Grand Designs 11/2
Discussion
Planet Claire said:
I think it's great. Although have to agree with Kevin, I thought the second storey new build didn't look right.
Agreed. I think the main building was lovely, very well done. The new bit was done well too, but it didnt quite work. I think if they lost the second storey bit, it would be much better.Hooooooj house though, I thought it was going to be a B&B or something!
Pork said:
Silverbullet767 said:
I could've hit that banker guy repeatedly with a large baseball bat. Her, I'd give her one.
I thought they said he was in IT?Silverbullet767 said:
Pork said:
Silverbullet767 said:
I could've hit that banker guy repeatedly with a large baseball bat. Her, I'd give her one.
I thought they said he was in IT?
No matter, he's done well and you've got to admire his and her determination. Good on them. Cracking views too! 
sone said:
I run a contracting business and if I know we are bidding against 7 other contractors I will usually return the tender. A one in seven chance of winning a job that will without doubt take 2 weeks to put together are poor odds. The client in my opinion is looking for one of the contractors to drop a clanger during the tender period and then take advantage.
Precisely. Smug bint. Why should she assume other people want to work for nothing? Mind you the Architect if there was one at that point should have given her some guidance on that.cardigankid said:
sone said:
I run a contracting business and if I know we are bidding against 7 other contractors I will usually return the tender. A one in seven chance of winning a job that will without doubt take 2 weeks to put together are poor odds. The client in my opinion is looking for one of the contractors to drop a clanger during the tender period and then take advantage.
Precisely. Smug bint. Why should she assume other people want to work for nothing? Mind you the Architect if there was one at that point should have given her some guidance on that.Seems like a strange definition of smug. I didn't see her suggesting anyone would be asked to work for nothing.
The restored windows and the cinema room were lovely - the latter particularly so because I couldn't see a screen.
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
Davel said:
I'd have tried to extend just at ground level and in a more balanced on either side of the castle, maybe even trying to match the existing finish of the castle, which was presumably a local stone anyway.
You then have the problem (if done well) of it not being clear what is old and what is new.I liked it, the original was very obviously original and the additions contemporary.
I agree about the 2nd floor though.
i liked the house in the end. I'd definitely have it, but would probably live in the cinema room - the rest looked too cold and clinical.
recession aside, i dread to think what it'd be worth for resale. I'm sure it doesn't interest them one bit, but it seems like we've agreed the cost was circa £1.5m and that this is well above the rest of the houses in the area.
Anyway, i seem to remember reading that KM would be more interested in cars than houses and that if he wasn't doing GD then TopGear would be his ideal show. So i bet he's on here. Kevin, reveal yourself!
recession aside, i dread to think what it'd be worth for resale. I'm sure it doesn't interest them one bit, but it seems like we've agreed the cost was circa £1.5m and that this is well above the rest of the houses in the area.
Anyway, i seem to remember reading that KM would be more interested in cars than houses and that if he wasn't doing GD then TopGear would be his ideal show. So i bet he's on here. Kevin, reveal yourself!
SJobson said:
The restored windows and the cinema room were lovely - the latter particularly so because I couldn't see a screen.
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
I have to agree, it seemed somewhat odd having 5 bedrooms for a family of three (with only two bedrooms being used) and going to the expense of furninshing said bedrooms. Surely those spare guest rooms will sit there gathering dust?I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
Oakey said:
SJobson said:
The restored windows and the cinema room were lovely - the latter particularly so because I couldn't see a screen.
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
I have to agree, it seemed somewhat odd having 5 bedrooms for a family of three (with only two bedrooms being used) and going to the expense of furninshing said bedrooms. Surely those spare guest rooms will sit there gathering dust?I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
scotal said:
Oakey said:
SJobson said:
The restored windows and the cinema room were lovely - the latter particularly so because I couldn't see a screen.
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
I have to agree, it seemed somewhat odd having 5 bedrooms for a family of three (with only two bedrooms being used) and going to the expense of furninshing said bedrooms. Surely those spare guest rooms will sit there gathering dust?I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
Edited by Oakey on Thursday 12th February 10:42
scotal said:
Oakey said:
SJobson said:
The restored windows and the cinema room were lovely - the latter particularly so because I couldn't see a screen.
