Latest news with #buildingregulations
BBC News
3 days ago
- General
- BBC News
Interim injunction blocks Sky Building student flats from opening
An investigation has been launched into a suspected breach of building regulations at a block of student flats which was due to open in time for the new BBC understands that up to 230 students could be displaced as a result of the delayed launch at Deakin's Yard, formerly known as the Sky Building, in Newcastle-under-Lyme, Heath and Safety Executive (HSE) said it had secured an interim injunction to prevent "unlawful occupation" of the building while the matter was being investigated, adding students' welfare was the building's owner, Integritas Property Group Ltd, said it was working to address the situation and resolve things as quickly as possible. Keele University said it was supporting students affected by the issue and had a range of on-campus accommodation students were urged to contact the university directly for support.A spokesperson for the University of Staffordshire said they were aware of the issue but checks so far indicated none of its students were said: "We can confirm that the launch of Deakin's Yard has been temporarily delayed, pending the receipt of a final certificate."We are working closely with the Health and Safety Executive and the Building Inspectorate to address the matter and ensure all requirements are met."Our priority is to resolve this as quickly as possible and to ensure the building meets the highest standards of safety and compliance before launching." A spokesperson for the HSE said: "The welfare of those due to occupy the building is our primary priority."They added the HSE was working with relevant organisations to resolve the matter. Construction delays Last year, it was revealed that delays in construction meant the developer was unable to complete the building in time for the start of the 2024/25 academic had been left half-built after its previous owners went into site, formerly home to the Jubilee Baths, was sold by Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council in should have opened as a student housing complex in 2017, but work stalled due to long drawn-out disputes with owner Integritas Property Group Ltd, took the building on in November Borough Council said it was aware of the situation and was liaising with the relevant organisations to support those affected. Follow BBC Stoke & Staffordshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Irish Times
22-06-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Some local authorities inspecting ‘just 10%' of new builds for compliance with safety regulations
Enforcement of building safety regulations in Ireland is a 'key weakness', with inspections of new developments varying among local authorities, some of whom inspect 'virtually none', a construction conference has heard. The Construction Bar Association annual conference heard on Friday that local authorities require greater resources to ensure compliance with building safety regulations. Deirdre Ní Fhloinn, a barrister specialising in construction law, said statistics of historical building defects in Ireland do not suggest there were a 'few bad eggs in the industry' but instead, there was a 'systemic problem'. She cited a 2022 report that found that up to 100,000 of the 125,000 apartments built between 1991 and 2013 had defects concerning fire safety, water ingress issues or structural safety issues. READ MORE The total cost of repairing the homes is estimated to be in the billions, with Ms Ní Fhloinn saying the taxpayer has become the 'insurer of last resort for building defects'. Noting that rules and regulations were adequate at the time of their construction, Ms Ní Fhloinn said enforcement was a 'huge part' of the problem. Speaking on the value of 'robust regulation', she welcomed the fact that Government approval has been received to draft a general scheme to establish a Building Standards Regulatory Authority. She said about a quarter of new buildings are being inspected by local authorities, adding that this figure itself is inflated by larger authorities that inspect upwards of 70 to 80 per cent of new buildings. On the other hand, some authorities are inspecting 'virtually none', she said. Property developer Michael O'Flynn, meanwhile, said building control regulations in Ireland have 'great standards' but agreed enforcement of the regulations was a 'key weakness'. Inspection levels vary significantly among local authorities, he said, with some inspecting just 10 per cent of new buildings. 'There is no huge shortage of existing regulation, the question is, is it happening? Are people doing what they're supposed to be doing?' 'Local authorities are inspecting, unfortunately, a very low percentage. There has to be a consistent standard,' he said, adding that resourcing and upskilling is a must to ensure adequate enforcement. Mr O'Flynn added that there is currently no balance between regulation and planning, saying the Irish planning system was suffering from an 'existing enormous backlog'. He cited 2023 figures in which 22,000 housing planning applications were caught in a backlog in An Bord Pleanála , which had an average waiting time of 79 weeks. He described waiting times generally as 'quite frightening' and a 'really serious issue'. 'Our planning system is in a very bad place,' he said. 'We can't ignore these things, because if we do, we will continue to fail a generation of people who are unable to buy homes,' he said.
