Garden room planning queries

[Captain Nemesis]

A transportable, or portable if you prefer, building could be installed for use as a garden room. They can be up to 136m².

Examples

 

[^woody^]

A transportable, or portable if you prefer, building could be installed for use as a garden room. They can be up to 136m².

Examples

View attachment 213599

View attachment 213600

View attachment 213601

View attachment 213602

And you are saying that every one of those buildings in those pictures you have posted do not, and did not require any planning permission or permitted development rights, but have been installed for perpetuity under the "Caravan Act"?

 

[mikeey84]

I seem to remember some channel 4 program where the fella off of Grand Designs built a shed in some woodland, and he had to put wheels on it for planning reasons. It was a token effort, and would never have allowed it to be transported, but it was enough to solve the planning issues

Edit- spelling

 

[wessex101]

I seem to remember some channel 4 program where the fella off of Grand Designs built a shed in some woodland, and he had to put wheels on it for planning reasons. It was a token effort, and would never have allowed it to be transported, but it was enough to solve the planning issues

It only really works if you put the "caravan" in your garden and the use is strictly limited to "ancillary to the home". So a garden room (whatever that is) would be fine but not a separate residential unit.

If you place it in woodland or farmland again the use must be ancillary to the approved use of the land so it could be a storage shed or workshop or maybe a staff rest room etc. You certainly could not use it for residential purposes.

It is actually a really useful way to circumvent the planning rules, that is until they realise it is being widely abused and close the loop hole.

 

[mikeey84]

I don't remember it having a bed

 

[Captain Nemesis]

And you are saying that every one of those buildings in those pictures you have posted do not, and did not require any planning permission or permitted development rights, but have been installed for perpetuity under the "Caravan Act"?

Im saying that they are all buildings which meet the requirements to be classed as "caravans". I posted the images because you seemed unclear as to what they could be.

Whether the way any of them were being used meant they needed PP I cant say, but the nature of them, in and of themselves, means that none of them necessarily needed it.

A Certificate of Lawfulness is a BGI if youre putting one up not via PP.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

I seem to remember some channel 4 program where the fella off of Grand Designs built a shed in some woodland, and he had to put wheels on it for planning reasons. It was a token effort, and would never have allowed it to be transported, but it was enough to solve the planning issues

I remember that. It didnt have to have wheels - none of the ones I showed have wheels, they just have to be capable of being moved, even if that means craning it onto a flatbed. You often see Portacabins being moved like that.

Also theres no requirement for it to be feasible to move it assembled to or from its location. If you couldnt physically get a crane there, it doesnt matter. If theres no road access for a lorry big enough to take it, that doesnt matter.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

It only really works if you put the "caravan" in your garden and the use is strictly limited to "ancillary to the home". So a garden room (whatever that is) would be fine but not a separate residential unit.

And theres the fine line which makes a CoL pretty much essential, because for the structure to qualify under the Caravan Act it must be capable of being used as an independent dwelling.

 

[^woody^]

Im saying that they are all buildings which meet the requirements to be classed as "caravans".

Just looking at them it's clear they would either need planning pension or comply with PD criteria.

The reference of them being caravans under the Act, is irrelevant ( and I doubt very must that they are) if they need to comply with planning laws when plonked into those situations in the images.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Woody - you asked "when is a garden room a caravan or even transportable?"

I said that a transportable/portable building could be installed for use as a garden room and posted a bunch of photos in case your question indicated that you thought that something that qualified under the Caravan Act had to be something which looked like, or was, what is commonly understood to be a "caravan".

You then asked "And you are saying that every one of those buildings in those pictures you have posted do not, and did not require any planning permission or permitted development rights, but have been installed for perpetuity under the "Caravan Act"?

Now we have two questions to consider.

1) Do the buildings themselves meet the definition in the Caravan Act of a portable building?

and

2) Does the way they are used meet the requirements in the Caravan Act which would allow them to be installed and used without needing PP or PD rights?

Now, I have no idea about (2), which is why I was careful to answer how I did.

Use is important. If you want one to use as a gym, or a recording studio, or a hobby room, or a workshop, or a pool house, or for overnight guest accommodation when family or friends visit, or a myriad of uses incidental to the use of your dwelling, then yes, that qualifies. If you want to rent it out as an independent dwelling to people who are nothing to do with your household then that is definitely not OK.

