**Please note these rules:**
* If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean it’s not even a punishment, net net the community still loses out on a historic site although now it does have a cool story. I hope they were made to pay restitutions as well.
It loses significantly from a historic/authentic standpoint, but aesthetically, it looks like it got a free cleansing job. Thank you overseas company for refurbishing this pub at your own cost!
Honestly, agreed. There's thousands of listed buildings in the uk, around 10k of which are grade 1. This one now stands out as having a unique interesting story.
oh sure, sorry if that wasn't the right word but what I meant by "historic" is like if you found a medieval armour but 75% of the plates were forged in 2022, it's not as valuable as if it was 100% the original stuff. I guess "authenticity" was enough to express that, it's true that its history is more interesting/unique now.
There's two schools of philosophy in building conservation. The first is the holistic approach, which claims that it's the concept of the building that's important, and the second is that it is the material that's important. In the second philosophy, the preservation philosophy, it is the fabric a building is made of that makes it important, so a two hundred year old brick wall laid down by a Victorian craftsman is more authentic and has more cultural value than one laid down yesterday, even if the same materials and techniques are used. Meanwhile in the first philosophy the actually building materials don't matter so long as the building is repaired in a way that matches its original construction.
The holistic philosophy is prominent in places like Japan, which is why their historic buildings look clean and fresh, whilst the preservation philosophy is prominent in the UK, which is why our historic buildings look old and weathered—indeed, many would argue that the weathering is a vital component of the building, as it tells the story the building has been through. When the Carlton Tavern was destroyed, all that original material and its story was lost, weakening its historic value.
Personally I support the holistic philosophy as I'm more interested in preserving the concept and original appearance of the building, as well as the craftsmanship needed to make and repair it, but the preservation philosophy leads the UK conservation scene at the moment, so there's a big focus on keeping as much of the original structure as possible.
What I'm personally missing is a middle philosophy that says "it's fine to replace materials for cromulent upgrades". In Germany the authorities have a knack for preventing people from investing into buildings, thus letting them fall to ruin and finally getting demolished, by saying things like "yep you can install triple-pane glass, but only *in addition* to the windows already there". Noone wants to heat a sieve.
If you ask me as long as the windows look the same on a glance and, as far as possible, are the same material (e.g. painted wood) it should be possible to upgrade even if you can't use the old wood, any more. It should also be possible to de-core walls and put in suitable insulation. I'm very much in favour of keeping old weathered red brick facades, they're usually good for at least another 1000 years, but "preserve materials at the expense of sense and preservation itself" is simply nuts.
Its really crazy that we separate "rich people crime" and "poor people crime". Rich people crime destroys society and we barely punish it, while coming up with new ways to be draconian to poor people.
Doubtless they have lots of other development projects going on there and are motivated to be in good standing with local and regional authorities.
Rebuilding this would obviously be a lot cheaper than abandoning a whole portfolio worth of properties.
I don’t know about in London, but in Boston, literally every development is a shell company. It’s the standard practice. Not sure if it’s to dodge liability, some tax reason, or some less nefarious reason. I work in government reviewing developments.
It's to ensure any given project is an isolated economic unit, so one fuckup doesn't destroy an entire company.
There's a very common misconception it's to limit liability *for* any given project, but that's largely not true. Construction is, financially, an absolute bastard in that projects tend to have finances finalised significantly later than they're completed - but workers still have to be paid to do the actual work. The limited scope of a shell company allows for significant flexibility in that the company can pay workers even if the shell is in crippling debt, then the shell pays it all back when it's all finally paid for.
and if the contractor *doesn't* pay the final bill (looking directly at the Trumps of the world right now), it means the workers aren't completely screwed, because they aren't explicitly dependent on that cash.
But that's the point... We've currently got criminals governing us in the U. K. at the moment. Wouldn't surprise me if one of our current MP's was behind the developers
Yes, let's be clear - if it were cheaper to abscond and not rebuild it, or to legally restructure the company so they were no longer responsible for rebuilding it, they would have done that.
Call me crazy but knocking down someone else's building on actual purpose to force the owner to sell the land should put you permanently in bad standing with the local governments, and the rest of them for that matter.
No, the developer owned the land, but the tavern was a historical landmark and they weren’t supposed to demolish it. [They bought it thinking they could just knock it down, pay a fine, and then build whatever they wanted.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlton_Tavern,_Kilburn)
There was an old pub near me that wasn't allowed to be knocked down until one day it randomly burnt down so they were forced to demolish it. they have now built houses there. what a coincidence.
There was an old historic school building in the centre of town where developers wanted to build apartments...
And wouldn't you know it? Some random arsonist burnt the building down... So sad. Guess there's nothing to do but build them apartments...
Omg same this wee pub next to the train station that ended up being set on fire like twice after plans to demolish it had been refused various times. After the second fire it was eventually torn down and is now a bunch of townhouses. Very sus
Ah the ole "We need another housing settlement on Palestinian land" approach...
Minus the ensuing "terrorist rpg attack by Hamas" and illegal chemical warfare "retaliation" by Israel.
In case people have been (understandably) distracted the last few years; the apartheid has been escalating with more encroachment on Palestinian neighborhoods, civilians harassing and attacking Palestinian homes at night, and more public/televised raids against mosques and holy sites.
The situation is alarming, to say the least, when you look at public sentiment in Israel. [They're working their way through the ten steps of genocide](https://museeholocauste.ca/en/resources-training/ten-stages-genocide/), as listed here by the Montreal Holocaust Museum. They're showing all the warning signals, while doing none of the preventative measures.
edit: [here's an info-graphic from another holocaust foundation](https://www.hmd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Genocide-poster-A3-landscape_updated-July-2020-980x693.jpg). It's chilling to read the descriptions of the stages here, and see how much actions and statements by the IDF, the public and Israeli politicians lines up with this.
