****ing developers burning down buildings

[Most Easterly Pandas]

urbexer?

Whats one of those

 

[arc]

er, like what i do;

http://urban404.net/

 

[gaz.d]

they did tours around it or was that denbigh jail

that close to me....i didnt do it

 

[Andy Monty]

Same thing happened here Most locals think a fire in a large manor house was started by the people involved with a large supermarket distribution center....

Same goes for another area of land of special scientific interest.

 

[whiterose]

now i know how you like your old abandoned buildings arc, and i can sympathise, its a shame, it was a nice place

However, looking at it realistically, there was no way anything was going to happen to it otherwise. These days people dont have money to chuck away restoring buildings up perfectly, and to make it good again would have been a massive ballache both cost wise and work wise - grade II means that everything would have had to be done in a certain way to satisfy regulations.

What, would you have prefered that it stand derelict to the end of time? Deteriorating year after year? Having pikeys break in and slowly remove/vandalise anything remotely of value?

i probably would have done the same myself, put in the developer's place, sorry.

I agree. although the buildings were once really nice etc, I dont see the point in spending millions of pounds restoring them when the land it stands on could be put to better use like using to house people. building something else would cost less than restoring it and be something useful. it may even be something that would also be appreciated in the future too.
to be honest, id rather see the millions that would of been spent restoring it ploughed into something thats actually worthwhile like the NHS.

I think its sad that developers have to resort to burning the buildings down but at the end of the day, if it wasnt for the grade listings, they might not have had to. They may even have used the original building and done what they wanted to (convert inside to aparments etc) and the building would still be there to be appreciated. Its only because any work done has to be specific and to a very high standard which costs far too much.

 

[arc]

Whys the NHS being thrown into this? Its not public money, its private developers. Don't confuse matters.

Large sections of denbigh asylum will be kept and converted, no doubt into generic, characterless 'barrat boxes'. The main could have been restored and used a central point for the complex (like it was built for). It had projection rooms already built. As for putting the land to better use, the two examples i've shown, denbigh and fleetwood pier.. well denbigh is in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by empty land and the site where fleetwood pier is is perfect for.. a pier!

As I said previously, if a developer cannot afford to maintain a propery in line with the listing (that was present when they bought it) then they cannot afford, and should not buy it.

 

[whiterose]

id rather see the developers spend money on worthwhile things than pointless buildings.

If these building are so important to people and were appreciated in the first place then why have they become derelict?? surely people would do something to stop this happening in the first if they care so much.

 

[Chas Uno]

id rather see the developers spend money on worthwhile things than pointless buildings.

If these building are so important to people and were appreciated in the first place then why have they become derelict?? surely people would do something to stop this happening in the first if they care so much.

Well, going by your argument why did we bother to restore buildings like Westminster Abbey and St. Pauls cathedral that were damaged in WW2 and York minster that was damaged by fire? Why not just flatten them and build apartment blocks/ super stores? They're far more useful aren't they?

Sorry, but I'm with Arc on this one. The developers have plenty of other properties/ land areas to choose from. They buy some lots with listed buildings on it for the sole reason that they think they can make an easy buck, NOT because they are trying to do a service to the public. They know damn well that there are conditions attached to preserve the listed buildings/ trees, but blatantly ignore these once their they've got their greedy hands on them.

Do you also agree with developers 'accidently' knocking down listed trees as well whiterose? I mean, why not? Who needs a 300 year old oak tree when you could put a load of over priced characterless apartments in its place? Remember that these are private property developers out to line their own pockets rather than a housing association trying to build subsidised homes for those that cannot afford homes on the private market.

I hope the greedy developers get hit damn hard both by a court of law AND the recession

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

er, like what i do;

http://urban404.net/

Oh right. Yea

 

[punto_matt]

Whiterose i completely disagree. You say why not knock them down so they can be appreciated in the future but surely that applies to old derelict buildings aswell? Just because they have become derelict it doesnt mean they arent wanted any more. Old large buildings normally become derelict because either the owners die and who ever the building is passed on to doesnt do any thing with the building or because the owners run out of money and no one wants to buy them as they wont get any decent return on them. Keeping old buildings is important as it showcases the past architecture and reminds people of past history in building in this country instead of the majority of crap they build now a days.

 

[Chas Uno]

Keeping old buildings is important as it showcases the past architecture and reminds people of past history in building in this country instead of the majority of crap they build now a days.

:worship:

 

[punto_matt]

I dont think people realise how much some of these old building have influenced modern building techniques. Alot of stuff that was first pioneered in these older buildings is now widely used in modern buildings.

 

[Cian]

er, like what i do;

http://urban404.net/

Like the site


Comparatively very little to 'do' over here, but now that the economy has crashed theres gonna be some stuff empty I suspect...

 

[Hellcat]

Owning a old house - I know how important it is to use traditional building techniques and to renovate sympathetically to the style of the building. Modern houses just aren't built as well as traditional ones are - and these listed ones often have features which aren't seen elsewhere.

 

[hmallett]

to be honest, id rather see the millions that would of been spent restoring it ploughed into something thats actually worthwhile like the NHS.

They don't need it - they have a budget surplus this year
This will no doubt mean that they end up spending money they don't need to, in order that their budgets aren't reduced in the future.

 

[Captain Mike]

damn developers... that building is great, but in bad condition.. the entire area is fenced of and most of the rooms are boarded of as they contain asbestos..... been in a few times and can be bloody scary at night... said to be haunted...

btw it could be kids as i have seen many times group's of lads smashing the place up and trying to set fire to it....(tossers)...

 

[M111CYY]

Know how you feel there is a derelict mansion in Hartlepool called Tunstall Court, people keep trying to break in and cause major damage

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=22184&highlight=hartlepool this was in 2007, there has been more damage to the property since then

This is what they plan to do with the site, but i bet it doesnt happen
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/Fireblitzed-house-to-be-care.4557261.jp

 

[punto_matt]

Nothing will happen for at least a year as there is no money to build anything and if there is money to build stuff then there is no money about for people to buy it as banks and private investors arent willing to spend at the moment.