Renovating garage that become legal under 4 year rule

[Luis Pal]

Hello!

 

I have a detached garage with a door and roof that need replacing. The garage was built around 40 years ago without planning permission and became lawful under the discontinued 4 year rule. The garden rests on a boundary wall with the highway on one side elevation, neighbor party wall on the other side elevation, back elevation onto an unclaimed sliver of land and front elevation to my garden.

 

I would like to replace the door for a similar looking motor operated one and the same for the roof, keeping it mono pitched, replacing the structure of the roof and putting metal sheets. 

 

My main question is, given that I'd be doing a like for like replacement of a structure that has become lawful, can I undertake my proposed works?

 

Thanks to all in advance.

 

 

[BotusBuild]

Yes, you are effectively maintaining the existing structure.

[ProDave]

With the caveat you do just that, maintain and repair it, one bit at a time.  Don't dismantle the whole thing expecting to then replace it without at least getting a certificate of lawful development first.

[BotusBuild]

Agreed, I presume you would only be replacing the door and the roof, leaving everything else untouched ( but maybe repainted 🙂)

[BigBub]

Have you applied for a Lawful Development Certificate (Existing) to formalise that the garage is now lawful and exempt from any enforcement action? I would recommend to do this first before you make any substantial changes. Most people don't realise that you can't make use of permitted development rights if you have built anything unlawfully (Article 3(5) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015). From the aerial photo you have provided, it looks like you have a rear extension. If it wasn't built with permission or in accordance with PD rights then this would also lead to a loss of PD rights. 

 

Section 55(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) sets out what amounts to building operations and the changes you are proposing would fall under this. Section 55(2) sets out which operations do not involve development. It is likely that the works you are looking to do would materially affect the external appearance of the building and would therefore be considered development which you would either need permission for or be able to do so under Permitted Development rights, without needing planning permission. 

[Luis Pal]

Thanks all for your responses.

 

I should have mentioned that I bought the house 1 year ago and for the unauthorised extensions an indemnity policy was used.

 

I haven't applied for a LDC for the extension as my research has indicated that it's not straightforward and all that would do is confirm that the development wouldn't be subject to enforcement in the current state. I would be grateful if you guys could point out a benefit I'm missing for the lawful development certificate in other to undertake these works.

 

However with or without LDC, the question seems to boil down to: do the proposed works materially affect the external appearance of the building? The answer is never black and white as there isn't a statutory definition for material change. With regards to the works themselves and as previously stated, I intend to do a like for like replacement of the roof (lean on roof, same pitch) and door and can't see materially changing the appearance of the building other than by the effect the new materials might have.

 

Any further advice or comments would be greatly appreciated.