Shed to let out back garden!!

bri007

How is this still allowed. Surely it wouldn’t meet current fire and building regulations. Basically a shed advertised to let for €1k a month. Imagine a fire broke out!

https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/apartment-millbrook-avenue-donaghmede-dublin-13/2884962

weldoninhio

bri007 wrote: »

How is this still allowed. Surely it wouldn’t meet current fire and building regulations. Basically a shed advertised to let for €1k a month. Imagine a fire broke out!

https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/apartment-millbrook-avenue-donaghmede-dublin-13/2884962

I wonder if there was planning permission given, needed if the build is to be used as a habitable space.

bri007

I was wondering the same thing. Judging by some of the pictures from the outside with a lot of wood structure on it I doubt it would have passed... could be wrong now to be fair as not my field of expertise but doesn’t looks legit

weldoninhio wrote: »

I wonder if there was planning permission given, needed if the build is to be used as a habitable space.

macchoille

Heating and water all looks to be electric so that only bill might be expensive.

I wonder what the story would be regarding receiving post/parcels or even fast food deliveries.

ShaneC93

bri007 wrote: »

How is this still allowed

It's not, you could report it to DCC for not meeting the minimum requirements for apartment rental of a new-built.

It's definitely not meeting the 45 sq.m min. 1-bed size nor does it have all the required appliances (i.e. the required 4-place hob vs. the 2-place hob they have fitted).

Juwwi

Presuming the electric comes from the fuse board in the main house if both the main house and the shed both have the electric oven and electric showers on at the same time that's alot of power at the one time ,that's excluding the electric heaters ect ,, these sort of set ups need big fines as a deterrent if they don't fall under the regulations .

fkdws2

142 Millbrook Avenue, Donaghmede

photos on google when house was for sale

punisher5112

macchoille wrote: »

Heating and water all looks to be electric so that only bill might be expensive.

I wonder what the story would be regarding receiving post/parcels or even fast food deliveries.

Has a side gate shared with next door by what I can see....

1874

ShaneC93 wrote: »

It's not, you could report it to DCC for not meeting the minimum requirements for apartment rental of a new-built.

It's definitely not meeting the 45 sq.m min. 1-bed size nor does it have all the required appliances (i.e. the required 4-place hob vs. the 2-place hob they have fitted).

regardless of this place or back garden structures not being legit, the rules around white goods are ridiculous, but a rule on how many hobs are required is just outright stupidity, there are legitimate places that would suit a 2 hob setup, it should be ammended to refer to property size/no. of rooms/occupancy no.

JimmyVik

1874 wrote: »

regardless of this place or back garden structures not being legit, the rules around white goods are ridiculous, but a rule on how many hobs are required is just outright stupidity, there are legitimate places that would suit a 2 hob setup, it should be ammended to refer to property size/no. of rooms/occupancy no.

Ive a 2 hob cooker where i live.
Hope the council dont come to evict me

Alias G

It wouldn't be so galling if it was advertised for low rent. But they have the cheek to ask for 1k.

punisher5112

To be honest it's in better shape then most rentals.

Yes it's a shed but tiz a mighty fine one at that.

€1k though is an insult to be honest and regulation of these types could well help people to get a place of their own that it's not a house share or living with the LL set up which are an absolute pain a lot of the time.

I can't honestly see why we can't have set ups as such once rules are followed and it doesn't actually impact on neighbours.

If these were actually set up right, good standard, affordable and right price for what it is I'd be all for changes.

FluffPiece

I'd have thought a greedy ****er would live in the shed and rent out the house for twice the price

L1011

weldoninhio wrote: »

I wonder if there was planning permission given, needed if the build is to be used as a habitable space.

There would not appear to be "recent" (last 15 years) planning for something of that type in any property on that road

HansKroenke

Just to note that, should anyone wish to report the dwelling for suspected breach of planning legislation, the complaint is not anonymous.

weldoninhio

HansKroenke wrote: »

Just to note that, should anyone wish to report the dwelling for suspected breach of planning legislation, the complaint is not anonymous.

The complainant is anonymous. The home owner will not be given any details of who complained. You have to give your details in case it goes to court, and in that case, the council will contact you to see if you are willing to provide court testimony or a statement, you are under no obligation to. It's all explained on the complaint form.

loyatemu

weldoninhio wrote: »

The complainant is anonymous. The home owner will not be given any details of who complained. You have to give your details in case it goes to court, and in that case, the council will contact you to see if you are willing to provide court testimony or a statement, you are under no obligation to. It's all explained on the complaint form.

why would they need court testimony from the complainant though - it's a shed in a back garden, the council just have to send an inspector round, if it's non-compliant, it's non-compliant regardless of who reported it.

punisher5112

loyatemu wrote: »

why would they need court testimony from the complainant though - it's a shed in a back garden, the council just have to send an inspector round, if it's non-compliant, it's non-compliant regardless of who reported it.

Nothing stopping one having a shed but where the law comes in if it's used to be lived in....

If this wasn't the case then one wouldn't be able to have man caves etc....

weldoninhio

loyatemu wrote: »

why would they need court testimony from the complainant though - it's a shed in a back garden, the council just have to send an inspector round, if it's non-compliant, it's non-compliant regardless of who reported it.

I didn't compile the form, so i'm not sure, but it's all there.

https://www.dublincity.ie/residential/planning/planning-applications/planning-enforcement/how-make-planning-enforcement-complaint

HansKroenke

weldoninhio wrote: »

The complainant is anonymous. The home owner will not be given any details of who complained. You have to give your details in case it goes to court, and in that case, the council will contact you to see if you are willing to provide court testimony or a statement, you are under no obligation to. It's all explained on the complaint form.

Yes, sorry. For the purpose of the investigation your details are anonymous but the council has to have your name and contact details.

TylerRyan28

HansKroenke wrote: »

Yes, sorry. For the purpose of the investigation your details are anonymous but the council has to have your name and contact details.

So how are they all still standing if they get reported to the DCC . Most people will fight it and go to court could be a long time before you even get to court if you ever do.

The person who owns the property will then ask why are the other logcabins around me still up, if take one down they would all have to come down which doesnt happen.

There was a story before of a man who built one in the west of Ireland I think he had nowhere else to live . So the council told him they would get him somewhere to live , when he took the logcabin down he went back to the council who told him they didnt know what he was talking about basically f***ed him over.

Gumbo

HansKroenke wrote: »

Just to note that, should anyone wish to report the dwelling for suspected breach of planning legislation, the complaint is not anonymous.

weldoninhio wrote: »

The complainant is anonymous. The home owner will not be given any details of who complained. You have to give your details in case it goes to court, and in that case, the council will contact you to see if you are willing to provide court testimony or a statement, you are under no obligation to. It's all explained on the complaint form.

You send the complaint to planningenforcement@dublincity.ie

You must include your name and address so that it’s not a fictitious complaint (yes it does happen).

The building owner will then get a Section 152 letter. They have 4 weeks to reply to the council who will carry out a site inspection. This has to happen legally.

Your details are confidential. They will never be released, even to the courts or through FOI. And FOI requests on the file are heavily redacted to remove names, address, email or phone number.

The council will never ask you, the complainant if you are will img to go to court to testify. This is the reason why the inspector inspects the site so the photos he/she takes can be used in court. The inspector is an authorised officer and only their statement, photos and evidence can be used if it goes to court. It would be too unreliable and can be easily argued by the other side.

Gumbo

TylerRyan28 wrote: »

So how are they all still standing if they get reported to the DCC . Most people will fight it and go to court could be a long time before you even get to court if you ever do.

The person who owns the property will then ask why are the other logcabins around me still up, if take one down they would all have to come down which doesnt happen.

There was a story before of a man who built one in the west of Ireland I think he had nowhere else to live . So the council told him they would get him somewhere to live , when he took the logcabin down he went back to the council who told him they didnt know what he was talking about basically f***ed him over.

Sometimes it’s the use that’s the breach. So the structure can be exempt but living in it is the problem. Once evidence of
No one living there then the file is closed but the structure maybe able
To stay if within the exemption limits.

NIMAN

Surely if someone is sitting on the other side of the country on the internet, its none of their concern that a shed is being rented in Dublin for 1k per month?

But I'd like to think maybe the authorities might actually spot things like this themselves without needing informants to highlight them?

Gumbo

NIMAN wrote: »

Surely if someone is sitting on the other side of the country on the internet, its none of their concern that a shed is being rented in Dublin for 1k per month?

But I'd like to think maybe the authorities might actually spot things like this themselves without needing informants to highlight them?

Planning Enforcement relies on the complaints process.
They wouldn’t have the staff to drive around looking at everything then cross referencing if it has planning or not.

djan

I think that it's a fantastic idea. Gives the opportunity for someone to have their own space at only a bit more than a double bedroom in a house share of that area.

Finish and size is good and with an own door entry to garden it would be nicer to live in than a lot of places up on daft.ie.

End of the day it's seemingly good quality accommodation added to the market thus helping satisfy demand and lower prices. If half the people did this, it would be going for half the price and people would be happy out both ways.

1874

Gumbo wrote: »

Planning Enforcement relies on the complaints process.
They wouldn’t have the staff to drive around looking at everything then cross referencing if it has planning or not.

tbh the interior looks very clean, could suit someone, what exactly are the councils doing about accommodation? Not sure what the regs are re the having a washer & dryer in a bathroom. Doesn't look insulated, they could have gone a bit extra and airtight/insulated and run a small MVHR and it'd probably be better than most houses.

I lodged a complaint against a neighbour and my council were useless, even defending the person and the structures when the obvious defects and problems were highlighted, they weren't lived in but were appallingly poor work and had problems related to their use affected us, council were useless when the whole thing was pointed out to them.
I can see why people wouldnt even bother approaching them.

1874

Im not a particular fan of these, but when you see some of the shoddy sheds and other things that are allowed, I dont get the Councils significant objection.
So long as they are electrically safe/compliant and certain measures regards safety and energy efficiency has been made, I wouldnt be opposed.


My main concern is the electrics, if thats done right, then work away, dont see the councils sorting anything re accommodation, the 1k would be a bit hard to take. But it could be a useful way to increase accomodation capacity if certain criteria were met.



I think its the "fault loop impedance" thats of main concern electrically, potentially due to the increased length of the earth wiring. If the main house has a pumped or gravity shower then the electric shower might not issues regarding current draw and specific wiring requirements.

runawaybishop

TylerRyan28 wrote: »

True yes I would say 95% of them are being used to be lived in . Then again they could have the logcabin built and wait to get reported and no evidence of it being used to live it. Then get a kitchen & bathroom fitted after case is closed. could get reported again after that

They don't even have to go to that much trouble. The council tell you weeks ahead they will be coming for a look. You just remove the bed and put it back 5 mins after they go. Enforcement is very very poor.

Still, the owner is taking a big risk, if anything happened to the tenant in the shed they would be taken to the cleaners.

1874

runawaybishop wrote: »

They don't even have to go to that much trouble. The council tell you weeks ahead they will be coming for a look. You just remove the bed and put it back 5 mins after they go. Enforcement is very very poor.

Still, the owner is taking a big risk, if anything happened to the tenant in the shed they would be taken to the cleaners.

What do you mean anything?
as in, can the owner get insurance? or is the structure safe?
A structure could be safe but not compliant imo,



This is why these kind of things should be formalised,
It is like many things here, just ignore the reality, and everyone suffers the consequences.

runawaybishop

1874 wrote: »

What do you mean anything?
as in, can the owner get insurance? or is the structure safe?
A structure could be safe but not compliant imo,



This is why these kind of things should be formalised,
It is like many things here, just ignore the reality, and everyone suffers the consequences.

It won't be insured, it's uninsurable. If the tenant injures themselves the owner will be in a world of trouble.

There is also like 0% chance that shed is compliant with fire safety regulations. We have seen before what can happen to places like that. Probably no access for the fire brigade anyway.

Practically, for the tenant, it will not be insulated up to regs and will be expensive to heat. We should be cracking down on cowboy landlords, people deserve better than this.

listermint

djan wrote: »

I think that it's a fantastic idea. Gives the opportunity for someone to have their own space at only a bit more than a double bedroom in a house share of that area.

