Jump to content


ebuild is sad to announce its closure - it has become too time and resource intensive to develop, manage and maintain.

However, ebuild will remain on-line in archive mode (ie no posting facilties) for several weeks so that users can use it as an information resource.

Anyone Watch Grand Designs Last Night?


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 fuzzy

fuzzy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 12:18 PM

now normally i like modern design but that thing was a carbunkle and a half. i'd be ducking livid if they had the audacity to put that up next to me.

Ego Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego EgoEgo Ego Ego

but i suppose thats architects for you.

Edited by joiner, 27 September 2012 - 12:21 PM.
Typo correction


#2 admin

admin

    Fall Guy

  • Administrators
  • 527 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 01:05 PM

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Just as the programme was ending my better half walked in and saw the property on the tv - her first comment was "why are there a couple of shipping containers in that street?". Fair question!

#3 joiner

joiner

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 10,718 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands

Posted 27 September 2012 - 01:45 PM

Errr. I rather liked it. :)

The important point was made by KM at the very end, it was about personal "taste".

Apart from the original cokc ups with the precise location of the frame fixing bolts, the level of craftsmanship was superb. And to achieve Code 5 was excellent.

Not saying I'd live in it, at least not without divorcing the wife first, but I'd have no problem living next to it. Far better than a faux-Tudor (or even faux Victorian) under-performing box.

Edited by joiner, 27 September 2012 - 01:46 PM.


#4 admin

admin

    Fall Guy

  • Administrators
  • 527 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 02:15 PM

But you can use the "taste" argument to excuse anything?

View Postjoiner, on 27 September 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

The important point was made by KM at the very end, it was about personal "taste".
Yes, but if you carry this to its logical extreme you can justify any design by personal "taste". Even those ghastly rabbit hutch developments.

There also needs to be context. I don't think this design was appropriate for the street it was in. In a gritty urban area or a greenfield site maybe. In a line of Victorian/Edwardian terraces, no.

#5 fuzzy

fuzzy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 02:16 PM

View Postjoiner, on 27 September 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

Not saying I'd live in it, at least not without divorcing the wife first, but I'd have no problem living next to it.

hehe. aint that the truth.

i find i like some of the houses better when the people arent annoying.

i dont doubt the craftmanship or its eco credentials. i'm suprised they managed to get it through as it was out of character with nearly everything in the road, although i think there wasa modern looking house next to it although they never panned around to see it.

#6 pocster

pocster

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 712 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 02:35 PM

What I don't get as my local council ALWAYS use this as a reason for refusal is "is out of keeping with the character of the area" ; erm ; I think I would agree!

Also their furniture! :o what was it? marine ply!!!! - laugh I almost cried. £50 a couple of sheets - £500 quid for the guy to admittedly fix it *perfectly*. Should of just bought B&Q crap really !!! :P

Edited by pocster, 27 September 2012 - 02:37 PM.


#7 joiner

joiner

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 10,718 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands

Posted 27 September 2012 - 03:46 PM

:D
London planners do indeed seem to inhabit a different planet than their compatriots nationwide. But my defence of the location would be that it directly compares the ultra-traditional with the ultra-modern. I'd suggest that if you actually stood in the street it probably wouldn't appear to be so in-your-face.

Many townscapes contain streets with an industrial/workshop unit stuck in the middle of a terrace of Victorian or Edwardian houses, simply because like a lot of building back then it was speculative and, unless the area was already of specific architectural significance, with even earlier housing built specifically for the well-to-do, premises would have been built amongst it to house local businesses.

Come over here and walk around Kidderminster, Worcester, or even historic Ludlow or Shrewsbury and you'll see plots with modern housing infilling where those business premises used to be before they were demolished.

So, you can either rebuild the premises for businesses (especially workshops) or build something on the plot that doesn't pretend to be something it's not.

Watch this series and/or read the book. It's a thought-provoking ride through architectural prejudices...



Admittedly he's dealing with the evolution of existing buildings, but I'd suggest the same thinking can be applied to neighbourhoods.

I'd far rather see an originally conceived modern building in place of a traditional one of historic character defaced with upvc top-hungs and a plastic front door. ;)

Edited by joiner, 27 September 2012 - 03:47 PM.


#8 admin

admin

    Fall Guy

  • Administrators
  • 527 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 04:03 PM

I'm not against the mixing of modern and old and if done well can be great, for example the Louvre in Paris.

Posted Image

However, I think in the case of last nights GD, the building was plain butt ugly <_<

#9 joiner

joiner

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 10,718 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands

Posted 27 September 2012 - 05:23 PM

:D Sorry David, but you've picked the one example that, for me, epitomises something trying to be something it's not, in this case interesting in conception, design and location. To me it's an affront on the sensibilities unless you're standing in front of the Louvre looking back at it, when it just becomes a curiosity, moreover one that adds insult to injury when you remind yourself that it's not a temporary structure that's going to go away at some time.

The structure drives me nuts.

Vive la difference I guess, but last night's GD building was simply just there, making no claims and certainly not waving its arms about to draw attention to itself. For me the interest was in the understated detail, a point well made by KM.

#10 joiner

joiner

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 10,718 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands

Posted 27 September 2012 - 06:57 PM

Now a building that gets the prize for the ugliest in the WORLD is the Pompidou Centre, which to me would be an affront if I saw it as anything other than a mad man's joke at the expense of a nation that prides itself on good taste. To me it's brass-necked culture.

#11 admin

admin

    Fall Guy

  • Administrators
  • 527 posts

Posted 27 September 2012 - 07:40 PM

Now, you're just teasing me - I like the Pompidou Centre :lol:

(but I know what you mean)

#12 joiner

joiner

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 10,718 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands

Posted 27 September 2012 - 09:30 PM

:)

#13 fuzzy

fuzzy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:02 AM

now last's night i did like, even if i found the woman the most annoying person in the world ever. the neighbours were hilarious. i hope they flood. hehe. bitter.

Edited by joiner, 11 October 2012 - 08:05 AM.
Typo


#14 pocster

pocster

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 712 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:17 AM

It was good. Great design; that didn't stick out like a sore thumb. Glad the owners were against the neighbors and did as they wished; know how they feel :)

#15 admin

admin

    Fall Guy

  • Administrators
  • 527 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:55 AM

Yup agreed, beautiful finish to the property, will make the area even more desirable not less.

#16 pocster

pocster

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 712 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:03 AM

Even Mr. Mcloud liked it!. It was beautiful - and when he kissed the building I actually understood why. Very envious of such perfection - but then for 1m+ I'd expect no less.
Sensible modern design enhancing the area - this is what planning should always aim to achieve!

#17 fuzzy

fuzzy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:16 AM

still took them three and a half years to get through planning. some people really just dont like change do they.

#18 pocster

pocster

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 712 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:58 AM

Took me 5 years - so they had it easy! :unsure:

#19 fuzzy

fuzzy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:28 PM

View Postpocster, on 11 October 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

Took me 5 years - so they had it easy! :unsure:

should have paid a consultant.

#20 pocster

pocster

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 712 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:32 PM

I did!