4 bed house with 5 bedrooms

mickdw · 09-11-2019 3:44pm

kceire wrote: »

1991 no?

https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/part_b_1991_-_fire_safety.pdf

Pretty certain the requirement for escape windows for dwellings only came in for part B 1997 which took effect july 98 even though the document states January 98.

scamalert · 09-11-2019 4:21pm

some fire safety measures sometime go over the top, was in one office locked with keypad servers other sensitive stuff going on with paperwork, big windows facing to main street that would be way better way out if really needing fast exit. and they wanted to remove the safety lock due the fire safety regs, thou think they let it stay at the end.

as logically thinking it should be closest possible exit route - even if say window needs to be broken, as to opposite logic if theres fire in corridors etc going all the way and risking harm makes no sense.

thus why brought in attic example as even thou windows could be wide but depending on roof, and height hardly any safer trying to cling to roof, or risk going into fire, if it would happen.

sydthebeat · 09-11-2019 4:31pm

mickdw wrote: »

Pretty certain the requirement for escape windows for dwellings only came in for part B 1997 which took effect july 98 even though the document states January 98.

Tgd b 1991 referred to BS 5588: part 1 1990 for single dwellings.

This BS does indicate the requirement for openable windows to bedrooms.

Interestingly more akin to the current requirement, than the one from tgd b 1997

mickdw · 09-11-2019 6:40pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

Tgd b 1991 referred to BS 5588: part 1 1990 for single dwellings.

This BS does indicate the requirement for openable windows to bedrooms.

Interestingly more akin to the current requirement, than the one from tgd b 1997

Yes part B 1991 via BS5588 does refer to something very close to the current standard although if I remember correctly, the key lock was allowable. I've had this discussion before and for.some reason it was broadly agreed that the escape rules were not applied here until the 1997 regs came in. That has certainly been my experience to date seeing what has been installed over varying years but following the wording of the BS as quoted, it would appear that escape openings should have been provided from 1991 so my earlier comments should be discarded.

Gumbo · 09-11-2019 6:53pm

scamalert wrote: »

some fire safety measures sometime go over the top, was in one office locked with keypad servers other sensitive stuff going on with paperwork, big windows facing to main street that would be way better way out if really needing fast exit. and they wanted to remove the safety lock due the fire safety regs, thou think they let it stay at the end.

as logically thinking it should be closest possible exit route - even if say window needs to be broken, as to opposite logic if theres fire in corridors etc going all the way and risking harm makes no sense.

thus why brought in attic example as even thou windows could be wide but depending on roof, and height hardly any safer trying to cling to roof, or risk going into fire, if it would happen.

Offices are treated differently again. They don’t require escape/rescue windows as the escape is designed around protected escape routes to the final exit.

Claw Hammer · 11-11-2019 12:00pm

This has nothing to do with planning or regulations. It has to do with marketing. If a house is advertised as having 5 bedrooms and a viewer comes and sees one bedroom is downstairs they will be pissed off. Equally if it is advertised as 5 bedrooms a potential buyer might pass it over as they want 4 bedrooms only. I agree with the auctioneer. The way to market the house is 4 bedrooms with converted garage.

sydthebeat · 11-11-2019 12:04pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

This has nothing to do with planning or regulations. It has to do with marketing. If a house is advertised as having 5 bedrooms and a viewer comes and sees one bedroom is downstairs they will be pissed off. Equally if it is advertised as 5 bedrooms a potential buyer might pass it over as they want 4 bedrooms only. I agree with the auctioneer. The way to market the house is 4 bedrooms with converted garage.

What's wrong with a ground floor bedroom.

There are many positives for having one

Claw Hammer · 11-11-2019 12:06pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

What's wrong with a ground floor bedroom.

There are many positives for having one

There is nothing wrong with it per se but from a marketing point of view it is overselling. Losing some of the potential market is not a good idea.

11-11-2019 1:00pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with it per se but from a marketing point of view it is overselling. Losing some of the potential market is not a good idea.

How stupid do you think people are that they can't see a room can be changed to whatever they want? If someone doesn't want the 5th bedroom they can change it to something else, nobody is going to walk away because a room is called a bedroom and they want something else in its place.

Also going by your logic you are losing the market of people who want 5 bedrooms if you call it 4 bedrooms. Personally I don't think it makes any difference if its called 4 bed or 5 bed people will use the rooms the way they want to regardless. Someone might even use it as a 3 bed and convert one room to an office and another to a gym.

Gumbo · 11-11-2019 2:17pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

This has nothing to do with planning or regulations. It has to do with marketing. If a house is advertised as having 5 bedrooms and a viewer comes and sees one bedroom is downstairs they will be pissed off. Equally if it is advertised as 5 bedrooms a potential buyer might pass it over as they want 4 bedrooms only. I agree with the auctioneer. The way to market the house is 4 bedrooms with converted garage.