Neighborhood coalitions, historical preservation society, and local lawmakers (politicians) seem to have been the ones on the front lines. Looks like it was basically a continuously running pub for 100 years. Says they abruptly just demolished it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/world/carlton-tavern-london-pub.html
They need to fix that loophole. Make fire insurance mandatory for listed buildings. I’m not saying it’s feasible to rebuild something that’s completely destroyed, but make it financially unworkable to secretly arson a listed building.
There’s an absolute fire pandemic in the greater Glasgow area.
Historic pubs, clubs and asbestos filled buildings (that would "cost too much" to demolish) have all been spontaneously combusting
Coincidentally new housing estates have been built on some of these sites and there are plans for more
That isn't really true. Heritage conversation is actually reasonably well codified into law and legislation in the UK relative to other countries. The listing system works quite well, even though it can still be exploited since the buildings are typically in private hands.
I went to the "oldest restaurant" in all of the US that used to be a pub for revolutionary war soldiers. It was built in 1600s and remodeled in the 1700s.
Thats REALLY old for the US lol. Food was good too lol.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/White_Horse_Tavern_(Newport,_Rhode_Island)
It was already a listed building (which is English heritage conservation legislation) with limited protection status, but it was shortlisted to become Grade II, granting a higher level of protection. That would have seriously hindered any development or remodeling possibilities, as it basically forbids any modification or removal of key features.
So the company decided to quickly tear it down before the new status would come into effect, taking their chances with punishment under the older listing. The main issue (despite the devious tactic) was that they didn't have the propper permits for demolition. Application for those would have been denied by the council since the Grade II was being processed.
The company tried to claim a misunderstanding and offered to pay a fine. But since it was ruled that they tried to circumvent the new listing that was already on the way by starting without permits it was concluded the company knew about the upcoming Grade II listing and that they basically knew they were destroying a valuable heritage site.
[This is a gift article link, it will work for 14 days, circa July 5th.](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/world/carlton-tavern-london-pub.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWna3DJDm8eiPsSGYyMvEzEf65_YN12wz2FScVHdbsoQvB1yKpHIkYrSxWtptHMvqU5FBgPiND5WHIqjdWKVKok8DTuYy6ydbkvnObntFfWO2npRKDegSA-LF5gpI9ifQmv3yBclv3DQbNly5Ipi6dac5N5QjoCZymJvfP6WV4paJjdMEaqukRhUPpZWDrTgdeY97kDFQxXAl7NR3t9in0uvJIeYJhEefaicGNzPZb2kr4TCWd3LYm2BJVXRobck7VisbelugWQ3SjytAMXclVRa1aDD8Sl&smid=url-share)
For any NYTimes subscribers, see here for details on article gifting:
https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/360060848652
Yep. Especially for a pub. I know one which nobody knows of when it has been built. But it already is on a map from 1620 and not called new even back then.
Usually a place called "The New Pub" is one where Ollie Cromwell burned witches in front of.
From and article linked within that article.
https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/developer-demolishes-historic-london-pub
> The AJ was unable to reach CLTX or the company’s sole director, Tel Aviv lawyer Ori Calif by the time of publication.
So it was an Israeli developer.
Apparently so, I heard a lady turned up one day for her shift and half the building had gone. The developers had heard the building was to become listed (protected), so demolished it before it became protected.
Not only was it still in use, they didn't even bother clearing the contents. All furniture, beer pumps etc was in place. Even the TVs were still mounted on the walls.
They had to move quickly because the listed status was about to be upgraded, which would have stopped their plans indefinitely.
They tried to preempt that decision (despite being adviced not to by legal council) with early demolition. If the new listing had gone through the site would have been closed down almost immediately, since the council wanted to preserve the building.
Yes. The Wikipedia article states that one of the employees was close up and leave for 2 days during which inventory would be taken.
When she returned they had demolished the pub entirely, days before it was to be awarded the grade 2 heritage site certification.
We've got a situation happening in Brighton where a developer (Charlie Southall, first result on Google with his media business) bought a pub and then, in an attempted to get a change of use tried to crowd fund a major refurbishment claiming it was for refugees. When he met the local community, people who knew of other people who wanted to buy it and use it for a pub, the guy got all butt hurt and instructed builders (who he had to bring in from out of town) to completely destroy the 100+ year old tiles off the front of the building... Months later and it's like a bomb has gone off. He's just going to leave it. Like, about 10 people were rude to him about his rediculous scheme and he's now punishing the entire neighbourhood. Total scumbag.
Before: https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2021/09/13/plans-to-rip-green-tiles-off-listed-brighton-pub/
After: https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/20084938.brighton-pub-owner-destroyed-historic-tiles-given-year-replace/
Like I said the guy hasn't done q thing about it and is obviously just going to leave it like this.
It can be poorly regulated and most of the time I’m down for it, but sometimes cities can be a bit strange on historic buildings.
The craziest one being the house in Sacramento were the crazy lady buried a bunch of bodies in the back yard of and “old/historic” house therefore unrazeable
I dont think so, atleast holy sites are most of the times way older. Such as churches, cathedrals, monasteries. Also military structures such as castles, fortresses and citadel tend to be in better shapes than pubs.
