Search the Community

We have some land to the right hand side of our property, which is our boundary, total length is approx 24 metres. We would like to install 6 ft close board fence panels from a safety and security perspective and will give us more garden space However adjacent to the land is a footpath I found this online with regards to the regulations "No planning permission is required for a wall or fence that is under 2m in height. However, if that wall or fence is adjacent to a highway (including a footpath) then the height of a wall or fence cannot exceed 1m without planning permission" However i am not sure what 'highway' exactly refers to, is it the pavement, road or footpath? Or all? Can i install a 2m fence without planning permission? Pics attached highlighting the area where we wish to erect a fence etc https://ibb.co/xX6GdPt https://ibb.co/WkQMxFR https://ibb.co/wwZPGx8 https://ibb.co/5FKBTf0 https://ibb.co/1LnDK5n https://ibb.co/93XRyZ7

Hello All, newbie here! I have an issue with a neighbouring property and I wondered if any of you have had a similar experience that could shed some light. The site in question is adjacent to my property and is contiguous to 2 others. Historically (past 30+ years) this site has had 2 buildings on it, which were used for a workshop and garage for the owner who lives in a house on the opposite side of the (adopted) road – ie. not a contiguous property. In 2015, these two buildings were included in an application for a new dwelling on the site, which was approved with the existing garaging and workshop/storage utilised in that development. The development is in a conservation area and won favour by being an eco-friendly and low energy property, buried into a hillside with a grass roof etc., and specifically repurposing the existing buildings as garaging. What then happened is that the land owner split the plot, and sold only the part with the new dwelling to a self-builder, and retained the existing buildings which formed the garaging and workshop in the approved permission. He has subsequently had 2 attempts to gain permission for a dwelling on the remaining part of the site with these existing buildings, together with an appeal, but so far, he has not been successful. The self-builder is now close to completion of the new dwelling, and is about to put through a planning change for the reduced site area, a new garage and other minor amendments made along the way. The planners seem to be accepting that when presented with the application, they will have very little option but approve the amendments and reduced site area, which we find very worrying. Having looked online I have found a couple of references to the ‘red-line’ site area on a planning application as being fundamental and cannot be reduced or indeed increased without a whole new/full application and proper consideration. Both myself and another contiguous neighbour bought our properties post this approval being granted and expected a single dwelling to be built between us. To now find that the same property will be built on a compromised site and potentially another dwelling on the retained land is very upsetting. This particular neighbour’s property is grade 2 listed, which we hoped would carry some weight in this matter. Any thoughts or advice on this would be very helpful and appreciated.

The planning permission i have for my rear extension gives me permission to build it out along the full width of my property. It's a semi detached property and I have a party wall agreement with my attached neighbour. Builder due to pour footings TOMORROW. Architect calls me today to say that he thinks builder has set out the footings in such a way that extension would be 5cm to 8cm narrower than it should be. I went to the property to meet the builder to see what's going on. Builder shows me he has taken the boundary line from the centrepoint of where the old fence post used to be. This would account for 3cm of the 8cm, as looking carefully at his line there are places where he has deviated from that line by 3cm. However, under the deeds, it's my fence - and I have always been responsible for maintaining it. Via google, i found this: It is normal practice when using a fence to mark a boundary to place the outer face of the fence along the boundary, so that the posts stand on the land of the of the fence's owner. This rule would suggest that the builder is wrong to take the boundary line from the centre of the fence post, and as my fence post was 8cm or 10cm wide, that would suggest a discrepancy of 4cm to 5cm. Having said that, the same article notes that this won't always be conclusive. I looked at my party wall agreement and note that it says I am to reinstate the fence after the building works have finished. If by the word "reinstate" there is an implication that it should be reinstated in exactly the same place, then that ignores the above rule. In any case: the party wall surveyors never asked me who owned that fence or where the exact limit of my boundary is - they've generally been quite sloppy so this is par for the course; and my neighbour and I both agree that reinstating the fence would look silly as it would be right up against the wall - I won't see it, so i care little about what it would look like, but it will inhibit the walls from breathing and will also cost me an extra £400 to £500 in fencing material and labour which I rather avoid. My builder has agreed to shave a bit off the trench wall to give me the additional 3cm so it is more accurately under the centreline of the fence post. But even doing that I would lose the 4cm to 5cm. I know that doesn't sound like a lot, but it will make a slight difference to the internal space. My fear is that even though legally I am probably entitled to use that additional 4cm to 5cm, relations with my neighbour are difficult at the best of times and if he believes I am taking his space he will probably kick up a fuss. What would you do?