Decking renovation COUNCIL DEMOLITION REQUEST!

Joined
9 Oct 2007
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Location
London
Country
United Kingdom
3 years ago I moved into my house which had some old decking (4 x 5m sq) in the back garden that was over 10 yrs old with a 1m fence at the end of it. This was on land that slopes away so the end of the decking was about 1.2m higher than the lower garden with only a ladder for access. The decking was in poor condition.

Recently I decided to renovate the decking by strengthening the sub frame, extending the decking by 50cm to 4.5m and replacing the decking boards. I also added some proper steps down to the lower garden. The fence at the back is now even higher than before so it is even more private. I didn't even consider that I would need planning permission.

Then a neighbour complained to the council about planning permission, and the council said it was unlawful and that it would have to be removed (without even seeing it). They argued that when I renovated the decking it was a brand new structure and so new rules would apply. This seems ridiculous to me and poses the question: how do you legally determine when decking is new or has just been renovated? It's a crazy situation when you renovate something in poor condition and because of that the council then argue that you should demolish it. If I hadn't touched the decking then the council said it would be permitted because it had been there for over 4 yrs.

This leaves me in a position where I have spent thousands renovating my decking which I could be forced to destroy and I could actually end up with half the garden I had when I bought the property, when all I was doing was renovating the old decking so my small children could play safely in their back garden.

I decided to apply for a lawful development certificate. I found a very similar case involving brand new decking on a sloping garden that was rejected and was overturned by the planning inspector. I also provided details of this to the council with my application so I was hopeful of success. However the council rejected it without giving a specific reason, simply saying that it was not permitted according to class E, which was very vague. I feel that they were annoyed that I was trying to get around their planning process.

I am now going to go to appeal at which point the council will have to articulate their legal argument more carefully and hopefully the planning inspector will overrule them. In fact I would hope that the inspector would be annoyed with them for wasting their time when I have already provided details of a successful appeal for a similar project.

However you can never be certain with these things and my concern is that if the appeal is unsuccessful, then I will have to apply for planning permission and I feel that the council are already against me. Also, they have much more power over a planning permission than a permitted development application.

Would the council have the power to make me remove my decking completely? How can you determine if decking is new or renovated? How much power do they have to demolish renovated decking? How can I fight my case the best way?

If there are any planning gurus out there please help.

Thanks
 
Sponsored Links
If you strengthened the frame below, and replaced the deck boards, then presumably that would just be a repair; the overall size and impact on the neighbours would be the same.

It's the extended bit that makes the whole lot needs planning permission. As a last resort, could you remove the 50cm bit, and then apply for planning permission to reinstate it?
 
Would the council have the power to make me remove my decking completely?
Yes, providing it is actually unlawful.

How can you determine if decking is new or renovated?
By replacing the decking boards it would be classed as new. I don't believe the extended part makes any difference, at least not with my local authority. You may have some cause to argue if the original boards where damaged but there is no guarantee with planners.

How much power do they have to demolish renovated decking?
In this instance it is new, not renovated so they can issue an enforcement notice (it is not clear if you have already received one), and then if you do not comply by the deadline they can enter your land and carry out the demolition on your behalf, billing you for their costs. Whether they would do that or not is not always certain - they should only take enforcement action when it is in the public interest, but if one of your neighbours has influence with the local council then it will be a done deal.

How can I fight my case the best way?
(I am assuming that your property does not have its permitted development writes removed.)

You mention that the land with the decking slopes. At what height from the highest natural ground level is the lowest point of the decking (measured from the top of the ground to the top of the decking board)? If at that point it is 30cm or less then as long as the decking does not break and restart it will be classed as permitted development and not need planning permission or a lawful development certificate (which is a worthless piece of paper in law designed purely to earn local authorities money).

