' Shed finish is in keeping with the house '.? Meaning

Mrfool35

Hi all

Looking into getting a detached shed/workshop for the rear and side of our house (Maybe just to the side). It is 3 bed semi D end of terrace, with small rear garden that extends around the gable side of house.

One of the Planning permission exemption criteria for such a structure states that the

'Shed finish is in keeping with the house'.

Im just wondering how specific is this requirement. for example can i get a steel shed if the external walls of the house are plastered and painted? Do materials or even colour have to conform?

Thanks!

seamus

A steel or wooden shed is fine. That's a bit of a fluffy requirement, it'll only come into play if somebody builds some mini gothic cathedral out the back and call it a shed.

Penn

Mrfool35 wrote: »

Hi all

Looking into getting a detached shed/workshop for the rear and side of our house (Maybe just to the side). It is 3 bed semi D end of terrace, with small rear garden that extends around the gable side of house.

One of the Planning permission exemption criteria for such a structure states that the

'Shed finish is in keeping with the house'.

Im just wondering how specific is this requirement. for example can i get a steel shed if the external walls of the house are plastered and painted? Do materials or even colour have to conform?

Thanks!

It just means the external finish and appearance of the shed shouldn't be completely different to that of the house. So try to use the same type of roof slates/tiles, colour of external render should match to a reasonable degree, don't use timber windows for the garage if the house has grey aluclad windows etc.

It's not completely specific and you can use materials/finishes of a lesser quality/price for the garage, or like you ask build the shed in steel frame with external render, all so long as it's generally in keeping with the materials/colours used for the house.

sydthebeat

Mrfool35 wrote: »

Hi all

Looking into getting a detached shed/workshop for the rear and side of our house (Maybe just to the side). It is 3 bed semi D end of terrace, with small rear garden that extends around the gable side of house.

One of the Planning permission exemption criteria for such a structure states that the

'Shed finish is in keeping with the house'.

Im just wondering how specific is this requirement. for example can i get a steel shed if the external walls of the house are plastered and painted? Do materials or even colour have to conform?

Thanks!

i dont know where your getting your "Planning permission exemption criteria" because the actual wording is as follows

4. The external finishes of any garage or other structure constructed, erected or placed to the side of a house, and the roof covering where any such structure has a tiled or slated roof, shall conform with those of the house.

which is quite clear..

if its visible from the front of the house ie to the side of the house, then the finishes should conform with those of the house.

dont mind seamus' ill informed bar stool rubbish above.

Lumen

From my own bar stool these requirements exist to give an objective default reason for a planner to respond to a subjectively ugly or inappropriate structure, or one that offends the neighbours.

It's certainly not good architectural practice to build garages and sheds that look like little houses.

Mrfool35

Thanks all for taking the time to post.

One last question sydthebeat if you don't mind;

If the shed is to the side of house, but not visible from the front, are those conditions still the same? Most of the side of the house I'm proposing the erect the shed on is within the same boundary's as the rear garden, and separated from the front by a fenced wall.You may only see part of the roof of the shed/workshop from the front at a distance, if you were to see anything at all.

sydthebeat

Mrfool35 wrote: »

Thanks all for taking the time to post.

One last question sydthebeat if you don't mind;

If the shed is to the side of house, but not visible from the front, are those conditions still the same? Most of the side of the house I'm proposing the erect the shed on is within the same boundary's as the rear garden, and separated from the front by a fenced wall.You may only see part of the roof of the shed/workshop from the front at a distance, if you were to see anything at all.

that would be an ecumenical matter

what you can do, if there is confusion as to exemption or not, is to apply for a section 5 declaration from the council

generally if the structure extends beyond the side of the house, then this condition kicks in.

there is an argument that you could make, that if the sheds roof and walls were of the same colour then it "conforms" regardess of the material used.

Lumen

There's a house near me that's put up a decent sized wooden shed just inside the front boundary wall/hedge, and the roof is visible over the hedge, probably the top half metre.

I assume they're hoping that by the time anyone gets around to complaining the hedge will have grown to fully hide it.

It does raise the interesting case of what happens when someone builds an ugly shed behind a tall, thick hedge, waits 7 years and then cuts down the hedge. Presumably at that point the planners will be unable to enforce?

Plumbthedepths

Many years ago when I sought planning I was advised that the shed/ garage was in keeping with the house finish. I understand it to mean the house was a nap finish with corner stones and the shed/garage was to have the same finish. I also took it mean if these were permanent structure not a wooden shed/ or galvanized.

Plumbthedepths

Lumen wrote:

It does raise the interesting case of what happens when someone builds an ugly shed behind a tall, thick hedge, waits 7 years and then cuts down the hedge. Presumably at that point the planners will be unable to enforce?

Reminds me of a couple in the UK who built their dream home behind a facade and waited the requisite time before they revealed their mini Castle. Off topic but just triggered a memory.

Lumen

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I also took it mean if these were permanent structure not a wooden shed/ or galvanized.

There's nothing intrinsically temporary about a galvanized shed, it could well last hundreds of years if properly maintained.

While there are no exemptions for temporary structures, only temporary uses (e.g. exempted development classes 15-20), those won't help with a shed, they're for things like portacabins used in the process of building something that does have planning permission, or a temporary variation in use of premises for elections.

Plumbthedepths

Lumen wrote:

There's nothing intrinsically temporary about a galvanized shed, it could well last hundreds of years if properly maintained.

It is still a relatively easy structure to remove. I don't think it is viewed as permanent by planners. Open to correction.

Lumen

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It is still a relatively easy structure to remove. I don't think it is viewed as permanent by planners. Open to correction.

You are not correct.

Also, it's surprising easy to demolish a house, from a structural perspective. The only thing stopping it is our slow legal system.

Council takes legal advice as deadline to demolish Co Meath house passes
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/council-takes-legal-advice-as-deadline-to-demolish-co-meath-house-passes-1.3532240

sydthebeat

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It is still a relatively easy structure to remove. I don't think it is viewed as permanent by planners. Open to correction.

you are corrected im afraid

there are no allowances for a 'temporary structure'

tradesman

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Reminds me of a couple in the UK who built their dream home behind a facade and waited the requisite time before they revealed their mini Castle. Off topic but just triggered a memory.

I bought a box trailer which was parked right where their kitchen used to be!

dathi

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Reminds me of a couple in the UK who built their dream home behind a facade and waited the requisite time before they revealed their mini Castle. Off topic but just triggered a memory.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-36445848

and that didn't work either

Lumen

dathi wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-36445848

and that didn't work either

They should have left it like an old castle ruin for extra irony.