The rock legend recently submitted a retrospective planning application to Camden Council for the development.
It came after the 79-year-old had already removed a summerhouse and shed from his property in Hampstead and replaced it with a new one.
He claimed that the new green shed is “of modest size” and designed to ensure that there is no “loss of privacy or overshadowing”.
But the hut has been branded “obtrusive and overbearing” by disgruntled neighbours, who allege the new structure is “significantly more visually and physically intrusive than what stood there before”.
A summerhouse has been demolished by David Gilmour (Image: Camden Council / Whiteacre Planning)
Submitting a lengthy objection online, Hampstead Hill Gardens Residents’ Association have urged Camden Council to reject Mr Gilmour’s application.
They also asked that the shed be removed “as soon as possible” to “stop the continued harm to neighbourhood amenity”.
The group’s chair, Audrey Mandela, wrote: “Permission was granted to rebuild a shed on its original footprint, approximately two metres from the boundary.
“However, what has actually been built is abutting the boundary fence, in a substantively different and more intrusive location.
“The matter was raised with the applicant by residents of our road, who hoped to avoid the need for formal action.
“The applicant has reacted by submitting this retrospective application to pre-empt enforcement action.”
Other neighbours have also submitted complaints – with one saying the new shed is against the rear fence and therefore cannot be obscured with vegetation, as was the case with the old structure.
Another called for the building to be changed to allow a two-metre gap behind the shed to “provide space for planting and wildlife”.
In a statement supporting Mr Gilmour’s application, Whiteacre Planning, said: “The shed is of a similar design to the previously approved summerhouse.
“[It] is painted green to minimise its visual impact and has a cedar shingle roof which will quickly silver down.
“It is of high quality design and build and is appropriate in this location.
“Although the roof of the shed is above the height of the boundary fence, it will not lead to any overlooking, loss of privacy, or overshadowing.”
The letter concludes then that Mr Gilmour’s proposal should be “granted without delay” – as it “complies with all relevant local and national planning policy”.
Camden Council has not yet set a date by which a decision should be made.
Mr Gilmour was approached for comment by SWNS.
