Triple Garage. Conformity with Building Regs.

[shergar]

Before engaging a Structural Engineer I'm wondering if any member has experience and solutions to the problem. Wind post details etc.
Deemed to satisfy rules limit openings in any wall to an aggregate of 5 metres, so 3 doors at 2.1 metres fail to comply.
Floor area also exceeds 36 sq metre. Roof height is less than 4 metres to comply with permitted development but exceeds the 3.6 max allowed in diagram 2 of section A1/2.

 

[pjgtech]

Re-design it so its only a double rather than a triple and reduce roof height to not exceed 3.6?

 

[Jimbobjones]

There is no chance of exceeding the 3.6 m roof height unless there was an existing structure exceeding that , even then not much chance.Thought you could go to 4 m with a double pitch.

 

[shergar]

Re-design it so its only a double rather than a triple and reduce roof height to not exceed 3.6?

An anomaly in the regs allows me to build an internal wall so no floor area exceeds 36 sq. metre but this would reduce the utility of the building.

 

[Jimbobjones]

I thought 30m was the max internal without planning consent , can you not build a small “office” space at the rear , or small extension in the next year to a 30m garage.

 

[Lukeypoodle]

Build it how they want it and then do what you like.

Worked for my neighbours!

 

[shergar]

I thought 30m was the max internal without planning consent , can you not build a small “office” space at the rear , or small extension in the next year to a 30m garage.

30 sq metre floor area is max without Building Regs. hence involvement of Building control.
Building is compliant with Permitted Development.

 

[Jimbobjones]

But would not a small rear extension cover the lost 6 meters without building control, you know the “porch “ or “summer house” there used to be a loophole whereby you could keep extending the porch a certain sq m each year, can’t for the life of me remember the details.

 

[shergar]

Build it how they want it and then do what you like.

Worked for my neighbours!

Building will be used for some expensive cars, possibly Tesla.
Wouldn't want to be party to a claim should damage occur and insurance decide a non compliant building was partly the cause.
Recent fire at Luton has brought matters into focus.

 

[Lukeypoodle]

Building will be used for some expensive cars, possibly Tesla.
Wouldn't want to be party to a claim should damage occur and insurance decide a non compliant building was partly the cause.
Recent fire at Luton has brought matters into focus.

As was/is theirs, guy collects classics and supercars.

They built theirs as a car port and then put doors on a few months later

 

[shergar]

As was/is theirs, guy collects classics and supercars.

They built theirs as a car port and then put doors on a few months later

Their cars,their building,their risk.
I'm not prepared to take on an unlimited liability for a minimal advantage.
Case Law, Lindenberg -v- Canning 1992, established that even when working in accordance with drawings, builder can be found liable.