Log cabins & legality? 5k to buy, 850 pm rent.

red wine and ridin

Hi, looking for accomodation for a family member, and found one of these "Leitrim" logcabins on Gumtree. See logcabins dot ie as i can't post Urls,
I contacted the LL, who informend me that they would be putting it together next week..
The cabin itself costs just under 5k, and if it's legal to erect one of these in my back garden and house my family member in it, I would rather do that and not charge rent, or expect the state to fund it when it is no longer viable as the person has a few (mental) health issues and cannot get a job due to them. This would proclude them from most house shares, which would be affordable.
Basically, are these legal? Save me a lot of trouble trying to get the lad into a bedsit and have his mother worrying about him and as family we could support him and keep an eye on his health if he lived "out the back".
I would be also afraid of paying up rent/ buying for one of these cabins and them suddenly being declared illegal by DCC- if they are not already!
Something "outside the box" seems to be our only option, my sister knows if he is asked to leave the family home he will go downhill rapidly, her health is bad also

rawn

I would imagine the biggest issue first off would be planning permission. From what I've heard it can take a long time to grant. Other than that it's definitely a great option for someone you need to keep an eye on. I'll be looking to house my mam in a similar build in our back garden in the years to come so I'll be watching this thread with interest!

riclad

AN Extension of 40m square or less at the rear of the house maybe exempt from planning permission http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en...g_a_house.html):

Building an extension to the rear of the house which does not increase the original floor area of the house by more than 40 square metres and is not higher than the house. The extension should not reduce the open space at the back of the house to less than 25 square metres which must be reserved exclusively for the use of the occupants of your house.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056209527

http://loghouse.ie/products/standard-log-cabins/limerick5x5-log-cabin.html
this one is 25sq metres approx
is your garden at least 50 sq metres ?

they are not illegal if there is 25sq metres left over space in garden after the cabin is built ,

if its exempt theres no need to get planning permission

Michael D Not Higgins

A standalone log cabin will not get planning permission in your back garden (except as an uninhabited garden shed), nor will it be up to building regs. It will not be exempt from planning permission like a 40 sq m extension is.

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

AN Extension of 40m square or less at the rear of the house maybe exempt from planning permission http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en...g_a_house.html):

Building an extension to the rear of the house which does not increase the original floor area of the house by more than 40 square metres and is not higher than the house. The extension should not reduce the open space at the back of the house to less than 25 square metres which must be reserved exclusively for the use of the occupants of your house.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056209527

http://loghouse.ie/products/standard-log-cabins/limerick5x5-log-cabin.html
this one is 25sq metres approx
is your garden at least 50 sq metres ?

they are not illegal if there is 25sq metres left over space in garden after the cabin is built ,

if its exempt theres no need to get planning permission

It's worth noting that the figures used by the above poster are correct but the legal/illegal status is incorrect.

The log cabin will be a domestic shed if erected under that guise (25Sq. m) and habitation is is illegal or a planning breach at minimum. It required planning and will most likely be refused.

riclad

measure the garden ,.take away 25sq metres, is there 20-15sq metres left ?
.just build a small extension, with bathroom, small bedroom, living space front room.
theres people who just buy a caravan and put it in the back garden ,
i dont know if thats legal , under planning laws .

see rte ie ,room to improve .
One episode features a house being divided , the mother gets a bedroom,bathroom, front room to her self . with her own front door.

the rest of the house is used by her son and her sons wife .

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

measure the garden ,.take away 25sq metres, is there 20-15sq metres left ?
.just build a small extension, with bathroom, small bedroom, living space front room.
theres people who just buy a caravan and put it in the back garden ,
i dont know if thats legal , under planning laws .

see rte ie ,room to improve .
One episode features a house being divided , the mother gets a bedroom,bathroom, front room to her self . with her own front door.

the rest of the house is used by her son and her sons wife .

What your describing is a granny flat. It requires planning permission.
DCC won't give permission for a separate front door anymore. The link has to be inside the building envelope.

