Garden Pergola - permitted development?

[wiggy001]

Hi,

I live in a mid terraced house and next door have just installed a wooden pergola and I just wanted to sense check whether this is in breach of planning permission or is covered under permitted development?

It is 3 metres high at the highest point, attached to the back of their house and very close to the boundary with my property.

Google suggests a max height of 2.5m if near the boundary but 3m if attached to the house but isn’t clear what the max height is when attached to the house and near the boundary… can anyone confirm?

[Steve H]

Aren’t the permitted rights extremely restricted on footprint area if it’s attached to the house? I thought that was just for porches etc?

[gangzoom]

We've got one on order to provide some sun shading the garden sliding doors. The guidance I believe is:

• The pergola does not utilise more than 50% of the land surrounding the existing building
• It is not installed on the front elevation of a building
• It is no higher than four metres (or three metres if installed within two metres of a boundary with a neighbouring property
• It is not being added to an existing veranda, balcony or raised platform

[Ste-EVo]

From Google Ai;

Key Permitted Development Rules

To qualify for PD rights, an attached pergola must strictly adhere to the following guidelines: [1]

Location: It must be placed at the rear or side of the house. It cannot be positioned on the main front elevation of your property facing a road.Height Restrictions:If the pergola is within 2 metres of your property boundary, the maximum overall height is strictly 2.5 metres.If the pergola is more than 2 metres from any boundary, it can be up to 3 metres high.Footprint: The pergola—when combined with any other extensions or outbuildings—must not cover more than 50% of the land around your original house.Platform Height: It cannot be built on a raised platform, balcony, or veranda if the platform is higher than 0.3 metres.Structure and Materials: Because it is attached to the house, it should be designed for general garden/seating use and not fully enclosed to create a completely new, separate living space. [1, 2, 3]

[Ste-EVo]

Hopefully that helps, from my interpretation it would appear your neighbour is possibly in breach of the PD rule(s).

Do you get along with your neighbours?

[wiggy001]

Thanks for the responses so far but I’m still not sure whether being attached (3m max height) trumps being close to my boundary (2.5m).

The neighbour has only moved in relatively recently but we do get on and I’d like to keep it that way. But it’s a ln eyesore (imho) and I might be looking to move in the medium term and this won’t exactly add to the appeal of my place.

[Ste-EVo]

The above is based on being attached to the house, so if its within 2mtrs of a shared boundary then 2.5mtrs seems to be the max under PD.

However, they could have been granted planning permission.

You have the potential to fall out with them very quickly if the issue is raised. Even the nest of neighbours can fall out over lesser matter. Is .5mtrs gonna make any difference? Is it hurting anyone? Sometimes its better to just let things be IMHO.

Not that disregarding the rules is right mind if must add. It would likely piss me off, but id probably just let it be for the sake of an easy life.

Edited by Ste-EVo on Tuesday 19th May 23:27

[dickymint]

wiggy001 said:

Thanks for the responses so far but I m still not sure whether being attached (3m max height) trumps being close to my boundary (2.5m).

The neighbour has only moved in relatively recently but we do get on and I d like to keep it that way. But it s a ln eyesore (imho) and I might be looking to move in the medium term and this won t exactly add to the appeal of my place.

You've stated it is attached to his house but not stated exactly how close. There's no "trumping" involved if it's within 2 metres then the max height is 2.5 metres unless planning has been granted (doubtful if you weren't notified). It's your call but I suspect you'd still think it an eyesore at 2.5 metres? And I doubt very much that it would be a deal breaker for a potential buyer.

[alscar]

Obviously you don’t want to end up in the position of having to declare an argument with the neighbour when it comes to selling your house either.

[wiggy001]

Thanks again for the responses, much appreciated.

Generally my view is the leave things like this for a quiet life, however I don’t really want my new neighbour thinking she can do whatever she wants and nobody will say anything.

It would make a difference at 2.5m as there is a 2m fence between us so it wouldn’t be as visible.

Point noted about declaring a dispute.

Will give it some further thought.

[Bikesalot]

Got any pictures for context?

Are we talking a cheap wooden structure abutted to the house?

[wiggy001]

[CSR Performance]

Not brilliant, but once it weathers in it will be a lot less conspicuous. The extension a few houses along is far more offensive IMO!

[Snow and Rocks]

Difficult to tell from the photo but I'd assume there's still a roof covering of some sort to go on there - metal sheet, felt etc that will make it look a lot better.

Absolutely not worth falling out with you immediate neighbour over in any case.

[Bikesalot]

In no way will that detract from the appeal as you suggested earlier.

[The Three D Mucketeer]

CSR Performance said:

Not brilliant, but once it weathers in it will be a lot less conspicuous. The extension a few houses along is far more offensive IMO!

I agree

I was surprised to see a "Pergola" with a covered roof , at the side of the house you would call it a car port .

[Snow and Rocks]

The Three D Mucketeer said:

I agree

I was surprised to see a "Pergola" with a covered roof , at the side of the house you would call it a car port .

Or a covered porch. Transforms how you use the garden as the UK weather is often perfect to sit out in if you have a roof over your head. Also means you can leave proper furniture out there without it getting ruined - lovely sitting out listening to the rain with a cup of tea. No more abandoned BBQs because of a heavy shower either.

Every house should have one!

[dickymint]

Bikesalot said:

In no way will that detract from the appeal as you suggested earlier.

^^^ my thoughts exactly. As regards the photo from that angle it has no bearing planning at all and if it were at the allowed 2.5 metre height it would still look the same. OP's only valid complaint is the height viewed from the side and the point I made remains - it's up to him to decide does it really make that much difference, as in overbearing, enough to take action?

[andya7]

Permitted Development Schedule 2 Part 1 has two relevant sections;

Class A – enlargement, improvement or other alteration of a dwellinghouse
Class E - detached outbuildings

Some confusing comments put forward, however if it is attached to the dwelling then it is an enlargement (Class A) and (the following is extremely simplified...);

(f) ...the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would have a single storey and
(i) extend beyond the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse by more than 4 metres in the case of a detached dwellinghouse, or 3 metres in the case of any other dwellinghouse, or
(ii) exceed 4 metres in height

(i) the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would be within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, and the height of the eaves of the enlarged part would exceed 3 metres;

So;
- if the enlargement is within 2m of the curtilage boundary (which the photo suggests it is) then the eaves can be a max 3m
- it can extend beyond the rear wall by a mx of 3m (semi-detached)
- maximum height 4m

However...

Development is permitted by Class A subject to the following conditions -
(a) the materials used in any exterior work (other than materials used in the construction of a conservatory) must be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse;

So, it appears that they haven't completed the work as they would need to use materials that are of a similar appearance... i.e. roof tiles as per the photo

[mikey_b]

Snow and Rocks said:

The Three D Mucketeer said:

I agree

I was surprised to see a "Pergola" with a covered roof , at the side of the house you would call it a car port .

Or a covered porch. Transforms how you use the garden as the UK weather is often perfect to sit out in if you have a roof over your head. Also means you can leave proper furniture out there without it getting ruined - lovely sitting out listening to the rain with a cup of tea. No more abandoned BBQs because of a heavy shower either.

Every house should have one!

That's a personal thing, but for me, a UK day that's warm enough to enjoy sitting outside is often not warm enough to be sitting in full shade.