tripleheader
Well-known member
Sorry Newy, I couldn't imagine ever replacing having lunch followed by cake in some stately piles cafe for a re-purposed coal bunker in South Bank.Have the money spent of maintaining stately homes instead?
Sorry Newy, I couldn't imagine ever replacing having lunch followed by cake in some stately piles cafe for a re-purposed coal bunker in South Bank.Have the money spent of maintaining stately homes instead?
Or maybe, just maybe they decided it would of prevented the building of a new factory employing local people and be a costly burden of the local rate payers for maintaining the structure of a really f'ing ugly building..If the corrupt mayor wants it knocked down though to make some money, the culture war secretary will remove that in a heartbeat. That's the point of concern here
So should we demolish Stonehenge to make it easier to get that new road in?
A disused and derelict ?thing? that wasn't "of national importance at a time when the future of the country was at stake" and is preventing development?
The point is the money will go elsewhere in the country instead of us having a grade 2 listed monument. Having something is better than not having something.. I’ve tried explained it every other way.Sorry Newy, I couldn't imagine ever replacing having lunch followed by cake in some stately piles cafe for a re-purposed coal bunker in South Bank.
It wouldn’t have prevented the building of a new factory and the maintenance costs were vastly over exaggerated.Or maybe, just maybe they decided it would of prevented the building of a new factory employing local people and be a costly burden of the local rate payers for maintaining the structure of a really f'ing ugly building..
You find it pointless and silly because you're unwilling to accept that working class heritage and social history has the same importance as other national stories.That would be a historic buildings of national importance at a time when the future of the country was at stake, not a disused and derilict coal bunker, your analogy is pointless and silly.
I didn't mean to insult you. The point I was trying to make, inelegantly as it turned out, was that I also have family background in the industry and I see the value in keeping it up.I don’t value my past? I find that insulting.
It was a coke silo at the end of the day. The blast furnace is a much more symbolic building to the area and it’s history.
Thats not the point. I think we've said that its a split on whether the tower should have been knocked down. The issue is how quickly the culture war secretary acted, and how its because the mayor stands to profit. That's the issueOr maybe, just maybe they decided it would of prevented the building of a new factory employing local people and be a costly burden of the local rate payers for maintaining the structure of a really f'ing ugly building..
I have and I know exactly what you mean regarding closing lines, etc. Permits had already been signed off for the closure of the line on the evening of the 18th of September. I would bet my bottom dollar that these permits will have still been in place and this will be part of the evidence that Houchen went to Dorries with - 'We need to act fast or it will be another 6 months delay.'Has anyone here had dealings with Network Rail? I have and they are incredibly intransigent in the way they work. It would normally take months to secure approval for work that could affect their infrastructure. I find it extraordinary that it was demolished just hours after Listed Building Status was rescinded and Planning Permission secured. There really needs to be a review of the timeline here, and if due process was followed. This can obviously never bring the tower back, but at least it will show who know what, and how this came about. Maybe the Evening Gazette could actually try investigating for a change.
What proof do you want, he's been quoted as saying he asked for its listing to be overturned.Blaming the Mayor (without proof) is convenient, but it is the negativity and 'I can't imagine...' (see above) that is on show here that has decided the outcome. The same people would happily have seen the Town Hall demolished when gothic was out of fashion.
I wouldn't be happy at randomly and rapidly reneging on ANY listed status, it makes the whole idea of listed buildings pointless. It puts every single listed building at riskTo an extent I agree, but given I think it was wrongly given the status in the first place, I'm happy that it was done on this occasion.
Despite the fact I think they're both disgusting buildings, the Southbank Centre at least has major functions.
Fatuous comparison, an ancient monument. Vs a coal bunker.So should we demolish Stonehenge to make it easier to get that new road in?
A disused and derelict ?thing? that wasn't "of national importance at a time when the future of the country was at stake" and is preventing development?
And if it’s not fit for purpose and would cost millions upon millions to maintain it can go.They will be after the transporter next
You watch.
I wouldn't be happy at randomly and rapidly reneging on ANY listed status, it makes the whole idea of listed buildings pointless. It puts every single listed building at risk
Southbank is great, each to their own
And if it’s not fit for purpose and would cost millions upon millions to maintain it can go.
like I said removing listed status has to be far far more onerous than gaining it, otherwise the status is pointless. Took months or years of work to gain that status They got rid of the status via one phone call. Minutes. No listed building is now safe.it was given emergency listed status on the 13th of September, 6 days before its scheduled demolition