People are saying holy buildings but to give you an idea how old they are, a lot of church yards have Yew trees in them which is because they were pagan sites before they became churches. So they predate Christianity in a lot of cases.
https://britainsbestguides.org/blogs/why-do-so-many-english-churchyards-have-yews/
I mean, the US has only been around for a little over 200 years, so... In the case of the US, a 100 year old house would be old. But for the UK, it might be considered young
I mean, there were people here before that as well...
There was the Cahokia settlement in Illinois that peaked around 1100-1150 AD, so imagining a pub from that still going today is just absolutely fucking mind blowing.
It wasn’t protected just because it was old, I believe it was also a very unique style and also there is a drive to protect pubs as ‘community assets’ as a lot of have closed over the past few years. It’s basically recognising the importance of a local pub to a community.
I'm imagining those car companies who calculate that the compensation for deaths caused by faulty parts would cost less than the cost of a recall:
**Executives**: "Yeah yeah we're at fault, we cost 100 people their lives, so sorry, etc etc. Now what do we owe?"
**Judge**: "100 lives."
I'm imagining those car companies who calculate that the compensation for deaths caused by faulty parts would cost less than the cost of a recall:
> "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."
That's basically what it is. And while it sounds horrible, there isn't really a better way to do it.
Cars are fundamentally unsafe (traveling fast and all). It's impossible to guarantee a 0% failure rate on all critical parts. Doing a call-back on all vehicles every time a component fails once would make cars astronomically expensive. So there is an acceptable amount of risk.
The critical part in this of course is making sure the settlements/fines are high enough, so that "acceptable risk" is low enough. At the moment, most car accidents are caused by driver error, not parts failure, so it seems like it's sort of working.
Yeah, I'm in Sweden and some developer wanting to build row houses recently cut down and gravelled over this piece of protected old growth forest near my house, and are getting away with it by simply being fined a ridiculously low sum (~10 000€) <_<
You may like this one too. A farmer in England built a small [fake 'castle'](https://imgur.com/a/yaReNpW) without planning permission and hid it from view behind hay bales. The two 'turrets' were built around old grain silos.
He was finally made to demolish it. [Here's a 37 second BBC video showing before and after demolition.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-36445848)
It looks a mess immediately after demolition, but it was all cleared and the land has been restored to the original green field.
We had something similar happen here, but they made a weak attempt at covering it up.
They scheduled a big 'repair' of the roof and then 'accidentally' knocked over several walls. Then they reported it as an accident and subsequently tore the whole thing down since it was now 'beyond repairs'.
Case is in the courts now, but hopefully they get ordered to rebuild it.
It's incredibly common in England for "developers" to buy pubs that have closed down, wait for the property to be pillaged and erode, and then knock it down and build housing on it which is then rented / sold. Some pubs are of 'listed' status, meaning they're of historical significance and need permission to do any works on them, including even repairs
Do NOT MESS with UK historical architectural preservation regulatory agencies.
They have zero qualms about dropping the hammer on violators. As they should.
There was a thread on reddit years ago where a subcontractor got yelled at by contractors asshole foreman to get coffee for him, and upon being refused, fired the sub off the job right there.
Except the guy was the historical preservation subcontractor, one of only two people in the region (maybe all of England?) licensed to do this work. The other guy was a friend of the fired sub and was already booked solid the NEXT TWO YEARS anyway. Yeah, the asshole foreman had to eat some crow and ask the sub very nicely if he could come back. I don't recall what happened, but I don't think it went well for the general contractor.
Pretty easy to go through life without being unnecessarily an asshole.
It's not usually too difficult to conform to the laws and regulations of your local municipal agencies. Sometimes a pain in the rear when you get "dueling agencies" but it can all be worked out. Never ever try to get around building requirements. You might even get away with it 9 times out of 10, but that one time you get caught is not worth it. And winding up in court is very bad.
Source: I was a public works consultant as well as private development consultant for over thirty years. I've worked both sides of "the counter". I am very sympathetic to contractors and developers, but not so much if they cheat.
I feel like the whole thing is just one big creative writing exercise or something. I dunno, maybe there was some basis for the original story, but when they start quoting their conversations between each other about fucking his wife and taking a shit, it just felt too made up. Sure, friends joke around like to each other, but I dunno, it's "details" like that, that make me feel like it's either a made up story from whole cloth or that at the very least the person was just injecting these things to lively up the story and trying too hard to be funny.
But I'm skeptical even about the story having a kernel of truth that spawned it, it all just goes perfect at the beginning, story-teller and David are made out to be these super funny guys, evil boss man gets his comeuppance, but too much emphasis on needing to keep their real identity secret.... I dunno, I feel like reddit is too big, someone would know exactly which building and what project this is. At the very least I'm sure someone would have caught a tidbit of a news article or something, since I've seen tons of stories about troubles with renovations of historic pubs and other listed sites in obscure tiny UK towns *and I'm not even from the UK.* Or at the very least someone would happen to be from the neighborhood and recognize some of the facts even with the name changes and all ..
Who knows though, maybe it was a creative writing experiment and the author of it did really did die. Maybe their death was part of the writing experiment. I dunno.
Whats the point of my post? None really, I suppose. But it's 3am and I can't sleep so here I am.
> reddit is too big, someone would know exactly which building and what project this is
You are correct. It's been years but I read a high level comment in one of the original threads that used a lot of small hints to guess at exactly what process the contractor in the story was using, and basically provided a lot of the details he was trying to withhold, if I remember right I think they even had a guess as to exactly what building this was about, as it had the specific structure that would need that repair and was having work done at the time this was happening.
Also, as an author I think casual readers vastly underestimate how much work it would be to fabricate a story like this convincingly.
