got site from family - knock old house or keep it!

clovers

hi there, first time posting on here.... I've been reading a lot of the old posts and find it all very informative...

Just wondering if any of the qualified guys (and gals!) on here might be able to give a bit of advice.

My family has owned a farm for years and they are giving me about 3/4 of an acre of land. It has an old house on it, which hasnt been lived in for about 50 years. Its still in reasonable condition (i.e. its still standing!) I've attached a pic.

I'm hoping to apply for planning permission for a two storey 4 bedroom house but wondering whether it was better to knock the house and build a completely new one, or keep the existing structure and build onto it.

Would keeping the existing structure make it easier to get planning permission? I'm aware that building onto the existing structure might present the usual nightmare scenarios of trying to work with older strutures!

Regards

Damien.

smashey

Get the bulldozer out.

clovers

thanks for the prompt reply!!

Will it make getting planning permission for a new house on the site easier when there was already a house there (even an abandoned one!)....

i know its a general question and dependant on planning conditions in my area but any advice from people who've been in a similar situation would be appreciated!

muffler

clovers wrote: »

It has an old house on it, which hasnt been lived in for about 50 years. Its still in reasonable condition (i.e. its still standing!) I've attached a pic.

Sweet mother of Jesus

+1 for smasheys advice.

muffler

clovers wrote: »

Will it make getting planning permission for a new house on the site easier when there was already a house there (even an abandoned one!)

Yeah its normally a bonus to have an old house there.

Jimbo

I disagree with Smashey.

The fact that the roof is still on it still clasifies it as a house AFAIK (i.e. not a ruin).
Talk to a planning consultant, but generally it is alot easier to get planning to renovate a house like that than to build new.

Mr. Presentable

clovers wrote: »

thanks for the prompt reply!!

Will it make getting planning permission for a new house on the site easier when there was already a house there (even an abandoned one!)....

i know its a general question and dependant on planning conditions in my area but any advice from people who've been in a similar situation would be appreciated!

I think if you incorporate one wall from the old into your new house, you are no longer building new but improving old, and easier to get PP.

ircoha

"The old home town looks the same as I step down from the train,
and there to meet me is my Mama and Papa.
Down the road I look and there runs Mary hair of gold and lips like cherries.
It's good to touch the green, green grass of home.
Yes, they'll all come to meet me, arms reaching, smiling sweetly.
It's good to touch the green, green grass of home.
The old house is still standing tho' the paint is cracked and dry,
and there's that old oak tree I used to play on."


It should be possible to have it 'dozed on the grounds of being dangerous.

Good luck with the project, start from new.

clovers

i'm no structural engineer but a few of the walls do look fairly sound, obviously I'd need to get one out to have a look before proceeding with trying to keep some of the old house intact, any advice on a good one to contact? I'm in South Limerick area.

Jimbo

Whats the problem with having it as a side piece of your new house? You cant re-create character of houses like that. You could maybe have it as your kitchen/dining with the ceiling open to the apex with a glazed link into the newly-constructed (1 1/2 storey maybe) part of the house.
Its not hugly difficult to waterproof, insulate and re-roof the old house . The planning authority would no-doubt look alot more favourable on that rather than a complete new build

clovers

getting a range of advice on this.... and all in the space of an hour or so, thanks guys!

i would love to keep the house, and as a previous poster has said, maybe use it as a dining room, possibly build a kitchen on the far side and maintain that as a nice stone wall, and build a new l-shaped extension on the near side....

clovers

macnab wrote: »

Post deleted by muffler for breach of charter.

am I allowed to do that....? tell the planners that I am going to build onto it and then demolish it and start again? sounds a little illegal to me!

i've attached 3 more images, with views on the current structure of the house from the other three sides. Might be helpful if people see the whole thing!!!

Jimbo

Looks ok structurally. Is there any obvious bowing of the walls?
You'll need to get an engineer to take a look at it
BTW, you cannot knock down the house after you get planning unless it is stated in the planning description

smooth operater

If it was me, i'd get the dynamite, looks like more trouble than anything

Edit-I just seen the other pictures, its not as bad as i initially thought....Il let the experts give you the advice

muffler

clovers wrote: »

am I allowed to do that....? tell the planners that I am going to build onto it and then demolish it and start again? sounds a little illegal to me!