I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
I have to agree, it seemed somewhat odd having 5 bedrooms for a family of three (with only two bedrooms being used) and going to the expense of furninshing said bedrooms. Surely those spare guest rooms will sit there gathering dust?I don't understand how they only managed to get 3 bedrooms into the body of the old folly, though - and that only with the dreadful first floor new build part. They said the extension was 270sq m - that's roughly 2,900 sq ft. Then they waste that with two ground floor guest suites. What are they going to do - rent them out to conference guests?
Although Londoners are great at saying they'll leave the security of the M25 for a weekend but less good at actually doing so 
Maybe they do lots of entertaining, maybe they're planning more kids...
cardigankid said:
I'll say this and I would quite happily say it to their faces.
Inevitably the process and the finished product reflect the personalities involved. But, first off - the building.
They seemed to get it built, which was good, though the precise involvement of other professionals was glossed over. The restoration aspect seemed to be well executed, but they let it deteriorate for a hell of a time after they bought it before they took it in hand which is only ever going to create trouble - that decorative plasterwork just got worse and worse and I hate to think what was under it. Dry rot I expect.
The extension and the original tower did not fit together in any shape or form. The result was a ghastly reminder of the shonky 60's and 70's single storey extensions people used to do to Victorian houses, particularly to turn them into hotels with dining rooms and 'conference centres'. The thought that a 'star' conservation architect was involved makes you shudder. The upper floor bit was just too crass for words. I am sure at some point, perhaps in the not too distant future, someone will think again and demolish it. There was no explanation of how the design fitted on the site, which would be a good starting point for this kind of exercise, other than to say the views were fantastic.
Strange then that the space which had the largest windows and most benefitted from the views was the bedroom corridor. Clerestory windows achieve nothing internally except make the place feel like a public toilet. Then the interior design was like a high end Barratt show home, and all the spaces had that cold tidy whiteness which is like a disease these days but noone can think of anything better. It photographs well, but I suspect noone actually likes living in it much. The four poster in the master bedroom was laughable. One good jiggle and it would be a pile of matchwood. Where on earth is he supposed to have her? On the island unit in the kitchen?
I thought that we had the whole Scarpa conservation methodology typed and filed by now, but obviously not. As McCloud said, it is a hard one to pull off and frankly they failed and spent quite a bit doing so.
This is a direct result of the parties involved. He seemed a straightforward enough chap, but they lost me as soon as the 'B' word was used. I just think of smooth con men with six figure bonusses and the rest of us with reducing turnover and valueless pensions. She was a cutie, but she knew it and has no doubt been trading on the fact. With her silly pink hard hat and hi-vis she absolutely oozed the sort of selfishness and arrogance we normally associate with the home counties stockbroker set. To what extent her 'drive and determination' got the job done was hard to tell, but I have never met a bull headed amateur who built their own house exactly as they wished and actually succeeded.
I have a lot of time for Kevin McCloud, his comments are always to the point and he knows what he is talking about. I can't think of anyone who would present this better. Who do you want presenting it? Some anodyne grinning idiot like Noel Edmonds?
+1 Well explained.Inevitably the process and the finished product reflect the personalities involved. But, first off - the building.
They seemed to get it built, which was good, though the precise involvement of other professionals was glossed over. The restoration aspect seemed to be well executed, but they let it deteriorate for a hell of a time after they bought it before they took it in hand which is only ever going to create trouble - that decorative plasterwork just got worse and worse and I hate to think what was under it. Dry rot I expect.
The extension and the original tower did not fit together in any shape or form. The result was a ghastly reminder of the shonky 60's and 70's single storey extensions people used to do to Victorian houses, particularly to turn them into hotels with dining rooms and 'conference centres'. The thought that a 'star' conservation architect was involved makes you shudder. The upper floor bit was just too crass for words. I am sure at some point, perhaps in the not too distant future, someone will think again and demolish it. There was no explanation of how the design fitted on the site, which would be a good starting point for this kind of exercise, other than to say the views were fantastic.