It has everything to do with the regulations.
A ground floor bedroom is a very attractive item on a house purchase. It allows for guest privacy, future proofing by way of universal design should you ever require an accessible bedroom. Finglas county council for example, required this approach on a development I was involved with in Hollystown this year.

Sustainability, universal design and home adaptation are key elements looking long term.

Anyway, doesn’t every bungalow in the world have their bedrooms on the ground floor

riclad · 11-11-2019 3:37pm

From the point of view of marketing , it looks better to sell the house as
a 4 bed house,
especially if the bedroom downstairs is right beside the kitchen ,
or the front room,
4 bedrooms is enough for most people .
the new buyer will probably use it as a tv room, or even as a utility room for storage .

scamalert · 11-11-2019 5:20pm

riclad wrote: »

From the point of view of marketing , it looks better to sell the house as
a 4 bed house,
especially if the bedroom downstairs is right beside the kitchen ,
or the front room,
4 bedrooms is enough for most people .
the new buyer will probably use it as a tv room, or even as a utility room for storage .

partly agree as in more of a usual search trend would be 3-4 bed house, as those would be most viewed criteria, assuming most would think that 5bed would be lager or even separate house, or cost more so in simple terms estate agent just follows the trend with 4bed converted garage would draw more attention.

Gumbo · 11-11-2019 9:54pm

I thought the biggest search trend would be location and price.

riclad · 11-11-2019 11:52pm

I Think people search for location ,price, and no of bedrooms,.
someone with 3 kids is not going to buy a one bed house.
someone who works in dublin is not going to buy a house in kerry
even it is cheap and has 4 bedrooms .

Claw Hammer · 12-11-2019 11:57am

Just because someone sleeps in a room does not mean it is a bedroom. Equally just because someone does not sleep in a room does not mean it is not a bedroom. A house originally built as a 5 bedroom house will typically have other rooms larger than those found in houses built with fewer bedrooms. Therefore the sitting room, dining room kitchen et cetera will be proportionately larger. Adding a room to a house originally built as a 4 bedroom house will not increase the size of the other rooms. The house essentially retains its character as a 4 bedroom house notwithstanding the addition of another room. I know a man who demolished his house and rebuilt it rather than extend as an extended house is simply not the same as a house originally built as a complete unit.

c.p.w.g.w · 12-11-2019 12:07pm

Why don't people use Area of the home, instead of bedrooms. Its utterly bizarre.

I have seen a 4 bed and 3 bed in a very similar location. Both in need of a bit of updating.
4 bed property was 1000 sq feet 185,000
3 bed property was 1500 sq feet 160,000

I actually viewed both, and the 3 bed property could have been turned into a 4 bed easily enough by changing the layout up stairs(Brought a builder). So more property for less money is just really bizarre.

Gumbo · 12-11-2019 1:58pm

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Why don't people use Area of the home, instead of bedrooms. Its utterly bizarre.

I have seen a 4 bed and 3 bed in a very similar location. Both in need of a bit of updating.
4 bed property was 1000 sq feet 185,000
3 bed property was 1500 sq feet 160,000

I actually viewed both, and the 3 bed property could have been turned into a 4 bed easily enough by changing the layout up stairs(Brought a builder). So more property for less money is just really bizarre.

Because, going by some posters above you, that 3 bed house will always be a 3 bed house!
I don't believe it myself, as you can add additional bedrooms subject to them complying with the minimum standards.

Gumbo · 12-11-2019 2:00pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

I know a man who demolished his house and rebuilt it rather than extend as an extended house is simply not the same as a house originally built as a complete unit.

Very unusual approach as it would then bring that new house in the requirements for all the most up to date planning and Building Regulations.
I suspect there was more to this story than meets the eye.

Also, there would be a public record of it on the Council Website, so it would be interesting to see the description and documentation please.

Claw Hammer · 12-11-2019 3:49pm

kceire wrote: »

Very unusual approach as it would then bring that new house in the requirements for all the most up to date planning and Building Regulations.
I suspect there was more to this story than meets the eye.

Also, there would be a public record of it on the Council Website, so it would be interesting to see the description and documentation please.

It is not at all unusual. It has been done around Dublin a number of times. There have been many more facade only remaining with a full rebuild happening behind the original facade. The first one I knew of had got a quote of 130k to build an extension and was able to fully rebuild for 180k. the rebuilt house was work far more that the extended one would have been. Soe Sei-ds around Blackrock in Dubin have had extensions costing 300k added to them. A full rebuild would have been better. Around Castleknock several 1960s houses were demolished and rebuilt.

4 bed house with 5 bedrooms

Comments