But as for (1) then yes, absolutely, all of them meet the definition for the building in the Caravan Act.

I can't tell about (2) just from the photographs, and neither can you.

So no -

Just looking at them it's clear they would either need planning pension or comply with PD criteria.

You cant tell that just by looking at them.

The reference of them being caravans under the Act, is irrelevant ( and I doubt very must that they are) if they need to comply with planning laws when plonked into those situations in the images.

No it is not irrelevant, and yes, subject to how they are used, they are indeed "caravans under the Act" whether you think they are or not.

For some reason you have ignored what I said about how the use of the buildings may require PP, but the nature of them doesnt necessarily mean that. Only you know what that reason was.

As I see it you have two options.

1. Find out what the Caravan Act actually says

2. Continue to write stuff without knowing that and therefore risk writing things which are wrong.

Its up to you.

 

[sxturbo]

And you are saying that every one of those buildings in those pictures you have posted do not, and did not require any planning permission or permitted development rights, but have been installed for perpetuity under the "Caravan Act"?

Yes he is right, that's why there is lots of retirement sites these days on old caravan sites that become un-profitable in the traditional business. So owners filled up the land with "mobile homes" which are basically bungalows constructed from wood and sit on stilts, with mains power and gas etc. Some of them are proper posh aswell. And they don't require planning permission.

They class them as not permanent

 

[^woody^]

Yes he is right, that's why there is lots of retirement sites these days on old caravan sites that become un-profitable in the traditional business. So owners filled up the land with "mobile homes" which are basically bungalows constructed from wood and sit on stilts, with mains power and gas etc. Some of them are proper posh aswell. And they don't require planning permission.

They class them as not permanent

They need to be shut down and the site vacated for several weeks annually too - just like caravan sites.

 

[^woody^]

Woody - you asked "when is a garden room a caravan or even transportable?"

I said that a transportable/portable building could be installed for use as a garden room and posted a bunch of photos in case your question indicated that you thought that something that qualified under the Caravan Act had to be something which looked like, or was, what is commonly understood to be a "caravan".

You then asked "And you are saying that every one of those buildings in those pictures you have posted do not, and did not require any planning permission or permitted development rights, but have been installed for perpetuity under the "Caravan Act"?

Now we have two questions to consider.

1) Do the buildings themselves meet the definition in the Caravan Act of a portable building?

and

2) Does the way they are used meet the requirements in the Caravan Act which would allow them to be installed and used without needing PP or PD rights?

Now, I have no idea about (2), which is why I was careful to answer how I did.

Use is important. If you want one to use as a gym, or a recording studio, or a hobby room, or a workshop, or a pool house, or for overnight guest accommodation when family or friends visit, or a myriad of uses incidental to the use of your dwelling, then yes, that qualifies. If you want to rent it out as an independent dwelling to people who are nothing to do with your household then that is definitely not OK.

But as for (1) then yes, absolutely, all of them meet the definition for the building in the Caravan Act.

I can't tell about (2) just from the photographs, and neither can you.

So no - You cant tell that just by looking at them.



No it is not irrelevant, and yes, subject to how they are used, they are indeed "caravans under the Act" whether you think they are or not.

For some reason you have ignored what I said about how the use of the buildings may require PP, but the nature of them doesnt necessarily mean that. Only you know what that reason was.

As I see it you have two options.

1. Find out what the Caravan Act actually says

2. Continue to write stuff without knowing that and therefore risk writing things which are wrong.

Its up to you.

This thread is about a garden room. So it is very relevant that a caravan can't be dropped into a garden and claimed exempt under the Caravan Act.

What you seem to be doing is googling "Caravan Act" and finding various obscure sites from companies wanting to sell their cabins, and just posting those companies' pictures under the banner of 'what may be possible'. But in fact, and by your own admission you don't even know if planning permission is required.

Btw, it's the building that requires permission not the use. Put "Operational development" into Google instead of "Pictures to support my tenuous position".

I'd suggest you concentrate on the actual planning side of things for the correct information, rather than sales brochures.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

As I said - you can write about what the Caravan Act says from a position of knowing what it says, or from a position of not knowing what it says.

Its up to you.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

They need to be shut down and the site vacated for several weeks annually too - just like caravan sites.

Sites like that have absolutely nothing to do with the scenario of a building in someones garden being used for purposes to do with his use of the house.