Sarah over dramatic beany, at it again.

[jocelyn plummer]

This will be a good game, what shall we have embossed on our loo cisterns? I suppose Plumb & Plumm might be a safe bet for ours-----

 

[Penners]

I've often wondered why Mr P rejected the obvious career choice of plumbing.

I suppose one could argue that, at sea, the water is a bit cleaner.

 

[AMc]

Another example of the importance of punctuation. Just one little comma would have made all the difference.

On the contrary I meant exactly what I said. As Gareth's links show there are other documentaries about the same subject and mine was not as interesting.

 

[jocelyn plummer]

I've often wondered why Mr P rejected the obvious career choice of plumbing.

I suppose one could argue that, at sea, the water is a bit cleaner.

Quite so Penners!!!!

 

[Pford75]

I saw what I suppose is the final episode last night. Putting aside the melodrama and the rather dodgy 'Chinese' headboard (which I thought was hideous)....I must confess to feeling some sympathy for them in their travails with the local authority (who seemed to be taking an entirely obstructive stance wherever possible). If a property is accepted as a domestic dwelling, I can't see what business the LA have in interfering with their desire to rent it out for weddings/parties etc.

 

[Feltwell]

If a property is accepted as a domestic dwelling, I can't see what business the LA have in interfering with their desire to rent it out for weddings/parties etc.

I think that depends on what impact it is likely to have on others living around it, which for some properties could be a big factor. I think it's right the process is there, but if you've got a stately pile like Rise Hall where it appears that a marquee with a disco in on the lawn is not going to disturb anyone, lots of places for guests to park etc etc then I can't see the objection.

I have to think there is more to this saga than the one side we see. Local authorities can be frustratingly bureaucratic, slow and amazingly petty about process (especially the miserable old bat at Telford & Wrekin who looks after dropped kerb applications - I don't care if she's reading! :evil: ) but generally I've not found them to be bloody-minded for the sake of it. If there is an objection then there must be a reason somewhere.

 

[Moo]

If they try hard enough they can always find a reason.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

As far as I can tell from the small amount of reading between the lines that's possible from what the series has shown:
1. They don't seem originally to have applied for planning permission to change the use of the building from a school back to a house.
2. They don't seem to have applied for listed building consent for anything they've done (very little of what they've done might actually need LBC but the impression being given is of a monumental amount of work)
3. Having achieved permission to use it as a family home, they've then effectively stated that they will be having "some" weddings there, and renting accommodation to guests. There are limits to how often they can do this before effectively the house becomes a hotel and events venue. And since the income from events is intended to be the financial support for the house's long-term future, pleading that they will ony be having "a few" events with paying guests doesn't ring entirely true. Especially as we a frequently shown their "house manager", which as a job title doesn't quite sound like the same thing as a butler.

Beyond the planning issues, the use for events also makes demands in terms of building regulations and fire safety.

They do seem to have approached the whole thing on a course of "we'll do it, and not bother about what the end result is intended to be" - if the various planning advisors they've clearly employed retrospectively to get them out of the mess had been employed at the start, there might not have been a mess to get out of.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

"I have to admit, with hindsight, I think I would have dealt with it differently. I think we would have probably done what they wanted us to do in the first place and just got on with it, but actually we didn't think that we were going to get to a stage where they were not going to be helpful"
Mr Sarah, in episode 2.

So - the council wanted them to be straight about it up front, they decided not to be, because they thought they'd get away with it, and now they feel that having to go through the whole process properly is the council "not being helpful".

 

[jocelyn plummer]

Ahh well, what the heck, the building is first and foremost a home. What a delight to see children playing freely!
I loved the chinese room, such a simple proceedure, to stencil and get a great effect. Also nothing they have done on the decorative side is irreversible or pemanently damaging.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

I don't think I've been particularly horrified by any of their decorative decisions, and quite a few of them I've liked a lot.

But it's not first and foremost a home if it gets to the stage where it's being used for a wedding every weekend with 40 guests paying to stay overnight.

 

[Flyfisher]

Are there any legal rules for making such a decision though, otherwise isn't it just subjective opinion? In Ms Beany's shoes I would probably argue that it may be a wedding venue for 2 days per week but for the other 5 days it's a family home, which must surely qualify as it's main use.

 

[wobs]

Imagine how much drama there would have been if they'd have applied in advance for what they wanted to do and worked with the council. OK maybe not that much.

BTW, there is a house that has (or had) a wedding license in East Riding of Yorkshire. Although I doubt they rent it out for weddings generally.

 

[Penners]

there is a house that has (or had) a wedding license in East Riding of Yorkshire.

I doubt that there's any county which doesn't have several such houses.

Good title for a song, though.

 

[Flyfisher]

there is a house that has (or had) a wedding license in East Riding of Yorkshire.

Good title for a song, though.

. . . or would be if the house was in New Orleans. :wink:

 

[Penners]

That was sort of the point of the "joke", FF! :wink: