FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


I hate it when old Buildings get knocked down





chasbeen
I'm one of the older Frihost members so I suppose some of you younger pips won't have fealt like this yet. As you get older you look back at some of the places you remember as a youngster

This week the BBC shut it's doors (That's the main set of buildings which was the HQ of the broadcaster in West London, UK) It's scheduled for demolition and looters marched in and pulled out momentos directly after this weeks last broadcast.

I remember walking past it on my way to school many decades ago, I also remember going there to see a live Tv show and having a drink inside the establishment?
Which old building did you get nostalgic about?
bukaida
There are quite a few at Kolkata, India with rich heritage and memories. It hurt me a lot when I see the valuable historical documents, mementos etc lying without care. The " Victoria Memorial" is one such beautiful building which is seriously lagging maintenance. Even the historical New Market was caught fire quite a few times due to negligence.
inoshi
chasbeen wrote:
I'm one of the older Frihost members so I suppose some of you younger pips won't have fealt like this yet. As you get older you look back at some of the places you remember as a youngster

This week the BBC shut it's doors (That's the main set of buildings which was the HQ of the broadcaster in West London, UK) It's scheduled for demolition and looters marched in and pulled out momentos directly after this weeks last broadcast.

I remember walking past it on my way to school many decades ago, I also remember going there to see a live Tv show and having a drink inside the establishment?
Which old building did you get nostalgic about?

I feel the nostalgia too, but once when I was walking with an older friend and they were speaking about how they found such and such a church in the middle of the city so beautiful, I just had to say what I saw, and that was an even more beautiful and practical building in its place, still a kind of cultural center, but areligious. In that particular case, I would be perfectly happy with a demolition.

Historical preservation and the ideas we have about community and architecture, are subject to change. If the people don't own these places, then who does? In the BBC's case the people (I suppose) were saying this is our culture, our community, and we want a piece of it. Objecting to the change, and lack of preservation. Yes, it's a shame, but what are we to do, turn everything into a museum?

Maybe we need to get used to a more flexible approach in architecture, and stop trying to build things that we think are going to last forever. Then, if we want to establish intentional monuments, we can, and then we will inculcate a more youthful attitude towards our own creations.

Inoshi
RoylanM
nostalga is a common feeling but I had to say I miss the building that was stand before 9/11. What happened that day was horrible and I brings back many bad memories. I was recently on my way to the office and I herd people talking about it and I couldn't help but share the same feelings they did. I remember walking by that building when I was 12 years old.
chasbeen
RM I Remember where I was when that disaster that was to be called 9/11 occuree
I'm not from your country but when I see film of that area before 2001 it's difficult to realize they are gone.
ocalhoun
Keeping some old buildings around for historical value is fine... but it can be overdone.

Without replacing the old with the new, everything will eventually become stagnant and decaying.
chasbeen
No in England there are old historic buildings. No one knocks them down as they are listed.
The BBC buildings were used from 1969 so no great history there.
These buildings are coming down and being replaced by a University campus.
Bluedoll
I like to see new areas come up with new buildings but it is also great to see old historic buildings being used for a new purpose but still retain some character and history. Then we know from where we came from. It is also if design is right around grounds it can be a nice mix of old and new. Once it is gone though its gone.
nickfyoung
I remember there was a nice old building that was originally a bank and it was due for demolition. There was a bit of an uproar by the locals who thought that it was too nice a building to be knocked down. There was much protesting and petitioning of local council until one morning we woke up and it was gone. They knocked it down overnight when no one was watching just in case all the protests caused a delay.
watersoul
In my area on the south west coast of England the local planning authority has started allowing old and unsuitable buildings to be pulled down when they've come to the end of their life but the facade at the front has to be saved and incorporated into the new build if it is of a certain age and style.

I think it is a lovely compromise to avoid a repeat of the shockingly ugly concrete buildings and design which sprang up in 1960's Britain.
Many people do not think the same though, it is suspiciously curious how many 100+ year old empty buildings have been destroyed by fire since these new rules took effect.