Finish and size is good and with an own door entry to garden it would be nicer to live in than a lot of places up on daft.ie.

End of the day it's seemingly good quality accommodation added to the market thus helping satisfy demand and lower prices. If half the people did this, it would be going for half the price and people would be happy out both ways.

You know something is wrong when people are saying a shed in donaghmede for a grand a month is value.

1874

runawaybishop wrote: »

It won't be insured, it's uninsurable. If the tenant injures themselves the owner will be in a world of trouble.

There is also like 0% chance that shed is compliant with fire safety regulations. We have seen before what can happen to places like that. Probably no access for the fire brigade anyway.

Practically, for the tenant, it will not be insulated up to regs and will be expensive to heat. We should be cracking down on cowboy landlords, people deserve better than this.

I think there is some room for these to be viable, I dont think its a good situation, but we arrived here due to poor regulation and planning of other aspects of housing. Otherwise where were the councils when the likes of Priory Hall were built? are they safe?


imo, if something is energy efficient, electrically safe, what specific fire risks are there for this kind of construction over other houses? old houses with poor or old wiring or wooden framed houses, genuinely?
Access would be an issue, but if there was access an ample side entrance sufficient to park in?

listermint wrote: »

You know something is wrong when people are saying a shed in donaghmede for a grand a month is value.

Thats the one thing I baulked at, if you mean me, 1k is too much, if it was safe, I wouldnt think 500 is unreasonable. My own shed (which I use as a shed) is built better than that (and in many cases, better than some fo the extensions near me), I just never fitted it out for use as a habitable space, but I have seen 2 in my area, Im sure one is on my road, and I'd hazard a guess there are more unseen).

Spanish Eyes

Where I live we have huge long gardens with a gate into a lane at the back too. Ideal for a small habitable dwelling really. Own entrance and all that. Not that I am in the market for anything like that, but not one planning application for structures such as this was approved.

It would surely help the housing situation, subject to regs and controls to do something like this?

Gumbo

TylerRyan28 wrote: »

True yes I would say 95% of them are being used to be lived in . Then again they could have the logcabin built and wait to get reported and no evidence of it being used to live it. Then get a kitchen & bathroom fitted after case is closed. could get reported again after that

It may never get reported.

You also don’t need planning to add a bathroom or kitchen space into a garden room once the use is ancillary to the main dwelling.

Lantus

Great to see the private market providing a solution cheaply and quickly. Seems like a nice little spot.

Trend over next 5 years will be migration out of dublin as work from home allows a total rethink on where to live. You can get an awful lot for your money for a short drive in any direction.

TylerRyan28

Gumbo wrote: »

It may never get reported.

You also don’t need planning to add a bathroom or kitchen space into a garden room once the use is ancillary to the main dwelling.

Yeah true, then what do DCC look for when they come out to inspect it ? A bed ? Fire safety? Access to a public road ?

runawaybishop

TylerRyan28 wrote: »

Yeah true, then what do DCC look for when they come out to inspect it ? A bed ? Fire safety? Access to a public road ?

Evidence it's being lived in basically rather than used as an ancillary to the house. So a bed would be a no-no. They should also be looking at the size, height and position, the external finish and the space left in the garden.

Edit: grabbed these from a random county council website
Can I build a garage?
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.

weldoninhio

Gumbo wrote: »

You send the complaint to planningenforcement@dublincity.ie

You must include your name and address so that it’s not a fictitious complaint (yes it does happen).

The building owner will then get a Section 152 letter. They have 4 weeks to reply to the council who will carry out a site inspection. This has to happen legally.

Your details are confidential. They will never be released, even to the courts or through FOI. And FOI requests on the file are heavily redacted to remove names, address, email or phone number.

The council will never ask you, the complainant if you are will img to go to court to testify. This is the reason why the inspector inspects the site so the photos he/she takes can be used in court. The inspector is an authorised officer and only their statement, photos and evidence can be used if it goes to court. It would be too unreliable and can be easily argued by the other side.

On a rare occasion your evidence will be required in court to ensure a successful outcome to enforcement action. In such circumstances, you will be asked in advance if you are willing to give evidence.

weldoninhio

djan wrote: »

I think that it's a fantastic idea. Gives the opportunity for someone to have their own space at only a bit more than a double bedroom in a house share of that area.