Mail & Guardian
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
International Peace College claims it has permit to occupy building
The International Peace College South Africa (IPSA) claims that it has obtained a 'tacit permission to use' permit for sections of the building it is occupying in Rylands The International Peace College South Africa (IPSA) claims that it has obtained a 'tacit permission to use' permit for sections of the building it is occupying in Rylands, where it recently completed extensive renovations, but allegedly without submitting building plans to the City of Cape Town. The city has declined to confirm whether it granted this approval, save to say it is taking the matter to court. This comes after the mayor and mayoral committee member for spatial planning and environment, Eddie Andrews, told the Mail & Guardian that no building plans had been submitted for approval for the renovation of the ground and first floors of the building and that no steps had been taken to rectify the allegedly unlawful development. He said a notice to cease works on the premises was issued on 18 April and a notice to obtain written approval had also been issued to the property owners. The city's legal service department was now handling the matter and a summons would be issued for the matter to be heard in court. The The Islamic institution had not indicated in previous communication through its attorneys to the M&G that it was not the building owner, who, in terms of city by-laws, is ultimately responsible for renovations and building regulations compliance. A deeds office search showed that Habibia Muslim Hostel & Orphanage is the registered owner of the property at 44 Johnston Road in Rylands. Habibia's spokesperson, Sharfudien Parker, told the M&G this week that he would respond to questions regarding the development but still had not done so at the time of publication. The IPSA issued the press release in response to an M&G report last week that highlighted the concerns raised by whistleblower Salma Moosa, a former interior designer on the project. She wrote to the city in November 2024 to sound the alarm about the institution's alleged failure to appoint an engineer and submit building plans, as well as its occupation of the building, despite the issuing of the stop work notice. Moosa also filed a complaint with the city's fire department and later with the office of the city ombud, which responded to her in May 2025 advising that the office was 'registering and assessing the matter'. She said she believed it was her moral duty to blow the whistle on the non-compliance with the building regulations as she was concerned about the safety of students. But the IPSA has alleged in its press release that Moosa only raised these concerns because her contract to work on the project was cancelled. The IPSA also blamed her for the lack of submission of plans, alleging she had misrepresented herself as an architect. But the M&G has seen a copy of her contract with the college, which describes her as an 'interior designer'. Moosa said the IPSA's allegation was 'laughable' because its vice-chairperson, Nasier Osman, had only attempted to terminate her after she had raised concerns about his financial handling of the project in terms of his fiduciary duties. She said she had raised questions with the board regarding Osman's building supply business allegedly inflating the cost of building materials it sold to IPSA for the project. She said the same materials could be sourced at substantially cheaper prices from other retailers. 'A product readily available in the market, such as readmix concrete, costing approximately R1 465 per cubic metre excluding VAT at the time, was charged to IPSA by [his family business] at a price R2487 of excluding VAT. More than 30 units of this item were procured and supplied to IPSA at this … inflated rate,' Moosa said. 'There are numerous other invoices which illustrate this same behaviour and as such this occurrence cannot be regarded as a once-off When asked by the M&G to respond to the allegation about inflated prices, Osman referred questions to his attorneys, who responded with a legal threat and described the allegations, as well as the claims about illegal building activity, as 'devoid of truth' and constituting 'a deliberate campaign to damage IPSA's standing as a respected educational institution'. 'The insinuation that IPSA or Mr Nazier Osman engaged in unlawful construction practices is rejected. IPSA has consistently acted in good faith and is cooperating fully with the City of Cape Town's inquiries. Any suggestion [of] … non-compliance or negligence is vehemently denied. We are currently reviewing the matter, and a comprehensive response will be furnished in due course,' the lawyers wrote. In its press release the IPSA said it had since appointed a registered architect and a fire compliance specialist and that it had 'commissioned a structural engineering report [dated 4 July 2024]'. The IPSA said it had also submitted an administrative penalty (AP) application to the city on 2 July 2024 in accordance with the municipal planning by-laws and that it had 'prepared full building plans for submission, pending the outcome of the AP process'. 'The AP application, available under municipal tracking, is a precondition for the building plan submission and final occupancy certification. The delay now rests entirely with the City of Cape Town, which has acknowledged an administrative backlog in processing such penalties,' the IPSA said. It added that the 'regulatory due process is under way' according to its architect, who it quoted as saying: 'IPSA is currently under a tacit 'Permission to Use' permit from the city for certain areas, and prohibited from occupying one area (new classrooms) until formal approval is granted. The AP was initiated on 2 July 2024. At that point, construction was still ongoing, and we were advised the previous 'architect' had misrepresented the application status.' 'The city cannot comment any further as this matter is due to be dealt with in court,' he said. 'This matter has been referred to the city's legal services department. The city's development management department will be informed of the court date and action once the necessary issuing of summons has been executed.'