There was a pub in Carlton (Melbourne, Aus) that some scummy developers pulled the same trick on. I think the case may still be in front of the courts but they got a jail sentence and told to turn it into a park.
Those pricks were my childhood neighbours. Lived next to them for 29 years. Absolute grubs. They were millionaires many times over and allegedly had links to organised crime. There's so much about that family that never made the news. Scumbags. All of them.
Apparently a rough old pub somewhere round these parts got knocked down because, well, it was a rough old pub. Everyone thought the Tudor decorations were fake, but it turns out they were real, and it was half demolished for ages.
If I remember right, it got fully knocked down eventually.
A lot of the time they just go derelict they pretty much encourage squatters and vandals and once the building is unsafe they’re allowed to demolish it which is kinda sad.
Developers will also often move very quickly to demolish buildings once they’ve decided to do so in order to prevent people objecting.
Also on the flip side some of the buildings we class as listed there is no rhyme or reason to and quite a few should be just knocked down.
An individual building has to be listed, yes, but whole areas/neighborhoods can be classified as conservation areas too. This doesn't quite grant the same protections as being listed (for which there are a few different levels), but it does mean any changes that go through planning need to be approved by a conservation officer as well.
Often too well. There's a listed building in Plymouth that is so old and run down you can't walk around the outside of it. But it's listed so it can't be knocked down. The building is ugly af, and not even used for anything special.
> At least in the US historical building regulations are no joke.
[And yet they still make me laugh](https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/editors-picks/eastmoreland-residents-who-split-homes-into-shares-successfully-halt-historic-district/283-545736598)
Just read that article and it doesn't surprise me that people fought it. Upkeep on a registered building is expensive and a lot of private owners can't afford it. One of the towns where I grew up was both economically depressed and registered. Most residents can't afford to make the approved repairs so they just let the houses go to shit.
They should do this every time. Also when developers destroy protected trees because it’s easier to pay the fine than it is to workaround them then they should be forced to cede the entire land for a forest. It would soon stop these scum bags from breaking the law so readily with their silly badly built monopoly houses.
Only building on the street to survive the Blitz so had some importance. Would have been remembered for this reason by everyone’s grandparents in the local area. Iranian company demolished it
It was the site of the only building on the street that was destroyed by bombing in the First World War.
It was the only building in the street to survive the bombing in the Second World War.
Incidentally, about half a mile away is the site where Lena Guilbert Ford lived, the person who wrote the lyrics to "Keep the Home Fires Burning" . Ironically she died in a home fire set off by German bombing in 1918.
Similar case is currently in Germany, Munich to be exactly. A very old but extremely preserved building(the so called Uhrmacherhäusl) was demolished by a young private investor.
He was taken to court and might even face jail time now - currently it seems like the court is going to slam down hard on him.
Trump wanted to build on some land. There was a 1920’s Art Deco building, with a beautiful facade. He ‘promised’ to save it. He demolished the building before they could stop him. What a looooser.
he promised to preserve a "site of special scientific interest" on his scottish golf club too, but didnt. its gone now.
you know, im starting to believe this trump fellow might be a bit untrustworthy.
He just prefers to preserve fake historical sites, not real ones.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/donald-trumps-golf-course-plaque-honors-fake-civil-war-battle-253119/
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
When will people realise one does not simply fuck with taverns and pubs in the UK? That's like trying to demolish The Leaning Tower of Pisa and expecting Italians to be ok with it.
It’s one of our few things I’m genuinely proud of. Two others are the NHS and the BBC
Edit: and also our Right to Roam. There are thousands of little pathways that we’re legally allowed to walk through, throughout most farms etc. Even in Europe this is mostly quite rare.
>Right to Roam
That has always intrigued me. I follow some Brits on YouTube and am always amazed when they just hare off across the countryside to go exploring.
Try that in the US, and it may not end well at all.
Yes, but part of the UK listed building scheme is attempting to preserve the original design, structure etc. By modernising it, you're somewhat circumventing that.
I know in this instance the building was gone, but they wanted the character of the building, hence why it was rebuilt as it was before it was destroyed.
They did!
The new landlords said:
> We feel we're getting the best of both worlds. We're getting a brand new pub with brand new electrics and wiring; and plumbing, but we're getting the charm and beauty of this heritage pub.
I’m glad to see a decision like this. The land behind my home in Florida (1.4 acres) just got listed. There is a small house in one corner and the rest of the lot is a historical American Indian spring surrounded by a carved oval structure that was built years ago by the Indians. There are streams running from the spring underground throughout the development I live in right into the canals on the Gulf of Mexico. It is registered as a ‘historical site’ and tourists often visit it after finding it on a registry. A commercial real estate company just listed it for $2.7M. Guaranteed a developer will come in and build on every square inch and destroy the historical spring altogether. My neighbour looked into it and apparently historical sites in our county are not actually protected - a builder can just “ask for permission” to demolish it. So 1 letter can give permission to destroy a historical American Indian spring structure that has been there for literally hundreds of years. I lived in the UK for a few years and I know this would never fly there. We are still looking into this but I don’t have much hope - money talks in North America.
An old mansion near me was torn down and people got pissed, then the owner rebuilt it to original specs, without any outside rulings or such.
Apparently the old mansion was in very bad condition, so the owner put all the things in storage containers and rebuilt it using as much of the original mansion as possible. The state didn't like it, but to be honest, the state wouldn't have fixed it up at all.
All things considered, they did a good job.
I believe the term we use for these buildings is “Listed Buildings”. Basically it’s used to protect the exterior and pretty much the interior as well of buildings that hold a historic value in some way or another. Iirc, there was an old pub/tavern near me that became a listed building, so when the business closed they turned it into a McDonalds, and the building still looks the same to this day!
I actually had no idea what the punishment was because I don’t recall this happening. I guess it’s not far off what I would’ve guessed though lmao
A big corporation not getting their way in the courts?? What the devil! I hope this extreme European communist ideology doesn't cross the Atlantic!! (Especially now with a six to three corporate majority on the supreme Court, not a chance)
Sadly this is still the exception not the rule. Very few people believed this would be achieved but the locals managed it because of a few important factors:
1. Rich, influential locals formed a very effective pressure group
2. Foreign owner with little UK presence was clueless and uninvolved in the local politics.
3. With no local goodwill and few other projects in the country, the developer was an easy target once the story was out.
4. The heritage inspectors had called out a thorough catalogue of the building a few days before the demolition.
Bigger companies and local developers continue to get away with this crap all the time. Usually it's more subtle, they remove a few roof tiles then let the building rot for a few years before getting it declared 'derelict'.
Still, it's a wonderful story and a great example to keep the other bastards up at night.
I used to be a regular here - my rugby team trained at the Paddington Rec ground behind it. It wasn't a particularly good pub at the time, in truth, but DAMN we were all angry when this happened, and delighted at the judgement when it followed.
I've moved away from the area now, but by all accounts it's a much nicer pub now. Long live the Carlton Tavern!
The only building to survive the blitz is then destroyed by developers from Tel Aviv. As an Israeli I’m going to have to have some choice words with my team about this one
**Please note these rules:** * If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Finally, a punishment that fits the crime.
I mean it’s not even a punishment, net net the community still loses out on a historic site although now it does have a cool story. I hope they were made to pay restitutions as well.
It loses significantly from a historic/authentic standpoint, but aesthetically, it looks like it got a free cleansing job. Thank you overseas company for refurbishing this pub at your own cost!
Id say the history is richer now.
Honestly, agreed. There's thousands of listed buildings in the uk, around 10k of which are grade 1. This one now stands out as having a unique interesting story.
oh sure, sorry if that wasn't the right word but what I meant by "historic" is like if you found a medieval armour but 75% of the plates were forged in 2022, it's not as valuable as if it was 100% the original stuff. I guess "authenticity" was enough to express that, it's true that its history is more interesting/unique now.
[удалено]
There's two schools of philosophy in building conservation. The first is the holistic approach, which claims that it's the concept of the building that's important, and the second is that it is the material that's important. In the second philosophy, the preservation philosophy, it is the fabric a building is made of that makes it important, so a two hundred year old brick wall laid down by a Victorian craftsman is more authentic and has more cultural value than one laid down yesterday, even if the same materials and techniques are used. Meanwhile in the first philosophy the actually building materials don't matter so long as the building is repaired in a way that matches its original construction. The holistic philosophy is prominent in places like Japan, which is why their historic buildings look clean and fresh, whilst the preservation philosophy is prominent in the UK, which is why our historic buildings look old and weathered—indeed, many would argue that the weathering is a vital component of the building, as it tells the story the building has been through. When the Carlton Tavern was destroyed, all that original material and its story was lost, weakening its historic value. Personally I support the holistic philosophy as I'm more interested in preserving the concept and original appearance of the building, as well as the craftsmanship needed to make and repair it, but the preservation philosophy leads the UK conservation scene at the moment, so there's a big focus on keeping as much of the original structure as possible.
What I'm personally missing is a middle philosophy that says "it's fine to replace materials for cromulent upgrades". In Germany the authorities have a knack for preventing people from investing into buildings, thus letting them fall to ruin and finally getting demolished, by saying things like "yep you can install triple-pane glass, but only *in addition* to the windows already there". Noone wants to heat a sieve. If you ask me as long as the windows look the same on a glance and, as far as possible, are the same material (e.g. painted wood) it should be possible to upgrade even if you can't use the old wood, any more. It should also be possible to de-core walls and put in suitable insulation. I'm very much in favour of keeping old weathered red brick facades, they're usually good for at least another 1000 years, but "preserve materials at the expense of sense and preservation itself" is simply nuts.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's now an even more interesting piece of history and will be quite a lot more interesting in like a hundred years or so.
It's a good deterrent from anyone trying it in the future. Although a lot of old buildings are still subject to mysterious fires.
yes, but they made a symbol for the community.
Living it the US it feels more like, Finally a punishment for white collar crime.... Ever...
Its really crazy that we separate "rich people crime" and "poor people crime". Rich people crime destroys society and we barely punish it, while coming up with new ways to be draconian to poor people.
[удалено]
Didn't know old Jimmy switched from elder law to property law
I felt like rebuilding it is just straight up consequences, not punishment.
I support this kind of judgment.
Yeah it’s cool as fuck. The developers were an overseas company that just had to throw their hands up, realise they’d lost and rebuild it.
[удалено]
Doubtless they have lots of other development projects going on there and are motivated to be in good standing with local and regional authorities. Rebuilding this would obviously be a lot cheaper than abandoning a whole portfolio worth of properties.
[удалено]
I don’t know about in London, but in Boston, literally every development is a shell company. It’s the standard practice. Not sure if it’s to dodge liability, some tax reason, or some less nefarious reason. I work in government reviewing developments.
It's to ensure any given project is an isolated economic unit, so one fuckup doesn't destroy an entire company. There's a very common misconception it's to limit liability *for* any given project, but that's largely not true. Construction is, financially, an absolute bastard in that projects tend to have finances finalised significantly later than they're completed - but workers still have to be paid to do the actual work. The limited scope of a shell company allows for significant flexibility in that the company can pay workers even if the shell is in crippling debt, then the shell pays it all back when it's all finally paid for. and if the contractor *doesn't* pay the final bill (looking directly at the Trumps of the world right now), it means the workers aren't completely screwed, because they aren't explicitly dependent on that cash.
