He builds a summer house in the garden and the City Council forces him to demolish it because it does not fit in with other homes in the neighborhood

He builds a summer house in the garden and the City Council forces him to demolish it because it does not fit in with other homes in the neighborhood

Although having a house with a garden gives the advantage of being able make an attached home to take advantage of and have spaceit must be taken into account that this type of facilities require their corresponding urban planning permits. Doing them without the corresponding license can cause problems with the City Council and end up assuming the extra cost of demolishing the home, as has happened to this 36-year-old man in the United Kingdom, who built a summer house in his backyard and will now have to demolish it because the City Council considers that it does not fit with the rest of the houses in the neighborhood.

The affected person, as explained by the media Mirrorhad built a single-story, L-shaped building at the back of his property, which he described as a summer home. However, for the town council it was a completely independent home and it refused to grant the building permit that it had requested after building it.

Although the owner of the house tried to appeal this decision, the urban authorities rejected his request, giving him six months to demolish the construction, considering that it does not fit with the characteristics of the homes in the area.

The house will have to be demolished because the City Council considers it to be an independent home.

The first problem is that the man built the house without requesting the corresponding building permit. Although he claimed that it was a summer house, the building had a bedroom, a kitchen open to the living room and a full bathroom.

However, due to these characteristics, municipal technicians considered that it was not a simple garden shed, but rather an independent home from the main house, since it was separated from the building, had its own electricity supply and could have independent access.

Furthermore, the City Council explained that the construction reduced the space available for green areas and altered the type of buildings in the area. He also considered that it could cause inconvenience to neighbors due to increased noise and lack of outdoor space.

Another problem was the proximity of the construction to a large protected oak tree located on the grounds of a nearby school. Those responsible for urban planning pointed out that this tree had an important value for the environment and that it was necessary to avoid possible damage.

The owner appealed the municipal decision, but his first appeal was rejected in 2024. Subsequently, he appealed the demolition order again, although the urban planning inspector also did not agree with him and considered that the six months granted to remove the construction were a “reasonable and proportionate” period.

“I am not going to continue fighting against the City Council, it is not worth it”

One of the owner’s main complaints was that he needed more time to carry out the demolition, as he would have to hire workers, remove materials and ensure that the work did not cause damage to the protected tree.

For this reason, he requested to extend the period to nine months. However, the inspector rejected his request, considering that he had not demonstrated why the six months granted were insufficient to carry out the work.

Davis explained that he had purchased the property with the intention of renovating and renting it out, while the small garden building was intended to be used as a leisure and meeting space.

“I bought the property and renovated it with the intention of renting it out, with a summer house at the back to use as a leisure and entertainment space, but that has not happened,” explained the owner.

Some parents manage to kick their son’s ex-girlfriend, who lived there with her granddaughter, out of the apartment, even though a judge had granted her use of the house

Feijóo announces a 60% reduction in housing taxes for young people and mortgage guarantees of up to 100%

Finally, after the appeals were rejected, the man has decided not to continue with the procedure and accept the decision of the authorities. “I’m not going to continue fighting against the City Council, it’s not worth it, so that’s the thing,” he said.