Planning permissions

[monisia]

We want put a higher fence at the back and the  side of our house to  extend the garden.We live on a corner plot .

I believe we need planning permission to do so as its next to a road .

 

Has anybody been successful with the planning permission or could give us any advice on what we can/can't do?

 

I have marked the area where we want to put a higher fence as we know any more would more likely obstruct the vision .

[NailBiter]

Planning departments make stuff up as they go along so this might not be useful to you. 

 

There have however been cases where it was held that "adjacent to the highway" means you have to be able to touch the fence when standing on the road. In this case because of the pavement you could argue that your fence is not adjacent to the highway. Unfortunately we had no pavement so we couldn't rely on that.

(Edit: sorry after looking it up that would only apply to a grass verge /  hedge, the footpath is considered to be part of the highway)

You might need to be persuasive / appeal. I lived in a corner plot, did something similar and rubbed a council enforcement officer up the wrong way in the process. Took me the best part of a year to finally get him to leave us alone. He even tried pursuing us when we reduced the fence to 1m high claiming a change of use had occurred (he was unable to evidence this so eventually gave up after haunting us for a few more months)

You will also want to check your deed for covenants, your house looks the perfect age to have a whole laundry list of them. Some are likely to refer to the fence and garden / what you can do with it. Don't panic though as you may be able to argue they no longer apply. 

Edited April 6 by NailBiter

[ProDave]

Put up a 2M fence, 1M in from your existing low fence.  That should meet the argument of not being adjacent to the highway.  That won't enclose all your garden, but most of it.

 

Then in that gap between the tall fence and low fence plant a nice hedge  (NOT Leylandii) and when the hedge should reach maturity about the same time as the 2M fence is ready to fall down.

 

I have a relative in a similar layout estate and his entire garden is surrounded by a nice mature Beech hedge.

[monisia]

Thank you for your advice,we may do that instead.

Just to clarify does it mean  mean that  if we put a 2m fence from the existing 1m ,  we do not need planning permission?

[joe90]

“UK legislation defines the permitted height of fencing that is "adjacent" to a footpath or highway, but doesn't define "adjacent". However, it's generally accepted that fences at least one metre from the road are limited to one meter in height, and fences more than 1 metre from the road can be up to two metres ”

[NailBiter]

As always it comes down to case law, interpretation and an element of luck (which you can influence with forethought and research).

It isn't as clear cut as it seems, for example look at this failed Planning Appeal:
https://planningjungle.com/wp-content/uploads/3150593-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf
 

Quote

3. The erection of a gate, fence, wall, or other enclosure can be permitted
development under Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 2, Class A of the Town and Country
Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (GPDO). But the erection
of a gate, fence, wall, or other enclosure over 1m in height, which is ‘adjacent’ to a
highway used by vehicular traffic, is not permitted development and planning
permission is required for such a proposal.

4. The question in this case, therefore, revolves around whether or not the
proposed boundary wall is considered to be ‘adjacent’, or not, to the highway which
in this case is Greys Road. The word ‘adjacent’ is not defined in the Planning Act
and it has been held that legislators were not likely to have intended ‘a one size fits
all approach’. The common dictionary definition of ‘adjacent’ is ‘lying near’ or
‘contiguous’, although Case Law shows that ‘adjacency’ does not equate to
‘contiguous’ or ‘abutting’.

5. Thus the position established by the courts is that the word ‘adjacent’ does not
necessarily mean that the fence has to be abutting or touching the highway. In
the case of Simmonds v SSE and Rochdale MDC [1981] it was held that a fence
higher than one metre and less than one metre from a footway to a highway did
abut the highway. A 2m figure has also been referred to in Case Law and I accept
that this particular proposal would slightly exceed that figure. However, the thrust
of Case Law and other appeal decisions is that a wall or fence can be set back from
a highway, but still be ‘adjacent’ to it, as a matter of fact and degree, provided that
the enclosure is clearly to define the boundary of the property concerned from the
highway and is perceived to do so.

