I think the attraction of appearing on these programmes is partly a desire for self-publicity, being on TV at any cost, and a common factor seems to be the complete conviction that their proposals are the best solution and SB is merely there to endorse them. I find myself yelling at the screen in frustration at the blind arrogance of some of these amateur developers - but they are often the losers in the end because they have ignored her advice, under budgeted, over spent and over estmated the desirabiltiy and potential price of the completed project. Having said all that, the Waterloo house is a stunning space, pity it's not possible to wander past rubber-necking. Mean spirited of the LFO to object to the brickwork that replaced the previously scruffy view - green eyed monster coming out there?
"Mean-spirited LFO"? What about the arrogant conceit of two people with more money than sense (I am shocked that they can stomach a single meal from a £34k cooker when there are people starving in the world) who are so far up their own a***s they think their redevelopment for their own selfish purpose of making yet more money to spend on themselves takes precedence over the LFO being able to practise properly - the LFO actual having some social and cultural purpose!!!!!!
I too am a Sarah Beenie (how do you spell her surname? There are at least 3 variations above!!) - my friends and I often have conversations in the pub about her merits!
But how can we also forget the incredibly entertaining Kirsty and Phil on Relocation Relocation.
I often have a "is he fanciable?" debate with myself about Phil and Kirtsy is pure entertainment - those clothes she wears, what does she think she looks like!!!
Thanks Lang Rabbie, I now feel as though I could be a television watcher... In just 3 minutes I've 'watched' that whole programme without any of the preposterous gushing one tends to suffer.
1. Why do people want to live in soulless places like that. Open plan kitchens, exposed brickwork - bit like a gaol somebody said. Quite! (Where's Loftman when we need him?)
2. Why oh why do people get planning permission and then ignore the terms of it and go ahead anyway with what they want. Do they think that planners - particularly on a prestigious project like that - won't notice? Then they complain when they're told to tear it down.
Finally, I seem to recall that SE1 was a famous place for producing violins in factories. No doubt somebody else will be able to elaborate.
Ooh, now Phil is completely fanciable - my mum would approve of me taking him home. And Kirsty's shoes are fantastic - now that has to be a good combination for a tv show - most gay men would approve! lol!
Kirsty always looks as if she's just put down the Harvey Nicks bags before doing her bit to camera......
Lara F, I have some sympathy with the gist of your viewpoint about the Waterloo house, but wouldn't claim the insight into the couples motivations that you appear to have. The LFO have been a little short sighted, the original view of the wall was nothing to write home about and their insistence that it is rebuilt could only cause them yet more disruption.
I was a bit saddened about the dispute with the London Festival Orchestra, obviously we only heard part of the story, but party wall awards are there to prevent delays and disputes, not to be used by a vindictive owner to try to stop their neighbours developing.
My experiance of party wall awards is that they are very detailed on construction and materials. It is half the LFO's wall, so they could say exactly what they wanted it to look like, and if they wanted stock bricks they should have asked for them. Since they delayed the build by 11 months while they looked in detail at the award it seems a bit of an oversight to forget to say that they wanted a particular brick. If they had of done so there would be no arguement, the wall would have been built as they wanted. However, they objected through planning which is slower and subject to appeal, so it seems that orignally they had no view on the wall's brick type and it is not in the award, (though I could be wrong on this) and after failing to stop the building through prevarication are now seemingly trying to cause the owners financial loss through the use of a third party.
The building itself is a huge asset to the area. Imaginative, eccentric and impossible to imagine anywhere else.