Renovating The UK's Expensive Country Houses | Country House Rescue Season 2 Compilation | Abode

Renovating The UK's Expensive Country Houses | Country House Rescue Season 2 Compilation | Abode
Spread The Viralist



In this blockbuster episode, we explore some of the best episodes from County House Rescue Series 2. Ruth Watson is one a mission to save the manor homes of Britain from collapse and dealing with some very particular owners in the process. Will she be able to save Kelly House, Heath House and Riverhill House? Or will these relics of British history be lost forever?
Abode is the ultimate design, home, and gardening channel.
Get inspired for your next home or garden makeover – or just lean back and pick up some DIY tips from renovation experts, following full home and garden transformations from start to finish.

Want to keep watching? Subscribe here: https://bit.ly/AbodeYouTube

Become an Abode member and get exclusive access to special content, badges, and emojis across our channel.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-ONn89UOXabgtPcuWCIR5w/join

Any queries, please contact us at owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com
#abode #property #mansion #millionaire #business

source

Recommended For You

About the Author: Abode

20 Comments

  1. That Kelly guy is too useless to get anything done. He seems to think that if he ignores the problem for long enough, it will fix itself. It's such a shame for a family to last thirty generations only to have everything destroyed by one idiot.

  2. Lordie….with parents like that…poor Ben had more moral support from his aunt than his mother. Bizarre. Also why call Ruth if the property is on the market??? Good God.

  3. Energy isn't likely to get less expensive. Fusion is far from a reality and doesn't even break even yet. It has to be able to deliver far more output than input by a ratio of at least 35 to 1 for it to compete with oil – the cheapest overall. At present the European reactor ITER doesn't yield more than about 500 mw to the 800mw plus needed to turn it on..
    Tiny house living is very appealing if you don't have to spend all your time in them and have the ability to add spaces seasonally as required. Many tiny house owners do that with temporary structures that don't cost much.
    These great houses always required tenant farmer rents to exist at all. Most don't seem to have their estates so tenant farming is out of the question. They were usually sold off decades ago for them to last as long as they have. But tiny houses that can be moved easier than the so called mobile home might be a good match for these great houses. Mobile homes aren't very mobile actually. A TH 'really doesn't need the infrastructure required for a subdivision in as much as they don't require full size lots. Their small volume makes them energy efficient. They require small amounts of electrical power and water and have their own waste water holding tanks. A large ganged holding tank might do for a cluster.
    The family could make the big house a kind of village center and dedicate the grand rooms to more public use like a private club. The owners could live in an apartment on an upper floor or wing. If they had renters who appreciated the setting it could be very satisfying for all involved.
    Otherwise how many wedding venues, holiday homes etc can the town, county or country support? There would be an endless appetite for small, low cost, energy efficient housing. And they are not permanent structures and could actually shop around for the best rents if there were enough options available to them or they moved them where employment was available. They could be clustered to create a village or villages within the estate within the larger village or town. The idea that people volunteer to keep the old place alive is a stretch, even an abuse of generosity (and very British I guess) but having "volunteers" in exchange for a rental site discount isn't so unreasonable. And it would work better than selling the estate to some developer who will want to amortize his debt quickly and require large lot rents to do so.
    Existing owners only have to recoup operating expenses.
    It might be the death of the private domain dear to these owners but it would be a better use than trying to preserve the life styles of yesterday. These great houses are all guaranteed money pits and always live on borrowed time.
    I am 71 years old , never lived in one place expect for the past 35 years in one house, and can't understand people who must have a home town, let alone a home estate. I would probably move again if it wasn't such a chore to sell out, cash out and find someplace I could afford. In as much as my next home will be a grave of unspecified size, dying on a private estate with a place to put my bones (if only in an urn) would be a nice amenity they could also provide as well. That goes so well with the idea these old house were supposed to last forever.

  4. You know most of these men are procrastinators. The wives had to push them. I can’t understand how could their marriages ever survive… I would have been so fed up

  5. Re: The Kelly house. Why does the family not, at the least, remove and store all relics (I saw paintings on the floor, etc.) for preservation until the home is restored OR sell items they don't deem worthy of the home? I hope volunteer community members were at least commandeered to sweep, remove cobwebs, dust, remove large chunks of falling debris, etc.

  6. These places are relics… a small family shouldn't be living in these money pits. How many more generations are going to put up with up-keeping a dilapidating house.

Comments are closed.