Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think a note of caution is needed with everyone saying planning permission isn't required: under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 any "building or enclosure" between the front boundary of a building and the public highway requires planning permission. Obviously Southwark have very sensibly decided to turn a blind eye to this as regards cycle storage, but there's nothing to stop them instigating a crackdown whenever they choose, as Brighton council did a few years ago: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/aug/01/brighton-green-council-crackdown-cycle-stores-barriers-cycling (note the sentence in the article, "Under national regulations any ?outbuilding? in front of a house (flats have different and more complex rules), even a compact bike shed, officially requires planning permission.").


Not to say don't build a bike shed by any means, just be aware that the potential is there for the council to object. Certainly best to make sure neighbours will be happy with it, because if they object they would certainly have the law on their side, even if it is an ass.

We had one built last year (120cm high). The council planners said that in theory, we should apply for planning, however, as long as it did not exceed any of the usual building limits, they would not enforce any kind of action or insist on the application, and that we can carry on and build it.

Unfortunately, our neighbours are complete tits and put in a planning appeal because we didn?t put in a planning application and they felt our bike shed was infringing on their right to enjoy their home (honestly, don?t get me started), so we had to do a retrospective planning application which was rubber stamped straight away.

The long and the short of it is, you shouldn?t need to apply, unless your neighbours are idiots.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Of course  The tests are very stringent and they look carefully at claimants for things like how easily they can get up from an armless chair, if they don't use the chair arms thats a black mark, can they walk More 20 yards without problems including breathlessness, pain or even if they need aids (again over 20 yards reduces their chances of claiming) and so on  Trust me, having been assessed a few times, its not easy or guarenteed to get or maintain PIP.  But yes, the whole what is claimed for should be reviewed bur let's not penalise those who need it.  
    • Afternoon,   Does anyone have an Islabike 14 cnoc that their little one has grown out of and in need of a new home? I would prefer orange if possible or, failing that, blue or red.   Many thanks.    Michelle
    • Hello All,   I am looking for a Little Tikes covered sand pit. If you have one that your little ones have grown out of, please get in touch.   Many thanks in advance.   Michelle
    • My perspective is based on reason - my first comment was a question - what is driving the forecast increase in claimants. It suggests that - if so many new claims are expected, that either there is something seriously wrong or the tests are not sufficiently stringent. Happy for you to have a stab at that.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...