I have added some boundary walls to the gateway area of my property.
The gateway area has right of ways for neighbours to access their properties, but there is a small U shaped area (Approx. 4mx6m) to the side of the gateway with no row access.
I have built stone boundary walls to enclose the area that is free of RoW, and I have now received an enforcement notice from the local council asking me to remove the 'building'? The walls also provide hanging points for the entrace gates, and the space enclosed by the walls will be used for storing wheelie bins, recycling, grass mower, etc.
The local council believe the walls to constitute a garage/building due to the foot print, but there is no roof, windows or doors and no services installed, or any slab foundations.
The walls are all lower than 2m and less than 1m next to the highway (built into a slope).
I have asked for clarification on what the local council object to as I believe building walls on private land is covered by permitted development and no permission is required.
Sorry no photos as I'm working away from home this week.....
Further discussion with development control and it appears they feel the walls fail the permitted development rules with the walls being over 2m and 1m next to the highway.
We were very careful not to exceed these limits with the walls that were built, so hopefully they will withdraw the enforcement action without having to appeal.
Anyone else here has such issues with planning and permitted development with regard to gateways?
A wall adjacent to a highway can't be higher than 1m.rp_uk wrote:Further discussion with development control and it appears they feel the walls fail the permitted development rules with the walls being over 2m and 1m next to the highway.
Adjacent can have a very broad interpretation, sometimes - within 2m.
Highway, can also include footways and verges.
smile...it confuses people
Yes, the 1.9m walls are away (over 2m I think from memory) from the highway, and the 0.7m high wall is adjacent to the highway.
I was very careful when setting out the walls.
I think that the planning officer has seen my footings and walls going in and jumped to the conclusion that we are building a garage, rather than redeveloping the gateway area under permitted development.
In the letters from the council I am getting lots of legalise and they talk constantly about 'the building'.
Our 1.9m walls have no roof, no doors, no windows, no electic supply, no slab foundation, now water supply, etc. They are three walls arranged in a U shape to delineate an area of land to the side of the gateway. A passerby could confuse the walls as an unfinished garage, which I would need planning permission for....
Rough outline in ASCII Art:
| / Flowerbed | 0.7m walls
Wall | Gateway --------------------- Rear wall approx. 1.4m high due slope....
-------|+----------------+ | |
| U Shape |
Right of Way | 1.9m walls |
I have now met with the Planning Enforcement Officer and his supervisor.
They now seem to accept that the walls fall under permitted development in terms of size and locations.
The issue seems to have moved to lawful use of the area.
What is not clear is the extent of the 'planning unit' at the site, as opposed to the domestic curtilage of our dwelling house.
The development includes 4 individual properties, surrounded by my land (which includes right of ways to the individual properties), which is then in turn surrounded by (and what was originally fenced off from) a paddock area.
My understanding is the 'planning unit' on the original approved plans for the development included the 4 dwellings and the area of land inside the fence, sperate from the paddock. If this is the case then all inside the fence should be classed as useage class 3C domestic and we do not need to prove lawful use of the area where we have put the walls.
Now awaiting the letter from planning to clarify their position on this.
Nothing that I am aware of....... except trying to develop and enjoy the land I own......
Our property has some development rights removed and the planners often think this applies to all development.
I find that the local planners can get themselves very entrenched, and some seem to suffer from the green eyed monster syndrome.
Hopefully, on the home straight with this one.....