I'm working on a conversion of a former Victorian villa at the moment. One big house being turned into 6 apartments. We are in what is known as a 'conservation area' so everything has to be in character with the surrounding buildings. It has cost an absolute fortune adding an extension to the building as everything has to be built (external walls) with locally sourced limestone.
We all thought it was a stupid rule at the start, but now we've nearly finished it I have to say I'm looking at the lovely traditional stonework we've done and it is beautiful.
Of course buildings need to be functional, but keeping the historic beauty of an old area is definitely worth it if you ask me.
grofet
Sometimes the location value is more valuable than the historical value. They can build the old buildings replica on somewhere else.
chasbeen
Grocer, there are examples of the exact opposite!
The bridge in Lake Havasu City, Arizona, United States, is the original 1831 London Bridge that spanned the River Thames in London, England until it was dismantled in 1967. The Arizona bridge is a reinforced concrete structure clad in the original masonry of the 1830s bridge, which was bought from the City of London. exterior granite blocks from the original bridge were even numbered and transported to America to construct the present bridge in Lake Havasu City, the bridge was finally completed in 1971.
standready
I am all for saving an old building if it has true historic value to keep it and the building is structurally sound. Otherwise, progress.
rjraaz
I belongs to one of heritage city of my country. Here we have building those have historical values. But because of land encroachment by public those are loosing their values. To get rid of these land encroachment municipal corporation has started to demolish such buildings.
raaeft1
Sometimes,old structures that have outlived their utility and are crumbling,decrepit buildings have to be demolished to make way for fresh creation.

However, I am against indiscriminate and unwarranted demolition of old structures. Sometimes status quo has to be maintained.
chasbeen
Yes we are talking here about a variety of buildings.
I cannot understand the economics sometimes of seeing perfectly good structures being destroyed and replaced by slightly different ones.

Why don't they just refabricate the shell at least? I often think.
catscratches
Well, it's better than when old buildings get knocked up. Hey-oh!
ocalhoun
chasbeen wrote:
Yes we are talking here about a variety of buildings.
I cannot understand the economics sometimes of seeing perfectly good structures being destroyed and replaced by slightly different ones.

Why don't they just refabricate the shell at least? I often think.

It may be cheaper to rebuild than to repair sometimes.
Particularly if the old building has fundamental issues in its design or the way it has aged.

...It may also be for legal reasons. The remodeled building would have to pass code inspections, and the old building's framework may no longer be possible to make code compliant.
Insanity
It might make sense economically, but it's still a shame to see these buildings knocked down since they have so much historical value and sentimental value.
chasbeen
The first house I had a mortgage on was built in 1854.
It was part of some terraces that were originally built for workers at the old dockyard.
That terrace and many others like it in the area are still standing.
I can see the concrete step I built onto the house with my humble budget 30 years ago.
I used to work as a concrete specialist an I know that step has a huge tensile and compressing strength. It will still be there in another 100 years attached to that house.
However the dockyards just retain some historical features but the old rusty cranes and irrelevant equipment have been removed.
You see in England there is unrivaled appreciation of history. That said, I see perfectly strong newer buildings being removed that have stood for 30 years or less. These buildings are what I was really thinking about when I started the topic.
Radar
Yeah, I do think it's a shame. I mean, you want to be able to see the history and past of a city when you live there. There's a feeling of community when you're not just connected to the people around you right now, but also to the people who lived there in the past. It helps you latch on to the idea that our time here is short, and that we are connected. If all you see are new building, you are less reminded of the age of things.
inoshi
chasbeen wrote:
You see in England there is unrivaled appreciation of history. That said, I see perfectly strong newer buildings being removed that have stood for 30 years or less. These buildings are what I was really thinking about when I started the topic.

One can have an appreciation for history and not insist when designing and constructing a structure that it be historic for future generations. Sometimes this is a giant imposition against intelligence of future generations, and limits our/their ability to adapt and be flexible to change. This is what I was referring to in other post.

Inoshi
inoshi
catscratches wrote:
Well, it's better than when old buildings get knocked up. Hey-oh!

Good one, heh heh!

Razz

And people, so that you don't get my posts wrong, I'm not advocating for eminent domain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain).

Inoshi
inoshi
chasbeen wrote:
No one knocks them down as they are listed.
The BBC buildings were used from 1969 so no great history there.

What do you mean?
inoshi
chasbeen wrote:
No in England there are old historic buildings. No one knocks them down as they are listed.
The BBC buildings were used from 1969 so no great history there.
These buildings are coming down and being replaced by a University campus.

Revenue implications, regarding recent tuition debacle and debate in the UK, for university education?
watersoul
inoshi wrote:
chasbeen wrote:
You see in England there is unrivaled appreciation of history. That said, I see perfectly strong newer buildings being removed that have stood for 30 years or less. These buildings are what I was really thinking about when I started the topic.

One can have an appreciation for history and not insist when designing and constructing a structure that it be historic for future generations. Sometimes this is a ginat imposition against intelligence of future generations, and limits our/their ability to adapt and be flexible to change. This is what I was referring to in other post.
I'm with you on that to a certain extent inoshi.
I don't accept that England has an unrivaled appreciation of history either, surely that's just human nature, and also one must not forget that Wales, Scotland and Ireland have had populations sharing the space of these islands for just as long, and often longer.