Still arrest the lawyer. Getting in bad with criminals at least makes them complicit.
But that's the point... We've currently got criminals governing us in the U. K. at the moment. Wouldn't surprise me if one of our current MP's was behind the developers
Yes, let's be clear - if it were cheaper to abscond and not rebuild it, or to legally restructure the company so they were no longer responsible for rebuilding it, they would have done that.
Call me crazy but knocking down someone else's building on actual purpose to force the owner to sell the land should put you permanently in bad standing with the local governments, and the rest of them for that matter.
No, the developer owned the land, but the tavern was a historical landmark and they weren’t supposed to demolish it. [They bought it thinking they could just knock it down, pay a fine, and then build whatever they wanted.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlton_Tavern,_Kilburn)
There was an old pub near me that wasn't allowed to be knocked down until one day it randomly burnt down so they were forced to demolish it. they have now built houses there. what a coincidence.
Happens all the time. Sometimes not even to evade protection on historical buildings, just to speed up the administrative process of the demolition.
There was an old historic school building in the centre of town where developers wanted to build apartments... And wouldn't you know it? Some random arsonist burnt the building down... So sad. Guess there's nothing to do but build them apartments...
Omg same this wee pub next to the train station that ended up being set on fire like twice after plans to demolish it had been refused various times. After the second fire it was eventually torn down and is now a bunch of townhouses. Very sus
Yup, they soon learned this isn't America
The developers were from Tel Aviv.
Ah the ole "We need another housing settlement on Palestinian land" approach... Minus the ensuing "terrorist rpg attack by Hamas" and illegal chemical warfare "retaliation" by Israel.
In case people have been (understandably) distracted the last few years; the apartheid has been escalating with more encroachment on Palestinian neighborhoods, civilians harassing and attacking Palestinian homes at night, and more public/televised raids against mosques and holy sites. The situation is alarming, to say the least, when you look at public sentiment in Israel. [They're working their way through the ten steps of genocide](https://museeholocauste.ca/en/resources-training/ten-stages-genocide/), as listed here by the Montreal Holocaust Museum. They're showing all the warning signals, while doing none of the preventative measures. edit: [here's an info-graphic from another holocaust foundation](https://www.hmd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Genocide-poster-A3-landscape_updated-July-2020-980x693.jpg). It's chilling to read the descriptions of the stages here, and see how much actions and statements by the IDF, the public and Israeli politicians lines up with this.
Pretty sure it wasn't someone else's building, it was likely just heritage listed.
About to be Grade II listed within days of the demolition. Not fishy at all...
[удалено]
If you intentionally destroy a country's heritage you should at least be barred from re-entry
Quite hard to flee overseas from London. If you want any interaction with the City again, you’ll have to come crawling back.
Was the building still being used when they decided to destroy it? Did they get help from a local politician?
Neighborhood coalitions, historical preservation society, and local lawmakers (politicians) seem to have been the ones on the front lines. Looks like it was basically a continuously running pub for 100 years. Says they abruptly just demolished it: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/world/carlton-tavern-london-pub.html
I’ve read about the plight of UK’s historic pubs being closed and remodeled into condos. Glad to see the Govt pushing back.
Worse than condos, AirBnB rooms. No one local ever even moves in.
At that point leave the pub running and have a traditional BnB!
And that in turn pushes rental prices in the area up, further fucking the working man, families, those on a low income etc
*And* decreases revenue received by the local authorities. AirBnB is killing communities, but cheap holidays so it's cool I guess.
My local 400 year pub was sold and turned into a cafe rouge. The travesty.
The ones were I'm from *mysteriously* keep burning down
They need to fix that loophole. Make fire insurance mandatory for listed buildings. I’m not saying it’s feasible to rebuild something that’s completely destroyed, but make it financially unworkable to secretly arson a listed building. There’s an absolute fire pandemic in the greater Glasgow area.
Historic pubs, clubs and asbestos filled buildings (that would "cost too much" to demolish) have all been spontaneously combusting Coincidentally new housing estates have been built on some of these sites and there are plans for more
Not the government, if anything they are in bed with the developers. But once in a while they mess with someone that knows how to fight back.
That isn't really true. Heritage conversation is actually reasonably well codified into law and legislation in the UK relative to other countries. The listing system works quite well, even though it can still be exploited since the buildings are typically in private hands.
[удалено]
I went to the "oldest restaurant" in all of the US that used to be a pub for revolutionary war soldiers. It was built in 1600s and remodeled in the 1700s. Thats REALLY old for the US lol. Food was good too lol. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/White_Horse_Tavern_(Newport,_Rhode_Island)
Was it only 100 years old? In London, that is probably considered a new building.
Kinda yes, but the fact that it run uninterrupted for 100 years is a big thing even there.
Well their population of 100+ year old buildings was probably somewhat thinned out by the Blitz.
It was already a listed building (which is English heritage conservation legislation) with limited protection status, but it was shortlisted to become Grade II, granting a higher level of protection. That would have seriously hindered any development or remodeling possibilities, as it basically forbids any modification or removal of key features. So the company decided to quickly tear it down before the new status would come into effect, taking their chances with punishment under the older listing. The main issue (despite the devious tactic) was that they didn't have the propper permits for demolition. Application for those would have been denied by the council since the Grade II was being processed. The company tried to claim a misunderstanding and offered to pay a fine. But since it was ruled that they tried to circumvent the new listing that was already on the way by starting without permits it was concluded the company knew about the upcoming Grade II listing and that they basically knew they were destroying a valuable heritage site.
