….
did the rear have no gate or was it open access. I couldn't make out in the end if the back of the house was just open to the laneway behind
That original design was a much better one imo.
But I guess Dermot has to add some 'wow factor' for TV. He flipped the living area upstairs and tried to sell it as capturing the magnificent views… fair enough if you're on the coast etc… but the magnificent views in this case was a church carpark to the front and some green area to the back.
I enjoyed the show (I've accepted that it's more entertainment that architectural) and I thought the house turned out very well at the time but the more I think about it, the more I think his design was awful... The master bedroom being the back door of the house, no wonder she wasn't comfortable with it.
Interesting to see what the rest of us could do or can be done / got for half a million or 557,000 in today's economic climate too. Say 100,000 or 150.000 for existing building ( seemed structurally sound, was there a long time, no damp ) , say 350.000 for building work and finishing off, say 50,000 for architect, quantity surveyor, ber, planning, stamp duty etc. Maybe another 5,000 or 7,000 to finish the outside at the back, back gate and wall etc.
Would be interesting to see it valued now. Some property programmes in us and uk do that. Could help solve the housing crisis if developers here were also able to buy old properties and rebuild them, but could they pay overheads like accountancy fees, bank interest, legal fees etc and still make a profit? Would be great if they could.
Lovely finished home but agree with others about the upstairs living area. IMO the living area downstairs and connected to that outside yard makes more sense. The rear space would make a lovely town garden and patio for summer, bbqs etc. right outside the kitchen or living area.
Renovating/rebuilding in tight spaces is always a series of compromises/trade offs. Programme is good at highlighting how people build spaces to suit their needs. The 'needs' here would not be mine but the client seemed happy with the compromises and with what she got.
And the rear access in to the house then is through the big glass door in to the master bedroom ! Past the bed which the controversy was about.
The design which planning was got for in 2022 was very different. Was it changed for the sake of change, because a different firm of architects came up with the 2022 design? You can have a look - it is in the public domain from Mayo co. Co., by going in to www.eplanning.ie, click on Mayo, and it is planning number 2250.
" I just think it'd be far more interesting viewing if it were edited more as a Home & Garden show…"
So do I, but I suppose it's for the viewing figures.
There is rear access ;
The show seems to have evolved from the earlier over designed, over budget glass boxes with confrontational clients who had more money than taste. This appealed to many for the drama effect and was perfect for social media reactions. I prefer the more realistic-to-build format that they have now. The efforts by Dermot to manufacture controversy is a bit cringe but I can live with the tradeoff.
As others have mentioned some more info on heating systems and how they achieved energy ratings would be useful but then the show changes again into something else.
Dermots drawings showed a car parked behind the house so presume there's rear access?
@chooseusername I don't disagree with Boards.ie's classification of the show, I just think it'd be far more interesting viewing if it were edited more as a Home & Garden show…
It's in "Entertainment > Television> Reality TV" though.
Not "Home &Garden > Construction & Planning"
Lovely woman and her sister was too, it was a really nice house and I am delighted to see these derelict town houses being renovated. Irish towns are full of them and I completely support any grants that allow this to happen. It regenerates towns, saves on building on big green sites in the country, is a doddle to connect to all services, (mains water, mains sewage, broadband, a greener option too as less driving to get to shops and schools)
Was there a back garden in this house? If so it means she has to go through the bedroom with plants and tools and compost to do a bit of gardening? Or was there an entrance to the back of the property I missed? I wouldn't want that myself.
Having a kitchen, utility area downstairs is so practical, even in this kind of Winter weather for bins, bringing in some logs for the fire, feeding the birds etc. I wonder when people get older is having the kitchen upstairs a good idea with navigating stairs , mobility issues etc?
Overall this girl had her head screwed on and it's her decision where she puts her bedrooms and kitchens. It didn't come across that Dermot was dictating the project, she had her own ideas and stuck to them.
As usual the programme was let down by the inclusion of all the unnecessary personal stuff about the owner's social life and the manufactured arguments over the joists and location of the bed in the master at the expense of details of the design and build. Felt they missed a lot of opportunities to include more of the old furniture and fittings in the new build. Surely they'd have been able to salvage enough from the shop and abbatoir fittings to build a characterful kitchen island? Seemed a rather wasteful lot though: a lot of good stuff getting hurled into a skip just like all the food they left rot in the empty shop instead of dropping it all off to a local charity foodbank etc.
The problem is that these smaller projects don't really have enough design content to sustain a whole episode so they need a bit of fluff to pad it out.
The show used to get a lot of stick for featuring these big jobs with enormous budgets and it seems like they've made a conscious decision to move away from that.