Strange then that the space which had the largest windows and most benefitted from the views was the bedroom corridor. Clerestory windows achieve nothing internally except make the place feel like a public toilet. Then the interior design was like a high end Barratt show home, and all the spaces had that cold tidy whiteness which is like a disease these days but noone can think of anything better. It photographs well, but I suspect noone actually likes living in it much. The four poster in the master bedroom was laughable. One good jiggle and it would be a pile of matchwood. Where on earth is he supposed to have her? On the island unit in the kitchen?
I thought that we had the whole Scarpa conservation methodology typed and filed by now, but obviously not. As McCloud said, it is a hard one to pull off and frankly they failed and spent quite a bit doing so.
This is a direct result of the parties involved. He seemed a straightforward enough chap, but they lost me as soon as the 'B' word was used. I just think of smooth con men with six figure bonusses and the rest of us with reducing turnover and valueless pensions. She was a cutie, but she knew it and has no doubt been trading on the fact. With her silly pink hard hat and hi-vis she absolutely oozed the sort of selfishness and arrogance we normally associate with the home counties stockbroker set. To what extent her 'drive and determination' got the job done was hard to tell, but I have never met a bull headed amateur who built their own house exactly as they wished and actually succeeded.
I have a lot of time for Kevin McCloud, his comments are always to the point and he knows what he is talking about. I can't think of anyone who would present this better. Who do you want presenting it? Some anodyne grinning idiot like Noel Edmonds?
Edited by cardigankid on Thursday 12th February 09:15
Was a good one this week, made a nice change to have a smooth build rather than all the drama of previous weeks. I thought the woman did extremely well in learning as she was going, I was expecting a major problem to rear its head, but none came. Her husband should stay bloody clear of anything on the house, doesn't even know what fascias are, idiot.
I agree with the 2nd storey extension being a balls-up, although I imagine the couple themselves weren't too keen on it - I suppose it was more a case of necessity rather than choice.
I can't help but feel the extension was too big, they should have dropped one of the guest bedrooms and made the corridor shorter. If it was me living in the house I would probably tend to keep within the folly area of the house, i'm not keen on wandering along a fully visible passageway, especially at night when its all lit up. Maybe thats just me.
Wouldn't say no to a place like that though, and the location was amazing! Anyone found it on google/live maps yet?
I agree with the 2nd storey extension being a balls-up, although I imagine the couple themselves weren't too keen on it - I suppose it was more a case of necessity rather than choice.
I can't help but feel the extension was too big, they should have dropped one of the guest bedrooms and made the corridor shorter. If it was me living in the house I would probably tend to keep within the folly area of the house, i'm not keen on wandering along a fully visible passageway, especially at night when its all lit up. Maybe thats just me.
Wouldn't say no to a place like that though, and the location was amazing! Anyone found it on google/live maps yet?
rufusruffcutt said:
51 37'31 N 2 53'27 W
Dated June 2004 on Google Earth. A lot more to the plot than shown on TV...
Dated June 2004 on Google Earth. A lot more to the plot than shown on TV...
No mention of the pool house, substantial stable blocks, equestrian menage/schooling area which are now tennis courts etc. Probably because work hasn't even started on some of these bits yet.Edited by Mr MoJo on Thursday 12th February 11:40
ewenm said:
cardigankid said:
sone said:
I run a contracting business and if I know we are bidding against 7 other contractors I will usually return the tender. A one in seven chance of winning a job that will without doubt take 2 weeks to put together are poor odds. The client in my opinion is looking for one of the contractors to drop a clanger during the tender period and then take advantage.
Precisely. Smug bint. Why should she assume other people want to work for nothing? Mind you the Architect if there was one at that point should have given her some guidance on that.Seems like a strange definition of smug. I didn't see her suggesting anyone would be asked to work for nothing.
If she wanted to get the best value for money what she should have done is get a full set of drawings, a Bill of Quantities, and issued it to a maximum of four contractors examples of whose work she had seen and who had confirmed their interest. We do not know but it doesn't sound as if that happened. Our contractor friend above has imho summed it up correctly. Mark my words, there will be a few nasty compromises in there, apart from the obvious visual ones, which weren't focussed on.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff