What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.
--

Dave

On 13 Feb, 22:19, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.
--

Dave

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:07:45 -0800 (PST), sm_jamieson
wrote:

On 13 Feb, 22:19, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.
--

Dave

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.


I did like the bookcased room.
It had lovely views but until that last room they could have stuck
with the cottage they'd had for me!
In the meantime are they holiday letting the cottage? If they're
waiting for their son to be old enough to live on his own before
putting him into it, then it's just sat empty?
--
http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that

I suppose there were considerable restrictions which limited the options

irritating woman... are they friends of his?

Strangely enough I found her a lot more pleasant than the usual suspects.
She came across as a lot more honest, and was prepared to have a laugh about
herself.

cheers

David

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
...

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

I didn't see the beginning. What was the situation on planning? Was it in
Greenbelt. etc?

On 13 Feb, 22:19, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.

Were we watching the same programme? If that was an unremarkable box
then I'd love to see what you think a remarkable box would look like.
Irritating woman? She was delightful, intelligent, amusing and
amused, and she made the builders bacon butties (ok, the cameras were
there). Much better and more interesting than that horrible mess in
Oxford earlier in the series, that looked like a poorly-designed
primary school (though it had a wonderful wall)

Edward

wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb, 22:19, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.

Were we watching the same programme? If that was an unremarkable box
then I'd love to see what you think a remarkable box would look like.

One weathered the cladding will set the house off. I think this house is
one that in real life looks 100% better than pictures.

In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.

I would like to see it again in a few years with mature landscaping and
when the cladding etc has weathered in. And I quite liked the interior.

I thought she was rather fun. Didn't exactly try and say how good she was
at project managing either like so many do with the project falling apart.
The builders obviously liked her too.

--
*I used up all my sick days so I called in dead

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 14 Feb, 11:45, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
"sm_jamieson" wrote in message

...

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

I didn't see the beginning. *What was the situation on planning? *Was it in
Greenbelt. etc?

Yes, and I think the lime kilns were listed as well.

wrote in message
...
On 14 Feb, 11:45, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
"sm_jamieson" wrote in message

...

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

I didn't see the beginning. What was the situation on planning? Was it in
Greenbelt. etc?

Yes, and I think the lime kilns were listed as well.


So he built on virgin land. Well not really as it was adjacent to other
buildings. Encouraging!!!!

The 2004 PPS7 planning law, may hopefully pave the way for people to live
back in the countryside and build individual homes on greenfield sites. The
proviso is that it must be an eco house, well designed, modern, with
advanced construction techniques. Taken from the act:

Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

"11. Very occasionally the exceptional quality and innovative nature of the
design of a proposed, isolated new house may provide this special
justification for granting planning permission. Such a design should be
truly outstanding and ground-breaking, for example, in its use of materials,
methods of construction or its contribution to protecting and enhancing the
environment, so helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural
areas. The value of such a building will be found in its reflection of the
highest standards in contemporary architecture, the significant enhancement
of its immediate setting and its sensitivity to the defining characteristics
of the local area."

The PPS7 law, which on paper actively encourages advanced eco design and
construction, is a positive step. If PPS7 is implemented anything like the
previous PPG7, Gummers law, which permitted building houses in the
countryside, then hope is lost rendering this law a cosmetic exercise.

Approximately 100 houses were built in the countryside under Gummers law
from 1997 to 2004, a figure is so low it is not worth considering.
Theoretically you could build, however the planners would block proposals at
every angle and opportunity rendering the law virtually useless.

The Kate Barker's Review of Land Use Planning Final Report -
Recommendations, document of December 2006 holds a belief that any building
project that has little or no impact on others should be given the go-ahead,
whether it is a private extension, the restoration of an empty building in a
town, or even in some cases the development of low-value farmland within
green belt areas.". This aspect is encouraging and compounded by the PPS7
law may open the way for people to build on the countryside with ease.

A planning policy based on the French approach is worth pursuing. There are
no central quotas for housing, with houses being built almost anywhere
provided the local community supports the proposal. The system works well
and caters for the needs of communities.

The 1947 Town & Country Planning act is Stalinist in nature being based on
quotas which local authorities have to acheive. Demand, market forces, plays
little part in this act. Amazingly, Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s reinforced
this Stalinist planning act.

On 14 Feb, 15:23, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On 14 Feb, 11:45, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message

...

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

I didn't see the beginning. What was the situation on planning? Was it in
Greenbelt. etc?

Yes, and I think the lime kilns were listed as well.


So he built on virgin land. Well not really as it was adjacent to other
buildings. *Encouraging!!!!

No, sorry, it was a brownfield industrial site, situated within the
green-belt.

wrote in message
...
On 14 Feb, 15:23, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On 14 Feb, 11:45, "Doctor Drivel" wrote:

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message

...

And it was only granted planning since it was to be a building of
outstanding architectural merit. Friends of the planners as well ? I
note he was a Managing Director (nicely not a CEO) of a "design"
company.
Simon.

I didn't see the beginning. What was the situation on planning? Was it
in
Greenbelt. etc?

Yes, and I think the lime kilns were listed as well.


So he built on virgin land. Well not really as it was adjacent to other
buildings. Encouraging!!!!

No, sorry, it was a brownfield industrial site, situated within the
green-belt.


Ah different.

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:05:16 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:



I would like to see it again in a few years with mature landscaping and
when the cladding etc has weathered in. And I quite liked the interior.

Me too. Interesting that the programme spent quite a lot of time on
the final visit. There can't have too many problems during
construction to make exciting TV. I also wondered why there was no
interview with the architect - you'd think that someone newly started
would want to be involved in a TV prog.

On 14/02/2008 15:23, Doctor Drivel wrote:

So he built on virgin land.


They mentioned having demolished a barn on the site (before the filming
began)

In article , Peter Johnson
writes
Me too. Interesting that the programme spent quite a lot of time on
the final visit. There can't have too many problems during
construction to make exciting TV. I also wondered why there was no
interview with the architect - you'd think that someone newly started
would want to be involved in a TV prog.

If the project (rather than the design) turned out to be a disaster,
would you want your face appearing in the programme with it ?. I've
noticed in some earlier programmes, some faces have been pixelated.


Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "news" with "adrian" and "nospam" with "ffoil"
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
What a stinker. An unremarkable box set into a slope and as for that
irritating woman... are they friends of his? That's the only reason I
could see for them being on the series.

I would like to see it again in a few years with mature landscaping and
when the cladding etc has weathered in. And I quite liked the interior.

I thought she was rather fun. Didn't exactly try and say how good she was
at project managing either like so many do with the project falling apart.
The builders obviously liked her too.

I agree with Dave on this. The only problem I had with the design was
all the straight lines... I know it would have cost more, but a curved
roof (curved in two planes preferably) and facade would have looked more
organic and sympathetic to the environs. The engineered timber they were
using should have made that possible. Also, perhaps using some stone to
fit in with the lime kilns might have worked - in fact a larger, modern
take on the kilns might have looked pretty good.

Of course, we have no idea how hideous the barn was that stood beforehand...

-Antony.

Peter Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:05:16 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

And I quite liked the interior.

Me too.

Me three - much more homely-looking than any of the other neo-modernist
boxes they've covered.

I'm not sure about the wiring though - at one point we saw a cable tie
being applied round an enormous bundle of T&E cables, although whether
permanent or temporary wasn't clear. The phrase "grouping factors" came
to mind though. There also seemed to be some distinctly less than
vertical drops through studwork.

--
Andy