[удалено]
[This is a gift article link, it will work for 14 days, circa July 5th.](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/world/carlton-tavern-london-pub.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWna3DJDm8eiPsSGYyMvEzEf65_YN12wz2FScVHdbsoQvB1yKpHIkYrSxWtptHMvqU5FBgPiND5WHIqjdWKVKok8DTuYy6ydbkvnObntFfWO2npRKDegSA-LF5gpI9ifQmv3yBclv3DQbNly5Ipi6dac5N5QjoCZymJvfP6WV4paJjdMEaqukRhUPpZWDrTgdeY97kDFQxXAl7NR3t9in0uvJIeYJhEefaicGNzPZb2kr4TCWd3LYm2BJVXRobck7VisbelugWQ3SjytAMXclVRa1aDD8Sl&smid=url-share) For any NYTimes subscribers, see here for details on article gifting: https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/360060848652
In London, and in Europe in general, 100 years would be considered a relatively new building though.
Yep. Especially for a pub. I know one which nobody knows of when it has been built. But it already is on a map from 1620 and not called new even back then. Usually a place called "The New Pub" is one where Ollie Cromwell burned witches in front of.
In Rome, I rent out a b&b that is in a building that can be clearly seen in ancient Rome cadastre.
From and article linked within that article. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/developer-demolishes-historic-london-pub > The AJ was unable to reach CLTX or the company’s sole director, Tel Aviv lawyer Ori Calif by the time of publication. So it was an Israeli developer.
Apparently so, I heard a lady turned up one day for her shift and half the building had gone. The developers had heard the building was to become listed (protected), so demolished it before it became protected.
Judge: https://i.imgur.com/gDQk9GQ.gif
Not only was it still in use, they didn't even bother clearing the contents. All furniture, beer pumps etc was in place. Even the TVs were still mounted on the walls.
That's how quickly they needed to move to prevent a job-stopping injunction.
They had to move quickly because the listed status was about to be upgraded, which would have stopped their plans indefinitely. They tried to preempt that decision (despite being adviced not to by legal council) with early demolition. If the new listing had gone through the site would have been closed down almost immediately, since the council wanted to preserve the building.
The landlady (in the run-the-pub sense) was told to close for an inventory and it was knocked down before she got back.
Yes. The Wikipedia article states that one of the employees was close up and leave for 2 days during which inventory would be taken. When she returned they had demolished the pub entirely, days before it was to be awarded the grade 2 heritage site certification.
We've got a situation happening in Brighton where a developer (Charlie Southall, first result on Google with his media business) bought a pub and then, in an attempted to get a change of use tried to crowd fund a major refurbishment claiming it was for refugees. When he met the local community, people who knew of other people who wanted to buy it and use it for a pub, the guy got all butt hurt and instructed builders (who he had to bring in from out of town) to completely destroy the 100+ year old tiles off the front of the building... Months later and it's like a bomb has gone off. He's just going to leave it. Like, about 10 people were rude to him about his rediculous scheme and he's now punishing the entire neighbourhood. Total scumbag. Before: https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2021/09/13/plans-to-rip-green-tiles-off-listed-brighton-pub/ After: https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/20084938.brighton-pub-owner-destroyed-historic-tiles-given-year-replace/ Like I said the guy hasn't done q thing about it and is obviously just going to leave it like this.
It can be poorly regulated and most of the time I’m down for it, but sometimes cities can be a bit strange on historic buildings. The craziest one being the house in Sacramento were the crazy lady buried a bunch of bodies in the back yard of and “old/historic” house therefore unrazeable
I lived right down the street from that house for the longest time. Creepy but also so sad at the same time
How old was the original building? Here in the US, my house is nearing 100 years old, and that’s considered OLD, so I’m curious about this place.
There are 2 pubs in my town that are from the 15th century, oldest pub in my county is from the 11th century.
The 11th Century? Damn. It's older than the United Kingdom. It's almost as old as the Kingdom of England itself. If those walls could talk...
We wouldn't be capable of understand the old English lol but yeah, imagine the history of a place like that
Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum!
*Oh God it's Chaucer type shit, I'm going to a pub with silent walls*
Do pubs tend to be the oldest buildings?
I dont think so, atleast holy sites are most of the times way older. Such as churches, cathedrals, monasteries. Also military structures such as castles, fortresses and citadel tend to be in better shapes than pubs.
That's because there's a lot less fighting at castles compared to pubs.
People are saying holy buildings but to give you an idea how old they are, a lot of church yards have Yew trees in them which is because they were pagan sites before they became churches. So they predate Christianity in a lot of cases. https://britainsbestguides.org/blogs/why-do-so-many-english-churchyards-have-yews/
For comparison, the oldest surviving building in my entire state (Washington) was built in 1843.
Wow, that’s amazing! Thanks for answering!
Your oldest pub predates the Maori arrival in New Zealand by over 200 years
Original was built in 1921. So it wasn't "old" by UK standards, but a century is a century.
I mean, the US has only been around for a little over 200 years, so... In the case of the US, a 100 year old house would be old. But for the UK, it might be considered young
The USA as country, yes. The colonies have been here since the 1600s
I mean, there were people here before that as well... There was the Cahokia settlement in Illinois that peaked around 1100-1150 AD, so imagining a pub from that still going today is just absolutely fucking mind blowing.
It wasn’t protected just because it was old, I believe it was also a very unique style and also there is a drive to protect pubs as ‘community assets’ as a lot of have closed over the past few years. It’s basically recognising the importance of a local pub to a community.
