Morning Ireland 'that's the current law'. 'Every time a rent pressure zone is extended, the planning requirements kick in for short-term lets,' he said. Asked about the effect this would have on big tourism areas like Kerry, Clare, Galway and Mayo, Mr Browne said: 'a lot of them actually, the families live in the homes'. 'It's really important for those families to know that if you live in the home and you're renting out rooms, that [planning permission rule] doesn't apply,' he said. 'When this law passes, you have 90 days within a calendar year that you can rent your property out, that you don't need planning permission, so you're not going to see anybody even considering it for several months.' He said that he and Minister for Enterprise Peter Burke are bringing in 'very strict new laws' for short-term lets that will ban new planning permission for short-term lets in towns with a population of more than 10,000. 'So all of this is going to be resolved over the coming months anyway under the short-term lets plan,' he said. The Minister was also interviewed on Newstalk Breakfast where he said the new legislation would give more protection to renters. 'Renters are going through an awful lot of pain at the moment – rents are too high and I have to think of not only the renters that are currently renting but those who are home in their box rooms, in their parents' homes, who need somewhere to rent where there is no housing for them to go out and rent or to buy for that matter. So what we've taken is measures to increase that supply level. 'If we continue doing what we're doing, the pain will continue to grow as well. So I'm very conscious of the pain that everybody's going through out there who are renting and those who need somewhere to buy as well,' the Minister said. 'So the decisions I'm making this week is about increasing supply, because the only way we're going to address the cost of houses, the only way we are going to adjust the cost for renting, the way we were going to get homeless numbers down is by increasing that supply,' he told Newstalk Breakfast.
BBC News
12-06-2025
- BBC News
Travellers ordered to leave Pulborough caravan site launch appeal
A family of travellers who turned a field in West Sussex into a caravan site have launched an appeal after being told they must Keet laid hardstanding and built waste tanks on land off Stall House Lane, near Pulborough, before installing caravans on 18 were called to intervene after clashes between the travellers and local residents, but no further action was District Council said it already has "a number" of existing traveller and gypsy sites, and that it had rejected retrospective planning from Mr Keets because of potential harm to the area and a nearby listed building. The land is jointly owned by Mr Keet, Tony Castle and William Hughes, and there are currently two static caravans and two touring caravans on moving onto the land, they sought retrospective planning permission for four static caravans and four touring the council has rejected the application "due to concerns that the extent of the development was harmful to the rural character of the countryside location and to the setting of an adjacent listed building".The authority then served an enforcement notice ordering the owners to remove the caravans and return the land to how it was before they moved in within six three landowners have appealed against the order, claiming the site is well screened and not visible from the road or other properties."You'd be chucking me and the kids on the side of the road in a caravan with a generator if I couldn't live here, same for my brother," said Mr Keet. Shortage of traveller sites Elizabeth Pleasant, from the planning inspectorate, heard from residents opposed to the development and council planning officers as well as the travellers, their agent and their Rudd, the barrister for the owners, said they had intentionally developed the land without permission, but said the law allows for retrospective applications and appeals."The impact from this development on the landscape is limited and can be reduced with planning conditions," he Rudd also said there was "significant need" for places for travellers to live.A review carried out for the council last year concluded that 80 pitches for travellers and gypsies should be provided over the next five years and 128 by Mr Castle said the council have "little interest" in finding sites for travellers and gypsies."We're trying to create homes for our community that the local authority is failing to do," he Hughes added: "It's down to us and it's hard to find a site that's not in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a flood zone or a protected area, and if we do find one, developers want it for housing and pay millions."The planning inspector will decide whether to uphold the appeal in about four weeks. The council accepted that there is a need for additional traveller sites, but said: "This application was refused due to concerns that the extent of the development was harmful to the rural character of the countryside location and to the setting an adjacent listed building, and therefore contrary to relevant planning policies.""The council reserves its position on any further planning enforcement action until after the planning inspector's decision is received on both appeals."
