My garden Room Build

Lumen wrote: »

The law says...

For class 1 exempted development "Where the house has not been extended previously, the floor area of any such extension shall not exceed 40 square metres."

For class 3 exempted development "The total area of such structures constructed, erected or placed within the curtilage of a house shall not, taken together with any other such structures previously constructed, erected or placed within the said curtilage, exceed 25 square metres.".

I reason that class 3 is imprecise because not all structures have a floor, but where they do, the floor area is measured.

Plus random legal site:

https://www.bellassociates.ie/services/exempted-planning-guidelines/

"The floor area limitation for exempted development is 25 square metres"

Found the thread, think I will need to ring the local office to see what they do by, based on what's in the thread

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058186438

runawaybishop wrote: »

Found the thread, think I will need to ring the local office to see what they do by, based on what's in the thread

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058186438

In case anyone is interested its 25m externally measured, at least in Mayo anyway.

chooseusername wrote: »

Maybe they should read their own bumph;

https://www.mayo.ie/getmedia/2897a10d-a8d1-4015-a01d-6e2a4e5dfdfd/8-a-guide-to-doing-work-around-the-house.pdf

Section 5 onwards.
That's Mayo co.co by the way.

The way I interpret the differing wording for extensions vs gardens buildings in the legislation is as follows:

- With an extension to a house, the principal concern is the relative increase in accomodation provided, so it is measured internally. We don't allow unlimited size of exempted development extensions because the trigger for planning is also the trigger to consider whether (for instance) waste water treatment capacity is sufficient or needs to be upgraded.

- With a standalone building, the principal concern is the impact on open space and visual impact, so it is measured externally.

More pragmatically, it's probably easier to measure an extension internally and a shed externally, as the extension doesn't have an accessible perimeter and sheds are usually full of dangerous junk. :pac:

Obvs Mayo have decided (in their documentation) to treat both extensions and sheds the same.

chooseusername wrote: »

You're muddying the waters now with waste water treatment(pun intended).

I'm just trying to find a rational explanation as to why the legislation is differently worded around size for exempted extensions (habitable) vs exempted free-standing buildings (non-habitable), and why some councils are measuring them differently.

It would be a good idea to seek clarification via a section 5 declaration.

I emailed my local council and received the following reply

“I am aware of different interpretations of the phrase “total area”, being either external area or internal floor area. Notwithstanding the above and having considered the matter, I consider that there is a reasonable probability that the planning authority could interpret the phrase as internal floor area. However, this is my opinion alone at this time and is given without prejudice to any decision or determination that the planning authority may make in relation to this or any related matter, and does not commit the planning authority to any particular course of action, view or interpretation.



Should you require a definitive view on this issue, you may request a declaration under section 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended (details on our website www.corkcity.ie) in relation to this matter.”

Mellor wrote: »

The law indicates 25m2 floor area.

I don't what you mean by "indicate" but the law does not state floor area for class 3 exemptions.

As I posted above.

Lumen wrote: »

For class 1 exempted development "Where the house has not been extended previously, the floor area of any such extension shall not exceed 40 square metres."

For class 3 exempted development "The total area of such structures constructed, erected or placed within the curtilage of a house shall not, taken together with any other such structures previously constructed, erected or placed within the said curtilage, exceed 25 square metres.".

Lumen wrote: »

I don't what you mean by "indicate" but the law does not state floor area for class 3 exemptions.

As I posted above.

Originally Posted by Lumen View Post
For class 1 exempted development "Where the house has not been extended previously, the floor area of any such extension shall not exceed 40 square metres."

For class 3 exempted development "The total area of such structures constructed, erected or placed within the curtilage of a house shall not, taken together with any other such structures previously constructed, erected or placed within the said curtilage, exceed 25 square metres.".

I interpret it as ; the "floor area" singular in class 1 as one extension to an existing house..
In class3 " The total floor areas of such structures taken together ......"

Mellor wrote: »

No it’s not.

Floor area is measured internally.
Footprint is measured externally.
The law indicates 25m2 floor area. It’s not within MayoCC’s power to change that.

Misinterpreting that is a different matter.

Good afternoon,

Mayo County Council’s view is that it is 25 sqm as viewed externally.

Regards,
MayoCOCO planning dept

I'm just reporting back what the planners told me.

I had planned on building myself this summer similar to rob but wanted to verify what the area limit was.

Mellor wrote: »

I understand that they may take that view.
My point is that that doesn’t make it coorect.

If one county takes it internally, and another externally. One of them is clearly wrong.

Exactly. Which is why the Section 5 is a good idea. At least with that if ultimate clarity ever arises and you’re on the wrong side of it then at least you can prove that you sought clarification and acted accordingly.

what an amazing job by both men, well done. I too am about to start a built, however i was wondering @Robamerc - would/did you of considered pine cladding? I know cedar is all the rage but pine looks like a good choice too, i am thinking of going with Shou Sugi Ban look. Just wondering why you went Cedar?

2011 wrote: »

A soft wood such as pine will require a lot more maintenance. Cedar is virtually maintenance free.

cheers but i thought you had to oil cedar ever couple of years, treated pine not so? Shou Sugi Ban would also help the treated pine? Perhaps i got this wrong though

Cyrus wrote: »

if you want it to silver.

How anybody thinks that untreated cedar is attractive once it goes silver/grey is beyond me - it's hideous. In it's new/treated state, it's fab.

dodzy wrote: »

How anybody thinks that untreated cedar is attractive once it goes silver/grey is beyond me - it's hideous. In it's new/treated state, it's fab.

Cyrus wrote: »

i agree it looks awful once it greys.

IMO there are two opposing views on gardens and their structures.

On the one hand you have the garden room people, who will paint/stain every bit of bare wood, put down porcelain tiles because they're neat and consider replacing the lawn with plastic grass because they can't bear unevenness and weeds and moss. For those people the garden represents a conquering of nature, and an extension of their indoor space, and thus the garden room must be as their house, with plasterboard and laminate and rubber roofs and all that jazz. The underlying philosophy is that physical degradation is synonymous with poverty.

On the other you have the shed people, who see the garden as a barely tamed slice of nature where things slowly age, rot and return to earth. These people believe that we can no more hold back these natural processes than we can become immortal ourselves, and that paint is the botoxing of nature, a futile act of denial.

Garden room people consider shed people to be disgusting troglodytes.

Shed people consider garden room people to be philistines.

It's all good, as long as you know what you're dealing with.

I am shed people, and so I tread lightly upon the sensitivities of the garden people, particularly in this thread, which is hostile territory.

(the above diatribe is not intended to be taken seriously, in case it's not obvious)

listermint wrote: »

Meh swings and roundabouts. I think my porch looks great. There's an element of fakary trying to yellow the timber every year to maintain a fake state. I love the fact it ages. This timber here was recycled from an office block so has been up on the side of a building for around 8 years.


Hideous is well... An exaggeration

in fairness that does look well.