Calahonda52 wrote: » not crossing kc here but the following bothers me a littlehome office or anyway extra room, but not a permanent living space The home office if used for bringing folk into for consultations etc will be problematic, as will any use that give rise to the possibility that it is being used as a habitable space
Pkiernan wrote: » Can't see how you can get away without planning g if you're adding a bathroom.
jsabina wrote: » ah the bathroom would be the problem for planning? I didn't know that.. If this is the case I might think without it.. it was just thinking of rainy days and working there she wouldn't have to cross the garden to go into the house..
kceire wrote: » The bathroom will not be a planning issue.
Pkiernan wrote: » Try telling Fingal CoCo you want to put an extra toilet on to their sewer infrastructure and see what they tell you.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Why?
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Could you not elaborate without being secretive about it.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » I thought a person was precluded from building a cabin/outbuilding in the back garden (unattached to the house) with a bathroom out the back in Dublin recently. Cannot be habitable (rentable!) but ok for office or playroom kind of thing is what I understood.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Thanks anyway.
kceire wrote: » It's classed as a domestic shed. So shed exemption limits apply. Max internal area of 25 Sq. M. Max height of 3m with flat roof or 4 m with pitched roof. No windows facing the boundaries. Building regulations do not apply.
Walter2016 wrote: » A little off topic - Why can't they make it easier to allow a habitable garden room that could house a student. My mother has large garden near ucd - she wouldn't like a student living in the house, but if she could install a garden structure of about 30sqm with single bedroom, shower and lounge, she'd love to house a student in it. Win win for both. These structures are relatively cheap, easy to install and would certainly suit some people.
unkel wrote: » Sorry for hijacking your thread, jsabina, but my needs are very similar, so we might as well share this thread if that's ok with you?
unkel wrote: » My future shed will comply with all that. Can the shed be the full width of the property? As in, my semi D house is about 8.5m wide, the garden about 10m wide (side entrance of about 1.5m wide). Can the shed be 10m wide?
unkel wrote: » Also, I already have a conservatory extension of about 15m2 (internal area). Is the exemption for this extension separate from the one for a domestic shed? So I can have both?
unkel wrote: » My shed will need a toilet and a sink. It will mainly be a home office and a gym (+ hopefully man cave ). No shower, no kitchen. Are there any other restrictions?
unkel wrote: » I'm not planning to do this very soon, but do you expect any of the current regulations to change in the next year or two?
Spanish Eyes wrote: » According to previous poster there should be no problem. No kitchen though, but a bathroom seems to be ok. I'm sure the student could cope with a tabletop halogen cooker, a sink, and a microwave, Like yourself, I just don't know why more aren't put in. I reckon there is a snag there somewhere though. Has to be.
kceire wrote: » Because it will be abused by a few who will stick the worse type of shed possible to house the most amount of people as possible. They should relax the granny flat arrangements I think, to allow detached structures at the rear of the property but that's an argument that people should highlight when DCC advertised for submissions to their Development Plan.
Walter2016 wrote: » Easily sorted by having agreed structures that are pre-approved. Granny flats I'd agree also should be permitted under current exemption, again once certain protection conditions were followed.
Walter2016 wrote: » For many it isn't a case of earning a few bob, but security and company especially if they live alone, without the intrusion of someone living in the main house.
fitz wrote: » Are you sure on the 25 Sq. M. limit applying to internal space? Is it not overall footprint?
Angry bird wrote: » Yes internal floor area, including any internal walls
fitz wrote: » Someone at Kildare CC told me it was external walls. I'm curious because I'm looking into a garden studio design, with a decoupled room-in-a-room dressing for 50-60db of sound transmission loss, so if planning exemption is based on internal size, I wouldn't lose nearly as much floorspace to the additional wall thickness, which would be great.
kceire wrote: » It is internally measured from the inside face of the external walls. You or they probably mis pronounced or misheard the advice, the external walls do come into play, but it is the area within the external walls.
fitz wrote: » OK, so if the soundproofing design is an external brick wall --> air gap filled with rock wool --> insulated stud wall with a couple of layers of plasterboard, it will be measured from the inside of the brick wall?
kceire wrote: » Inside of the finished wall. So let's say I build a shed and fit insulation inside. I measure the area of that shed and it is 26 Sq. M. I am over the exemption limits. So now, I add an extra layer of insulation to one wall, thus reducing the floor area to 25 Sq. M. I am now in compliance.
fitz wrote: » So, if they are double leaf walls, like this (http://www.soundproofingcompany.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/green-glue-wall-types-double-stud.jpg), but with the external facing leaf made using brick rather than studs ( in order to add mass and improve sound transmission loss)....Is the area measured from where the plasterboard stops on the internal leaf? Or would it be measured from the internal side of the internal stud wall before plasterboard goes on? Sorry if these are stupid questions, but space will be at a premium, so will want to maximise as much as possible...
