Sheds on private allotments - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

David, much as regulations may be applied to prevent small sheds and the like being used in such environments, the thinking behind that philosophy comes from protecting the visual scene. Logically, this is a somewhat flawed concept that has been created in recent times. The thinking being that a lovely chocolate box view of the British landscape is all powerful and should be protected to the enth degree. But what is the consideration being given to promote people to be able to work there small parcel of land for the reason of producing home grown foods? Surely the benefits knock the loss into a ten penny hat! People are eating healthier straight away. There own vitality and fitness is improved. The benefit to nature is far greater by having divesity over a grass field (which is actually a desert in wildlife terms). Social values are improved as fellow owners tend to co-operate and finally, the landscape one is protecting is not ancient in the first place. That is not some kind of happy-hippy philosophy but a serious set of points that planning bodies are not properly contemplating these days. It seems LPA's would far rather react to complaints from those who do not want change over the wealth of benefits to be derived by allowing and helping such schemes. Planning urgently needs to consider how the countryside is used, It is not just the playground of the casual viewer or a museum piece for conservation and preservation. It is an industrial place where the growing of foods should be both encouraged and promoted.

There is an argument that growing of food for ones own consumption on an allotment means that the use does not fall within agriculture. The land may therefore have a material change of use requiring planning permission which would allow the LPAS to condition the land against structures. Try and do a Compass search on this because I remember a quite recent case either at appeal or in the courts when the matter was discussed but i cannot lay my hands on it at the moment. The share the case details with us as we cannot all afford Compass searches.

From a senior Welsh government planner: "I cannot comment on specific cases but from a town and country planning perspective the 'use' of land as allotments is considered to fall within the definition of 'agriculture', which the planning legislation provides does not involve development of land and, consequently, does not require planning permission. However, while the 'use' of the land does not require planning permission, the erection of any sheds on the land, for instance, may, depending on their size, need planning permission". Having looked at cases which have sometimes unnecessarily gone to appeal thanks to 'enthusiastic' planners it seems that as long at they are easily moved, no solid concrete base (slabs are OK) a small 6X4 tool shed or a polytunnel less than 3m in height will more than likely not require planning permission, the problems only arise when the planning department has a certain kind of 'culture', if you know what I mean.

The advice we have been given is that while local authority sites do not need permission for the erection of sheds, on private sites this is considered developement and requires planning permission. We have been given this view by NSALG (National Association of Allotment & Leisure Gardeners) and the chief planning officer at SCDC (Suffolk Coastal District Council). Having said that SCDC originally told the land owener that permission was required to use agricultural land for allotments but, after wasting several weeks of everybodies time we managed to prove they were wrong, as we had initially told them, and they had to issue a permitted developement certificate. It's time someone changed the rules so it is the same for everyone. It seems to be just a money making scheme. Apart from sheds, does anyone know what else might require permission on a private site (greenhouses, poly tunnels, fruit cages etc.)?

Why would you need a permitted development certificate for allotments? Planners will do anything to get out a hole they have been digging (no pun intended), and of course there is the fee. Polytunnels under 3m high and 'temporary' are not development, neither is a shed that can be moved or dismantled easily. A caravan is outside planning law and can be used for shelter, storage or as a toilet. You can forget the term 'private', it has no meaning in 'agriculture' so you can carry out whatever permitted development a farmer can get away with. If you take up forestry, even as a hobby, you can plonk anything that meets the definition of a caravan (some log cabins) on there and use it as an office, stay in it overnight during a 'season' which according to the law is 'less than a year'. With 'forestry' You can also build a shed as long as it is 'reasonably necessary' and doesn't look like a house.

Care must be taken when dealing with planning matters not to over-simplify things or adopt a 'common sense' approach. The law is far more complicated than that. It can be costly to get things wrong. A number of local authority planning enforcement officers read this site and they must be looking with some glee at some of the comments posted hereon. Be careful or one of them could be calling on you soon.

Come on down, I like a challenge. If planners were consistent in their personal interpretation of the law it would be pretty boring out there.

We have recently been served with an enforcement notice to remove the sheds from our allotments by the council. A shed is defined as "a building or structure, with walls and a roof, in excess of 1 meter in height, being constructed from wood or other solid materials". The reason for the notice is "The land is in the Green Belt. The erection of sheds is detrimental to the visual amenity and openness of the Green Belt and conflicts with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt and its essential characteristics”. Some on the parish council have been trying to get rid of the allotments almost since they began some 15 months ago, for whatever reason I cannot begin to imagine. They have tried many different threats over the intervening months before finally settling on the visual aspect argument a couple of weeks ago. We are in the process of formulating an appeal, would anyone have any advise or examples for us?