Latest news with #planningPermission
The Independent
08-07-2025
- Entertainment
- The Independent
Pink Floyd guitarist caught in planning row over ‘obtrusive' garden shed
Pink Floyd's guitarist is caught in a planning row with his neighbours over claims his new garden shed is 'obtrusive' and 'overbearing'. David Gilmour built a green shed in his garden in Hampstead after demolishing a summer house and later asked for retrospective planning permission. But his application has sparked calls from The Hampstead Hill Gardens Residents' Association to remove the shed on the grounds that it is obstructive. The local residents group argued in a letter published on Camden Council 's planning website that the new shed is 'significantly more visually and physically intrusive than what was originally approved or what stood there before'. The residents group said the shed has been built against the boundary fence, unlike the previous building, which they claim was built two metres away and called for it to be 'removed as soon as possible'. Residents added in the letter: 'We urge the Council to resist being misled by this retrospective rationalisation and to refuse this application. 'Allowing it would be a signal to all applicants that they can ignore the terms of their permissions.' A neighbour also responding to the retrospective application said because the shed was built up against the back garden wall, there was no opportunity for it to be blocked from view by vegetation. Another resident of Hampstead Hill Gardens said: 'The applicant's garden is long and ours is very short which makes this stand out all the more. You can see why they want the shed at the fence, but their gain is our loss.' The Hampstead Neighbourhood Forum has also asked for a gap behind the shed for wildlife to pass by and to provide space for planting. 'The proposal does not include any works affecting the fabric of the listed building,' Mr Gilmour's application said. 'The replacement of these two buildings with a single well-designed new garden shed would have less impact than the previous arrangement. 'The proposed shed of high-quality design and build and is appropriate in this location.' The application added: 'The shed is painted green to minimise its visual impact. As such, the modest size of the shed, good design and colouring mean that there would not be any harm to the setting of the listed building or that of neighbouring listed buildings. 'Nor would the proposal adversely impact the character of the conservation area.'
Telegraph
25-06-2025
- General
- Telegraph
‘I spent £180k on garden flat I now have to tear down'
An IT engineer has been ordered to tear down a £180,000 bungalow he built in his garden without planning permission. Mark Jones, 55, replaced an old garage in his back garden with a two-bedroom 'granny flat' and hooked up the electricity, water and internet to his house in March 2019. The 83-square-metre annex, featuring a kitchen, two bedrooms, a bathroom and storeroom, was completed six months later. He did not apply for planning permission, believing it was legal owing to its size and the utilities being connected to the main house. Mr Jones hoped his ill father Tony, 71, would move into the property in Sutton Coldfield, West Midlands, but he died of bowel cancer months later so it was used by his grown-up daughter and her boyfriend during the Covid lockdowns. But after three neighbours complained, claiming it was 'over intensive', Birmingham city council ordered him to tear it down in 2021. Mr Jones said he believed the building complied with planning laws and lodged a retrospective planning application. The plan was rejected and, despite making a second application, he was told the property broke planning regulations. He has been ordered to demolish the bungalow by the end of the month or face possible further legal action. Mr Jones, who moved into the building after he and his wife divorced, said he will be homeless if he is forced to demolish the building. The father-of-two said: 'The bungalow was within the permitted development rights and could have habitable rooms. It was meant for my father and reliant on the main house.' He said because several nearby properties had two-storey buildings in their gardens 'I thought it was fine' and saw his original £60,000 plans double after adding in a kitchen. Mr Jones completed the inside and appealed to the planning inspectorate after being warned he needed planning permission. But in February 2021 the inspector refused and said the bungalow was 'alien' to the area. Mr Jones said: 'There is no public interest in taking the bungalow down, so I don't know why they're making me. You look at other houses on the street and I can't see why we wouldn't get permission for it. 'It was never meant to be a separate building, it was supposed to be part of the main house. It doesn't have its own water, internet, council tax or waste. 'It is still part of the main house. I should've waited for planning permission but people can see why I haven't. I was in a hurry to get my dad moved in.' Accusing the council of 'bullying' him, he used Google maps to investigate his neighbour's gardens and 'thought it was safe'. 'Loads of people have done this. If I tear it down I've got nowhere else to go so I'll probably be on the streets. To me the council is bullying me.' Mr Jones has applied for a new permitted development certificate application with the council. Even if it is granted, he will still have to tear down the original bungalow and build it again to comply with the council's rules. A spokesman for Birmingham city council said: 'Mr Jones is currently in breach of the enforcement notice that was served to him in 2021, and we have given him ample time to comply with the notice by the end of June 2025. 'A decision will be made imminently on the lawful development certificate that Mr Jones has submitted, and a case officer will then be in contact with him to advise further.'
The Sun
23-06-2025
- Business
- The Sun
Neighbours say our swish new porch ‘makes home look like a shopping centre' – but they're just jealous of our mansion
A FAMILY says their neighbours are 'jealous' following complaints that their new porch looks more like a 'giant shopping complex' than a home. Proud homeowner Aysha Khanom has hit back at her Oldham neighbours who have gone to the council about her 'monstrosity' extension, which was built without planning permission. 3 3 Ms Kanhom, who shares the property with the rest of her family, was made to pay £2,000 after a retrospective planning request for the swish new porch was rejected. Angry neighbours have claimed that this new addition to the semi-detached property, which features two 2.4 metre high columns and a tiled roof, was 'more in keeping with the Roman pillars of the Trafford centre'. Residents also protested to the council that it 'sticks out like a sore thumb', dubbing the porch an ' eyesore.' Oldham Council received 23 formal objections. Ms Kanhom's son, Mohammed, 21, is now claiming that these neighbours are simply 'jealous' of their large home. He explained the family-of-nine moved from a "bad area" and saved up to build "the house of dreams". Mohammed told the MailOnline: 'Some people are just jealous because our home makes theirs look small. "Personally, I wouldn't even care if my neighbour painted his house yellow." 'There's nine of us living here, so we need a big home for our family.' However, local resident Ian Rees, 69, said the porch "jutted out a long way", adding that the builders also "left a lot of rubbish piled up" on the grass opposite. I came home to find my nightmare neighbour knocking down my DOOR – he claimed it was his right to do it Mohammed went on to reveal the family plans to build another "even bigger" property on some nearby land and turn it into an AirBnB, which may cause further friction with their neighbours due to the potential parking issues and more. The family already own another home, restaurant and car hire firm in Dubai. The Chadderton Hall Road house has already had applications for a dormer, a two-storey side and rear extension and a children's play house approved. One neighbour said the porch is "the final straw", with the property described as already "overdeveloped". Oldham Council initially drew the line at the porch proposals in December 2022. According to a report, it was an 'overly dominant and incongruous addition to the existing property'. It read: 'It would cause a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene, largely owing to its prominent and unduly conspicuous appearance.' Ms Khanom appeal and submitted revised plans in March 2023 but the plans were again refused. After a further appeal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate, the homeowner defied an enforcement notice to either remove the porch or reduce its size. This failure to comply saw the council take her to Tameside Magistrates' Court last month. Here, she admitted to breaching the enforcement notice and was ordered to pay £1,050 costs, a £500 fine and £200 victim surcharge. Alternative plans for the porch have since been approved by the council, which sees the removal of the two large pillars - which have been replaced with wooden supports. But not all neighbours were upset by the porch, with one woman - who did not wish to be named - saying the developments "never bothered me" and accused some residents of worrying "about some things too much". The Sun has reached out to the council for comment.
Irish Times
19-06-2025
- 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."
