Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Ownership of land question

  • 02-06-2008 11:49am
    #1
    mikemac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,986 ✭✭✭✭


    Suppose I own a house in a city on a good sized plot.
    The council decide to build a metro, it might go directly under my land or it might be on stilts and go over me like a monorail.

    Do I own this space or are there limits such as 10 metres down and 10 metres up?

    Just wondering what's going to happen if the government have to issue CPO's for the metro.
    I know the Port Tunnel is much the same but I don't know how it worked. Residents in Marino got compensation for damage and that seems fair. But do the council and project engineers have a right to use the land under you? Who actually owns it?

    As another example, if people strike oil on their land they own it even it's hundreds of metres below. Would love to strike oil on my place :D
    But why is building a metro different?

    Maybe a daft question, just wondering


Comments

  • #2
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,549 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    micmclo wrote: »
    Suppose I own a house in a city on a good sized plot.
    The council decide to build a metro, it might go directly under my land or it might be on stilts and go over me like a monorail.

    Do I own this space or are there limits such as 10 metres down and 10 metres up?

    I believe ownership goes above and below land to the extent that it's actually or reasonably in use. So while you might own the land that your neighbour's tree is overhanging onto, you do not own the land over which a plane flies at high altitude.

    As for below land, you own down so far as could reasonably be used. So if there was a mine underground you would own the mine and the rights to extract minerals from it.
    micmclo wrote: »
    Just wondering what's going to happen if the government have to issue CPO's for the metro.
    I know the Port Tunnel is much the same but I don't know how it worked. Residents in Marino got compensation for damage and that seems fair. But do the council and project engineers have a right to use the land under you? Who actually owns it?

    As far as I'm aware, a CPO only has to pay compensation at a reasonable rate for the taking of the land. If you do not use the underground land, you are unlikely to get a lot of money for it. However, if it will cause damage, nuisance or loss of value to your property the compensation would be higher. If the result of the metro would be to make your house uninhabitable, they might buy the entire property.
    micmclo wrote:
    As another example, if people strike oil on their land they own it even it's hundreds of metres below. Would love to strike oil on my place :D
    But why is building a metro different?

    Because the dirt which will be removed from your land is of significantly less worth than the oil. You are only entitled to be compensated for it's worth.

    Hypothetically of course.


  • #3
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,574 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    One needs to look at the Strategic Infrastructure Act 2006 to be more informed on this. In reality the capital appreciation will typically be much greater than the loss incurred by the land owner.

    With the Port Tunnel, most residents got about €5,000 for their 'land'. Total compensation for damage came to about €1.5m spread over 600+ properties.
    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    I believe ownership goes above and below land to the extent that it's actually or reasonably in use. So while you might own the land that your neighbour's tree is overhanging onto,
    A reasonable point. The zoning of the land would have some influence on this.
    you do not own the land over which a plane flies at high altitude.
    More specificly, the Air Navigation Act 1935 allows people to over-fly land.
    As for below land, you own down so far as could reasonably be used. So if there was a mine underground you would own the mine and the rights to extract minerals from it.
    In such cases, one does not build a Metro. :) One builds metros where one can have medium to high density developement, which you can't have over a mine or quarry.
    As far as I'm aware, a CPO only has to pay compensation at a reasonable rate for the taking of the land. If you do not use the underground land, you are unlikely to get a lot of money for it. However, if it will cause damage, nuisance or loss of value to your property the compensation would be higher. If the result of the metro would be to make your house uninhabitable, they might buy the entire property.
    The taking of land (or space in theses type of cases), damage to structures or amenity, incovenience, disturbance and so on need to be considered separately. Yes, if these figures are higher than the value of the property, it makes sense to buy out the property and paying moving costs.


  • #4
    grumpytrousers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭grumpytrousers


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    As for below land, you own down so far as could reasonably be used. So if there was a mine underground you would own the mine and the rights to extract minerals from it.

    Only being pedantic, but in a lot of Land Registry properties, they'll say something like 'The Registration does not extend to the mines and minerals...'


Advertisement