Press "Enter" to skip to content

In Eure-et-Loir, its garden shed was the size of a house, the building permit is canceled!

The garden shed was 70m2, 5.70m high with a fireplace and therefore had to meet more standards than a traditional “shed”, particularly in terms of rainwater drainage and parking. (© Illustration – AdobeStock – Eléonore H)

The administrative court of appeal of Nantes (Loire-Atlantique) finally annulled the building permit that the municipality of Bailleau-Armenonville (Eure-et-Loir) had granted in january 2017 to an inhabitant of the municipality.

This permit gave him the authorization to build a huge “garden shed” of 70 m2 and of 5.70 meters high!

Potentially regularizable

In february 2020, the same court had however left the possibility to the town hall to regularize this tainted permit of two “vices”, by allowing it to issue a modifying building permit to PJ within three months

The first permit issued did not in fact comply with the regulations onstorm water flow and on parking areas.

The request (…) relates to the erection of a 70 m2 building with a height of 5.70 m of orthogonal shape, which has several openings and a fireplace. The project cannot, given its dimensions and characteristics, be qualified as an annex to an existing building constituting a garden shed.

Administrative Court of Appeal

However, it was in a building zone, so potentially regularizable.

A second license “just as illegal”

The commune of Bailleau-Armenonville had therefore produced last summer, the Aug 12, 2020, a license supposed to have served these two “defects”.

But the two applicants, AA and DL-S., Had maintained their cancellation request initial: the amending permit was “just as illegal as the original permit”, they said.

The beneficiary of the permit, PJ, did not consider it necessary to regularize his brief, which he had drawn up without having recourse to a lawyer. The town, too, had preferred to continue to defend itself.

Rainwater harvesting

“The license (…) modifying (…) provides for a device for the recovery and evacuation of rainwater”, notes for its part the administrative court of appeal of Nantes in its second judgment.

“It does not appear from the documents (…) that this device would not be suitable for the operation and the terrain. Consequently, this permit regularizes the defect. “

On the other hand, the Nantes judges note that “the vehicles will not be able to access the two parking spaces provided for by the amending permit (…) to the left of the building whose construction is planned ”.

“Under these conditions, (…) the defect on this point tainting the initial (…) license (…) has not been regularized”, they deduce.

The two permits were therefore canceled, as was the judgment of the Orleans administrative court (Loiret) which had rejected the request of the two applicants.

GF (PresssPepper)