Also, for the garden shed, there must be 25 Sq. M of garden space remaining to be exempt, not 15-20. And there are also height restrictions (4m & 3m).

riclad

ok to clarify this ,I Meant measure your garden, mark out 25msq on paper,
IF there is say 15sq metres left you could build an extension there which would not require planning permission if its under a certain height .
it should be still built in line with current building regulations and rules
re fire safety .
the episode re house converted into 2 units .
I built an extension with a friend about 8 years ago ,he applied for planning permission and got it.
Its 400 sq ft single storey about 14ft high with a flat roof ,
2 doors and 3 windows .
It uses the water supply and has a link to the main house for an esb connection .


Heres the link the episode re house converted into 2 units .

http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/room-to-improve-839/10638365/

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

ok to clarify this ,I Meant measure your garden, mark out 25msq on paper,
IF there is say 15sq metres left you could build an extension there which would not require planning permission if its under a certain height .
it should be still built in line with current building regulations and rules
re fire safety

Your still mixing things up. You mention extensions and log cabins and standalone flats all in one post.
Just to clarify, what are you actually talking about?
When you measure out the 25 meters of garden space, what you are allowed to build after that is a garden shed, and they are exempt from building regulations.

riclad wrote: »

I built an extension with a friend about 8 years ago ,he applied for planning permission and got it.
Its 400 sq ft single storey about 14ft high with a flat roof , 2 doors and 3 windows .
It uses the water supply and has a link to the main house for an esb connection .

That's an extension to an existing house. What relevance does it have?

riclad wrote: »

Heres the link the episode re house converted into 2 units .

http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/room-to-improve-839/10638365/

I'll have a look now, but IIRC that required planning permission.

Edit - Just reviewed that episode, what they have is a granny flat extension and it is still linked to the main house by a door through the utility room.
It required planning as part of the overall work.

riclad

ok What i mean is an extension , made of brick ,.mortar .with a tiled or flat roof .
i have zero interest in log cabins .
I always thought say you have a garden at the rear of the house ,
garden is 50sq metres ,
then you could build an extension of the size 24 sq metres up to a certain height .
ie if you can leave 25 sq metres of the garden empty , you can build on
the remaining space .
You may need to leave a small space on either side between the new building and the side boundary walls .

if you have neighbours on the right and the left of your house .

i know someone who built a 2 storey 27ft high extension and left 15 sq metres
in the garden ,
But since that extension was built in 1940 its probably exempt from current
planning rules .

something like this single storey .
http://photo.mybuilder.com/2_thumb/480687_7d2b2df846.jpg

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

ok What i mean is an extension , made of brick ,.mortar .with a tiled or flat roof .
i have zero interest in log cabins .
I always thought say you have a garden at the rear of the house ,
garden is 50sq metres ,
then you could build an extension of the size 24 sq metres up to a certain height .
ie if you can leave 25 sq metres of the garden empty , you can build on
the remaining space .
You may need to leave a small space on either side between the new building and the side boundary walls .

if you have neighbours on the right and the left of your house .

I see what your saying now.
Yes, they can build a proper extension connected to the main house to the rear up to 40 Sq. M of course. Height is not really an issue as you can build up to the existing eaves. 25 Sq. M of rear garden space required as you say.
The space to the side is a civil issue and not a planning issue, so that can be agreed between you and the neighbor

riclad wrote: »

i know someone who built a 2 storey 27ft high extension and left 15 sq metres in the garden ,
But since that extension was built in 1940 its probably exempt from current
planning rules .

something like this single storey .
http://photo.mybuilder.com/2_thumb/480687_7d2b2df846.jpg

If you know them they must be near 100 years of age by now!
But, yeah that extension would be pre 1963 so exempted and the area figures start from 0 for them.

riclad

So basically if you have a garden of 40 sq metres , you can build an extension right up to the eaves , As long as you leave 25 sq metres
empty ,
40 -25= extension of max size 15 square metres .
I Do,nt know the person who actually built the extension ,i know its a pre 63 build.
12 ft under the roof ,eaves .

