Grand Designs tonight

[Penners]

I haven't seen it yet but I completely agree than barn conversions are a dreadful shame.

With many old, disused barns, there's a stark choice. Convert them into domestic dwellings (or some equally commercial property) or let them decay to dust.

It's a lovely, romantic idea that all of our old barns should be protected as old barns, but if we do that we shall eventually have no old barns.

 

[Pford75]

Re: Grand Designs tonight
by biffvernon on Thu 7th Oct, 2010 7:51 am

Gareth Hughes wrote:
His idea that mediaeval buildings all had reclaimed tile roofs was a bit of an eye-opener (jaw-dropper) too.
I've gone on about this before, but:
1. Every reclaimed tile roof represents a demolished historic building (whether legally or not - and "it will be salvaged for reuse elsewhere" has been known to swing a decision in favour of swinging the ball and chain), or a wrecked historic building with a new roof, or a couple of blokes turning up with a van in the middle of the night and pinching someone else's roof.
2. Craft skills should be kept alive - they are part of the "biodiversity" (wrong word, but it's close enough) of the building industry. Craftsmen today need employment. Some of them make clay roof tiles by hand, which they then try to sell, against a market glutted by people trying to by reclaims because they provide more instant gratification. In time, these new tiles weather just like old ones.

Sound arguments of course. But. What should we do with old tiles? Smash them up? There is also a sound argument in favour of reuse

I'm in agreement with Biff here....re-use of materials seems sensible. But the reasons you give Gareth show why it is important to purchase only from a reclamaition dealer that subsribes to the Salvo code.

I was torn about GD last night - On one hand, I sympathise with the owner....who is to say that the Victorian 'history' of a Medieval building is any more valuable and interesting than the 1970's woodchip and panelled doors that were installed later? Noone seems to care about ripping out those less fashionable changes.

On the other hand, some of the changes looked awful - the limestone floor was particularly bad.

But I do tire of Kevin's attempts to generate conflict and drama :|

 

[Juju]

I agree - the limestone floor really jarred with the building. I also thought the 3 buildings looked awful together from the outside. What I did like was the fact they talked about the garden and possibly how it could link the buildings together - it's rare for gardens to feature in GD and as I'm retraining as a garden historian, I found it particularly interesting!

 

[biffvernon]

So what was this 'guildhall' doing in private hands anyway? It was a public building and should be restored to community use.
Vive la Revolution!

 

[robgil]

ive just learned that its just up the road a bit from me. i loved it , all of it , what a great job they did on it all.

 

[Nigel Watts]

So what was this 'guildhall' doing in private hands anyway? It was a public building and should be restored to community use.
Vive la Revolution!

Guilds were not always exactly public. They were often controlled by a small self-perpetuating elite who sought to protect their privileges and maintain their monopolies. Not unlike the RMT or the BMA. Not sure either of these bodies would like to see members of the community wandering through and raiding the drinks cabinets. Not sure about the RMT's HQ, but the BMA's is very fine - built by Lutyens for the Theosophical Society, a rather looney Hindu-Buddhist outfit of which his wife was an ardent follower.