Legal Q? - Neighbour's garage rebuild
Discussion
Not sure if this might have been better in SP&tL but a quick look in there revealed just car related subjects. I don't expect any binding expert legal advice...
TL:DR; Next-door-but-one rebuilding garage on existing footprint, putting up a tall roof that blocks the view - is it legal?
We live on the side of a fairly gentle hill, which means that from the door we can see over the gardens to what remains of some woodland. The people next-door-but-1 down have 2 garages behind each other (not actually usable as garages now they have extended the house up to the plot boundary). The garage closest to the house was built in the early 1970s - standard garage size and height, roof flush with the walls and hedges of the houses. The current owners have understandably decided to demolish it and build a new block-built construction, possibly to be used as a party room or similar. The main part of the building seems to be on the plan of the previous garage. So far, so good.
I came back today to find that the 45 degree pitched roof (previously it was flat) is probably as high again as the main garage, and blots out the view. It seems a tad... well mahoosive to be honest. Nothing has come up on the local authority planning permission lists. Now, I'm not massively chuffed that they are blocking out what remains of the view, but I suspect there's not a lot I can do about that. But - according to the Planning Portal:
" If the outbuilding is within 2 metres of the property boundary the whole building should not exceed 2.5 metres in height."
This seems to be more like 4m than 2.5m. Maybe they are after retrospective consent with the thought that "nah they won't make us change that". It abuts and may even form part of the boundary wall.
A pic if that helps:
Surely they should have planning consent for that? Any thoughts?
TL:DR; Next-door-but-one rebuilding garage on existing footprint, putting up a tall roof that blocks the view - is it legal?
We live on the side of a fairly gentle hill, which means that from the door we can see over the gardens to what remains of some woodland. The people next-door-but-1 down have 2 garages behind each other (not actually usable as garages now they have extended the house up to the plot boundary). The garage closest to the house was built in the early 1970s - standard garage size and height, roof flush with the walls and hedges of the houses. The current owners have understandably decided to demolish it and build a new block-built construction, possibly to be used as a party room or similar. The main part of the building seems to be on the plan of the previous garage. So far, so good.
I came back today to find that the 45 degree pitched roof (previously it was flat) is probably as high again as the main garage, and blots out the view. It seems a tad... well mahoosive to be honest. Nothing has come up on the local authority planning permission lists. Now, I'm not massively chuffed that they are blocking out what remains of the view, but I suspect there's not a lot I can do about that. But - according to the Planning Portal:
" If the outbuilding is within 2 metres of the property boundary the whole building should not exceed 2.5 metres in height."
This seems to be more like 4m than 2.5m. Maybe they are after retrospective consent with the thought that "nah they won't make us change that". It abuts and may even form part of the boundary wall.
A pic if that helps:
Surely they should have planning consent for that? Any thoughts?
Zad said:
Maybe they are after retrospective consent with the thought that "nah they won't make us change that". It abuts and may even form part of the boundary wall.
Maybe they are, and if so, they'd be absolutely correct.That looks very much as though it does require Planning Permission, but I'd be willing to bet a very large amount on it being granted, retrospective or not.
One of the fundamental tenets of the Planning system is that you have no right to a view, and apart from that the addition of a pitched roof on that garage is perfectly acceptable.
Get over it, and get on with your life.
neal1980 said:
I don't see that a view worth arguing over tbf...
Also you may be the only person without an invite to the new party room if you carry on
The more I look at it, it just seems a standard garage pitched roof so not even room for a room above judging by the number of blocks at the apex.Also you may be the only person without an invite to the new party room if you carry on
OP, annoying certainly but not enough to cause issues over in imo.
Technically that roof needs a householder planning application (cost £206)
If you complained to the planners they would invite the owner to submit an application and it is my opinion it would be granted.
You would end up costing the guy some £600+ which would make you popular.
As mentioned before, if you want to own a view you should buy it, it's not a planning matter.
If you complained to the planners they would invite the owner to submit an application and it is my opinion it would be granted.
You would end up costing the guy some £600+ which would make you popular.
As mentioned before, if you want to own a view you should buy it, it's not a planning matter.
Wacky Racer said:
Generally speaking you do not have any right to "a view"....-There are a few exceptions.
Boston Borough Council has a Local Planning Policy that you're not allowed to obstruct views of the 'Boston Stump' (the tower of St Botolph's Church). Perhaps the OP could try persuading the LPA that the view of the distant electricity pylon is an important heritage landscape?
Skyedriver said:
Is England different to Scotland?
I think it's only 1 metre over the Border, or is the Building Warrant?
That's Building Regulations (= Scottish Building Warrant) you're thinking of, I'd guess; you're exempt B.Regs on certain small detached buildings provided they are at least 1m. from the boundary or built substantially from non-combustible materials.I think it's only 1 metre over the Border, or is the Building Warrant?
I don't know about Scotland - I don't do much work in third-World countries, 'cos there's no money in it - but the Welsh permitted development rules are slightly different to the English, however.
In England. if any part of the building is within 2 metres of the boundary, then the height of the whole of the building must be less than 2.5 metres. Whereas in Wales, if any part of the building is within 2 metres of the boundary, then only that part that lies within the 2 metres must be less than 2.5metres high... which is a much more sensible interpretation, if you ask me.
OP, ignore everyone on this thread that has nothing better to do than make you feel worse than you already do.
I sympathise with your situation, but have to agree with the constructive comments that even if a planning permission application is required he’s probably going to be successful.
One crumb of comfort.....curiously buildings tend to look taller than they actually are before the roof is put on. I know you’ll still lose some view, but the building will look smaller and more aesthetically pleasing once he’s finished.
I sympathise with your situation, but have to agree with the constructive comments that even if a planning permission application is required he’s probably going to be successful.
One crumb of comfort.....curiously buildings tend to look taller than they actually are before the roof is put on. I know you’ll still lose some view, but the building will look smaller and more aesthetically pleasing once he’s finished.
Chrisgr31 said:
If you think it needs planning consent email the local planning authority to ask. They wont tell the the other party who has complained. Will just ask them to submit a planning application if necessary.
But what benefit is there in that approach?Even if your neighbour does not guess who notified the Enforcement Officer, as Busa mav has said, the end result will be that you cost your neighbour £600+ for the preparation of the application and the application fee itself, and I guarantee that the end result will be the same. A retrospective application for that work would be approved - there is no sound reason why it should be refused - so it would be an entirely malicious and pointless act.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff