Building fence on boundary line
- Thread starter Al@n
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Grow a hedge.
Just another question promise!
I asked the council the following regarding the footpath not the actual land to the side of my property which i want to fence off
Please could you kindly confirm whether the metalled footpath running between numbers xx and xx, from the back of the public footway on xx to the northerly end of xx close, is a public highway and, specifically, if it is identified on the definitive map as a public right of way.
The council provided the plan and stated the following: as you can see there is a public footpath between houses xx and xx
However, they have not explicitly stated whether it is a public 'highway' and whether it is a 'public right of way'
Should i get the council to clarify?
Also, the width of the footpath is noted down to be 1.8 minimum, does this help in anyway in determining whether I need planning permission?
Is the information sufficient enough that I definitely need to apply for planning permission?
The land is within my boundary as per the title deeds
I've taken further pics and also marked where i intend to put up the 2m fence, the orange line will be a gate and the red line is where the fence will be installed
https://ibb.co/rpKLGB6
https://ibb.co/yRrN68d
I asked the council the following regarding the footpath not the actual land to the side of my property which i want to fence off
Please could you kindly confirm whether the metalled footpath running between numbers xx and xx, from the back of the public footway on xx to the northerly end of xx close, is a public highway and, specifically, if it is identified on the definitive map as a public right of way.
The council provided the plan and stated the following: as you can see there is a public footpath between houses xx and xx
However, they have not explicitly stated whether it is a public 'highway' and whether it is a 'public right of way'
Should i get the council to clarify?
Also, the width of the footpath is noted down to be 1.8 minimum, does this help in anyway in determining whether I need planning permission?
Is the information sufficient enough that I definitely need to apply for planning permission?
The land is within my boundary as per the title deeds
I've taken further pics and also marked where i intend to put up the 2m fence, the orange line will be a gate and the red line is where the fence will be installed
https://ibb.co/rpKLGB6
https://ibb.co/yRrN68d
You're just on a highway (haha) to nowhere. The term highway is merely a term meaning somewhere the public has access to, albeit a road, footpath or otherwise, 6" wide or 6m wide. The public have access to this 'path' ergo it is a highway.
Sponsored Links
Its about 50m of fence. My wife calls it the great wall of china.
For the benefit of others...
Shedule 2, Part 2 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 which defines what permission is granted that allows fences to be erected.
PART 2
Minor operations
Class A - gates, fences, walls etc
Permitted development
A. The erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure.
Development not permitted
A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if-
(a) the height of any gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed adjacent to a highway used by vehicular traffic would, after the carrying out of the development, exceed-
(i) for a school, 2 metres above ground level, provided that any part of the gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure which is more than 1 metre above ground level does not create an obstruction to the view of persons using the highway as to be likely to cause danger to such persons;
(ii) in any other case, 1 metre above ground level;
(b) the height of any other gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed would exceed 2 metres above ground level;
(c) the height of any gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure maintained, improved or altered would, as a result of the development, exceed its former height or the height referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) as the height appropriate to it if erected or constructed, whichever is the greater; or
(d) it would involve development within the curtilage of, or to a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure surrounding, a listed building.
In my case a public footpath is not a highway used by vehicular traffic.
Which means that a fence with a maximum height of 2 metres can be erected on my land even if it is next to a public footpath.
The GPDO grants planning permission for a 2m tall fence adjacent to a highway UNLESS said highway is used by motor vehicles - where it must be 1m tall instead.
Shedule 2, Part 2 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 which defines what permission is granted that allows fences to be erected.
PART 2
Minor operations
Class A - gates, fences, walls etc
Permitted development
A. The erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure.
Development not permitted
A.1 Development is not permitted by Class A if-
(a) the height of any gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed adjacent to a highway used by vehicular traffic would, after the carrying out of the development, exceed-
(i) for a school, 2 metres above ground level, provided that any part of the gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure which is more than 1 metre above ground level does not create an obstruction to the view of persons using the highway as to be likely to cause danger to such persons;
(ii) in any other case, 1 metre above ground level;
(b) the height of any other gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed would exceed 2 metres above ground level;
(c) the height of any gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure maintained, improved or altered would, as a result of the development, exceed its former height or the height referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) as the height appropriate to it if erected or constructed, whichever is the greater; or
(d) it would involve development within the curtilage of, or to a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure surrounding, a listed building.
In my case a public footpath is not a highway used by vehicular traffic.
Which means that a fence with a maximum height of 2 metres can be erected on my land even if it is next to a public footpath.
The GPDO grants planning permission for a 2m tall fence adjacent to a highway UNLESS said highway is used by motor vehicles - where it must be 1m tall instead.
Haha, nope, but I emailed planning aid england who i must say provided incorrect advice on my initial enquiry! However they have confirmed the interpretation to be correct
Sorry to be pedantic, but what about item (b) and (c) ?
In my case, the fence I'll be erecting will not exceed 2m
If you've seen the pics in my earlier posts its open land with no existing fence
It's been a while, we decided to submit an application for a lawful development certificate proposed use to erect a 2m fence along the boundary line of our property. I'm disappointed to say the least but the council are stating I can only erect a 1m fence on my land which I own
Is it worth pursuing this further to challenge their decision and appeal? or do I concede and accept? I would appreciate your advice
Council response below:....
unfortunately I do not believe your proposal would accord with the relevant class under the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO). Part 2 Class A of the GPDO permits the erection of fences, subject to accordance with guidelines outlined in paragraph A.1. Part a states:
the height of any gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed adjacent to a highway used by vehicular traffic would, after the carrying out of the development, exceed—
(i) for a school, 2 metres above ground level, provided that any part of the gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure which is more than 1 metre above ground level does not create an obstruction to the view of persons using the highway as to be likely to cause danger to such persons;
(ii) in any other case, 1 metre above ground level;
From assessment of your proposal, the footpath which runs between no.51 and no.53 is an adopted highway and therefore the height of your fence should not exceed 1 metre. Footpaths are still classified as highways. Furthermore, it is important to recognise the use of the land as landscaped amenity land which is important in retaining the open character of this footpath. On this basis, the erection of any fence in this location should ensure that the use of this land is amenity land and not private garden, otherwise a change of use application would be required. This would also be unlikely to be supported due to the importance of this land in the character of the streetscene.
In short, we could accept a fence similar to that at no.51, as this would be lawful under this application. However, enclosure of this land should not result in a change of use of the land. I would therefore recommend that you amend your proposal if you wish to proceed with it to accord with the GPDO. If you have any questions about the information above please do let me know.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I responded back stating that the GDPO, there is no reference to an "adopted highway" instead it refers to "a highway used by vehicular traffic".
Also, the land is not amenity land, it is part of my private garden, and provided title plan, the council responded as below:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A highway used by vehicular traffic does not limit itself to motorised vehicles, nor should it be open to all forms of vehicles. As this footpath is open to pedestrians and cyclists it would still fall within the definition of ‘A highway used by vehicular traffic’. The proposal therefore does not accord with Paragraph A.1. I have attached an appeal decision which outlined this matter in further detail.
With regards to the issue of private garden, whilst I do accept it is within your title deeds in planning terms it is still landscaped amenity space which contributes to the open character of the footpath. It is not private garden space. With this in mind, any fence erected, should still maintain the open character of the area, a 1m fence would do this as I suggested in my previous email.
The fence at no.51 was considered to be acceptable as it restricted access to their land without reducing the open nature of this path. This is something which would be permitted along the border of your land, however, a 2m fence would impact upon this openness.
Therefore, as I stated in my previous email, I suggest you revise your proposal to accord with the relevant class under the GPDO.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the second response the council cited this previous application in Milton Keynes for rejecting the application which refers to redways and also the MK example the fence would be setback 0.6m from the highway whereas our proposed 2m fence will be setback over 6m from the road!
Also to note I found out that although the MK lawful development application was refused the owners submitted a full planning application which was approved!
Links below
Is it worth pursuing this further to challenge their decision and appeal? or do I concede and accept? I would appreciate your advice
Council response below:....
unfortunately I do not believe your proposal would accord with the relevant class under the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO). Part 2 Class A of the GPDO permits the erection of fences, subject to accordance with guidelines outlined in paragraph A.1. Part a states:
the height of any gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure erected or constructed adjacent to a highway used by vehicular traffic would, after the carrying out of the development, exceed—
(i) for a school, 2 metres above ground level, provided that any part of the gate, fence, wall or means of enclosure which is more than 1 metre above ground level does not create an obstruction to the view of persons using the highway as to be likely to cause danger to such persons;
(ii) in any other case, 1 metre above ground level;
From assessment of your proposal, the footpath which runs between no.51 and no.53 is an adopted highway and therefore the height of your fence should not exceed 1 metre. Footpaths are still classified as highways. Furthermore, it is important to recognise the use of the land as landscaped amenity land which is important in retaining the open character of this footpath. On this basis, the erection of any fence in this location should ensure that the use of this land is amenity land and not private garden, otherwise a change of use application would be required. This would also be unlikely to be supported due to the importance of this land in the character of the streetscene.
In short, we could accept a fence similar to that at no.51, as this would be lawful under this application. However, enclosure of this land should not result in a change of use of the land. I would therefore recommend that you amend your proposal if you wish to proceed with it to accord with the GPDO. If you have any questions about the information above please do let me know.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I responded back stating that the GDPO, there is no reference to an "adopted highway" instead it refers to "a highway used by vehicular traffic".
Also, the land is not amenity land, it is part of my private garden, and provided title plan, the council responded as below:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A highway used by vehicular traffic does not limit itself to motorised vehicles, nor should it be open to all forms of vehicles. As this footpath is open to pedestrians and cyclists it would still fall within the definition of ‘A highway used by vehicular traffic’. The proposal therefore does not accord with Paragraph A.1. I have attached an appeal decision which outlined this matter in further detail.
With regards to the issue of private garden, whilst I do accept it is within your title deeds in planning terms it is still landscaped amenity space which contributes to the open character of the footpath. It is not private garden space. With this in mind, any fence erected, should still maintain the open character of the area, a 1m fence would do this as I suggested in my previous email.
The fence at no.51 was considered to be acceptable as it restricted access to their land without reducing the open nature of this path. This is something which would be permitted along the border of your land, however, a 2m fence would impact upon this openness.
Therefore, as I stated in my previous email, I suggest you revise your proposal to accord with the relevant class under the GPDO.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the second response the council cited this previous application in Milton Keynes for rejecting the application which refers to redways and also the MK example the fence would be setback 0.6m from the highway whereas our proposed 2m fence will be setback over 6m from the road!
Also to note I found out that although the MK lawful development application was refused the owners submitted a full planning application which was approved!
Links below
"A highway used by vehicular traffic does not limit itself to motorised vehicles, nor should it be open to all forms of vehicles. As this footpath is open to pedestrians and cyclists it would still fall within the definition of ‘A highway used by vehicular traffic’."
You could just check that the footpath is in fact designated for cycling as well as pedestrians. I don't think there is a general right for cyclists to use paths and pavements?
You could just check that the footpath is in fact designated for cycling as well as pedestrians. I don't think there is a general right for cyclists to use paths and pavements?
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