Daily Mail
17-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Widower is forced to spend £25k demolishing his home after council rules 'objectionable' extension is THREE INCHES over limit
A distraught pensioner faces a £25k demolition bill over an illegal roof extension that overhangs his home by just three inches. Warren Benton, 73, was hit with a £16k fine over the third storey add-on, after council officials ruled the build did not match the exact specifications of approved plans. His top-floor flat was adjudged to be 60cm taller than the signed off plans, with cladding that extends fractionally over the original footprint, instead of being set back as required. Bradford Council says the breaches mean the 'obtrusive' extension must be torn down, despite no complaints from neighbours in Idle, West Yorkshire. Town hall chiefs accused Mr Benton of wilfully ignoring the issue for 15 years and breaking conservation area rules. However, the retired electrician has defended the build and said the protracted enforcement action against him had become a 'nightmare'. He told MailOnline: 'The building was practically falling down when I bought it. There were junkies in the basement, beer cans everywhere. 'If I hadn't stepped in, it would have just become another derelict house. 'I admit I made a mistake but in my mind it is a minor breach. As far as I know, no-one has ever complained. Not one neighbour has said they have the slightest problem with what I built. 'To me, it seems really harsh that they want me to demolish what is my home.' In September 2009, Mr Benton bought the 19th-century office building at auction, with plans already approved to add a third storey. However, when work began, it quickly became clear the headroom was too small, something that was overlooked when the council initially rubber-stamped the development. Mr Benton said the 60cm increase in height was necessary to make the internal living space habitable. The plans also said the extension must be set back from the existing building, which Mr Benton failed to do. In November 2009, planning enforcement wrote to him, pointing out the unauthorised increase. Despite the efforts to preserve the property, the council issued an enforcement notice in 2010 demanding the extra storey be demolished. The council said the extension was 'too obtrusive' and 'ruined the street scene' in the Idle and The Green Conservation Area. Mr Benton said: 'I didn't just slap something together. I put in steel beams, fixed the walls, and made it solid again. 'It's a shame that I'm being treated like a criminal when I was just trying to do the right thing and help the building. But I do accept that I made a mistake. 'It's gone on for a long time and, yes, I probably have buried my head in the sand on it at times. 'This whole thing has been weighing on me for years.' In a court hearing earlier this month, Mr Benton was hit with a £12,000 fine and ordered to pay another £4,000 in costs for failing to comply with the council's enforcement notice. Mr Benton also faces a hefty demolition bill. While the council told the court the estimated cost of demolition would be between £15k and £25k, the family say the figure has been 'plucked from thin air' and could amount to considerably more. The judge at Bradford Crown Court, Colin Burn, acknowledged Warren had no ill intent but said the extension was out of line with the original planning permission. During the build, Warren cared for his late wife, who suffered from vascular dementia, while also trying to complete the renovation. He said he did not want to worry his family with the stress of the planning issue, which is why it went unresolved for so long. Son Connor, 32, who helped build the project, said: 'The stress of this is breaking my father. 'He can't even talk about it without falling apart. This has been going on for years now, and it's made everything worse. 'The council's attitude is unbelievable. They're talking about tearing down a house for a mistake that's basically just a few centimetres too high. 'People assume we're just trying to make money off this, but that's not it at all. We bought a run-down property at auction with the hope of fixing it up and selling it, so my parents could retire. 'At the end of the day, they're talking about demolishing a widowed pensioner's home - someone who's worked his whole life to provide for his family. 'The council's response has shown no sense, no compassion.' Sentencing Mr Benton, Judge Burn said: 'The extension you built was objectionable in terms of planning permission. 'Images of the property show the extension appears to be somewhat jarring in a row of terraced houses. 'The notice was issued in August 2010 and in May 2025 it has still not been complied with. 'This is a building in a conservation area - from a layman's point of view this extension is at odds with the surrounding buildings. 'It clearly undermines the scheme of planning control, not just in this area but generally.' He added: 'It is the council's obligation to uphold planning control.' Speaking at his apartment, above three tenanted flats, Mr Benton said: 'I've lost sleep over this. My wife's since passed away, and now I'm stuck with this fine and the threat of demolition. 'If I had to demolish my home, where would I live? I could move to the flats downstairs but that would mean kicking out one of my tenants, and that is not fair on them. 'I hope we can find some kind of compromise. I've asked architects to put together plans that hopefully the council will be happy with. We just hope they will engage with is.'
