Victory for Geri Halliwell-Horner after council give green light to keep ‘illegal’ pergola built with no planning permission at her £9.2million mansion

Geri Halliwell-Horner has won a planning battle with neighbors after being given the green light to keep her ‘illegal’ pergola on her £9.2million mansion.

The former Spice Girl and her husband, former Red Bull Formula 1 team boss Christian Horner, sparked local outrage by building an oak-framed pergola and pergola in the garden without making a planning application.

Although retrospective planning permission was previously refused, the pergola’s future is in line with World War II. While the application for a new pergola was approved today due to the listed house, the future of the pergola remains uncertain.

Neighbors claimed the celebrity couple were disturbing the ‘peace’ of their local village in Oxfordshire and interrupting the pristine view of the adjacent church.

They said they were ‘trolled’ after Geri, 53, and Christian, 52, wrapped fairy lights around the pergola and felt treated differently by the council due to their celebrity couple status.

Planners at the local council today said they would be ‘sympathetic’ to the star’s wishes due to the ‘layout, scale and design’ of the pergola, adding that it was ‘consistent with the appearance, character, layout, scale and design of existing housing in the area’.

The planning officer added that the proposal would ‘ensure adequate standards of amenity and privacy’ for neighbours.

They continued: ‘The council’s heritage response confirms that the oak-framed pergola, when covered with plants such as wisteria, represents a traditional garden feature sympathetic to the character of the site.’

Back and Christian’s World War II in Oxfordshire. Building work on their Grade II listed house has annoyed neighbors over the years and proposals to include an oak-framed pergola and pergola in the backyard were rejected

Although metal was ‘historically more typical of a pergola’, the wooden version ‘was thought to be able to integrate into the environment without causing damage, provided it was screened appropriately’.

The pergola is visible to passers-by over a high garden wall surrounding the house, which the council decided would ‘not affect essential views or alter the established relationship between the listed building and the church’.

It concluded: ‘The proposal is considered to preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area as the pergola does not appear over the garden wall and does not contain visually prominent or discordant elements.’

The couple reignited local outrage after resubmitting their pergola plans in January.

A neighbor accused them of rubbing our noses in ‘complete disregard’ of regulations by wrapping fairy lights around the outdoor structure.

They claimed that this highlighted ‘the level of injustice and inequality shown between the super-rich and the average person’.

The neighbor, who did not want to be named, said: ‘The pergola and wooden pergola, which were not given retroactive planning permission, still exist and are used with fairy lights on them.

‘If this isn’t thumbing our noses and completely disregarding planning permission, I don’t know what is.

‘Any ordinary person would have to destroy them all.’

In the now-approved application, a representative for the couple said the oak-framed pergola with integrated plants ‘aims to provide a modest and visually sensitive garden structure that preserves the character and setting of the host property’.

They claimed that the proposal, planned by Riach Architects, had been carefully designed to ‘ensure that it remains clearly connected to the main house and does not undermine its significance or setting’.

It was also said that climbing plants would be wrapped around the pergola in a bid to ‘soften the appearance of the structure over time, reduce its visual impact and reinforce its role as a garden feature rather than a building’.

The statement added: ‘This approach responds directly to planning recommendations seeking improved landscape integration.

‘The pergola is positioned to prevent any impact on the fabric. [the house] and requires minimal ground intervention.

‘As a reversible structure, it maintains the long-term integrity of the heritage property whilst supporting the practical enjoyment of the garden.

‘In summary, the pergola represents a modest and sympathetic intervention that preserves the character and ambiance of the space. [the house] and is compatible with local and national planning policies.’

The pergola is located next to the previously approved swimming pool and is described as an ‘open frame oak beam structure’.

The gazebo is also made of oak support beams, complemented by a pyramidal slate roof.

The couple’s latest application adds a new page to the disputes with neighbors that have been going on for years.

The couple, who own a horse racing company called OMBI, are waiting for the council to consider an application to build a horse walker in their stable.

Permission was granted last year to build a second pool on the site, despite fears it would be a ‘stain on the landscape’.

The applications follow council approval three years ago to extend the first floor, build a replacement barn and a new greenhouse.

This left neighbors exhausted by the constant ‘industrial-scale’ developments on the property, adding that they ‘do not represent what a conservation area should be’.

They said: ‘The local village is no better for it in many respects and there are many disgruntled residents. Construction noise levels change daily.

‘It is fair to say that the landscape is not richer for Mr. Horner’s contributions.’

They added that footpaths had been ‘engulfed’, ‘exposing the public to unsightly combinations of oversized stables, downsized fences, horse jumps, horse barriers and the frequent flight of noisy quad bikes across their land which annoys local neighbours’.