Daily Mail
05-06-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
Are we allowed an 8ft fence for privacy? Our neighbour says we've broken planning rules
Last month, my wife and I decided to replace the fences on either side of our garden. We've wanted to do it for ages to make the garden more private. Given the original fences were only 4ft, we always felt very overlooked when either of our neighbours were in their garden. Plus the children of one family are always bouncing on a trampoline, which feels even more intrusive. We asked both our neighbours if they were interested in contributing towards a bigger fence but both said they were not bothered. We mentioned that we might go ahead with it anyway and they seemed relaxed about it. We decided to buy 8ft fence panels that we found advertised online to give us maximum privacy and had our local handyman install them, which saved money. Now one of our neighbours is complaining that not only have we removed their fence, which we apparently had no right to do, but that our new fence is so high we should have got planning permission. They said that if we don't reinstall the old fence they are going to report us to the council. What should we do? And is there any legal protection under our right to privacy? Also, is there a way to find out if the fence boundary belongs to us and would that give us any protection? Let's double it: Our reader felt a four foot fence was an insufficient privacy screen, so they replaced it with an eight foot fence without getting planning permission Ed Magnus, of This is Money, replies: When it comes to neighbours winding each other up, garden fences are a common cause. In the past, we have had questions about a neighbour stealing someone's garden and a dog jumping up at a fence so relentlessly that it was in danger of knocking it down. The height of a fence may seem an issue that wouldn't cause dispute, but I fear you may have acted a little too hastily in opting for these eight foot fence panels. A quick search online would have revealed that anything above two metres (6.5 feet) typically requires planning permission, so your neighbour is probably right. Trying to find a fair and reasonable solution with your neighbour should always be the first course of action. But not everyone likes being fair and reasonable – particularly when it is a matter concerning their home. For expert advice we spoke to Olivia Egdell-Page, a partner and head of the property department at Joseph A Jones & Co solicitors, Mike Hansom, a consultant for property litigation at BLB Solicitors, and Chun Wong, head of dispute resolution at Hodge Jones & Allen. Will you need to replace the fence? Olivia Egdell-Page replies: It is clear that you did attempt to seek agreement here, however, it may be that the neighbours' objections are now based on the height of the new boundary fence, rather than the act of replacement. In terms of the boundary structures, planning permission is not required if you erect a new fence or replace an existing fence where the height does not exceed two metres. If you are replacing a fence which exceeds two metres in height, you can replace this on a like for like basis, provided the height would not be increase. On that basis, it does seem that planning permission should be obtained, as the height of the fence has been increased from four to eight feet. Alternatively, you may consider reducing the height of the fence to the maximum height of two metres, however consideration must be given to the planning regime in the area and if there are any additional controls imposed on the property, for example if the property is listed or located within a conservation area. Mike Hansom adds: The general rule - unless you live in a conservation area or a listed building - is that a fence can be a maximum height of one metre if it faces a road or two metres otherwise. Therefore, an eight foot (2.44 metre) fence requires planning permission. To comply with the law you should probably install panels no taller than two metres. If you did not do this, the local authority - but probably not your neighbour - has the power to enforce planning law. What if the neighbour proves it was their fence? Mike Hansom replies: If your neighbours can prove that the original fence belonged to them, then whether you need to restore it to its original condition depends on precisely what was agreed. If your neighbours expressly consented to your removal of the fence on the condition that you would cover the cost of its replacement, they cannot renege on that agreement, although they can still take issue with its height via the council. If they were merely silent, you may need to replace the fence, as silence cannot, in law, be construed as consent. In that case you could erect a new six foot fence on your side of the existing fence. If you explain this to your neighbour, they may have a change of heart, as their view over your garden would be reduced in any event. Do they have any rights of privacy? Chun Wong replies: There is no absolute law which provides for a right to privacy in a garden especially against private individuals. However, if something your neighbours are doing causing a nuisance this could give rise to a claim for statutory nuisance. A starting point to remember though is that a fence is not necessary indicative or definitive of actual legal boundaries between properties. A fence is just a physical boundary on the ground. A legal boundary is an imaginary or invisible line which divides one's land from another's. What's the best thing to do about a fence dispute? Chun Wong replies: Where possible it is always best to try and resolve any issues you have with your neighbour amicably. You have to see them day in and day out so it is best to keep relations civil. In addition, if a dispute is escalated you may have to disclose this to any potential buyer if you are considering a sale