Finish and size is good and with an own door entry to garden it would be nicer to live in than a lot of places up on daft.ie.

End of the day it's seemingly good quality accommodation added to the market thus helping satisfy demand and lower prices. If half the people did this, it would be going for half the price and people would be happy out both ways.

Yeah, sure building regulations are only there for the craic??

Idbatterim

Report ot to dcc? Dcc are the prime culprits behind the housing " crisis "

mcgragger

Juwwi wrote: »

Presuming the electric comes from the fuse board in the main house if both the main house and the shed both have the electric oven and electric showers on at the same time that's alot of power at the one time ,that's excluding the electric heaters ect ,, these sort of set ups need big fines as a deterrent if they don't fall under the regulations .

Well if the main house has an electric shower then there is a problem.

If both are on at the same time the mains house fuse will pop and if there is a priority switch fitted (which there should be) then only one shower can be on at a time.

Unless the home owner got a mains fuse upgrade from the ESB.

gctest50

mcgragger wrote: »

Well if the main house has an electric shower then there is a problem.

If both are on at the same time the mains house fuse will pop and if there is a priority..............

Amazing the way people look for potential things to whimper about

Just have a hot tank and pumped shower there

Added benefit : the person renting won't have to listen to a cr@p noisy electric shower every morning

The price is a bit much, but the place looks really good, in my opinion.

Assuming the house has a boiler (gas/oil) I would have thought it'd make more sense to run that into the shed for heating, rather than electric storage heaters, though.

fritzelly

That someone thinks they can rent a shed (admittedly nicely fitted out) for a €1000 euro month (and probably get it) just goes to show there is an endemic issue in Ireland

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

fritzelly wrote: »

That someone thinks they can rent a shed (admittedly nicely fitted out) for a €1000 euro month (and probably get it) just goes to show there is an endemic issue in Ireland

It's a disgrace. And no doubt they only accept cash under the table etc so probably not paying tax either.

I don't care how well kitted out the unit is, it's a disgrace that people are starting to accept a shed in someone's back garden is an acceptable place to live. Even if the rental was half at 500 a month I still wouldn't touch it with a large stick.

It's crap like this that drove me out of ireland, now living in North America and without giving any real details, I'm living in one of the biggest cities, in the middle of downtown in a high rise , well kept 1 bed apartment with bills, internet and underground parking included for $1,100 a month.

If I can have this here, why the hell would anyone pay 1k for a scabby shed in raheny with the owner looking out the back window at you ? Bollox to it, the rental market needs to change big time to prevent the type of crap

jimmycrackcorm

Alias G wrote:

It wouldn't be so galling if it was advertised for low rent. But they have the cheek to ask for 1k.

Nobody has to rent it if they don't want to.

What's the purpose of this thread? To get likes and groupthink outrage?

Op, what reaction are you looking for? It reminds me of that old joke about the guy who asks a woman of he'd sleep with her for a million, she says yes, then he asks her if she's do the same for one hundred.

She's outraged and asks him what does think she is, to wit he replies, we already know, we're just haggling.

If you put that "shed" out in the middle of some nice scenery, no one would complain about the price of rent.

Yet, if you put it in a commutable distance for a city, convenient to work, it becomes an abomination.

My guess... Op loves outrage

fritzelly

A garden shed is still a garden shed no matter where it's located

And in case you hadn't noticed the toilet is in a separate outbuilding- which if I'm not mistaken is totally illegal in Ireland. Great fun in the middle of the night needing a tinkle and it's lashing rain outside

fritzelly

fritzelly wrote: »

And in case you hadn't noticed the toilet is in a separate outbuilding

It's not - that's the utility room.

fritzelly

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not - that's the utility room.

It's the utility room come toilet - watch the video

Strike that - it's his own toilet weird

fritzelly

fritzelly wrote: »

It's the utility room come toilet - watch the video

Strike that - it's his own toilet weird

Some people use their bathroom as a utility room, generally if their house is tight for space. Not my cup of tea, but to each their own. I think he's trying to demonstrate that you have access to it, albeit it's not part of the shed itself.