I will say that there is a lot of our built environment in the UK and the Republic of Ireland which is many hundreds of years old, and for historical or cultural reasons should be preserved in my opinion.
There are 700 year old working buildings just 500 metres from my home. My own stone built small house is a 150-200 year old converted farm stables/cow shed.
These buildings are built from locally sourced sandstone and limestone which ranges in age from 395 to 345 million years ago. The local stone is itself an historical local record - This land was around the equator then, under the sea.

I'm currently working on a conversion of an old building as mentioned in my earlier post. Modern looking apartments/flats on the inside but in the shell of a lovely old stone building.
We've lowered the high ceilings in some places and at my request we retained the originals with their beautiful intricate decorative coving work (crafted by hand 150 years ago) by hiding them above the new ceilings which house service pipes/conduits etc.
I hope that one day in the future someone will redevelop the building again and discover this secret gem created by craftsmen many years ago.

I totally understand the thoughts towards an environment adapting to change with new steel and glass constructions which are not intended to last for hundreds of years. I do think hundreds of years old hand cut stone buildings are something special though, and if they can be incorporated into a re-build/conversion sympathetically then that's all the better.

*Edit* We discovered a perfectly constructed and preserved 150+ year old red brick external floor (block paving) under a metre of layered earth and concrete when a trench was dug for the gas supply at my current site.
It was left intact and re-buried with a protective layer of sand over the parts we had exposed. We all respected the work that we saw.
That made me smile, for the men who laid those bricks all them years ago.
inoshi
watersoul wrote:
I'm currently working on a conversion of an old building as mentioned in my earlier post. Modern looking apartments/flats on the inside but in the shell of a lovely old stone building.
We've lowered the high ceilings in some places and at my request we retained the originals with their beautiful intricate decorative coving work (crafted by hand 150 years ago) by hiding them above the new ceilings which house service pipes/conduits etc.
I hope that one day in the future someone will redevelop the building again and discover this secret gem created by craftsmen many years ago.

I totally understand the thoughts towards an environment adapting to change with new steel and glass constructions which are not intended to last for hundreds of years. I do think hundreds of years old hand cut stone buildings are something special though, and if they can be incorporated into a re-build/conversion sympathetically then that's all the better.

*Edit* We discovered a perfectly constructed and preserved 150+ year old red brick external floor (block paving) under a metre of layered earth and concrete when a trench was dug for the gas supply at my current site.
It was left intact and re-buried with a protective layer of sand over the parts we had exposed. We all respected the work that we saw.
That made me smile, for the men who laid those bricks all them years ago.

@Watersoul, maybe you could leave a little time capsule in new back structure for future generations . . . ?

I didn't mean to suggest newer structures HAD to be made with steel and glass only, just an opening to redesign and new materials too. I appreciate Bucky Fuller's work.

Layers & Balance,

Inoshi
watersoul
Quote:
@Watersoul, maybe you could leave a little time capsule in new back structure for future generations . . . ?

I didn't mean to suggest newer structures HAD to be made with steel and glass only, just an opening to redesign and new materials too. I appreciate Bucky Fuller's work.

I haven't quite gone for the time capsule idea, but there are many daily newspapers now hidden behind plasterboard walls and other insulated cavities. I've also drawn smileys and signed my name with a date in most of the ground floor concrete bases underneath the suspended floors Laughing

I certainly see the beauty of steel and glass and know what you mean about Fuller, some absolutely amazing creations.
We're definitely much more about blocks/bricks/stones and timber in my team though!
inoshi
watersoul wrote:
Quote:
@Watersoul, maybe you could leave a little time capsule in new back structure for future generations . . . ?

I didn't mean to suggest newer structures HAD to be made with steel and glass only, just an opening to redesign and new materials too. I appreciate Bucky Fuller's work.

I haven't quite gone for the time capsule idea, but there are many daily newspapers now hidden behind plasterboard walls and other insulated cavities. I've also drawn smileys and signed my name with a date in most of the ground floor concrete bases underneath the suspended floors Laughing

I certainly see the beauty of steel and glass and know what you mean about Fuller, some absolutely amazing creations.
We're definitely much more about blocks/bricks/stones and timber in my team though!

Well, yeah, taking designs from nature and implementing them isn't always practical or utilitarian. The idea is sound and has been taken up by others too. Maybe one day it'll be a lot easier to fabricate those type of designs for construction.
watersoul
inoshi wrote:
watersoul wrote:
Quote:
@Watersoul, maybe you could leave a little time capsule in new back structure for future generations . . . ?

I didn't mean to suggest newer structures HAD to be made with steel and glass only, just an opening to redesign and new materials too. I appreciate Bucky Fuller's work.

