# Planning/Retention Granny Flat



## Leesider32 (17 Apr 2019)

Hi all,

Would like some advice on this. Bought a house with a building at the end of the back garden which is plumbed, wired etc and was used as a beauty salon by the previous owners. It is under the size required for planning but we bought it with it specified that it can only be used for ancillary use, so storage etc. but not residential or commercial.

We want to do a bit of AirBnB, maybe even a longer term renter or use it for friends etc. visiting us. I wouldn't say our relationship with our neighbour is the best so I want to have everything in order in case she would bring it to the attention of the council etc.

Should I go for retention or change of use or what is the best and quickest way of getting it through planning?

Thanks


----------



## Leo (17 Apr 2019)

Leesider32 said:


> It is under the size required for planning



There is no allowed size for a detached residential space. There are exemptions for sheds, but any other use requires planning. Is the structure up to the standards required (building regs compliant) for habitable space in terms of minimum size, insulation, electrics, ventilation, etc.? 

You will almost certainly be refused permission for Air BnB style letting or residential use though. Very difficult to get that through.


----------



## noproblem (17 Apr 2019)

What's the overall size of the structure? Has it got its own ESB connection, can bins be brought in and out for rubbish without going through the main residence, is there a separate entrance to get to it, what sort of heating, cooking, toilet facilities, sleeping quarters, washing machine, TV connection, etc, etc, etc. A lot more involved before you get permission from any Co Council to allow someone to live there and rightly so.


----------



## Bronte (17 Apr 2019)

Leesider32 said:


> Bought a house with a building at the end of the back garden which is plumbed, wired etc and was used as a beauty salon by the previous owners.
> 
> It is under the size required for planning but we bought it with it specified that it can only be used for ancillary use, so storage etc. but not residential or commercial.



It may have been specified in your contract that it can only be used for storage. But that's just because the sellers were not able to provide you planning permission so that clause is to get around that. It doesn't change the fact it was used commercially.  And that 'use' can not be stopped now by the council if enough time has lapsed. 

When I sell a house I own, which has a converted garage at the side, I'll be selling as a house with a garage rather than a house with a flat.  To give you a more concrete example. I'll also have no issue confirming in writing that it's been a flat for the last 20 years.  For some of that time the council was paying me rent on my 'illegal' flat.


----------



## Bronte (17 Apr 2019)

Leo said:


> You will almost certainly be refused permission for Air BnB style letting or residential use though. Very difficult to get that through.



It's absolutely ridiculous with the country awash with 'illegal' dwellings that none of us can go down the legal route to get them planning permission.  All this talk of densities and not allowed to go up nor to convert space into dwellings.  As for rules on sizes. It's absolutely amazing to me that we keep hearing this but it's ok to put an entire family into a box in a hotel.  For years !


----------



## Leo (17 Apr 2019)

Bronte said:


> It's absolutely amazing to me that we keep hearing this but it's ok to put an entire family into a box in a hotel. For years !



One for a thread of its own, but the solution to this is not facilitating families living in glorified sheds.


----------



## Leesider32 (17 Apr 2019)

Bronte said:


> It may have been specified in your contract that it can only be used for storage. But that's just because the sellers were not able to provide you planning permission so that clause is to get around that. It doesn't change the fact it was used commercially.  And that 'use' can not be stopped now by the council if enough time has lapsed.
> 
> When I sell a house I own, which has a converted garage at the side, I'll be selling as a house with a garage rather than a house with a flat.  To give you a more concrete example. I'll also have no issue confirming in writing that it's been a flat for the last 20 years.  For some of that time the council was paying me rent on my 'illegal' flat.




Yeah that's exactly the way it went down! It's size is around 25sqm, electricity and water are off the main house, no cooking area (microwave max), combi gas boiler, shared entrance with neighbour at side of main house, refuse can go through shared entrance.....so it was built for commercial use but probably doesn't meet some specifications.

It was built in 2013 so going by the logic above should I not say anything, as mentioned my concern is the neighbour could kick up a stink and going to the extreme the council could request us to pull it down?


----------



## noproblem (17 Apr 2019)

Might also have an issue in regard to a fire hazard. What if a fire broke out, how would the fire brigade gain access? Personally I cannot see you getting permission for any sort of habitable space. Maybe you should think about putting an extension on your own house with separate entrance, or similar?


----------



## Leesider32 (18 Apr 2019)

Ok if I go for planning and don't get it as most it as most people are suggesting will happen could the council ask for it to be taken down? Take out current features that make it habitable? Or just say don't use it for residential and leave as is?

If I don't go for the planning is there a certain time period after the build date (2013 in this case) that the council can't ask me to pull it down even if it is being used for residential purposes and my neighbour complains to the council?


----------



## Leo (18 Apr 2019)

Leesider32 said:


> could the council ask for it to be taken down? Take out current features that make it habitable?



The latter is most likely.



Leesider32 said:


> If I don't go for the planning is there a certain time period after the build date (2013 in this case) that the council can't ask me to pull it down even if it is being used for residential purposes and my neighbour complains to the council?



No, such usage over time of a sub-standard structure never becomes OK. Any space to be let must meet the minimum standards.


----------



## Chrissy28 (23 Apr 2019)

If it’s being used as a shed and it’s below the floor area for which planning permission is required (ie if it’s exempt from pp) you will not be asked to take it down and no one can force you to remove it. Phone the planning dept of your local authority and they will advise you whether it’s exempt or not - you don’t have to specify the address.
You will not get a grant of permission for this to be used as a dwelling so I would advise not to invest time or money in this regard.
The period of time after which the council cannot take enforcement action is 7 years - but this is 7 years from when it commenced use for residential purposes, not from when it was built.


