Practise area boundary netting

[AAC]

We have an issue with our practise area, an adjacent owner has been granted permission to build a large house on ground which borders our practise area, he has removed our trees which previously sheltered his land to improve his view (tree removal is a separate issue which he has been made to remedy albeit poorly). We are no longer able to use drivers on the practise area in case balls go onto his property, as a club we have suggested erecting a fence, however again he doesn't want this as it will spoil his view. We can apply for planning permission to erect a fence but he will object out of hand. We could plant tree's but these will take time to grow.

Does anybody have experience on this or know of relevant case law ? It seems to be a classic case of moving next to a pig farm & complaining about the smell, however the fact that we have been there for very nearly 100 years has no bearing.

Any sensible advice would be appreciated.

AAC

 

[rulefan]

I suggest you contact the National Golf Clubs' Advisory Association https://www.ngcaa.co.uk/

 

[fundy]

We have an issue with our practise area, an adjacent owner has been granted permission to build a large house on ground which borders our practise area, he has removed our trees which previously sheltered his land to improve his view (tree removal is a separate issue which he has been made to remedy albeit poorly). We are no longer able to use drivers on the practise area in case balls go onto his property, as a club we have suggested erecting a fence, however again he doesn't want this as it will spoil his view. We can apply for planning permission to erect a fence but he will object out of hand. We could plant tree's but these will take time to grow.

Does anybody have experience on this or know of relevant case law ? It seems to be a classic case of moving next to a pig farm & complaining about the smell, however the fact that we have been there for very nearly 100 years has no bearing.

Any sensible advice would be appreciated.

AAC

Hope you fair better than The Bedford or Millbrook, both have had to compromise their course because of houses nearby

 

[Deleted member 29109]

IIRC There is no such thing as a right to a view in planning.

Put in a watertight application and let him contest it. If the planning committee play by the rules, they should only listen to objections that are against regs for the work you want to do.

 

[CliveW]

One of my old clubs had an issue with a new owner who had bought a property situated behind one of the greens. Although there was netting between the properties he insisted that the club relocate the green to prevent wayward balls entering his property. After years of legal wrangling, it went to the Court of Session and it was ruled that although the house was over 100 years old, the course was older and therefore the ruling was made in favour of he Club. It was also stated that the house owner knew the green was there when he bought the house so had no case in Scottish Law.

 

[AAC]

One of my old clubs had an issue with a new owner who had bought a property situated behind one of the greens. Although there was netting between the properties he insisted that the club relocate the green to prevent wayward balls entering his property. After years of legal wrangling, it went to the Court of Session and it was ruled that although the house was over 100 years old, the course was older and therefore the ruling was made in favour of he Club. It was also stated that the house owner knew the green was there when he bought the house so had no case in Scottish Law.

Unfortunately I am not sure English law is the same or as sensible.

 

[chrisd]

IIRC There is no such thing as a right to a view in planning.

Put in a watertight application and let him contest it. If the planning committee play by the rules, they should only listen to objections that are against regs for the work you want to do.

I agree about "no right to a view" especially if he cut down trees not on his land to acquire said view. I'm involved in a planning application where we've had to do an impact study on sunlight and shadow impact of we build out the plan. Also, as BIM says if your application is allowed by the regs then it should get through on merit

 

[Ross61]

Hope you fair better than The Bedford or Millbrook, both have had to compromise their course because of houses nearby

The Bedford closed 18 months ago. I don’t know where at Millbrook you are talking about, nothing has changed as far as I know in the last 30 years. The only thing I can remember was the changing direction on the tee shots on the 12th hole, as it was a danger to cars on the A507.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

The Bedford closed 18 months ago. I don’t know where at Millbrook you are talking about, nothing has changed as far as I know in the last 30 years. The only thing I can remember was the changing direction on the tee shots on the 12th hole, as it was a danger to cars on the A507.

What about the tee for the 11th ?

That have been a few issues there and also the 12th beinfg near the road as well

And The Bedford had big issues with their 15th I think it was

As for the OP - you won’t win , the houses always seem to win

 

[Old Skier]

This is happening all over and usually because golf clubs are selling of areas of land to supplement their budgets without fully thinking of the consequences.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

This is happening all over and usually because golf clubs are selling of areas of land to supplement their budgets without fully thinking of the consequences.

There is planning at my club for around 30-40 houses to be built on some empty land. We have loads of spare land, it makes total sense and should have minimal impact. However there is one corner of the land that could be problematic and so I can see that the tee box on the relevant hole will need to be moved. Do it correctly, to the right and forwards 30yds, and it will become a better hole. Just move it to the right, to keep the course length the same, and balls will go into this section, complaints will come in and we will be in the same boat as the OP.

Clubs either need to think more carefully about the land they sell or accept that with it will come course changes.

 

[clubchamp98]

My last club had this problem.
The course was 100+ yrs old.
A housing development was built over 100yds from the boundary.
A car was struck by a ball allegedly and the club decided to remodel the tee / hole to play away from the danger.
I think the brains in the club knew they would not win a legal battle even though the course was there 100yrs before the houses.
They seem to take a different view in Scotland.
The law seems very skewed in this instance.
If you choose to build a house so close to a course you should not ask the club to change the course.
But clubs should not sell land for housing if it can impact them in any way in the future.

 

[AAC]

I believe that our club committee are thinking along the same lines. FYI the land wasn't ours to sell.

If we have a redundant patch of land after this I was thinking we could offer to rent it to a local pig farmer

 

[clubchamp98]

I believe that our club committee are thinking along the same lines. FYI the land wasn't ours to sell.

If we have a redundant patch of land after this I was thinking we could offer to rent it to a local pig farmer

Re the land it was just a comment on what others have said.
But some clubs are under the impression that because it’s older than the houses it will get a judgement in their favour but the law dosnt work like that. ( not in England anyway)

 

[IanM]

I was at a club once where we countered a similar move by a bloke seeking planning permission with a proposal for 2 rows of "social housing" adjacent to his site. No more was heard of it.

I suggest you contact the National Golf Clubs' Advisory Association https://www.ngcaa.co.uk/

...is the best advice. Assume nothing and avoid fights where possible.