The measurement must be from natural ground. If it has been made up with extra soil then you must add that depth to your measurement, and if soil has been removed from the natural ground then you can subtract that depth onto your measurement. It doesn't matter if the other end of the decking is 1.2m or 120m above the ground as long as it is 30cm or less at some point and is continuous.

If it is 30cm or less then simply write to the council referencing their letter/notice and inform them that the decking is 30cm or less from natural ground level and therefore it is permitted development and does not require planning permission. That is all you would need to do, and can ignore any future letters from them unless they are notices before action (or an enforcement notice) at which point you would enter into a formal appeal for a violation of national planning policy.

If it is not 30cm or less in height at the lowest point and you are certain that the land has not been lowered* (be truthful as lying to obtain planning permission (even if it is permitted development) is unlawful and very, very unwise) then you may be trying to fight a losing battle. You would have no grounds to appear an enforcement notice. However, if you could lower the structure so some part of it (which can be an edge or in the middle) is 30cm or less from the natural ground level then you can lower/rebuild it in that position and make it permitted. (Again assuming your permitted development rights are not removed.)

* Note that natural ground level is taken from the ground before any buildings where erected. If the decking is attached to a building it may be that the land was adjusted to keep the building floors level, so be careful when measuring the height next to buildings.
 
42704"]


By replacing the decking boards it would be classed as new. I don't believe the extended part makes any difference, at least not with my local authority. You may have some cause to argue if the original boards where damaged but there is no guarantee with planners.

Replacing the deck boards on the original deck would not make it a new deck - it would just be a repair and would not require planning permission.

It's the 50cm extension which makes the whole deck unlawful. If he removed that, then he could apply for a certificate of lawfulness, assuming he could prove it had been there > 4 years. In that case the height wouldn't be an issue.
 
Sponsored Links
By replacing the deck frame as well as the decking it would be classed as demolition and rebuilding a new structure. The four years was reset.

I went through exactly the same process with a deck at the top of my garden which was only 45cm high (but fortunately was 15cm along the rear). Once I informed the council it was PD they were happy and withdrew their letter. Mine was not an enforcement notice though so I had nothing to appeal - it's not entire clear if the communication the OP has had is a notice or just a letter inviting them to apply for PP.
 
By replacing the deck frame as well as the decking it would be classed as demolition and rebuilding a new structure.

OP didn't say he replaced the deck frame, he said he strengthened it. From the Planning perpective, there is a difference.
 
However the council rejected it without giving a specific reason, simply saying that it was not permitted according to class E, which was very vague.

Press them on this point. A simple letter along the lines of "The decking installed is less than 30cm high when measured relative to the natural ground level at its highest point and thus does not form a raised platform, balcony or verandah, and it covers no more than 50% of the curtilage of the original house. I require either clarification from you as to the exact reasons why it fails to comply with Classes E/F of the GPDO 2008, or I require you to notify me that your complaint against me is withdrawn" will do
 
cjard; I'm not sure the OP said that the deck was less than 30cm high at the highest point. If that was the case, he'd be OK with the original deck (assuming he could prove it was more than 4 years old).

If it is lss than 30cm high at the highest point, then the extension to the deck still won't need p.p.

If it is greater than 30cm above the highest ground level, the extension to the deck will take the wholedeck out of permitted development and he would need p.p.
 
I think I disagree, though I think youre right for different reasons

Does the deck touch the house? I think this would make it an extension under Class A rather than a hard area under Class F. If it's an extension, then it wouldn't be able to go over 4m distant from the house anyway, without a neighbour consultation scheme and extending it 50cm means the whole needs PP as tony says. If it were 3m, extended to 3.5 the whole would still be within PD limits and be ok (subject to other factors such as <30cm high so as not to be classed as a verandah/platform/balcony)
 
Dear All,

Thank you very much for your comments. I missed out a few things on my original post.

