inforfun wrote: » To be fair, with the current WC it is actually my preferred set up
jmayo wrote: » Just because the Dutch didn't make it
Cheshire Cat wrote: » ∆ That's only suitable for teetotalers!
Mollyb60 wrote: » How in the name of jesus did that pass any sort of building control? Do they even have building regs in The Netherlands? Even if I didn't drink I'd never go near that. Imagine if you had a kid in the house?
inforfun wrote: » Seen it all now.... Dutch building control\regulations being questioned on an Irish website. Whatever someone does inside the 4 walls of his own house has nothing to do with building control or building regs. They only come into play if you are going to take down walls of built extensions. Rules are so strict, you cant even paint the outside of your own place in a colour you desire.
How in the name of jesus did that pass any sort of building control? Do they even have building regs in The Netherlands?
inforfun wrote: » Your own words. That is not questioning rules. That is wondering if there are rules. In a condescending way even. Well, last part is how i picked it up. You actually think that a country that built the Afsluitdijk, The Flevopolder, The Delta works, the Stormvloedkering and many other things all over the world has no building regulations?
Mollyb60 wrote: » From my point of view that construction is insanity but as I said, I'm not aware of how the regs work in Amsterdam. And going by the fact that 'regulations' are a wishy washy term in the South with no real enforcement, I thought it might've been the same sort of system over there. But seeing as how you just said that there are no building regs that are applied to things like this sort of internal work then yeah, I was right. There are no rules. So I stand by my disbelief. If you choose to pick up as condescending there's not much I can do about that tbh.
inforfun wrote: » In most people's view it is an insane construction. That is the whole point of me posting it here. Take a look at the thread title. Still... that doesnt make it against any regulations. Might not be the safest place to have toddlers growing up or an ideal situation for a wheelchair user but i am pretty sure the building isnt going to collapse anytime soon with those beams. After all, most of the building in that street were built in the 17th century. It wasnt a choice of mine to pick it up as condescending i just read it that way. After reading what you have to say about the "South" i think i read it just the way it was meant to be.
inforfun wrote: » And this one is a bit special and probably only suitable if you ever competed in on the balance beam on olympic level. This is your bedroom: And i cant see any other way to get there than this: All that in the part of Amsterdam where you can shovel the self-righteousness of the street.https://www.funda.nl/koop/amsterdam/appartement-40538768-leidsegracht-82-n/
inforfun wrote: » Gas central heating and proper insulation will take care of that. One of the most expensive parts in Amsterdam to buy so you will not see people there who have to think 2x about every euro they spend.
retalivity wrote: » http://www.daft.ie/dublin/bungalows-for-sale/ranelagh/21a-leeson-park-ranelagh-dublin-1724869/ 290k for what appears to be a ruined country shed in ranelagh. Bonus points for posting photos of photos in a book instead of, you know, actual photos of the place
Kamili wrote: » Or a kitchen
M5 wrote: » 290k for a shed and the agent can't even be bothered proof reading the spiel!
Speedsie wrote: » Or a roof.