The economics of this are fairly simple. For the loss of light Suzi should be paid what is called a compensation due to a negative business externality coming from next door. In the case of Suzi Malin's potential contribution to the art world from the studio as is with the natural light and that without the natural light, we are looking not merely at potential, but capacity. Suzi has the capacity to produce masterpieces that would be essentially priceless. In other words, the cost would be more than the School could afford over many centuries. Such is what economists would argue!
Obviously, the school should not be expanded unless it can afford to pay Suzi a reasonable compensation, such as forty or fifty million pounds. David Hockney supports Suzi!
Suzi is a very reasonable person and she deserves her fair compensation, but the story continues as she is put in the position of having to fight for fair treatment.
http://www.camdennewjournal.com/news/2010/jul/lost-light-artist-suzi-malin-turns-developer
Suzi and I shared the studio for a few days in 2004. I would have to agree with her that a studio with such light is worth fighting for. The light in Suzi's studio is amazing.....artist to artist. I would not give it up.
Suzi, fight on! We support your battle for a fairness. Will the school see the light or just take it?
I will definitely follow up on this one.
http://www.thecnj.com/camden/2009/073009/news073009_05.html
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
