Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Restoring a house separated into flats (ball park figures)

Options
  • 11-07-2012 3:22pm
    #1
    quad_red
    Registered Users Posts: 5,561 ✭✭✭


    Hi folks,

    I walk past this regularly and from the outside... it's a dream house in an area we'd love to live. And with tiny cramped poor condition boxes 2/3's of the size for not much less up the road... this has me thinking.

    But clearly, from the ad, it's been divided into 3 flats.

    http://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/317-harold-s-cross-road-harold-s-cross-dublin-6w/1929632

    Would anyone take a guesstimate on what something like this would take to be converted back into a standard format house?

    I know it's long is a piece of string but is it a 50/60k job or a 160k job?

    Thanks,
    And sorry if it's a silly question.:o

    Cheers,
    Quad
    Tagged:


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    johnr1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 965 ✭✭✭johnr1


    As you seem to already know, -it is a very difficult question to answer without going away and running the sums on it.
    However, I'll stick my neck out and guess that you could probably get a relatively bog standard conversion done for the 60k you mention, assuming there aren't any major structural changes beyond a stud wall here and there or any re-roofing to be done.
    The problem with this is that as you become a little bit better off, that you will want a better heating system, nicer doors and floors, more sockets and possibly some more bathroom/wc's. Also, you might want to extend out back, and fit a better kitchen. This would be a second major renovation job, and you'd lose a lot of the work done the first time on a shoestring.
    I've seen it a few times, where people begin the second job, hoping to keep finishes they paid for when they moved in first on a shoestring, and bit by bit, they get taken out and replaced, as they 'dont fit' with the newer work being done.
    If you were tough enough to plan for a high spec finish job, and do all the first fix, and only finish some rooms, then live in it for a couple of years, that'd allow you to save again for the higher total cost of a better job.


  • Options
    #3
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,645 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    you would require planning permission to convert back to dwelling.


  • Options
    #4
    quad_red
    Registered Users Posts: 5,561 ✭✭✭quad_red


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    you would require planning permission to convert back to dwelling.

    Didn't think of that.

    Presume it would be straightforward enough given there would be no outward change to the building. Saying that, the shed in the back would be coming down (eventually).


  • Options
    #5
    quad_red
    Registered Users Posts: 5,561 ✭✭✭quad_red


    johnr1 wrote: »
    If you were tough enough to plan for a high spec finish job, and do all the first fix, and only finish some rooms, then live in it for a couple of years, that'd allow you to save again for the higher total cost of a better job.

    Having the 'basics' done and no more wouldnt bother me per we. Basic white walls, wooden floors, spare furnishing (actually sounds better than the over finished cluttered rental house we're in now!)

    But leaving rooms off limits - not sure now practical that would be with a young family!

    Thanks for the advice john1. It's a dream house but I suspect it's a road to either too much debt or half arsed land.


Advertisement