Restrictive planning condition on garage and internal work

[Auction]

A garage has a restrictive planning condition imposed on it which says it should be kept available at all times for garage use.

In the proposed plan it was indicated that there is no access from the garage to the other parties of the house. However this garage has not been developed according to the proposed plan and there is an access from the garage to the others parts of the house. Moreover it has been developed in such a way that to go to the upper floors it is necessary to go first through the garage

1.
Even though this was internal work I would like to know if planning permission should have been necessary to develop the garage in a different way that this indicated in the proposed plan because the fact that there is an access from the garage to the other parts of the house means that it is less likely that this garage is kept at all times for garage use because it will be easier for the occupier of this house to use the garage as an additional room.

2.
I would like to know if the owner of this property applies for a lawful development certificate if he has to inform the planning department that his garage has been development in this way because this could be material information because of this previous restrictive condition imposed on the garage

 

[tony1851]

Just because there is a door between the garage and house, it does not mean that it cannot be used as a garage.
Internal matters are not generally the concern of Planning.

 

[Auction]

Yes but the problem is that when the planning department gave planning permission it was not aware that there will be a door between the garage and the living parts of the house because this door was not in the proposed floor plan. And if it would have known it could have refused planning permission with this door being here because this door makes more likely that this garage would not be made available at all times for garage use because this door makes a lot more easy for the occupiers to use the garage as an additional room instead that as a garage

It is truth that the insertion of this door is internal work for which usually planning permission is not necessary. However it influences the possible use of the garage which it is protected by a planning condition.

 

[tony1851]

And if it would have known it could have refused planning permission with this door being here

It might, or might not, have refused the planning permission - no one can say either way, though the presence or otherwise of the door would have made hardly any difference.

What the planning department cannot do is refuse something just because someone might use the space in a different way.

 

[roganty]

Déjà vu!? //www.diynot.com/diy/threads/t...oom-to-the-bedroom-through-the-garage.413621/

 

[Auction]

This previous thread was about whether or not a property could be a single dwelling house if it is necessary to go first through the garage to access the upper floors. However my new thread is about whether or not the planning department should have disclosed this information to the planning department what is different matter

However in this case it was not an ordinary garage because the planning department intended to issue a planning condition so that it can be used only for car parking use

The issue is whether or not the fact that the garage was not developed in accordance with the proposed floor plan is material information because all material information should be disclosed during an application for a lawful development certificate

I think that it could be material information because it influences the application of a planning condition concerning the likelihood that this garage was really made available at all times for garage use. If the planning department would have known that it was not developed in accordance with the proposed floor plan it could have done additional checks to be sure that this planning condition was complied with.

We can wonder why the owner of this property developed his garage in such a way that to go to the upper floors it was first necessary to go through its garage what is not convenient for himself. I think that the answer is that he did not intend to use his garage as a garage in contravention with this planning condition it is why I think that this is material information which should have been disclosed to the planning department

 

[AronSearle]

Do the following.

1. Use commas,,,,,,

2. Read your own sentences, half the time they read like gibberish.

3. Shorten your posts. Writing a short post is harder than writing a long winded one, but it makes you think about what you write, helping you to spot mistakes.

4. No one, especially a government department, is interested in what 'you think'. If you are not referencing directly to any laws or legislation, that describes whether X can or cannot be done, you are just wasting everyone's time.

If you can't communicate ideas properly in writing, no one in planning will listen to you.

 

[kingandy2nd]

Untitled

• kingandy2nd
• 3 Apr 2015
• 1

 

[Auction]

I would like to add the following

1
To convert a garage into a living space is permitted development rights. However the consequence of this planning condition which says that the garage should be kept at all times for garage use is that this garage has lost these permitted development rights. I would like to know if this means that the owner of this property should have made a planning permission to do this internal work in its garage because of the loss of these permitted development rights.

2
I would like to know if planning permission to do this internal work in the garage should have been necessary because the planning department should have been informed that during this work took place the garage could have not been available at all times for parking car use contrary to this planning condition which says that it should be kept at all times for parking use

3.
I would to know if a planning application would have been necessary for this internal work because the planning department should have been made aware that this garage was not developed in accordance with the approved drawing for the following reason:
We can wonder why the garage has been developed in such a way that to go to the upper floors it is necessary to go first through the garage because this causes inconvenient to the occupiers of this property who have to go through the garage first each time they want to access their flat in the upper floors.
Moreover there is also the extra cost of this internal work.
I think that there is only one reply is that the owner of this property has the intention to use this garage as an additional room and not as a garage. Hence the planning department should have aware of this internal work through an application for planning permission

4.
The owner of this property got a planning permission to build a one-bedroom flat in the ground floor with the loss of one of his two garages.
One planning condition to which I already referred attached to this planning permission says that the remaining garage should be kept at all times available for garage use.
However there is also another planning condition attached to this planning permission which says that the development permitted should not be carried out except in complete accordance with the submitted plans
I would like to know if this second planning condition means that this garage was developed illegally because it was not developed in accordance with the submitted plan and as a consequence a lawful development certificate can be refused for this reason

5.
As a consequence I would like to know if when the owner of this property applied for a lawful development certificate he should have disclosed the fact that his garage was not developed according to the submitted plan because this could be material information. I would like to know also if he has not disclosed this information if this could be a reason to have the lawful development certificate revoked for failure to disclose material information.

 

[Auction]

In my last post the following paragraph raises a new issue

4.
The owner of this property got a planning permission to build a one-bedroom flat in the ground floor with the loss of one of his two garages.
One planning condition to which I already referred attached to this planning permission says that the remaining garage should be kept at all times available for garage use.
However there is also another planning condition attached to this planning permission which says that the development permitted should not be carried out except in complete accordance with the submitted plans
I would like to know if this second planning condition means that this garage was developed illegally because it was not developed in accordance with the submitted plan and as a consequence a lawful development certificate can be refused for this reason

 

[geraldthehamster]

Answer these questions, please.

1. Is this property (about which you have posted 106 times) your property?

2. If it is not your property, what is your interest in these issues?


Cheers
Richard

 

[Auction]

I am helping a friend. Moreover I am a passionate of planning issues

 

[geraldthehamster]

I am helping a friend. Moreover I am a passionate of planning issues

You started this topic over a year ago. I don't think any fresh information is likely to be forthcoming, do you?

 

[Auction]

I do not remember how many posts I have made about this issue and I do not remember when I started the conversation. When we are passionate we do not count

However in my penultimate post the following paragraph raises a new issue

4.
The owner of this property got a planning permission to build a one-bedroom flat in the ground floor with the loss of one of his two garages.
One planning condition to which I already referred attached to this planning permission says that the remaining garage should be kept at all times available for garage use.
However there is also another planning condition attached to this planning permission which says that the development permitted should not be carried out except in complete accordance with the submitted plans
I would like to know if this second planning condition means that this garage was developed illegally because it was not developed in accordance with the submitted plan and as a consequence a lawful development certificate can be refused for this reason

which is that there is another planning condition which says that the development permitted should not be carried out except in complete accordance with the submitted plans. And I would like to know what is the impact of this other planning condition

 

[kingandy2nd]

Untitled

• kingandy2nd
• 3 Apr 2015
• 1