No. Legally you cant and those issues are not debatable here.

muffler

ircoha wrote: »

"The old home town looks the same as I step down from the train,
and there to meet me is my Mama and Papa.
Down the road I look and there runs Mary hair of gold and lips like cherries.
It's good to touch the green, green grass of home.
Yes, they'll all come to meet me, arms reaching, smiling sweetly.
It's good to touch the green, green grass of home.
The old house is still standing tho' the paint is cracked and dry,
and there's that old oak tree I used to play on."


It should be possible to have it 'dozed on the grounds of being dangerous.

Good luck with the project, start from new.

Villain

Apply for an extension and renovate using as much of the old building as possible, that may end up been only 1 or 2 walls, this will save you in development fee's and make planning much easier.

clovers

Villain wrote: »

Apply for an extension and renovate using as much of the old building as possible, that may end up been only 1 or 2 walls, this will save you in development fee's and make planning much easier.

the size of the house at present is 23ft by 16ft, and the house was a 2 storey building obviously.

is there any recommendations on how big the extension can be?

Villain

As big as the planners allow really, whats the story with water and sewage these can often cause a problem with this type of scenario.

clovers

Villain wrote: »

As big as the planners allow really, whats the story with water and sewage these can often cause a problem with this type of scenario.

there is no water at the house, as far as I know there is a small water tank for animals near the house but this is piped through from the farmyard about 400 yards away.

as it is a very old house and hasnt been lived in for 50 years, there is no sewage option at present. i presume I'd have to install a septic tank....?

smashey

jimbo78 wrote: »

I disagree with Smashey.

The fact that the roof is still on it still clasifies it as a house AFAIK (i.e. not a ruin).
Talk to a planning consultant, but generally it is alot easier to get planning to renovate a house like that than to build new.

I never said it wasn't a house. It's an uninhabitable dwelling and in my opinion, it would be easier all round to apply for demolition of this along with the construction of a new dwelling.

Clovers, how is it located on the site? Is it in the exact location you wish to build on within the site, or if it wasn't there, would your site be opened up a bit better?

Villain

So you'll need a well and sewage system, best idea is to arrange a pre planing meeting with the council

muffler

Im not entirely sure of the exact advice that Clovers wants here. If you want to retain the old structure well that would be fine providing you can get an engineer to declare it safe and capable of re-use and are happy enough to replace the roof, treat the entire structure to prevent wood disease, damp proof it etc etc etc. To build a 4 bed house attached to it is going to be some feat if you wish to retain the character.

Some councils have policies in relation to old houses like this so you should read up the details in the county development plan. Maybe the property is located in an area of high amenity or close to a monument - who knows? You should check these things out first as there is a slight possibility that you could be restricted to renovating and extending only and if that were the case then you would most likely be limited in the size in which you could extend the structure.

However the most likely scenario is that there would be no restrictions on the site and it would be your choice (subject to planning permission of course) as to whether you wished to build completely in the new or not. As I've stated previously that is the route I would take.

clovers

smashey wrote: »

Clovers, how is it located on the site? Is it in the exact location you wish to build on within the site, or if it wasn't there, would your site be opened up a bit better?

the house is probably in the best position on the site, there is about 80 yards by 25 yards of space in front of the house and there is another 50 yards by 25 yards to the side and behind the house.

if i was being picky, the house in only 2-3 yards in from a ditch and i prefer it to be a bit more as this is the side where a lot of evening light will come from. there are trees all along this ditch and no windows cut into the wall at present....

some more pics attached to give a full view of the house location on the site.

archtech

Subject to its structural integrity there is possibly some merit in keeping the house and extending it.. I'm not too familiar with the Limerick County Development Plan and its rural design guidelines but they were prepared by the same consultant, who is currently preparing the South Tipp ones and one thing that is encouraged in that one, is the retention and renovation of old semi derelict farm houses/rural dwellings, where possible.

However as others have said, there will be alot of work and additional expense associated with working with an existing structure. It will be a challenge but some people find the idea of renovating an existing "half falling down" house as romantic and take great satisfaction in doing so.

Before you would rule anything out, it may be no harm to have a pre-planning meeting, to establish the general view of the planning authority, with regard to demolition and new build and also get the opinion of a structural engineer on the structure before decided either way.

