Click on that link above, this is what the front extension should have looked like. Note the very different window shape and roof shape?
Not a conspiracy theorist. Just noting that you are looking at a photo taken by the TV company in the best possible conditions (snow/frost) from the best possible angle. So you think the front extension is OK.
About a dozen other posters on this thread before you, who saw the footage on the TV on Sunday night, took time out to saty that front extension is "Vile", that if they were a neighbour they would be "bulling" at how it turned out etc.
The photo shows the roof and window are a lot different to what Bannon submitted planning permission for, so do you think Bannon will have to apply for retention planning permission yet again? What if he is refused, like some people are?
Almost as bizarre as thinking the front wall of the extension is sloping.
The pitched roof of the extension is stepped back and a parapet gutter hides the roof from the ground.
Here you are;
Edit;
Just looked again, it seems you think it's the roof that's sloping, still bizarre!
The TV company was quite clever to wait until snow to photo it, so it blends in to the ground and wall in the foreground more.
Jaysus Francis, that is just bizarre.
What a fabulous conspiracy theorist you are, 😁😁
I loved the idea of the bike shed/storage at the front with the hidden door.
Very impressed with the builder.
I would bet the green and the yellow are equal distance, because that is how perspective works.
https://www.johnlovett.com/perspective-drawing
In any case, it is different to the drawing submitted for planning permission, which someone else posted yesterday evening.
So Dermot Bannon did not comply with planning permission for the front extension? I suppose he can apply for retention planning permission, says you.
The TV company was quite clever to wait until frost /snow to photo it, so it blends in to the ground and wall in the foreground more. And do not forget, from the front, you do not see the red-brick on the side of the extension, or the front door. See the initial bit of video on Room to Improve showing the outside. Vile as other poster on this thread called it.
They did.
Planning comments are posted above and from that angle I agree with them.
I think when planting and newness wears off that is not as bad as it first looked and I have to say the laths are growing on me bigtime.
That in fairness, is ugly.
If they got planning for that, I would be amazed.
The relationship was broken, apparently...
...
Then we see how pleased the couple are with Dermot and their new house.
Not everything is a Soap Opera
It's not a court of law Francis. 😁
The porch comes out from the main wall at 90 degrees,(blue line) but the roofline doesn't seem to, (red line) indicating a slope.
Secondly, if you drop a line from the front point of the wall (green) and the back(yellow)
they are different lengths, indicating a slope.
As I say, there may be distortion but that is how it looks to me. If the line was straight it would be parallel to the porch line.
Re: Window, as stated by industry pro's here, changes like that can be made and retentions sought. Works much better for me as a rectangle.
Do you have a link /photo ? Because all anyone else can see is a box.
From the front elevation it looks worse than in the photo above, because you do not see the brick on the side of the extension then, or even the front door.
And should not the window have matched the planning drawings, instead of being completely different shape?
It slopes back to the main roof
That's the kind of view I remember - no sloping roof visible there, it just looks like a large box tacked onto the side of the house.
Actually, I didn't see this view on the programme.
I quite like that and can see the planners argument now.
Thanks for that, but I would lve to know how come he got away with building something different to what is on that Bannon drawing above in your post?
For example, The window of the extension in the drawing above - the only perforation in that wall, which is the front wall of the house and facing the road / closest to the road - is square and the exact same size and proportions as the other three upstairs windows.
Was was built is a tall narrow window, at least 3 times tall as it is wide, totally out of keeping with the rest of the streetscape.
Also, from the drawing, you would think there is a pitched roof on the front extension, to match all the other houses in the area. Instead all that is visible from the road is a box, like two shipping containers, one on top of the other, painted up. From the photos and from the tv programme, no pitched roof is visible on that front extension, it just looks like a flat roofed box joined on to the house like a carbuncle. Even from the most sympathetic angle the tv company could photo it from ( sideways on, and from behind a few branches ), it still looks pathetic and hideous. No wonder everyone hates it. Let us hope it does not set a precedent for other FRONT extensions in housing estates.
Not very. We had a scene where the house was gutted, lots of decisions were not being made and the builder was complaining that he had an impossible amount of work to do in 7 weeks. A minute later Dermot was walking up the street to the finished house. Something happened that meant they decided to cut possibly the most interesting part of the build.
Final granting of planning was only at the start of August last year. Tight schedule to get it all turned around so quickly.
If you're talking about medical judgements, that's an entirely different story. She didn't get where she is today in a male dominated sector by faffing around with red herrings when she needs someone to do something.
Also on the costs.. I was stunned.. but from the plans it looks like a demolition of 46 sq metres, complete retrofit of 76 sq metres (including a new roof), plus 114 sq metres of new build for a combined total 190 sq metres..
So 600k is explainable.. everyone can have their own opinion on whether you'd invest that in that project in that location.
Thanks @spockety, all I could see was a box attached to the side of the house!
Would be good to see the wider area.
While I think it looked unresolved I’ have no love for the existing architecture. That style of house is so unoriginal and bland.
I think the roof detail wasn't clear from the camera angles, but it looked like it had a slightly recessed roof to avoid an overhang.. so not flat..
Did it have a gable roof? I thought it was flat on the 2nd floor?
And they removed the existing single floor extension rather than extending upwards?
Also for anyone concerned about Granny's access to a downstairs bathroom.. like like it was nicely accounted for in the plans at least..
Here's what the Planners thought of the front extension...
"The proposed development of a first storey extension with gable roof above the existing side extension would generally respect the pattern of development in the area in terms of the existing building lines, roof profiles and urban form of the street. On this basis, it is considered that it would make a positive contribution to the existing streetscape."
I thought the front looked terrible. But from memory their 2 houses weren’t the same as the ones beside them and also Dermot mentioned bringing the extension out to the same level as the neighbour’s place so they might be two reasons planning was granted for it?
Don't know about that Renko. Spoken to a couple on the last few years and they could be fairly hard to nail down.
Oh yeah maybe that was it.
I think it was the granny's house.
So I presume, her parents bought down the road from the granny.
Granny died and house sold.
Sister then bought down the road from her mother.
Granny's house came up for sale again....I presume they knew the owners and they agreed once she matched the first offer they'd sell to her.
She bought in early 2000's so before the whole craziness that was the tiger!
I could be wrong but I think that's how it played out
I'm assuming one-off changes to the streetscape like this would be granted on some kind of "enhances the architectural integrity of the street yada yada" type of basis/clause.
I wouldn't be as hopeful for your car port getting permission unless you had half a million and a top architects firm behind you.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