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

So basically if you have a garden of 40 sq metres , you can build an extension right up to the eaves , As long as you leave 25 sq metres
empty ,
40 -25= extension of max size 15 square metres .
I Do,nt know the person who actually built the extension ,i know its a pre 63 build.
12 ft under the roof ,eaves .

Yes the limit on domestic extensions to be exempt is the existing eaves.
2 stores is quite hard to be exempt in the city as you have to be 2m from the boundary each side to be exempt at first floor level.

riclad

THE Rear extension is exempt ,its 12 ft under the eaves ,but it was built before 1963 ,
so existing planning rules do not apply .
it goes up to the boundary wall on the right hand side .
it does not go near the other boundary ,theres a 15ft gap on the left .
if a house was built in 62 ,the council does not expect it to comply with planning laws made in 1970 or 1984.Builders cant see into the future.

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

THE Rear extension is exempt ,its 12 ft under the eaves ,but it was built before 1963 ,
so existing planning rules do not apply .
it goes up to the boundary wall on the right hand side .
it does not go near the other boundary ,theres a 15ft gap on the left .
if a house was built in 62 ,the council does not expect it to comply with planning laws made in 1970 or 1984.Builders cant see into the future.

Never said they had to? Where are you getting the idea that I did state that?

riclad

No offense meant ,
i just mean if a building is built in 2004, i presume it would not be expected to comply with new rules made in 2006,or 2010,
i presume it just needs to be in compliance with the building regs in 2004.
i think for older buildings an architect will inspect it and give a cert this is a pre 63 building ,extension,
its exempt from current planning rules.

Gumbo

riclad wrote: »

No offense meant ,
i just mean if a building is built in 2004, i presume it would not be expected to new rules made in 2006,or 2010,
i presume it just needs to be in compliance with the building regs in 2004.

Yes. Only the building regulations in force at the time of commencement applies. So even if the regs get updated mid way through a build you still only have to comply with what was in force on commencement day.

Suckit

Crikey. I was way out on what i was told.
I was told that if it is a removable structure then you do not need planning permission. Obviously that is a bucketload of nonsense.
A friend of mine has one similar to the one linked above that he used as an office for a year or two. I have not asked him how he did it, as i was not planning on buying one, but those prices are pretty good.
If it is just for office use, does a standalone cabin count as a shed?
Sorry if i brought this a little OT.

monty_python

There was an investigation on rte about that company and there low standards of work

riclad

You can build a garage, carport, shed, greenhouse, kennel
for domestic pets etc., as long as it does not extend out in
front of the building line of the house and does not exceed 4
metres in height, (if it has a tiled or slated pitched roof), or 3
metres (if it has any other roof type). The floor area
limitation for exempted development is 25 square metres.
The structure may not be lived in, used for commercial
purposes or for keeping pigs, poultry, pigeons, ponies or
horses. Garages, sheds etc. to the side of the house must
match the finish of the house. You cannot reduce the open
private space, reserved exclusively for the use of the
occupants of the house, at the side or rear of the house
below 25 square metres.


There may also be issues if the house has previously been extended


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056605589


MY Neighbour just built a large metal shed in his back garden ,2 months ago .
its quite large ,
i don,t know if he applied for planning permission ,
took a few days to build . it takes up at least 50 per cent of his rear garden .
it looks at least 15 ft long .
i dont know if its being used as an office or a storage unit.for tools paint etc

Just because a building is called a shed does not exempt it from
planning permission .
I Think if someone applys for planning permission than they have to post a notice
at the front of their house for a few weeks .

if your shed is built , will there be 25sq metres of empty space left at the side or rear of the house.?