in the near future. You could also consider a more structured and formal alternative dispute resolution such as mediation. The Property Litigation Association and Rics have launched a new mediation service to help neighbours resolve disputes over their property boundaries without resorting to court action - the Boundary Disputes Mediation Service In the event that you really cannot resolve the matter, then proper legal advice should be sought at an early stage before you embark on any self-help which could make matters worse or prejudice your position. You should check whether you have the benefit of Legal Expense Insurance as part of your home, contents, or motor insurance which may provide some indemnity for legal costs in these types of cases. You could consider a hedge... Mike Hansom replies: It is common for deeds to be unclear about who owns the fence. If it cannot be demonstrated one way or the other, the legal position is the new fence panels belong to you. You are entitled to inform the neighbour they are not to remove or damage your panels, as to do so could amount to criminal damage. Although not an instant solution, another option is to plant a hedge next to the fence, if space permits. Again you must check for the existence of planning conditions or restrictive covenants in your deeds, but in general there is no planning restriction on the maximum height of a hedge. The exception is the Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003, sometimes known as the 'High Hedges Act' which legislates against hedges comprising two or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs over 2 metres in height. A hedge of native deciduous planting would not fall foul of the legislation, can grow quickly and would soon provide added privacy, as well as a habitat for wildlife. What punishment could they face if they refuse to lower the fence? Mike Hansom adds: The amount of the fine depends what part of the enforcement process has been breached, and how severe is the breach. However many breaches, including non-compliance with a planning enforcement notice, give rise to criminal liability and an unlimited fine. Best mortgage rates and how to find them Mortgage rates have risen substantially over recent years, meaning that those remortgaging or buying a home face higher costs. That makes it even more important to search out the best possible rate for you and get good mortgage advice, whether you are a first-time buyer, home owner or buy-to-let landlord. Quick mortgage finder links with This is Money's partner L&C > Mortgage rates calculator > Find the right mortgage for you To help our readers find the best mortgage, This is Money has partnered with the UK's leading fee-free broker L&C. This is Money and L&C's mortgage calculator can let you compare deals to see which ones suit your home's value and level of deposit. You can compare fixed rate lengths, from two-year fixes, to five-year fixes and ten-year fixes. If you're ready to find your next mortgage, why not use This is Money and L&C's online Mortgage Finder. It will search 1,000's of deals from more than 90 different lenders to discover the best deal for you.
Daily Mail
31-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 'My neighbours hate me... but I don't care!': Woman at war with whole village over her 'HS2 tunnel' house wins bitter planning battle
A farmer whose controversial new Teletubby-style eco home caused her own tight-knit village to ostracize her for 'bringing HS2' to their idyll has finally won her planning battle, saying: 'It's a bit like Putin and Ukraine - we should have just had a talk.' Defiant June Titterton-Fox has been granted retrospective permission to continue building her dream house in an idyllic village in Rutland which juts out of a hill in much the same way a piece of tunneling from the cursed infrastructure project does. However this has come with the fury of some neighbours who say the 'out of place' property looks 'absolutely horrible' and should never have been allowed. During a recent council meeting - where planners voted in favour of the scheme with one objection and one abstention - it was revealed that Mrs Titterton-Fox had breached rules and built it bigger than she had been granted permission for. But instead of launching 'enforcing action against her,' officers from Rutland County Council - where the rare breeds farmer was a former councillor - worked with her to seek a resolution. This month jubilant Mrs Titterton-Fox, 65, speaking from her smallholding in posh Whitwell in The Midlands, told MailOnline: 'I've got retrospective planning permission and I am really pleased. 'But it could have been so much better if people in the village, who objected to what I am doing, had spoken directly to me instead of holding secret meetings and not inviting me.' She said the long-running fight with some of her neighbours, whom she had previously counted as close friends and socialised with and branded 'just vicious, horrible people,' had taken its toll on her health and she has lost two stone in weight because of 'all the stress.' As she was nursing a poorly lamb and awaiting a vet's visit, she said: 'It's victory for me but it's a shame it's has taken so long and caused so much aggravation. 'I've won the war but it should have been finished a lot sooner. It's a bit like Putin and Ukraine, if we had just sat down and talked, me and those objecting neighbours, we could have found a solution a lot quicker. 