Back Garden Wall at Entrance to Estate

I am currently building a house at an infill site at the entrance to an established estate. The side and back of the house is parallel to a main road and footpath and at the entrance to the estate. My builder has built a 1.8m high wall at the side of the house which will be plastered and capped. The council are saying that the wall needs to be reduced to 1m.

At the opposite side of the estate entrance with a house on a similar plot, they have the 1m high wall and have erected a wooden fence on top to take the height to 1.8m. My feeling is the council will come back and say that we can build half wall half fence like the house opposite.

My concerns with a 1m high wall are that people can easily access the back and side of my house and there was a lot of rubbish, glass bottles etc. on the site that we had to clear which people had thrown in from the footpath. A half wall and half fence would address this, but a wall would block more road noise, and it is already built.

I thought that a wall at the side or back of a house could be 1.8m and, if it faces a road, should be capped and plastered - and that this was exempted development. I think the council don't want one side of the estate entrance to be a 1.8m wall and the other side to be a half wall and half fence - they probably think that it looks better if both sides have the same treatment.

Is there any chance of changing their minds? We have already made a submission arguing that there was a lot of rubbish thrown from the footpath in to the site when the wall was only 1m.

pillbottle88 said:

I thought that a wall at the side or back of a house could be 1.8m

Click to expand...

Walls to the rear of a property (bounding the rears or side of other properties) can be built to 1.8m without the requirement for planning. The requirement for it to be fully behind the front facade generally applies to yours and adjoining properties.

Local Authorities can apply their own interpretation at times to what might to you or I seem to fall within the definitions of Exempted Development.

What Leo said. Any part of the wall that projects beyond the line of the front of the house, or of your neighbour's house, is likely to be viewed as a wall around a garden in front of the house, and is limited to 1.2 metres in height. And any facade of your house that faces a road is likely to be regarded as "front", even if you think of it as the back of the house.

The 1.2m limit (or 1.8m limit, if not in front of the house) applies to walls and fences, made of concrete, brick, masonry, wood, etc. So if you have a stone wall topped with a fence, you're measuring to the top of the fence.

The littering problem should diminish anyway, now that the site is no longer vacant or derelict. But if it's still a problem, your best bet is to grown a hedge inside your 1.2m wall. The hedge can be higher than the wall.

Build the wall as requested; next year add a fence inside the wall.

If no one complains in 5 years, finish the wall.

Edit to add : IANAPE

This is what I would do were I in the OPs position.

Thank you Leo, TomEdison and Dannyboy.

@Leo - very interesting (and scary) article. And good to think about what may be considered a facade.

@TomEdison - great point about the littering being a function of the derelict site.

@DannyBoyD - a man after my own heart. I think I will probably do what the council want for now, next year do something sensible that the neighbors wont care about and ask for forgiveness after a few years.

I wouldn't be too quick in doing what DannyBoyD suggested. Firstly there's nothing about being exempt after a 5 year period. I don't know where that came from. Secondly there is statutory bar on planning authorities taking enforcement proceedings after a 7 year period in some instances but in your case it will be a 12 year period from the date the planning permission was granted. Finally just be aware that if you carry out works that breach a planning condition you can face enforcement at any time.

nutty nut said:

exempt after a 5 year period

Click to expand...

Never suggested that; what I said was if no one complains about the fence after 5 years ( i.e. around 7 ish years after the low wall was built) I'd go ahead & build the wall.

Unlikely however that Mexico will pay for it

DannyBoyD said:

Never suggested that; what I said was if no one complains about the fence after 5 years ( i.e. around 7 ish years after the low wall was built) I'd go ahead & build the wall.

Unlikely however that Mexico will pay for it

Click to expand...

You are obviously not familiar with the Planning & Development Regulations.

nutty nut said:

You are obviously not familiar with the Planning & Development Regulations.

Click to expand...

It might be helpful to clarify if @DannyBoyD is mistaken? E.g. by posting relevant links etc.?

nutty nut said:

You are obviously not familiar with the Planning & Development Regulations

Click to expand...

Oh I think we can be pretty sure Mexico wont pay for the OPs wall.

To @Nuttynuts's point above, It would not be a great idea to extend the wall at a later date. You might get away with it for a while, you might not, but at the latest it will become a problem if you ever go to sell the property.

The 5 year confusion might be stemming from the enforcement period on unauthorised development. If you carry out works without planning and the LA don't take action for 5 years, they are no longer able to launch enforcement proceedings. Note that period becomes 12 years where the work is tied in to planning permission.