Me thinks Bannon didn’t for a minute think she’d go for that and was just saying it for the argument that would follow
It is very unfair he is able to get 95k for his client for a new build ( the side walls, roof, back wall , floors , internal walls, etc were all replaced) , when other couples elsewhere in the country, who have been struggling and paying their taxes here for the past 15 years, were told they could get no grants for the same thing.
It is the taxpayer here who paid the 95k. I know taxpaying couples here who employed similar expensive architects and were definiely told by the planners they could not get grants just by keeping a front wall.
You are right there. Plus the other design, the one which got planning, had a nicer front elevation and more practical layout, bedrooms upstairs instead of downstairs, back door not going through bedroom etc, different size void I think etc
Sitting down to watch last night's show..
I'm not going to last these docu dramas much longer.
These episodes get more maudlin and less about architecture and renovation with each series.
i like the idea of an upside down house but it doesnt work in this case as others have pointed out. far to impractical for the everyday tasks.. if there was parking at the front and a tiny garden at the back it could work but not the other way around.
Exactly that felt a bit manufactured for drama. Pain in the arse to dust them, they also weren't lined up...
Same with the bed, she should be able to put it where she wants it. I personally think the second option made the most sense, but it's her blooming house.
The bed is still not too far from the back door, and if the master bedroom has not enough room for either a wardrobe or walk-in-wardrobe it is never going to work. Imagine having to walk by the main bed in the house to get to the bin outside the back door, or having guests for a bbq and them having to walk through the main bedroom to get to the kitchen ( upstairs) or the bathroom?
The other design ( the one from the Mayo firm of architects- the one that got the planning permission with a completely different design and layout ) had not such drawbacks and was perhaps better suited to the needs of country people?
Imagine bringing in shopping through the back door ( ie bedroom door) past the bed, hanging out washing past the bed etc?? I never saw anyone arguing for or with an inflatable bed just inside a fully glass back door before, hope to never again.
One word..grants, he seems to have no problem getting them.
Only getting round to wayching the episode now.
Finished product was very nice and really suited her needs. The bed being next to the door was never going to work.
The ope joists wouldn't have worked either I think, especially with the wooden floor, too thin a room also.
The best feature of the whole build for me was the name of the butchers on the outside, a real country and family thing to do.
the boards in between the joists were not aligned at all if they were staying like that it would have just looked like the plaster board was due to be done.
I don’t know why Bannon got involved at all. He made so many changes she might have to apply for retention.
Yeah, good points. What do you think of the completely different design done by the other firm of architects ( for planning permission)? I have no connection to either firm of architects - the one in Swinford who got the planning or Dermot Bannons.
I thought she came across really well. I knew her brother so might be biased but I think she handled Dermot as well as anyone on the show has done before.
The house ended up lovely... That should be a given but I don't actually think it was well designed at all.
Living area upstairs is trending but it's completely impractical imo. There was a small balcony upstairs but the back yard is wasted entertaining space, unless guests are brought through her bedroom. Having the second bedroom / office onto the main street... That would no for me. And while it was a really nice touch to have the name on the front… could they not have kept or recreated the original framing and signage. A big missed opportunity there imo.
In the planning permission 2022 drawings the 3 bedrooms and walk in wardrobe were upstairs. And the heat pump area downstairs.
On last nights programme the 3 bedrooms were definitely downstairs, and I do not recall a walk in wardrobe?
https://www.eplanning.ie/MayoCC/AppFileRefDetails/2250/0
Interesting. I think most people would prefer the very different house design and layout in the 2022 planning permission drawings. What do you think?
The walk in wardrobe was upstairs, no room for it downstairs. Was the underfloor heating upstairs or on the ground floor?
You are right. The plans submitted and approved for planning in 2022 ( application no. 2250 Mayo Co Co ) are very different to how the house turned out.
I prefer the old design in a way, at least with the kitchen living downstairs you could more easily bring in laundry or shopping or have a bbq or coffee outside more easily, without the only back entry to the house being through the master bedroom.
Also the plans approved on the planning permission drawings had a walk in wardrobe. I think last night she had a canvas pop up wardrobe in her room, and you squuze between it and the bed to get out the back door of the house, to eg the bin?
Would have like to have seen the kitchen design, which appliances she got and more on the heating/ solar system. Also there was no mention of the bathrooms; the program jumped from a half build to the finished product. Would prefer more detail than the trip to London to see her friends and the GAA bit.
I thought it was one of the better RTI, not your typical type of rebuild / extension. Nice to see an old shop being restored and bring a bit of life back into the town rather then (what seems) the norm now of building massive houses in fields on the outskirts of towns.
Looks like she has rear access but the back wall / gate was unfinished.
