Print

[Peter Holden]

John take notice of Gordon (GMF). He is a landscape Gardner and his information will be accurate.

Petet

[w3526602]

John take notice of Gordon (GMF)

Hi Peter,

I will indeed. I intend to PM my home address, and a couple of links, but will also continue here, for the education of the others (those that are still interested).

From memory, PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT allows the erection of walls and fences up to 2m high, except when they front a highway (including the footpath), and I believe NOT within 1.5m from that highway ... but Permitted Development allows those fences to be 1.m high. Somehow/somewhere, I got the idea that Milton Keynes had withdrawn that particular Permitted Development right, but I am unable to retrace my footsteps.

Visibility "splay", so that approaching traffic can be seen, has to be factored in, but that's not a problem with my plot.

See Alan's photo in an earlier reply. My "secret garden" will run from the front of the bungalow, to the back, about 12m (40ft). It will be 6m (20ft) wide at the front, and 3m (10ft) wide at the rear. The footprint of the bungalow is 12m (40ft) x 6.6m (22ft) wide, so this is a useful little plot. (40ft cabin cruiser on a trailer, accessed by the wheel-chair friendly dropped kerb?  . I joke!)

Doh! Barbara called to say tea (tiffin?) is ready. No sense of timing, these women!)

602

[Wittsend]

Visibility "splay", so that approaching traffic can be seen, has to be factored in

So it's perfectly permissible to plant road signs at junctions & roundabouts to interfere with drivers' line of sight, forcing them to slow down 
So why can't you have a fence in a residential area that's 2 m high, yet you can grow a hedge to that height or more 

[w3526602]

So why can't you have a fence in a residential area that's 2 m high, yet you can grow a hedge to that height or more 

Hi Alan,

"BECAUSE THEY CAN".

Why is the British Army based in Aldershot, rather than Yorkshire?

Because the "Colonel's Lady" wishes to go shopping in Harrods!

OT ... A RAF Xmas dance was announced at one of my stations, for Officers and their Ladies, Sergeants and their Wives, and "Other Ranks and their Women".  (I kid you not).  Strangely, no married "Other Ranks", nor their wives attended.

On one of my camps (RAF Barnham, near Thetford), it became a standing joke, that if anybody shouted "All them what can't dance is queers!"  every body would start jigging up and down. (Little minds, and all that) Come the MT Section Xmas Bash, the CO was invited, brought his wife.

Somebody shouted "All them what can't dance, etc ...!"

The CO was not aware of this strange practice, and was puzzled by everybody pointing, and laughing. He quickly cottoned on, and joined in the jigging, next time. Barnham was a very happy camp.

602

[w3526602]

Hi Gordon.

PM sent a few minutes ago.

602

[GMF]

So it's perfectly permissible to plant road signs at junctions & roundabouts to interfere with drivers' line of sight, forcing them to slow down 
So why can't you have a fence in a residential area that's 2 m high, yet you can grow a hedge to that height or more 

Couldn't have said it better Alan, subjectivley subjective

John, I have responded to your pm

Gordon

[w3526602]

John, I have responded to your pm

Hi Gordon,

I've PM'd a reply to your reply. Many thanks!

Disabled Facilities Grants can include improving ACCESS to a garden by a disabled person, but whether they cover PRIVACY once in the garden, is a different matter. I will make enquiries with the DISABLED LAW SOCIETY, and report back, either way.
In the meantime, I'm happy to consider this discussion closed.

Oops!

Sorry, breaking my own request.

Slightly OT, but I just found this, which might be of general interest.

https://www.waltons.co.uk/blog/seven-garden-laws-you-never-knew

While looking for something else, I came across this.

https://www.disability-grants.org/gardening-grants.html

I'm not expecting a comment or reply.
My thanks to all.

602

[w3526602]

Hi,

A trellis on top of a fence would seem a sensible idea, but ...

1. I don't like the idea.

2. If I did take that route, I would want the trellis to be nailed to the same 4" x  4" posts as the lower fence, which would mean the posts being two metres high, which would probably be "frowned at" too.

From what I've read on the Garden Law Forum a trellis extension counts as as part of the fence.