Gumbo

Suckit wrote: »

Crikey. I was way out on what i was told.
I was told that if it is a removable structure then you do not need planning permission. Obviously that is a bucketload of nonsense.
A friend of mine has one similar to the one linked above that he used as an office for a year or two. I have not asked him how he did it, as i was not planning on buying one, but those prices are pretty good.
If it is just for office use, does a standalone cabin count as a shed?
Sorry if i brought this a little OT.

The "removable" structure still needs to obey the planning rules. So in essence, the shed could be brick built or it could be a drop in steel tech shed or a wood shed etc

In reality, most planning enforcement officers will not enforce the restrictions on the small standard garden sheds, 6x4, 8x6 etc

It just depends on the complaint and the inspectors opinion on what you have done at that time.

appfry

I know someone who bought a very spacious and well equipped wooden "house" for €13000 for their garden.
They now rent out the main house and live in it. They have been doing this for about 15 years now.
SOmeone reported them for not having planning permission about 5 years ago and it came to nothing.
They just said they dont live in it. They just use it as summer house and utility room and the occasional guest sleeps in it. Total lie on their part, but planning dont give a toss. Too much effort

Gumbo

appfry wrote: »

I know someone who bought a very spacious and well equipped wooden "house" for €13000 for their garden.
They now rent out the main house and live in it. They have been doing this for about 15 years now.
SOmeone reported them for not having planning permission about 5 years ago and it came to nothing.
They just said they dont live in it. They just use it as summer house and utility room and the occasional guest sleeps in it. Total lie on their part, but planning dont give a toss. Too much effort

That's sounds like a spoof or an old wives tale.
Planning enforcement are very strict and once a complaint comes in it has to be followed through legally no. After how big or small (remember little old stubborn lady and her satilite dish).

Once they mentioned housing a guest in it that would set alarm bells off and the internal finish would have also set alarm bells off to the inspector. Any sign of a kitchen and/or sleeping facilities and it's will move on to enforcement proceedings unless the notice is followed.

What county was this located in?

Stoogie

kceire wrote: »

That's sounds like a spoof or an old wives tale.
Planning enforcement are very strict and once a complaint comes in it has to be followed through legally no. After how big or small (remember little old stubborn lady and her satilite dish).

Once they mentioned housing a guest in it that would set alarm bells off and the internal finish would have also set alarm bells off to the inspector. Any sign of a kitchen and/or sleeping facilities and it's will move on to enforcement proceedings unless the notice is followed.

What county was this located in?

I'm no expert but if it was built 15 years ago and only reported 5 is there not a rule that it can't be touched ?

Gumbo

Stoogie wrote: »

I'm no expert but if it was built 15 years ago and only reported 5 is there not a rule that it can't be touched ?

The structure cannot be enforced on ( 7 year rule) but that's different to the comment another poster made by stating that "planning don't give a toss, too much effort ". They do but are obviously over ruled by the statue of limitations.

But here's the kicker, the structure cannot be removed but the use of that structure has no statue of limitations so the Plan Enf section could very easily issued enforcement proceedings for the use of the use had not been ceased by the follow up inspection.

Maybe they moved out for a week during the follow up inspection

Gumbo

Stoogie wrote: »

I said what now ?

My mistake. I was quoting another poster not you.
I've edited that post.

Stoogie

I was wondering how the rule worked cos you could just build a "shed" wait 7 years and then turn it into a house inside. But as you have said the use is not protected by the SOL.
Question for you on a similar matter. A friend of mine built some buildings and started running a business out of them. Land is zoned agri and residential and he's been there 8 years he was in talks with the council but he says they can't do anything because he's there too long but from what your saying they can't touch the buildings but could close the business?
How does that work ?

Gumbo

Stoogie wrote: »

I was wondering how the rule worked cos you could just build a "shed" wait 7 years and then turn it into a house inside. But as you have said the use is not protected by the SOL.
Question for you on a similar matter. A friend of mine built some buildings and started running a business out of them. Land is zoned agri and residential and he's been there 8 years he was in talks with the council but he says they can't do anything because he's there too long but from what your saying they can't touch the buildings but could close the business?
How does that work ?