My back garden is 5m wide extending 16m from the back of my house. Directly outside my back door is a level patio at normal ground level that is 5m x 5m. At the end of the patio the land starts to slope away unevenly but drops 3m in total to the back boundary fence. (3m drop over 11m).
The decking extends from the end of the patio for another 4.5m and is 5cm above the level of the patio, with the land dropping away under the decking.
Therefore the patio should be taken as the ground level for measuring the height of the decking, and as this is 5cm the decking should be permitted development. The decking does not take up anywhere near 50% of the garden.

I have always believed that the decking was permitted and you all seem to share that view. xdave, I note that you have had similar decking and looked into this issue yourself so the fact that you agree gives me added confidence.

I contacted the council and they gave more detail. They said it was a veranda, balcony or raised platform and that it was 1.5m from natural ground level which they measured from the lower garden. Therefore in their opinion it needed planning permission and the application was rejected.

The following questions are the only relevant ones:

1. Has it been there for over 4 years? It depends on whether it is deemed to be new or renovation of the old. There seems to be some dispute about this and depends on the interpretation. One option would be to chop off the last 50cm, but this seems like a costly option as I would have to move the stairs as well.

2. Is it greater than 30cm from ground level (highest ground level)? No, not if you take the well known clarification into account that states that the highest ground level should be used.

I have tried to explain this to the planning officer already and have even provided a successful appeal as stated before which shows this ruling but it still didn't seem to change the planning officers mind. It clearly states that the highest ground should be used.

I have a number of options:

1. Contact the officer and try to persuade him again to withdraw his letter.

2. Appeal - This may take a while but will not cost anything.

3. Apply for planning permission - The officer has already said that this would probably be granted if a condition to keep the back fence was added. However this involves more money and take up more of my valuable time.

I think I will probably try them all in that order. I have nothing to lose except my time (and my sanity? no only kidding! :)).

Thank you all again for your helpful comments.
 
Does the deck touch the house? I think this would make it an extension
Eh? Attaching a deck to a house does not make it an extension.

Why not? Decking seems to be built under PD as either Class E where it's an outbuilding or Class F where it's a hard surface. Class E things shouldn't touch the house (otherwise they're no longer an outbuilding). If decking touches the house, it can't be Class E. If decking touches the house and has a measurable volume, it's a Class A structure
 
I contacted the council and they gave more detail. They said it was a veranda, balcony or raised platform and that it was 1.5m from natural ground level which they measured from the lower garden.

Write back to them and say "so.. Where in Class F does it say anything about verandahs?"

If they insist it's Class E, press them for detail as to why the lower garden was chosen as the ground level - the inference is that they deem the ground adjoining the house to be a made up level. You need to know where they get this from..
 
yes it's class E. I think I will press them on this as you suggest. The top level is clearly not a made up level. I may even try and get some advice from the inspector to clarify this point which may carry a lot more weight than my opinion. Surely the planning officer couldn't then ignore that! If he does then an appeal is the next route.
 
You were right to go for a certificate and not for planning permission, the muppet that came out and measured the height does not know PD (this happens so often, you need to explanin to planning officers how PD works, crazy!)

So as everyone says and you have obviously looked into, the technical guidance for height measurements is at the highest point of the intersection with the land, which as you state is less than 30cm.

You mention something about a fence, is this a fence at the back of the decking? Please elaborate.

You need to make sure that you are defo PD.

If you are, the council may well have cocked up (surely never, I hear you say). Try to find out why the council feels it is not PD, what Class and what clause - I cannot believe they have not told you this. Sometimes you need to point out the Technical Guidance as they may not have read it (or in one case for me, the planning officer had not even heard of it)

If they are still not giving you a straight answer or listening and you defo think you are PD, go straight to the top by writing a letter to the Chief Executive of the Local Authority explaing that there is no explanation and that you are planning to appeal with costs - you will get an answer.

Then you will know why the council thinks it is not PD and you may well get some paper shuffling a cover up and a certificate of lawfulness.

Failing this, if you are defo sure its PD, appeal with costs.
 

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
Back
Top