Posts: 4,533
Threads: 241
Joined: Jan 2006
quote:
Originally posted by Kaixin...
MarkP, are you planning to apply for a permit to build an agriculture building without any primary residence on the property? I thought that there needed to be one before being able to get permits for building building structures, even on an ag zone.
You can get non-residential building permits before you permit a residential structure. It takes longer and also has to go through fire dept, and have an engineer do the energy calcs but yes you can get one.
Posts: 2,484
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
Yes, a friend of mine went that route, which is why I know that you can have a toilet, shower, and sink. He can come back later and build a regular house.
The code I was looking at at the time called out a minimum of 220 sf for the main living area in an efficiency dwelling. Cooking facilities and a bathroom were also required. They had no minimum sf requirements but there are minimum clearances in front of fixtures so they do take up some room. It is like a puzzle to fit in the minimum sf room, kitchen, and bathroom in the least space. I decided I couldn't do it in a 40' container and have any useful storage space left over so I gave up on permitting the container as a dwelling. I could have moved all the lawnmowers and chainsaws out but that would have meant building something to secure them. No way I can build something more secure than the container, and no way I can build the container to be as comfortable as a small cabin designed for habitation, so I finally came to my senses. The container will be for storage although it will have a few amenities.
Posts: 603
Threads: 60
Joined: Mar 2008
Residential permits have minimum requirements of square footage for each area of use, kitchen, bath and living. It equals about 400 sf. I believe. Our smallest yurt that can pass is a 24', which is 450 sf, so I know it's not less than 350. That's an efficiency dwelling, codes would be found by looking that up. But really, all you have to do is hire a local, experienced draftsman. They're going to know all that stuff probably more than someone you call at the building department even, sadly enough, because they have to run a business getting the plans through, so if they're worth their salt, they know what's going to pass or not.
You have to show a water source, a working and engineered wastewater system, a toilet, a shower or tub, a source of refrigeration, Food cooking (stove) and dish washing (sink). I don't think you have to show electric, but then your refrigeration would need to be propane and water pump either gravity or solar...
I'd just hire a local draftsman. Lori is great with All Aina Services.
Melissa Fletcher
___________________________
"Make yurts, not war" Bill Coperthwaite, 1973
Melissa Fletcher
___________________________
"Make yurts, not war" Bill Coperthwaite, 1973
Posts: 8,472
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
The problem with getting accurate information on what might be the absolutely smallest allowable home is that it is so rarely done.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Kaixin,
Why not just draw up what you want and submit it to County?
Posts: 2,484
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
Just checked online. Chapter 5 of the county code, revised 8/1/2012, Article 3, Section 5-71, Subsections 310-3-7 and 310-3-8 seem to cover what we are looking for. They are as I remembered them. An efficiency dwelling must have a living area of not less than 220 sf. It must also have a sink, cook top, a refrigerator, and a closet. There is no separate minimum square foot area for the kitchen but each appliance must have 30" clear in front of it. There must be a separate bathroom. Again, no specific minimum area is listed but there are minimum clearances around fixtures. For example the space for the water closet must be 30" wide and there must be 24" clearance in front of it.
If not an efficiency dwelling, I could not find where it was specifically stated how many rooms were required, only that one room must be 120 sf and other habitable rooms (not kitchen or bathroom) had to be minimum 70 sf and no room with less than 7' as one dimension. It stands to reason that you would have to have a living room and at least one bedroom, one at 120 sf and the other at 70 sf. That adds up to only 190 sf. Smaller than an efficiency dwelling? I doubt it. Hallways, room to swing a door, etc will eat up any savings.
Assuming a 5' x 7' bathroom (you might squeeze it smaller but not by much) and something like 3' x 7' for the kitchen counters, you get Dee's 274 sf. It is hard to see how you could get by with less. In my case, the container is 8' x 40' on the outside. It is only 7' 8" wide inside and that is without any wall treatment, so figure no wider than 7 1/2' by 39 1/2' inside. Then subtract 4" for each wall and I was left with only about 300 sf to work with. It could be done but in the end it would leave a lot to be desired as a house. As a storage/work space with a few amenities it will be fine. As for sleeping, it is a darn sight better than my car, which I have done many times.
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Why skimp on square footage? It is the cheapest part of the house.
Posts: 14,124
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
More square footage means more to clean and maintain (and higher taxes). In places with actual heat/cold, a bigger house makes sense, since you'll spend lots of time indoors. Here, I'd rather be outside, so I'm perfectly happy with a little shack, very glad I didn't build a Standard Western House.
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Not sayin' you need a mcmansion, just that 300 sq.ft. is mighty tight when there is company and it is raining.
Posts: 2,484
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
If you are set on using a shipping container then there is an upper limit of sf that is less than 320 sf. If you can fit it all in then you can use the container. You could of course weld multiple containers together and get past that threshold. For me this gets away from the original principle of making the most of the inherent value of the container, which is that it is already a strong and secure unit, if you can live with it as it is. After gaining some experience with my container I can see that there are some serious drawbacks to using them to build a house. I would still like to pursue a single container house as a project but I don't have the funds to do that.
If you don't have an artificial limit of 320 sf then there does seem to be an element of false economy to going too small just for the sake of it.
|