Yes the buildings cannot be touched if he has no planning for them but they could chase him for the use. Also, the Building Control Department could chase him for a fire cert and disability access cert. actually, scrap that. Statue of limitations for building control is 5 years but I'm sure Fire Orevention could prosecute him for something under the ease of escape regulations, fire service act or at the very minimum ensure the building is compliant technically.

Plenty of these cases throughout the country and Dublin also. Loads of little pockets of development that would not get planning nowadays but because of the length of time they are there they cannot be touched. Maybe the use has a time limit also, I'll check it out and confirm as planning is not my primary occupation

appfry

kceire wrote: »

That's sounds like a spoof or an old wives tale.
Planning enforcement are very strict and once a complaint comes in it has to be followed through legally no. After how big or small (remember little old stubborn lady and her satilite dish).

Once they mentioned housing a guest in it that would set alarm bells off and the internal finish would have also set alarm bells off to the inspector. Any sign of a kitchen and/or sleeping facilities and it's will move on to enforcement proceedings unless the notice is followed.

What county was this located in?

Well there you have it.
Believe it or believe it not. No skin off my nose. Just telling a story I know of.
I also know of someone who built a granny flat without planning. But I suppose you'll think thats a spoof too. Dont know why I bother tbh. Some people will always pretend that what they say is gospel and ignore what others have to say. sure if the planners were as active in shutting down as you say they are there would be nothing in the country contrary to planning laws - but we all know thats far from the truth of the matter dont we.

riclad

Maybe different councils vary re levels of enforcement , you can apply for planning permission of a building after its built ,
its risky .
they might ask you to take it down.

Gumbo

appfry wrote: »

Well there you have it.
Believe it or believe it not. No skin off my nose. Just telling a story I know of.
I also know of someone who built a granny flat without planning. But I suppose you'll think thats a spoof too. Dont know why I bother tbh. Some people will always pretend that what they say is gospel and ignore what others have to say. sure if the planners were as active in shutting down as you say they are there would be nothing in the country contrary to planning laws - but we all know thats far from the truth of the matter dont we.

This just proves my point. The planners are not involved in the enforcement of planning matters. Planning Enforcement Officiers, completely separate to the planners that deal with planning applications man the Enforcement Section (Dublin anyway), as I said, it may have been an old wives tale or not all the info passed on when people pass the story on.

We all know these people that built so and so without planning but if nobody makes a complaint then they don't get acted on, but when it comes to selling or re-mortgage it will be caught and permission will be required for a clean sale.

appfry

kceire wrote: »

This just proves my point. The planners are not involved in the enforcement of planning matters. Planning Enforcement Officiers, completely separate to the planners that deal with planning applications man the Enforcement Section (Dublin anyway), as I said, it may have been an old wives tale or not all the info passed on when people pass the story on.

We all know these people that built so and so without planning but if nobody makes a complaint then they don't get acted on, but when it comes to selling or re-mortgage it will be caught and permission will be required for a clean sale.

Well I can tell you that I sold a house with granny flat that had no planning permission a couple of years ago.
The buyers solicitor copped it, and then the two solicitors came up with a way around it.
These things happen all the time, and are gotten around every day.

athtrasna

Mod note

This forum is not an appropriate place for the discussion of legal loopholes.

appfry

Im not suggesting loopholes. I am just pointing out that planning enforcement isnt a certain thing as some people belive. It is quite the opposite in practice. Its getting permission in the first place that is difficult.
Not getting permission and fixing it all up afterwards in one way or another is quite easy.

Graham

appfry wrote: »

Not getting permission and fixing it all up afterwards in one way or another is quite easy.