'There's only 25 houses here and half are on the warpath!' Fellow residents in the tiny village - which is twinned with Paris and has two dozen homes - have been divided over the £800,000 three-bedroom home set into a hillside of a six-acre field she owns. She had applied for planning content in 2020 and claimed her unique property Field House would be one of the most energy-efficient properties in Britain. But the plans faced opposition from villagers who said the 'garish Hobbit house' looked 'more like something from Teletubby Land', and planners refused the application for the single-storey home in 2021. Council officers said the development was 'unacceptable' and would be 'visually intrusive and impact adversely on the form and character of the area'. But Mrs Titterton-Fox appealed, and Planning Inspector Dominic Young, clearly impressed by her plans, ruled: 'The state-of-the-art property has been carefully and sensitively designed to the most exacting environmental standards.' He added: 'Given the dwelling would be built into the hillside with no part of its structure protruding above the natural topography - it would have very little impact,' adding that the design had the 'wow factor.' Having cleared one hurdle Mrs Titterton-Fox then faced further obstacles as locals complained she had breach regulations, building the property 1.2 metres higher than approved, adding two extra rooms at each end to be used as an ensuite bathroom and a plant room, and changing the frosted widows size and design, Councillor Kiloran told the recent meeting: 'Residents contacted enforcement because the building did not look like the plans approved on appeal. 'It had an impact on locals living nearby and has impact on heritage.' She urged: 'This application should be rejected for Rutland and for the country. It certainly lacks the wow factor and is in breach of planning.' Retired publican Julie Healey, who has lived in the desirable village for decades, believes the eco house - which is yet to be screened and landscaped - 'looks out of place' and is 'absolutely horrible.' The great grandmother added: 'I cannot believe this has been allowed to happen in a village like this. 'I can only see the house from one bedroom and my paddock so it is not too bad for me but a few of my neighbours overlook it directly and the occupants will be able to look into their bedrooms.' Widowed Mrs Healey, 86, who used to run the next Noel pub with her late husband for 18 years until 1997, told how the eco home had 'spilt the village.' She said: 'People on my side are against it because it is right ion front of them but those on the other side of the road are not so concerned.' She said she and fellow villagers 'always used to socialise' with Mrs Titterton-Fox and her husband Andrew but don't now, saying: 'It has caused a rift and I rarely see her now.' Simon and Beverley Jackson, whose home overlooks the distinctive build likened to the famous pre-school children's TV show, claims the windows face directly into their bedroom and bathroom, destroying their privacy. Mrs Jackson, a semi-retired MD of a legal services firm, said: 'It is an eyesore and when people move in it will be even more so! 'But at the end of the day she's won and we have to live with it. I thought it would go that way, in her favour. 'She used to be a local councillor and she has a few friends there. 'We're not happy but we fought our case and she won. It is what it is and there's nothing we can really do. 'Getting retrospective planning permission is the final straw.' She said it was too early to say if residents would challenge the decision as they would need to spend 'lots more money' seeking a judicial review. Devastated Mrs Jackson, who now feels like selling up her beautiful £1.2 million home, a converted farm grain store, said: 'It is a massive intrusion. It was meant to be built into sunken hollow ground but it sticks out like a sore thumb, and it is farcical. 'I hate living here now. I wake up every morning and see that monstrosity staring back at me from my bed. 'I go to my ensuite to take a shower and I see it, I go to my dressing and make-up room to get ready for work and I see it. 'I go downstairs to my kitchen and lounge and I still see it. It is horrendous.' 'No one around here likes it.' She added: ''The building should be disguised by greenery, it should be covered, but most importantly it should be much lower in height. 'It makes a mockery of the planning system. 'There needs to be trees, evergreens, and landscaping put in pace, and the new gabion structure on the right side needs to mirror the other.' She said that the eco home owner, who like her has lived in the village for 20 years - a beauty spot near Oakhame village lies which boasts the first memorial statue to the late Queen, and historic Stamford in neighbouring Cambridgeshire - 'used to be a friend of mine but I don't speak to her now.' Her insurance broker husband Simon previously fumed: 'There is no getting away from it. When people are living there they will be able to see us in bed and see us in the shower. That is an invasion of our space and privacy, and is alarming. We feel sick.' Another neighbour, who declined to be named, said retrospective plans being given the green light was 'very sad. The woman, whose home overlooks it from a height, said: 'Is it an outstanding an innovative build, no, and it is certainly no Grand Designs building. 'It was a breach of planning law and she did not meet the criteria and there has since been seven rounds of consultation by planning officers who then recommend the council approved it. 'There were a lot of objections but locals have been ignored - our views have not been taken into account. 'It is not an attractive building and spoils the view in our pretty, historic village, which has some listed buildings. 'And now a tall black ugly chimney flue has gone up on the roof.' She added: 'But she got it, fair play, and what can we do apart from spending £30,000 on a judicial review.' The house, which is inhabitable, is still worked on and the owner hopes it will be completed and ready to move into by late summer. Mrs Titterton-Fox and her husband Andrew, 60, a civil engineer with Transport for London, are living in a caravan on site. She told our website: 'We've not done anything to it really because this planning row has dragged on, apart from putting flooring down and plastering and painting the walls. 