I have also read (can't remember where) that if a Local Authority ignore an "infringement", it prevents them from leaning on somebody else doing the same. I keep noticing infringements "like what I want to do", as I drive around. In fact, there is a wall being built, on the front boundary, of a house about a couple of hundred yards away, that is already more than a metre high. I must stop and have a chat.

Again, something in my mind, that says the one metre restriction only covers land within two metres of the highway/footpath boundary. I know tat people have erected fences and walls within a few inches of a highway/footpath boundary, on their own property, and it's come back to bite them.

My daughter's next door neighbour had a knock on his door. Planning Enforcement Officer following up complaints about the several scrap Land Rovers parked on Council Amenity Land, behind his back fence. Red face when the neighbour produced his Land Registry Certificate, to show that HE owned the land behind HIS back fence, asfar as the footpath, as did every other house in the street.

My daughter's Land Registry Certificate shows that the last 6 metres of HER garden is to be kept as Amenity Land, and may not be fenced at any time.
There is a tarmac footpath between her amenity land, and similar land behind houses in .the next street. Effectively, half of my daughter's garden in a public convenience for dogs (on their leashes), and somewhere for the local urchins to build Evil Kneival jumps, that are left in place when the kids are called in for tiffin.

My letters to both the Planners and my Local Councillor have been ignored. Time to play "hardball". There is a system (if I can remember how) of writing to your Representative (Councillor or MP), in such a way, that it will be followed up by an enquiry (apparently with clout) as to whether you received a reply (and possibly a satisfactory outcome?). This "tally" is open to public scrutiny, and can influence voting at the next election, so tends to concentrate their minds. Does anybody here know anything? Ultra Vires?

At Tech College (60 years ago), we were taught that every representative was my representative, even if I wasn't in their constituency, and even if I didn't vote for them.

Onward and upward!

602

[Moogling]

If you apply for planning it'll likely be refused.

If you don't apply how likely is it to get enforced?

[w3526602]

If you don't apply how likely is it to get enforced?

Hi Moogling,

I don't know!

As the law stood, last time I looked (not in several years), if the LA did not tell me to remove something within four years, they lose the power to tell me to knock it down. If the LA do not tell me to stop using something within ten years, they lose the power to tell me to stop using it.

I'm guessing that I would not USE a fence ... but I WOULD probably use a garage or greenhouse.

One option would be to build a 2 metre fence, and ask for retrospective planning permission, if challenged. If that was refused, I could appeal. Appeals are/were free, and I can act for myself, but the LA would have to appoint a solicitor. £££. I can withdraw my appeal at any time.

If anybody objects to my application, it must be in writing. I would be entitled to see those complaints during the three days before the planning hearing, and may reply in writing.

I would be entitled to attend Planning Committee meetings, and listen to what our Councillors have to say. It's an education ... "You b....y liar!". etc

When all options are exhausted, I would have no option other than to reduce the height of the fence to one metre. A lot of the initial cost will have gone into digging holes for the posts, and bags of Post-crete.

There may be problems if I wish to sell the bungalow within four years, so no entitlement to retain the fence. I would argue that the more desirable my bungalow is to another disabled person, due to the alterations that we have made, the less chance of the next occupant applying for a Disability Facilities Grant, so I'm saving the LA money .. albeit in the long run.

602

PS Permitted Development includes using any land for any purpose for 28 days in any year, except motor racing, clay pigeon shooting, and open air markets, which I think are restricted to 7 days ... but check that.

[w3526602]

Hi,

I just found this, which relates to PLANNING FEES.

Exception for building work solely required for disabled persons
4.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), in relation to an existing dwelling which is, or is to be, occupied by a disabled person as a permanent residence, a local authority shall not fix or recover any charges where the whole of the building work in question is solely—

(a)for the purpose of providing means of access for the disabled person by way of entrance or exit to or from the dwelling or any part of it, or
(b)for the purpose of providing accommodation or facilities designed to secure the greater health, safety, welfare or convenience of the disabled person.
(2) Building work does not fall within paragraph (1)(b) unless the local authority are satisfied that the work consists of—

