planning permission on field

[notavalidaddress]

my house has some land that was part of the field next to it bought about 5 years ago. id like to build a large summerhouse on it to help intergreat it into the being part and parcel of the 'estate' rather than just being this field at the side that i mow every week. being that i am not wanting to build a dwelling on the land will the council let me build it? it will be hexagonal with brick walls up to waist high..windows all round and a slate roof.

whats the genrall rule regarding building non residential buildings on green field land?

steve

[Owain]

Steve wrote | my house has some land that was part of the field next to it bought | about 5 years ago. id like to build a large summerhouse on it to | help intergreat it into the being part and parcel of the 'estate' | rather than just being this field at the side that i mow every week. | being that i am not wanting to build a dwelling on the land will | the council let me build it? it will be hexagonal with brick walls | up to waist high..windows all round and a slate roof. | whats the genrall rule regarding building non residential buildings on | green field land?

If the land is currently regarded as agricultural you may need change of use consent to change it to domestic garden.

On the other hand if it's agricultural land and you're building an agricultural building, you may not need any planning permission. I think hexagonal stables would be most attractive.

Owain

[Andy Hall]

Really you need to ask your local authority.

If the land is designated as agricultural, then you may not be able to do anything.

If by non-residential, you mean that it won't have sleeping accomodation, then you have quite a lot of flexibility, because with careful choice of size and position you can be exempt from Building Regulations.

For planning purposes, there are then rules about building size and height and the proportion of the land used as well as the distance from the main property and the road. Position is important.. As long as you don't go mad, for an outbuilding you have quite a lot of flexibility generally.

Do a Google search using keywords

planning permission outbuilding

and

building regulations outbuilding

and you will find numerous local authority web sites.

So check with yours though because there may also be covenants on your property or other specific restrictions because of location.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Johnny 5]

but it is a residential building as it is will be there only because of your residential use next door. In effect you will have changed the use of the field to part of your (residential) garden, and the council is likely to want to prevent this.

[Peter Crosland]

Lots of information here

the short answer is you are unlikely to get permission.

[Dave Liquorice]

Almost certainly, another keyword is "curtailage", ie the space around a building for that buildings comfortable enjoyment. Garden in other words... You can build sheds etc in the "garden" without planning permission, see earlier post about restrictions etc on "garden sheds".

Careful, I don't think buildings for horses come under the agricultural class. Cows yes, hence the large pyramid shaped cowshed in Somerset...

[IMM]

Just because you own the field next door, it does not mean it is part of the house property. They are down as two separate pieces of land. So, by taking down a fence between the two does not mean the field is now a part of a residential plot. You may have to merge the two pieces of land into one large plot. Then the field still may be outside the local plan.

[IMM]

As been said. Build attractive well finished stables, and then take down the fence, or part of it for access. If I recall correctly you can't make a field a part of your garden, well not easily, as the Stalinist planning system stops your freedom. Some regs there on fields into gardens, and they may start to load on council tax, etc. If agricultural, then you don't need PP.

[IMM]

Does it have cows in?

[Andy Hall]

Which is why I prefixed my remarks with comments to ask the local authority and that if the land is designated as agricultural then it may not be possible to do anything.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Andy Hall]

You're slipping.

You forgot to mention about LVT, the aristocracy, Kevin Thingumyjig, Wotsisname George and all that stuff.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Toby]

Not during the last week of June.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Drivel left, for example.

After stating that the two pieces of land are in fact deemed separate with a wave of the magic IMM wand, they can be 'merged' (note no hint of how this is achieved) and then MAY be 'outside the local plan', whatever that means.

In short, meaningless drivel from the groups resident 'I have an answer for everything even when I haven't a clue'

RAYPIWS (Read at your Peril, Ignore with safety)

[IMM]

[IMM]

I did?

[Huge]

No empty postings, please.

[Owain]

"Dave Liquorice" wrote | > I think hexagonal stables would be most attractive. | Careful, I don't think buildings for horses come under | the agricultural class. Cows yes, hence the large pyramid | shaped cowshed in Somerset...

But if the OP keeps cows in it his kids are really going to get picked on at the local gymkhana.

Cow-jumping in Somerset's probably something completely different ...

Owain

[Bob Eager]

(snip)

I wish IMM would cease his content-free postings, too!

[Huge]

That's a different matter. Abuse *on* Usenet is a way of life, abuse *of* Usenet is a matter for a TOS.

[Dave Jones]

Careful, I don't think buildings for horses come under the

I think you'll find that it burned down a few years ago! (and it did require planning permission due to its height!)

Dave Jones