Mellor

Hmm, some greatly varying advice here. Been busy while I was out over the weekend
Some of it is almost disagreeing with other parts.

Generally it is best to keep an existing house where the house is habitable. This house is not, it is derelict. It is not suitable for living in without alot of work. Structure, insulation (alot needed), rewiring, plumbing etc. In my opinion, knocking it is the best option, from a practical point of view.

As for size, there is no limit. There was a famous case last year in clare where a writer built a 400sqm extension onto a 50-100 sqm house.

I can understand that you wish to keep it there for romantic reasons, as well as helping planning, but it you can show planners that it is not in a livable condition then the fact that there was a house there helps planning.
I'd also like to keep the old house for traditional/aesthetic reasons, but its not practical. If it was my house, i'd probably retain as much material from wall when knocking the house and rebuild these into the new house. This allows a "new" house to be built (insulation, services etc), but keeps the old character.

clovers

Mellor wrote: »

If it was my house, i'd probably retain as much material from wall when knocking the house and rebuild these into the new house. This allows a "new" house to be built (insulation, services etc), but keeps the old character.

this is probably what I would best like to do, as I am not a builder and I can imagine the whole host of problems that might arise from trying to build onto an old structure. Building from scratch would give me the freedom to have the house exactly as I wanted it.

the reason for my post was really to find out whether I should keep all or part of the existing structure so that the planning permission process was easier. If the planners take into account that a house did exist on the site and allow me to take it down and rebuild from new, thats my preferred option. Obviously I realise there is probably a lot of good stone in the house that can be saved and used in a new build to generate some character.....

JohnBoy

Keep it.

I've never understood how our planning laws have complete disregard for this countries built heritage. outside of georgian dublin there seems to be very little done to protect older buildings.

it'll cost more, be more difficult and present lots of interesting challenges, but it will be original, and part of our history and landscape. a good architect should be able to work with that building as a starting point.

if its lasted this long, odds are there's another hundred years in it, replace all the timberwork, have the stonework repaired and extend, it can be done tastefully.

smashey

JohnBoy wrote: »

it'll cost more, be more difficult and present lots of interesting challenges, but it will be original, and part of our history and landscape. a good architect should be able to work with that building as a starting point.

Well, until such times as the planning laws pay attention to our built heritage, this is always going to be a big factor.

bbam

Couldn't you retain it as an outhouse... Looks like it would make a nice feature on a site if it were repaired..
I agree with JohnBoy... 2 months ago I watched as a famine house where my ansestors were born was demolished for a dormer bungalow to be built close by, it could have been retained at the end of the garden.. I'm not on for stopping development... but we should retain our history where possible

Mellor

Where possible is key, the house is not habitable, and to retain it will be difficult. It would also seriously affect the energy rating out the house

sydthebeat

Many councils would not consider that dwelling habitable, and in absence of an septic tank / percolation system, they generally would consider the site as 'green field'. The derelict ruin doesnt make any difference.

Therefore issues such as 'local need', percolation test results, site road visibility etc all become an issue during a planning application..

so to answer your question, "whether I should keep all or part of the existing structure so that the planning permission process (was) easier"... the answer is no, it doesnt affect it in any substantial way.

clovers

guys, all the advice on here has been brilliant so far so maybe I can keep picking your brains a little longer!!

the site of the old house is a good distance in from an existing passage which is used by a neighbour. Its approx 100 yards in.

On the map.gif I've attached,
1) is the site of the house and where I hope to build / rebuild
2) is where I currently live
3) is a T junction and I've attached a pic to show the view to the site from there... its off in the distance (again over 100 yeards away), between two large trees
4) is where I hope to put in a new passage and lead over to the house I want to work with. (again pic attached)

i've attached gifs for you guys to visualise items 3 and 4.

am I going to get hassle from the planners because my site is so far in from the existing roads and passages?

Builderfromhell

Based on the current Limerick County Development plan the planners should look favourably on you renovating and extending this derelict property. As said above you will save on development fees and should get planning more easily.
I have renovated similar properties in Co. Clare where we took off old plaster and pointed sandstone. New foundation and Dry lining inside.
Get a good architect. I'm sure this could be a good design opportunity.

According to the Dev. Plan the extension should not be bigger or higher than the original house. Having said that the last two extensions of old houses I did were bigger and in one case 200% bigger than the original cottage. So it remains a subjective thing.