(a)the adaptation or extension of existing accommodation or an existing facility or the provision of alternative accommodation or an alternative facility where the existing accommodation or facility could not be used by the disabled person or could be used by the disabled person only with assistance; or
(b)the provision or extension of a room which is or will be used solely—
(i)for the carrying out for the benefit of the disabled person of medical treatment which cannot reasonably be carried out in any other room in the dwelling, or
(ii)for the storage of medical equipment for the use of the disabled person, or
(iii)to provide sleeping accommodation for a carer where the disabled person requires 24-hour care.
(3) In relation to an existing building to which members of the public are admitted (whether on payment or otherwise) a local authority shall not fix charges where the whole of the building work in question is solely—

(a)for the purpose of providing means of access for disabled persons by way of entrance or exit to or from the building or any part of it; or
(b)for the provision of facilities designed to secure the greater health, safety, welfare or convenience of disabled persons.
(4) In this regulation—

“disabled person” means a person who is within any of the descriptions of persons to whom section 29(1) of the National Assistance Act 1948(1), as extended by virtue of section 8(2) of the Mental Health Act 1959(2), applied but disregarding the amendments made by paragraph 11 of Schedule 13 to the Children Act 1989(3); and“dwelling” includes a dwelling-house and a flat; and “dwelling-house” and “flat” have the same meanings as in the Principal Regulations(4).
(1)1948 c.29.[/b]

I've tried to increase the font size, but don't know if it will work until it's posted.

B*****! The Planning Fee will be about £250. Not a deal breaker, but still a PITA.

Note, this only applies to Planning Fees.

The Disability Legal Services advice is that a grant for central heating will only be provided for rooms used by the disabled person - not a new system to heat the whole house. I haven't seen anything about "aparthied" (sp?) being required for other facilities.

Onward and Upward!

602

[w3526602]

Hi,

Well, the font increase worked.

I notice that "Health" and "Welfare" are mentioned as reasons to not pay the Planning Fee.

The Disability Law Society say that providing access to a garden is an acceptable reason for requesting a Disability Facilities Grant. At present, Barbara can only access the path around the bungalow ... the garden is at a higher level.

I have cleared an area, at path level, where Barbara can play with her flowers and fruit thingies ... but it is not private, hence the desire for a fence. Photo to follow.

What does the law have to say to rights to privacy?  Oh well, I'll deal with that when it arises.

602

[w3526602]

Exception for building work solely required for disabled persons

Hi,

Solely required by?,  Is that the same as "Will be solely used by"?

A Planning Application will cost about £250.  An ON SITE discussion with a Planning Officer will cost about £350, and have no legal standing, I think.

602

[w3526602]

Hi,

The saga continues ...

Today I found this (apparently called PLANNING PORTAL).

You will not need to apply for planning permission if you wish to erect a new; or alter, maintain, improve or take down* an existing fence, wall or gate if the following conditions are met.

In regard to its height:

it is next to a highway used by vehicles (or the footpath of such a highway) and it would not exceed one metre in height (from ground level); or
it would not exceed two metres in height (from ground level) if elsewhere; or

if an existing fence, wall or gate already exceeds the limits above, that its height would not be increased.


no part of the site is a listed building or within the curtilage of a listed building.


no part of the fence, wall, gate or any other boundary involved, forms a boundary with a neighbouring listed building or its curtilage.


the right to put up or alter fences, walls and gates has not been removed by an article four direction or a planning condition.


If any of these conditions are not met, then you will need to apply for planning permission.


I refer to the third of the above conditions, which I have accentuated in bold text.


As I see it, I will NOT be increasing the height, but I WILL be increasing the length. Nowhere does it mention not being allowed to alter the length. I welcome any comments.


One potential fly in the ointment, is that the fence ends in a short dog-leg. Does that mean my existing fence on that boundary is actually three fences?


Just to keep the pot boiling, when this estate was built 40 years ago, the Council donated two trees to each property. (I wish they hadn't, they are now huge).


The aforementioned dog-leg is to accomodate one of those trees, growing on a little grass plot, the other side of the dog-leg. IF it is my tree, can I claim adverse possession on the little grass plot which is continuous with larger strip of grass.


OR did I read on the GARDEN LAW FORUM that ADVERSE POSSESSION (aka Squatter's Rights) is now a dead duck?


OT.  A Man from the Council knocked on my daughter's  neighbour's door, and demanded the removal of various dead Series Land Rovers from the LA's amenity land.


Red face when the neighbour produced his Land Registry Certificate, showing HE owned the land ... despite a covenent preventing him from fencing it.


602