I'm sure it's very easy when it goes your way. Not so much when it doesn't.

tradesman

I'm in the process of buying my late fathers house from his estate. It is a bungalow on 1/2 acre. He bought it about 25 yrs ago just had to move his furniture in. In the process of me buying the house suddenly the house was built too far into the plot, front wall was too close to the road. Entrance gate should have been on the LHS not on the RHS. Garage roof was too high. Apart from that everything was ok! Applied for retention & everything was given without a question being asked. Council / solicitors obviously knew they made a mistake years ago so let it go

Obviously building a new permanent structure would require planning when not falling within the exemptions. However there is a provision in the Planning Act that an existing building "within the curtilage of a house" can be used "for any purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the house as such" .

Clearly this would exclude use of the structure as an independent building or a house in its own right... but I wonder if allowing a family member of the house who needs supervision and care to sleep there, could be an arguable incidental use.

It would be interesting to see if uses such as this has been teased out in Court or by the Bord Pleanala.

appfry

Deleted User wrote: »

Obviously building a new permanent structure would require planning when not falling within the exemptions. However there is a provision in the Planning Act that an existing building "within the curtilage of a house" can be used "for any purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the house as such" .

Clearly this would exclude use of the structure as an independent building or a house in its own right... but I wonder if allowing a family member of the house who needs supervision and care to sleep there, could be an arguable incidental use.

It would be interesting to see if uses such as this has been teased out in Court or by the Bord Pleanala.

See home many cases you find of people being asked to knock down or do away with their structures which are not according to planning.
Not too many at all.
Not talking about high profile developer cases that are followed through solely because of the media focus.

Gumbo

Deleted User wrote: »

Obviously building a new permanent structure would require planning when not falling within the exemptions. However there is a provision in the Planning Act that an existing building "within the curtilage of a house" can be used "for any purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the house as such" .

Clearly this would exclude use of the structure as an independent building or a house in its own right... but I wonder if allowing a family member of the house who needs supervision and care to sleep there, could be an arguable incidental use.

It would be interesting to see if uses such as this has been teased out in Court or by the Bord Pleanala.

I'm involved in 2 cases at the moment and I can assure you Planning Enf section are ready to issued enforcement proceedings against the home owners. One got retention to keep the shed (being used as a bedroom with its own kitchen etc) but they have to build the link to join it to the main dwelling.

The other has no way of linking to the house. He has got retention to keep the structure as a shed or garden room etc but the habitable use has to cease immediately.

Both of these cases in North Dublin currently.

appfry wrote: »

See home many cases you find of people being asked to knock down or do away with their structures which are not according to planning.
Not too many at all.
Not talking about high profile developer cases that are followed through solely because of the media focus.

I know many through work but obviously can't link to anything as they are. It online. Plan Enf dealings are confidential so you don't get the details published like you do for a planning app.

This week alone I've seen 2 vehicular entrances having to be removed and a complete dormer window structure on an end of terrace house in Dublin.

appfry

kceire wrote: »

I'm involved in 2 cases at the moment and I can assure you Planning Enf section are ready to issued enforcement proceedings against the home owners. One got retention to keep the shed (being used as a bedroom with its own kitchen etc) but they have to build the link to join it to the main dwelling.

The other has no way of linking to the house. He has got retention to keep the structure as a shed or garden room etc but the habitable use has to cease immediately.

Both of these cases in North Dublin currently.



I know many through work but obviously can't link to anything as they are. It online. Plan Enf dealings are confidential so you don't get the details published like you do for a planning app.

This week alone I've seen 2 vehicular entrances having to be removed and a complete dormer window structure on an end of terrace house in Dublin.

So that would be very few then.

Gumbo

appfry wrote: »

So that would be very few then.

Depends on your interpretation of very few.
That's 3 this week alone and just 3 in my area. There's more people that cover other areas and they would have 3 or more each.

Similar to speeding, very few get caught but the more that do it the more the chance of getting caught.

appfry

Up and down the country everybody knows people who have gone against planning.
Those same people would know how many out of those have been asked to remove their structures.
As usual the scare stories about the big bad monster coming to get you and what COULD happen to you if you dare step out of line are many, especially by a few people. But the real cases of something actually happening are few and far between.
The country is full of things that are against the rules but the punishment isnt there for breaking the rules.

