Interesting programme. It covered the main problems of planning permission, budget and construction, the joys, the fears and the reality of building a one off home. I will watch the series with interest. It is always interesting to cover the complete process in one episode. Well done to all involved.

Great programme. Well done, gar.

I still cant believe this type of TV series covering unusual architectural house-building projects has not been done before. Congrats to all involved, such an original idea for a reality programme.

Agree it was a great programme.
But it did re-inforce the fear that getting involved in an "Architect-Driven" build is a quick way of saying goodbye to all semblance of financial control.
€750k for a 1400 ft house!!!!

Cost-conscious Kilkenny Cat.

Am unable to understand how planning permission was granted for this house in such an exposed area of Co Sligo from applicants who were acquiring a site speculatively and contravening National policies set out since Sustainable Development a Strategy for Ireland 1997.

No amout of good design can resolve the inherent sustainability of continuing curent leves of urban generated housing sprawl across the Irish countryside.

The status of, or relevance of, a previous outline permission on the site was not stated. The Elwoods were seriously ill advised to spend over 200,000 on a piece of rural land without subjecting the sale closing to a grant of permission. This created the threat of planning appeal as a potentail disaster. The fact is that Sligo Co Co contravened National policy in granting the application, and an appeal would have resulted in refusal from An Bord Plenala.

The house appealed literally plonked on its site without any land based connection or location rationale. There was no reference to the level of car trips and emissions which the house would generate, since part of the proposal realted to some sort of business activity on the site, for which the clientele would largely come from Sligo urban area. The fuel sourse for heating was not identified and no information presented on wastewater disposal.

The whole tone of the programme was oblivious to any concern for the creation of community and was anti urban. At the same time it did not in any way present a model or example of house a rural area which would realte to a rural community. It presented the proposal as the achievement of a lifestyle asperation, without addressing impacts and emissiosn or the conswquence of the cumulativ eimpact of building "one off" rural houses in the average number of 17,000 per annum over recent years.

Am unable to understand how planning permission was granted for this house in such an exposed area of Co Sligo from applicants who were acquiring a site speculatively and contravening National policies set out since Sustainable Development a Strategy for Ireland 1997.

No amout of good design can resolve the inherent sustainability of continuing curent leves of urban generated housing sprawl across the Irish countryside.

The status of, or relevance of, a previous outline permission on the site was not stated. The Elwoods were seriously ill advised to spend over 200,000 on a piece of rural land without subjecting the sale closing to a grant of permission. This created the threat of planning appeal as a potentail disaster. The fact is that Sligo Co Co contravened National policy in granting the application, and an appeal would have resulted in refusal from An Bord Plenala.

The house appealed literally plonked on its site without any land based connection or location rationale. There was no reference to the level of car trips and emissions which the house would generate, since part of the proposal realted to some sort of business activity on the site, for which the clientele would largely come from Sligo urban area. The fuel sourse for heating was not identified and no information presented on wastewater disposal.

The whole tone of the programme was oblivious to any concern for the creation of community and was anti urban. At the same time it did not in any way present a model or example of house a rural area which would realte to a rural community. It presented the proposal as the achievement of a lifestyle asperation, without addressing impacts and emissiosn or the conswquence of the cumulativ eimpact of building "one off" rural houses in the average number of 17,000 per annum over recent years.

I was aghast at the way the one-off housing planning issue was presented by Garry Miley in this programme, almost like something you have to trick your way around to get permission, when, really, one-off house builders are tricking the rest of us. Those of us who live close to the services we need - shops, doctors etc. - are paying for the services burden of the one-off house dwellers with their electricity connection, waste collection and so on. The one-off housing lifestyle - which depends on daily schlepping around country roads by motor car - has no future and this was not even vaguely alluded to in the programme. I have lodged a complaint to RTE about it.

Nothing like wishing people well is there ?

Unfortunately, the series thus far has not reflected well on architects when it comes to cost control issues. The majority of architects are very cost conscious and I was fairly appalled at the architect's failure to communicate a 62k over-spend in Episode 2 last night.

And as for our 'esteemed' friend from An Taisce... While many of his points are valid, his organisation had its opportunity to submit an observation during the statuory process. Live with it and please stop bleating. Not everyone agrees with the tiresome An Taisce mantra that rural dwellers should be exterminated.

Garry,

As the comment made in the last sentence by Stephen on 7th. April that "the tiresome An Taisce mantra that rural dwellers should be exterminated", is both incorect and defamatory, please amend and remove, since it exposes your website to defamation proceedings.

Ian Lumley, An Taisce

The comment was clearly not intended to be taken literally. It is an obvious hyperbole which reflects the feelings of many of Ireland's rural dwellers and families, who are generally very understanding of An Taisce's concerns but are hugely exasperated at many of their methods and inconsistencies. Garry, Ian and I appear to have diverted this thread way off-course, and perhaps this discussion should take place elsewhere - please feel free to remove whatever you see fit.

Steven, your comments about "Ireland's rural dwellers and families" being "exasperated" by An Taisce are disingenuous nonsense and sound to me like the diversionary tactics of those who seek to protect income generated by selling sites with PP for one-offs (technically fraud, as planning permission is legally granted on the basis of applicants occupying the dwelling for minimum 7 years). The massive site-selling party that's been going on in particular for the last 10 years to replace rural farm income is going to hit a wall shortly because of the end of cheap energy.

The question we should now be asking about the one-off-house-in-the-countryside lifestyle is: can it be done without the motor car?

Richard: As I stated , my comments relate to established rural dwellers, and the actions by certain semi-state agencies and quangos to obstruct/prevent them from living in the townland of their birth after they leave the parental home. I agree that speculative rural development is unsustainable and should be curtailed generally, and stopped completely in area not suffering depopulation.

Your use of terms like 'disingenuous nonsense' and 'diversionary tactics' are incorrect and based on assumption.