----------



## Leesider32 (24 Apr 2019)

Thanks for your replies on this, going to do a bit more digging but does look like a bit of rabbit hole so not going to go too deep!


----------



## cremeegg (24 Apr 2019)

Leo said:


> No, such usage over time of a sub-standard structure never becomes OK. Any space to be let must meet the minimum standards.





Chrissy28 said:


> The period of time after which the council cannot take enforcement action is 7 years - but this is 7 years from when it commenced use for residential purposes, not from when it was built.



Can anyone reconcile these two statements or show if either one is incorrect ?


----------



## Leo (24 Apr 2019)

cremeegg said:


> Can anyone reconcile these two statements or show if either one is incorrect ?



The legislation covering minimum standards for rented accommodation are set in the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2017 legislation, so are completely separate from planning regs. Regardless of how long a property has been rented for, it must meet these standards.

The 7 rule is a bit of a myth. The 7 year, or in many cases 12 year limit applies to LA enforcement options, but just because something has stood longer than this time does not mean the structure or usage is approved. Any future development on the site will be refused until such time as the unauthorised structure or use is regularised. If there were any conditions attached the the original development on the site regarding subdividing or erecting further habitable space (common enough now, but may not have been when the site was originally developed), then there are no limits on the enforcement period. 

I'm not 100% sure, but the fact that the OP has bought this structure with it specified under the contract as non-habitable space likely reset the enforcement clock.


----------



## Bronte (24 Apr 2019)

cremeegg said:


> Can anyone reconcile these two statements or show if either one is incorrect ?


There are time limits meaning the council can't make you take it down.

Separate to that are the housing standards.  In my experience with councils and from what I've seen the council isn't interested in enforcing standards, they don't have the man power for it, they don't want to lose landlords if they impose standards and they are begging for landlords to take on tenants if my experience going with HAP is anything to go by.  Literally the councils don't want to know about standards as they are too preoccupied with actually housing people.


----------



## Bronte (24 Apr 2019)

Leo said:


> I'm not 100% sure, but the fact that the OP has bought this structure with it specified under the contract as non-habitable space likely reset the enforcement clock.



All the OP would have to certify is that the structure was used as x for the last y number of years. 

What experience have you of councils making people take down converted garages and sheds.  I converted a house into two flats and both are let to the council.  All they wanted from me was proof I owned the place. The council doesn't ask for proof of planning.  Which I didn't have anyway.  The city street that property is in is full of such properties.


----------



## Leo (24 Apr 2019)

Bronte said:


> What experience have you of councils making people take down converted garages and sheds.



None personally bar reading some of the enforcement orders issued by Dublin City Council. They receive over 1000 complaints per annum, in the majority of complaints, retention is granted but they still issue 100's of enforcement orders every year. Only a small few cases end up in the district courts when the owners refuse to comply.


----------



## Bronte (1 May 2019)

What percentage end up in court and what happens there?


----------



## Leo (1 May 2019)

Sometimes they make it to the High Court and cost in the tens of thousands. Plenty of other examples in the courts records, but most people will remove unauthorised development, it's rare to see wins over the LAs in these cases.


----------



## Bronte (1 May 2019)

But Leo that case failed because of the seven year rule.

Have you a link to a case over the seven years.

https://www.eastcoast.fm/news/wickl...n-appeal-against-planning-enforcement-ruling/


----------



## Bronte (1 May 2019)

More



... legal action can not be taken if it’s more than seven years since the beginning of the development...

That’s me sorted than on two conversions.  That’s a very good link for the legalities of it. I did one of my conversions before google maps. But it was internal anyway.


----------



## Bronte (1 May 2019)

Lees pidea when in 2013 was it built. Stay well away from the council until it’s well over the 7 years.


----------



## Bronte (1 May 2019)

Leo said:


> One for a thread of its own, but the solution to this is not facilitating families living in glorified sheds.


Dublin council think otherwise. Looks like quite a nice glorified shed to me.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...build-log-cabins-in-back-garden-37572814.html


----------



## Leo (1 May 2019)

Bronte said:


> ... legal action can not be taken if it’s more than seven years since the beginning of the development...
> 
> That’s me sorted than on two conversions.  That’s a very good link for the legalities of it. I did one of my conversions before google maps. But it was internal anyway.



Yeah, they can't take action after 7 years, or 12 years where they was planning in place to do some of the work (for instance where you got planning to build an extension, but built bigger than what you had planning for.

After those periods, you'll only run into problems where you go to sell the property (where there is a mortgage involved and the bank are concerned it might affect value) or seek planning to carry out further development. With the latter, the LA can refuse permission pending removal of the unapproved development or apply conditions to the approval that it will be modified to their liking.


----------



## Leo (1 May 2019)

Bronte said:


> Dublin council think otherwise. Looks like quite a nice glorified shed to me.
> 
> https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...build-log-cabins-in-back-garden-37572814.html



That certainly looks from the outside to be well above the usual log cabin standards alright. Note though that in the above vote, the council have just agreed to review the situation and write a report.  That report has since been completed and the motion rejected.


----------



## Leo (1 May 2019)

Leo said:


> Yeah, they can't take action after 7 years,



To correct that point, Section 46 of the 2000 Planning Act gives the LA authority a number of options after the 7 year period for unauthorised development 'in exceptional circumstances', without defining what constitutes exceptional. Not sure how often that has been used.


----------

