Topic: Red Tape Loopholes..?

[wraith]

Does anyone know the rules and regs ...?

I took on a allotment about a month ago and since then have been told that because the allotments are next to a river (Ouse) the land is technically a 'flood-plain' and because of this nobody is allowed to have any 'permanent structures' by which they mean sheds... this is a rule enforced by the E.A. and supposedly there is nothing that can be done about it..?

Well, for a start the flood plains haven't been flooded for over 40 years...!! Is there some rules on how long land can be deemed a flood plain if it hasn't flooded for a long period..?

I also suggested either sheds on stilts..? Or possibly sheds where the bottom two feet are steel mesh..? this way in the unlikely event of a flood the sheds would have no effect on the flow of the water...? Likewise we are not allowed any raised beds above .75 of a metre, hence: Asparagus beds are but a dream...!!

Any advice by anyone that know the ins and outs of combatting red tape or possibly someone who is familiar with old forgotten laws that have been forgotten, but are still enforcable would be a help...??

Many thanks in advance...


wraith

[dtw]

A flood plain is the flat bit of land around the lower reaches of a river, so theoretically can flood if there is enough rain in one go.
It can't be re-categorised as it is a feature of the land.

The most probable reason for having no sheds is that there is some grumpy old bugger in the council who doesn't like sheds. ;D

[Jeannine]

Hi, I can't help you with the red tape, but the aparagus bed,you said no beds above .75 metre, that is almost 30 inches, my aspargus bed was timbered in with a height of only 12 inches and my 'gus was very productive. Am  I misunderstanding you.

XX Jeannine

[lincsyokel2]

As far as im aware, a wooden shed not standing on permanent foundations isnt a permanent structure.  What you want is a definition of 'permanent structure' from the County Architects office, see if that pulls the rug.

[Chrispy]

What is the advantage of a raised bed for asparagus? Nobody on our side has theirs in a raised bed, and only 1 plot has any raised beds more than 12inches high.

I think most sites do not allow permanent structures, but that does not include sheds.

[OberonUK]

It may be worth finding out exactly what is written down regarding this matter. Is there a covenant? What are the conditions as written in any contract? It may be that you are suffering from a harsh interpretation of something that has not been questioned legally for many years. See what is actually written - you may find the 'rule' has just evolved over time and is actually far from the specific legal situation.

I thought that sheds below 6ft tall counted as temporary as long as they do not have solid foundations/concrete footings etc.

Could the issue be to do with insurance? I don't know where the liability would/might be if the area flooded and you lost a shed and all its tools.

May sound silly, but do you have rules prohibiting caravans? You could use one of those as a shed, especially if a few of you got together.

I think you are well within your rights to ask for a definition of 'permanent structure' from the people who are trying to enforce the rule. Local councils do define things differently but it seems reasonable to ask how the term is applied in your specific case. A solicitor's letter may carry some weight and all you would be doing is asking for legal clarification (so you don't accidentally break the rules)

[w00dy]

I know that when you build a permanent structure on your land you need planning permission, but sheds are not classed as permanent in this case and therefore dont need prior permission, maybe this translates to the allotments too?

[Robert_Brenchley]

A shed definitely isn't a 'permanent structure' as far as the law's concerned unless it has a permanent base. I'm on a flood plain, and get flooded regularly, We have sheds, even brick sheds which are definitely permanent. We're currently in the process of getting planning permission to rebuild a derelict brick shed - they weren't sure whether we needed it but eventually decided we did - but no objections have been raised, and there have been numerous discussions with the Council. This is just someone being awkward.

[Unwashed]

I agree with OberonUK, get to the bottom of who said what.  I'd like to know specifically how the EA enforce the "no permanent structures" rule.  To be honest, it sounds a little confused.

There are several mechanisms by which your sheds can be controlled, and you need to understand exactly what mechanism is being used before you can challenge it effectively.

1. Site rule.  Your tenancy will likely be subjest to certain rules and conditions so start here.  If there is a no-shed condition then find out why and try to change it.  This is likely to be very, very hard because it's in the nature of small-minded rule-mongers to defend their rules with a passion and oftentimes they're immune to reason.  It's possible the no-shed rule is based on an a misunderstanding of some old regulation or other so get to the bottom of it.

2. Planning control.  It's possible that the no-shed rule is actually enforced by the planning department, albeint on recommendation of the EA.  The old "temporary structure" thing often crops up in discussions of planning permission but that's not exactly the issue.  What matters is whether the local planners consider a shed to be development, and to be honest it's very difficult to say.  Planners have typically ruled that polytunnels that don't have foundations aren't development and so don't require planning permission, and it's likely that in general they don't consider allotment sheds to be development either because they are similarly temporary.  It's a subtle but important difference - the shed doesn't need permission because it isn't development, not because it's temporary.  It's possible that something about the situation, like an EA floodplain designation, will persuade the planner that even a shed will constitute development and therefore require planning permission which will not be granted.  Of course all this is accademic until you find out why sheds are not allowed.

3. Environmental legislation.  The EA do have some powers under various acts and if it's true that the EA enforce the no-shed rule then it will be under this power.  Find out specifically by what power the EA enforce the rule, because I'm doubtful whether they do.

So you need to get to the bottom of this and find out exactly why sheds are banned.

Which river Ouse is it, and which is your county council?

[tonybloke]

erm, if this is part of your tenancy agreement, and you ain't happy with it, why did you take an allotment there?  A lot of sites have a 'no shed' rule, some have a 'no tree' rule as well. some sites have a 'no livestock' rule, others allow livestock, it's not unusual to have prohibitive rules or conditions of tenancy on allotments.

[Tee Gee]

We are allowed huts but they have to comply with planning permission see photo below;



As you look up the track huts/greenhouses etc to the right of the track must be situated along the side of the track which is the top of the allotment.

Huts/greenhouses to the left of the truck again must be at the top of the allotment but this puts the allotment between them and the track (does that make sense?)

So I think I would visit the planning department and clarify the position!

[wraith]

erm, if this is part of your tenancy agreement, and you ain't happy with it, why did you take an allotment there?  A lot of sites have a 'no shed' rule, some have a 'no tree' rule as well. some sites have a 'no livestock' rule, others allow livestock, it's not unusual to have prohibitive rules or conditions of tenancy on allotments.

All apply in our case... No sheds, tree's or livestock (apart from bee's)

I am happy with the tenancy and (once I get the chest high weeds cleared from the entire plot) the allotment...

My intention is not to make waves, its simply a case of I believe that in life if somebody wishes to put restrictions upon us, then we have a right to know how they qualify their reasons for the restrictions..? I simply wish to get to the reason for them and then, if reasonable, abide - if not bring their reasons up at the next allotment holders meeting to see if 'we' as a group wish to challenge their rule...


wraith

[Unwashed]

My intention is not to make waves, its simply a case of I believe that in life if somebody wishes to put restrictions upon us, then we have a right to know how they qualify their reasons for the restrictions..? I simply wish to get to the reason for them and then, if reasonable, abide - if not bring their reasons up at the next allotment holders meeting to see if 'we' as a group wish to challenge their rule...

Well said, I think that's totally reasonable.

Tony, if we had a choice about which allotment site to take a plot at then I'd completely support your position, but mostly there's not more than one site that's within walking distance of our home, so if we want a plot we have no choice but to accept what's available.  And it does happen that oppressive rules come in, and not always with the tenants' involvement or consent.  I feel that wraith is asking a reasonable question: if there's a good and legitimate reason not to allow sheds then that's fine, but it does sound possible that the rule is over-zealous and it's reasonable to question it.