Breach of planning law regarding outbuilding against my fence. Council happy to ignore. (photo enclosed)

[Ltnman]

In June of 2022 I contacted my council about an outbuilding under construction that was only 26cm from my fence and approaching 3m high so requiring planning permission. The council did nothing despite photos being sent. I have now had a reply to my stage one complaint, which I want to appeal and go to stage 2. The council has sent me a long letter, which I can publish in full, but the following is the key point why the Council is content to do nothing. I am thinking that if the applicant had put in a planning application and stated it would be 3 metres tall on my boundary it would have been rejected.

What I am looking for is the home owner to put in retrospective planning application in so I can object to the planning committee. Either that or get it taken down.

On what grounds can I appeal?

Part of the reply follows:

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 gives a generous allowance for the construction of out buildings. Out buildings can be constructed at the boundary line for the purposes of the above regulations. This being said they should not if constructed within 2 metres of the boundary exceed 2.5 metres in height.

The height of the building may vary depending on the ground levels however the technical guidance suggests that the building is measured from the land that it has been constructed on. Officers would have attempted to have measured by the best practicable means and taking into account the accessibility and orientation of the building.

In this endeavour our officers noted that the building did not exceed 2.5 metres in height from the hosts side of the boundary. This being the case the council would consider that the building has been built within the prescribed limits set out within the permitted development regulations.

 

[johnny2007]

You now have a 26cm strip of land to be used as a skip...

 

[cdbe]

The reality is, if any part of that building is at 2.5m from the original ground level (and although there is no official leeway, in practice probably plus another 100mm or so), and looking at the fence behind it it quite possibly is, there is nothing you or the council can do about it - it is "permitted development" and you are completely wasting your time. As I suggested last time you posted, if it's clad in flammable timber then this is a breach of building regs, and your Local Authority building control department may take action on this - but only to remove or replace the cladding with a suitable non flammable material.
Probably best to plant some conifers and forget about it.

There used to be a website called planning jungle which had drawings illustrating some of the "idiosyncrasies" of the permitted development rules when it comes to sloping land - the image below demonstrates in the extreme what is perfectly legal.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

They ae saying it has been built under Permited Development so did not need planning approval. So there is nothing you can do because it is permitted. That's it. Complain all you like, all it will do is give you high blood pressure. What world do you live in that you think you will somehow get to vent your frustration to the planning committee?

 

[wessex101]

The simple question is, is it likely that the garden is naturally over 500mm higher on the neighbours side of the fence?

From the photograph the ground looks quite level and there is no sign of a retaining wall or large gravels boards along the bottom of the fence which would suggest a step up in level.

The planners do quite often get things wrong and do seem to like to turn a blind eye to minor infringements rather than have all the hassle of enforcement. If you feel strongly about it then keep up the complaint and if you are not satisfied with the outcome then go to the local government ombudsman.

 

[RandomGrinch]

The simple question is, is it likely that the garden is naturally over 500mm higher on the neighbours side of the fence?

For me, it's the side fence line (if there is a drop to the next fence panel?), that suggests the land drops away from the house.

 

[wessex101]

For me, it's the side fence line (if there is a drop to the next fence panel?), that suggests the land drops away from the house.

Possibly but that doesn't seem to work with the height of the conservatory and the other neighbour's shed would only be about 4 feet tall.

 

[Ltnman]

So permitted development allows a 3m rear facing building when planning law states 2.5m, as long as the 2.5m bit faces the home owner? Seems pointless having planning law when those affected can do nothing. The council admit they didn’t look at the rear boundary despite the original photos that were sent. The strange thing is that the gravel board of the fence, which is mine, still has the original matching soil line and is still visible but the builder appears to have put a large slab in.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

So permitted development allows a 3m rear facing building when planning law states 2.5m, as long as the 2.5m bit faces the home owner? Seems pointless having planning law when those affected can do nothing. The council admit they didn’t look at the rear boundary despite the original photos that were sent. The strange thing is that the gravel board of the fence, which is mine, still has the original matching soil line and is still visible but the builder appears to have put a large slab in.

No, the height (maximum 2.5m) is to be measured from the highest bit of natural ground level adjacent to any part of the perimeter wall of the building.

 

[wessex101]

The key word is NATURAL ground level. You cannot raise the ground or build it up with a thick concrete slab and measure from the top of that.

But as cdbe's and freddie's illustrations, on a naturally sloping site you can have a perfectly compliant building that is well over 3 metres high on the neighbours side. One of the many glaring anomalies in our rubbish planning system.

 

[Old Salt]

Its built of timber and therefore flammable which is not allowed within 1 metre of the boundary iirc.

 

[Mister Banks]

Ask your neighbour if you can paint it the same colour as the fence.

 

[jeds]

The LPA says the ground, measured on the host side, is 2.5m high. Do you have reason/evidence to dispute that?

 

[Ltnman]

The ground was at the same height on either side of my fence when the fence was put up, as the gravel board of the fence sits on the this ground. It still does but there is now a high slab that this outbuilding now sits on. The slab peaks at maximum height on the corner shown, as there is a very gentle slope left to right.

This is a bad photo looking down the gap between the outbuilding and the house next doors grey fence line. As can be seen there is a gap between the slab and the fence. The wood at the end was put in to stop anyone from the council looking down the gap.

This photo shows the general view. For reference my fence is 1.82m high. As can be seen, using the wooden shed on the right as a reference the slope is left to right. The fence to the house seems level. At 1.82m tall I could never see my neighbour and they could not see me.

This is the outbuilding form the home owners side. It looks good to me and the Council but without proof I think the ground level at the front was changed as there was a digger moving soil and hardcore around for days.

As can be seen there are two brick built borders keeping the garden patio away from both fences.

 

[Ltnman]

So after being told here I was wasting my time is that still the case? I am not losing sleep over this but i don’t see why a lazy council can just do nothing and fob me off.