'It still cannot be lived in, there's electricity but no water and not kitchen or bathrooms but they are no on order and we are hoping to move in by late August-September. 'The house is not any higher but a little bit wider and build into the wings. 'All this stress has been very traumatic and I've lost two stone in weight. 'There's been a lot of negativity and toxicity in the village and one resident has been harassing me, posting against me on social media and keeps videoing me because I'm building a new house.' 'There have been lots of negative posts by one individual and I have had to report it to police.' Mrs Titterton-Fox told how neighbours 'jealous of my dream home' had led her to halting her buildings work and has only made matters worse. But after working amicably with council officers to find a solution to meet planning rules, and make amendment, she assured fellow residents: 'Wait till you see the finished house! 'It will be all landscaped with trees and plants, and is even planted with wild flowed and white daisies on the roof, and you won't even know we're there! 'Complaints that our build is too high are ridiculous and in time it will be almost totally hidden from view, the house will disappear behind screening. 'I can the end of the light of the tunnel.' The couple own another £750,000 five-bed house in the village - their former family home - which they are renting out as an Airbnb and have recently sold. The twice-wed farmer said: 'We finally have a buyer but all the negativity about our new eco home has made it difficult to sell. 'Prospective buyers have said they've read all about me and the planning battle and commented: 'What terrible neighbours you have. 'I have lived in this beautiful village bedside Rutland Water for 24 years. I am a small holder with animals and livestock, and no one will speak to me anymore. I have done nothing wrong.' The Council's Development Manager Justin Johnson, who had previously taken members on a site visit of the property on land off Exton Road Whitwell Conservation Area, told the meeting: 'We investigated on behalf of out own enforcement team. 'The dwelling is larger that permitted with two additional rooms and a black flue has been erected to serve a wood burner. 'But there will be tree planting to provide further screening and the building will one earth covered and seeded.' He advised that the property did not impact in 'neighbours or amenities.' He said the retrospective amended plans included gabion walling, landscaping and excavation to the rear for car parking. 'It does not impact the setting of the Grade II listed Church of St Michael or the Home Farmhouse. 'Due to maintained separation distances, there will be no loss of privacy, or oppressive environment for neighbouring properties. 'It raises the design standards in the ares and has minimal visual impact, with only glimpsed views from nearby public roads and footpaths.' 'The development will not lead to increased flood risk in the area.
Irish Times
27-05-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Minister insists no ‘free pass' for builders who get planning permission extensions
Builders will not get a 'free pass' and there is a 'use it or lose it' provision in Government proposals to allow for planning permission extensions for delayed housing developments, Minister for Housing James Browne has insisted. Under the proposals for emergency legislation, approved by Cabinet on Tuesday, developers would be able to seek extensions to planning permissions in cases where building work has been delayed by judicial review proceedings or access to finance or infrastructure constraints. The measure is a bid to activate developments such as large-scale apartments that might otherwise go beyond their permission timeline and lapse. Mr Browne said almost 15,800 residential units have gone through judicial review and got the go ahead to proceed but have had the duration of their planning permission eroded as a result. READ MORE He said he believes that while judicial reviews are a legitimate part of Ireland's legal process, they have 'been weaponised by some people' in the hope that if a project is delayed long enough it will fail. Minister of State with responsibility for planning John Cummins said allowing extensions is a 'practical and common sense measure to ensure that sufficient time is given to activate planning permissions for much needed housing across the country'. Social Democrats housing spokesman Rory Hearne responded to the Government's plans by saying he is concerned that the measure will 'incentivise land and property speculation rather than actually getting homes built'. He added: 'We believe there should be a use it or lose it approach to planning permission rather than this extension.' Mr Browne later said there is a 'use it or lose it' element, with a requirement that developments commence within 18 months of the legislation passing. He said: 'This is not a free pass for people who have planning permissions.' Mr Browne said commencement notices are 'a legal step' where developers 'must notify the local authority that they're actually about to start that work' and that 'you actually should be putting shovels in the ground'. He also said: 'once you sign a commencement, it's actually very difficult to withdraw it'. He added: 'I'd expect developers here to act in good faith. If they don't commence, they won't get the extension of time.' He confirmed at a press conference that there will be no penalties for someone that gets the extension but does not develop the land. Mr Browne said bringing in penalties would be 'very challenging' legally given protections relating to land under the Constitution but also said this would be kept under review. The intention is for the legislation to be completed before the Dáil summer recess.