Ive a friend who has just built a home cinema in his attic, along with a sofa bed in case he needs it for guests. He didnt bother with planning permission.A few years ago, another friend, as we were watching Die hard in the illegal attic conversion, said to him that the room was against planning and fire regulations and the planners would be out to get him. His answer .... "Should woulda coulda, they'll never take me alive."

athtrasna

Mod note

Appfry the planning system is a legal system. Any further celebration of people who didn't abide by the law will lead to cards.

appfry

athtrasna wrote: »

Mod note

Appfry the planning system is a legal system. Any further celebration of people who didn't abide by the law will lead to cards.

Its not celebration, nor have I said anything at all about loop holes, nor did I encourage any particular behaviour.
As I said before I am pointing out that the planning system is not enforced as much, nor as cut and dried as people seem to think it is.

Gumbo

appfry wrote: »

Ive a friend who has just built a home cinema in his attic, along with a sofa bed in case he needs it for guests. He didnt bother with planning permission.A few years ago, another friend, as we were watching Die hard in the illegal attic conversion, said to him that the room was against planning and fire regulations and the planners would be out to get him. His answer .... "Should woulda coulda, they'll never take me alive."

An attic conversion does not require planning permission.
The fire regulations is a building control issue, not a planning issue.

tayto lover

kceire wrote: »

I'm involved in 2 cases at the moment and I can assure you Planning Enf section are ready to issued enforcement proceedings against the home owners. One got retention to keep the shed (being used as a bedroom with its own kitchen etc) but they have to build the link to join it to the main dwelling.

The other has no way of linking to the house. He has got retention to keep the structure as a shed or garden room etc but the habitable use has to cease immediately.

Both of these cases in North Dublin currently.

How is the bit in bold defined by the authorities please?
Do you mean that if you have a nice little shed with a few bunk beds the grandkids couldn't have a sleep-out in the summer?

Gumbo

tayto lover wrote: »

How is the bit in bold defined by the authorities please?
Do you mean that if you have a nice little shed with a few bunk beds the grandkids couldn't have a sleep-out in the summer?

Basically, if it has a kitchen or bedroom it's deemed to capable of been habitable and that's how they enforce it.

Technically no to the summer sleep over but that's not the problem as that it's relatively scarce. The use of the shed as permanent habitation would be more of a worry to the enforcement section I would imagine.

One shed recently, they made the owner remove the shower unit. I disagreed with this as my opinion is you an have a shower in a shed for wash facilities etc but it was that or the kitchen. The shower was the cheaper option in this case.

The bedroom is easily fixed, as all you have to do is remove the bed.

tayto lover

kceire wrote: »

Basically, if it has a kitchen or bedroom it's deemed to capable of been habitable and that's how they enforce it.

Technically no to the summer sleep over but that's not the problem as that it's relatively scarce. The use of the shed as permanent habitation would be more of a worry to the enforcement section I would imagine.

One shed recently, they made the owner remove the shower unit. I disagreed with this as my opinion is you an have a shower in a shed for wash facilities etc but it was that or the kitchen. The shower was the cheaper option in this case.

The bedroom is easily fixed, as all you have to do is remove the bed.

Thanks for that.
Is there a problem with putting a mobile home in your garden and have someone inhabiting it?

Gumbo

tayto lover wrote: »

Thanks for that.
Is there a problem with putting a mobile home in your garden and have someone inhabiting it?

Yes. Planning is required and will most likely be refused.

Sleeper12

Definitely legal once you get full planning permission. It'll set you back around 25k to fully install. Obviously you need an electric supply, water supply, waste water etc.

Gumbo

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Definitely legal once you get full planning permission. It'll set you back around 25k to fully install. Obviously you need an electric supply, water supply, waste water etc.

The problem is getting the permission. I don't know of one case in Dublin that has got permission for a habitable space in the rear garden that isint connected to the main house (granny flat or extension).