6. In this case the proposed wall and gates would form the boundary between the
back of the verge at the side of the highway and the appellant’s garden area. It is
clearly intended that the wall and gates would be a means of enclosure to the
appellant’s’ land. Having seen proposed location in conjunction with the highway, it
is my view that the wall and gates would, as a matter of fact and degree, be
‘adjacent’ to the highway and, despite the intervening Beech hedge, they would be
perceived as such.

7. I acknowledge that the proposed hedge would be between the highway and the
proposed wall and I have taken into account the other DCS referenced cases
referred to on behalf of the appellant (Chelmsford, Daventry, Mole Valley and
Tunbridge Wells). However, each case must be assessed on its merits and, as a
matter of fact and degree, I consider that a wall and gates of this length
construction and height would still be perceived as the main boundary between the
highway and the appellant’s property.

8. I accept that the proposed hedge will screen the wall to some extent. But I
agree with the LPA that it will not act as a sufficient intervening obstruction or
feature which would physically obstruct the wall from the highway and particularly
where it will remain fully visible from the highway. I conclude, therefore, that the
wall and gates (exceeding 1m in height) as proposed would not be lawful within the
meaning of Article 3, Schedule 2, Part 2, Class A of the GPDO. I consider that the
LPA decision was sound and that planning permission would be required for the
proposal. The appeal, therefore fails.

 

Edited April 6 by NailBiter

[NailBiter]

There are potentially some loopholes, for example:

 

Quote

the distance between the house and the highway - in cases where that distance is
substantial, it is unlikely that a building can be said to front the highway. The same
may be true where there is a significant intervening area of land in different
ownership or use between the boundary of the curtilage of the house concerned
and the highway.

If you were to have a small driveway with a bicycle lock up, say a strip of 1200mm or 1500mm and then the fence it is plausible that this would work. I have no formal training and I am probably wrong though. Do not take this as advice in any way.

It all comes down to case law as a lot of the important terms aren't fully defined (e.g. what does significant mean)

Edited April 6 by NailBiter

[joe90]

Frankly as you want the fence in the red bit on your photo which is away from the road junction I don’t think you will have a problem and would go ahead and do it, if anyone did complain by the time it concluded your hedge will have grown (and they can do nothing about that.)

[ProDave]

12 minutes ago, joe90 said:

Frankly as you want the fence in the red bit on your photo which is away from the road junction I don’t think you will have a problem and would go ahead and do it, if anyone did complain by the time it concluded your hedge will have grown (and they can do nothing about that.)

I would probably enclose part of the side garden, up to the bin store area or the window in the end wall (still keeping 1M from the low fence)  Once enclosed, that little corner would be a perfect place for a shed, without taking up any room in the main bit of garden.

 

Planning law is a lot more lenient now with the "adjacent" description, which should allow you to fence in most of it.  Previously it was any fence anywhere between the wall of the house and the highway needed PP if over 1M high.

[monisia]

Thank you,

Our current fence height is 1.25 ,therefore well above the limit of 1m.I wonder how that was possible?

 

As suggested here.we may add a  fence 1m from the existing fence and plant some hedge in between without requesting planning permission ,this seems to be the easiest option at the moment.

 

 

[joe90]

5 minutes ago, monisia said:

Our current fence height is 1.25 ,therefore well above the limit of 1m.I wonder how that was possible?

Just depends if anyone complained I guess 

5 minutes ago, monisia said:

As suggested here.we may add a  fence 1m from the existing fence and plant some hedge in between without requesting planning permission ,this seems to be the easiest option at the moment.

Best idea 👍, if you plant the hedge close to the existing one and with sheep fencing very close to it the hedge will grow through it and when the old fence rots out it will leave a hedge that is animal and human proof, and you could remove the “new” fence and regain some land.

[DevilDamo]

10 hours ago, joe90 said:

fences at least one metre from the road are limited to one meter in height, and fences more than 1 metre from the road can be up to two metres

What’s the difference between those two examples? Surely it should read “fences within one metre”?

[DevilDamo]

9 hours ago, ProDave said:

Previously it was any fence anywhere between the wall of the house and the highway needed PP if over 1M high.

When was the “adjacent to a highway” introduced?