I haven't quite gone for the time capsule idea, but there are many daily newspapers now hidden behind plasterboard walls and other insulated cavities. I've also drawn smileys and signed my name with a date in most of the ground floor concrete bases underneath the suspended floors Laughing

I certainly see the beauty of steel and glass and know what you mean about Fuller, some absolutely amazing creations.
We're definitely much more about blocks/bricks/stones and timber in my team though!

Well, yeah, taking designs from nature and implementing them isn't always practical or utilitarian. The idea is sound and has been taken up by others too. Maybe one day it'll be a lot easier to fabricate those type of designs for construction.
I imagine you are correct to a certain extent.
Design and building processes adapt to developing changes of course, but there will always be a place for the more natural stone constructions, and I shall hopefully continue to pay my bills for many more years by carrying out such work Wink
evilryu530
old buildings if possible, should be restored. i find it always charming when old buildings become multi-use business districts, or shopping centers, or restaurants, or hangouts. the only reason why they get knocked down is becuase of safety reasons.
inoshi
evilryu530 wrote:
old buildings if possible, should be restored. i find it always charming when old buildings become multi-use business districts, or shopping centers, or restaurants, or hangouts. the only reason why they get knocked down is becuase of safety reasons.

I just saw something this morning, kind of like what @watersoul mentions, not strictly preservation, called "adaptive reuse".

Groking Terminology,

Inoshi
watersoul
inoshi wrote:
"adaptive reuse"

I like that.
If this becomes the new buzz word in corporate circles of construction then I can't see that as being anything other than good.
Nearly every demolition and new build I've been aware of locally has been done essentially for cost reasons and not safety. It can be much cheaper to just clear and build new than make structurally sound, adapt and reuse.
It is why I think the council here have found a middle ground with developers by keeping the front face of buildings over a certain age and with a certain historic style. The rest is demolished and can be a modern block/concrete/steel/glass box behind.
chasbeen
As said
Quote:
*Edit* We discovered a perfectly constructed and preserved 150+ year old red brick external floor (block paving) under a metre of layered earth and concrete when a trench was dug for the gas supply at my current site.
It was left intact and re-buried with a protective layer of sand over the parts we had exposed. We all respected the work that we saw.
That made me smile, for the men who laid those bricks all them years ago.

Isn't that interesting that you shared the same feelings of the people who built that old wall.

Today I was knocking around a small village which I have been visiting since I was a 6 year old
The town is near the English channel port of Dover where many buildings dating from 1600 are built using flints that originally sat inside the crumbly white cliffs in that area.
watersoul
chasbeen wrote:
As said
Quote:
*Edit* We discovered a perfectly constructed and preserved 150+ year old red brick external floor (block paving) under a metre of layered earth and concrete when a trench was dug for the gas supply at my current site.
It was left intact and re-buried with a protective layer of sand over the parts we had exposed. We all respected the work that we saw.
That made me smile, for the men who laid those bricks all them years ago.

Isn't that interesting that you shared the same feelings of the people who built that old wall.
I always have respect for another mans work, especially if it has stood the test of time.
You can often find me looking at the built environment around my area, lots of lovely stonework which almost humbles me sometimes because it was all cut with handtools, no petrol diskcutters, grinders or breakers.

Quote:
Today I was knocking around a small village which I have been visiting since I was a 6 year old
The town is near the English channel port of Dover where many buildings dating from 1600 are built using flints that originally sat inside the crumbly white cliffs in that area.
That sounds pretty interesting to me, I've never really seen much of the South East coast apart from motorways and ferry ports to France. I do love how old buildings are mostly from locally sourced materials though, the differences around the country are noticable, all limestone and sandstone here. Some of the older sandstone buildings are unfortunately eroding much quicker than the less porus limestone.
chasbeen
Ws
The history in England, that's one of the bigger things that pulled me back to these Islands.
watersoul
chasbeen wrote:
Ws
The history in England, that's one of the bigger things that pulled me back to these Islands.

Understand.
I never stop recognising the past even while embracing the future.
There's a lot of built environment past to recognise on these little islands Smile
ratanegra
Instead, I hate it when anything old is taken down or destroyed or given away. I don't like throwing away the clothes that don't fit me anymore. It's like I'm deleting a part of my history. Like denying my past.
Related topics
How do you want to die?
Reincarnation
Where would you go?
Edouard Manet Biography
My short (uncompleted) story; The Heros Sword: A New Legacy
Art History class week 0
Let Arson = Terrorism
Why I hate Christianity so much. Reader disgretion advised,
How to keep fit
Powerful Italian quake kills many
Urban exploration
Dem's Global Warming Debacle
Why are atheists so angry?
Here is a really screwed up one.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.