Council approves Highcliffe director’s golf simulator cabin despite objections
BCP Council has granted planning permission for Highcliffe company director Pete Bransky to keep a large garden cabin fitted with a golf simulator, despite neighbours’ objections. The dispute has raised concerns about how the council assessed the structure, which residents say exceeds permitted development limits and was built close to fences and protected trees.
The timber cabin measures 23ft by 13.5ft and is soundproofed for indoor golf. Neighbours allege that earlier plans gave inaccurate height information and say the building risks fire and has affected tree roots; a parish council representative also objected. Bransky says the extra space is needed to swing a golf club and that the cabin is insulated and used only occasionally. The council advised him to have a tree surgeon check nearby trees within two years.
- BCP Council approved the golf simulator cabin.
- Neighbours dispute its size and planning history.
- The council advised checks on nearby trees.
New here? Start with this
A Highcliffe company director has been given permission to keep a timber garden cabin fitted with a golf simulator on his property. The structure, measuring 23 feet by 13.5 feet, belongs to Pete Bransky and is soundproofed for indoor golf. The council's approval came after a period of local dispute, with neighbours and a parish representative objecting to the building.
Residents objected on several grounds. They claim the cabin exceeds the size limit for structures that do not require formal planning permission, and argue that an earlier application gave inaccurate information about the building's height. Neighbours have also raised concerns about its closeness to garden fences and protected trees, and worry about fire safety and potential damage to tree roots.
The dispute highlights concerns about how councils assess residential structures and enforce planning standards. Bransky argues the cabin's size is necessary for swinging a golf club and points out that the building is well-insulated and used only occasionally. The council's approval included a requirement for a tree inspection within two years.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The council has approved the structure after due review, and the property owner's need for adequate space to use the facility is genuinely legitimate. The building is properly insulated and used only occasionally, minimising practical impact on neighbours, and the owner has cooperated with reasonable safeguards including tree surveys. Private citizens should be entitled to enjoy reasonable recreational facilities on their own property when they meet planning requirements and safety standards.
The case against
The approval's reliability is questionable given allegations that earlier plans contained inaccurate information about the building's height, raising concerns about whether the council's assessment was sufficiently rigorous. The cabin's proximity to protected trees, fences and residences, combined with fire safety concerns, suggests the decision may have underweighted legitimate community and environmental interests in favour of one resident's convenience. Environmental protections and safety standards should be actively ensured rather than merely hoped for through future surveys.
Art Business Companies Culture World
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Neighbours are teed off after company director gets to keep giant garden shed that houses his state-of-the-art golf simulator”.