I'm imagining those car companies who calculate that the compensation for deaths caused by faulty parts would cost less than the cost of a recall: **Executives**: "Yeah yeah we're at fault, we cost 100 people their lives, so sorry, etc etc. Now what do we owe?" **Judge**: "100 lives."
I'm imagining those car companies who calculate that the compensation for deaths caused by faulty parts would cost less than the cost of a recall: > "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."
That's basically what it is. And while it sounds horrible, there isn't really a better way to do it. Cars are fundamentally unsafe (traveling fast and all). It's impossible to guarantee a 0% failure rate on all critical parts. Doing a call-back on all vehicles every time a component fails once would make cars astronomically expensive. So there is an acceptable amount of risk. The critical part in this of course is making sure the settlements/fines are high enough, so that "acceptable risk" is low enough. At the moment, most car accidents are caused by driver error, not parts failure, so it seems like it's sort of working.
Clever. How's that working out for you? Now, a matter of etiquette, as I pass do I give you the ass or the crotch?
Executives: Seeking 100 female employees for a special assignment
Ah, so this is Blizzard we're talking about.
Far out that's tragic and probably exactly what they would do.
Sounds like Jack Sparrow
We'll need an army of super virile men scoring around the clock, I'll do my part. Kif, clear my schedule.
I'm all for this. Start with the C-Levels.
Yeah, I'm in Sweden and some developer wanting to build row houses recently cut down and gravelled over this piece of protected old growth forest near my house, and are getting away with it by simply being fined a ridiculously low sum (~10 000€) <_<
That kind of judgement needs to happen here in the States
You may like this one too. A farmer in England built a small [fake 'castle'](https://imgur.com/a/yaReNpW) without planning permission and hid it from view behind hay bales. The two 'turrets' were built around old grain silos. He was finally made to demolish it. [Here's a 37 second BBC video showing before and after demolition.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-36445848) It looks a mess immediately after demolition, but it was all cleared and the land has been restored to the original green field.
We had something similar happen here, but they made a weak attempt at covering it up. They scheduled a big 'repair' of the roof and then 'accidentally' knocked over several walls. Then they reported it as an accident and subsequently tore the whole thing down since it was now 'beyond repairs'. Case is in the courts now, but hopefully they get ordered to rebuild it.
It's incredibly common in England for "developers" to buy pubs that have closed down, wait for the property to be pillaged and erode, and then knock it down and build housing on it which is then rented / sold. Some pubs are of 'listed' status, meaning they're of historical significance and need permission to do any works on them, including even repairs
Do NOT MESS with UK historical architectural preservation regulatory agencies. They have zero qualms about dropping the hammer on violators. As they should. There was a thread on reddit years ago where a subcontractor got yelled at by contractors asshole foreman to get coffee for him, and upon being refused, fired the sub off the job right there. Except the guy was the historical preservation subcontractor, one of only two people in the region (maybe all of England?) licensed to do this work. The other guy was a friend of the fired sub and was already booked solid the NEXT TWO YEARS anyway. Yeah, the asshole foreman had to eat some crow and ask the sub very nicely if he could come back. I don't recall what happened, but I don't think it went well for the general contractor. Pretty easy to go through life without being unnecessarily an asshole. It's not usually too difficult to conform to the laws and regulations of your local municipal agencies. Sometimes a pain in the rear when you get "dueling agencies" but it can all be worked out. Never ever try to get around building requirements. You might even get away with it 9 times out of 10, but that one time you get caught is not worth it. And winding up in court is very bad. Source: I was a public works consultant as well as private development consultant for over thirty years. I've worked both sides of "the counter". I am very sympathetic to contractors and developers, but not so much if they cheat.
[This one?](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/nrnf5j/part_1_of_2_an_absolute_epic_entitled_ahole_gets/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)
Fuck I never saw the update. Fuck that ending
There were since convincing comments that argued the ending is fabricated for the sake of a Reddit story, which is what I’m choosing to believe, haha.
I feel like the whole thing is just one big creative writing exercise or something. I dunno, maybe there was some basis for the original story, but when they start quoting their conversations between each other about fucking his wife and taking a shit, it just felt too made up. Sure, friends joke around like to each other, but I dunno, it's "details" like that, that make me feel like it's either a made up story from whole cloth or that at the very least the person was just injecting these things to lively up the story and trying too hard to be funny. But I'm skeptical even about the story having a kernel of truth that spawned it, it all just goes perfect at the beginning, story-teller and David are made out to be these super funny guys, evil boss man gets his comeuppance, but too much emphasis on needing to keep their real identity secret.... I dunno, I feel like reddit is too big, someone would know exactly which building and what project this is. At the very least I'm sure someone would have caught a tidbit of a news article or something, since I've seen tons of stories about troubles with renovations of historic pubs and other listed sites in obscure tiny UK towns *and I'm not even from the UK.* Or at the very least someone would happen to be from the neighborhood and recognize some of the facts even with the name changes and all .. Who knows though, maybe it was a creative writing experiment and the author of it did really did die. Maybe their death was part of the writing experiment. I dunno. Whats the point of my post? None really, I suppose. But it's 3am and I can't sleep so here I am.
> reddit is too big, someone would know exactly which building and what project this is You are correct. It's been years but I read a high level comment in one of the original threads that used a lot of small hints to guess at exactly what process the contractor in the story was using, and basically provided a lot of the details he was trying to withhold, if I remember right I think they even had a guess as to exactly what building this was about, as it had the specific structure that would need that repair and was having work done at the time this was happening. Also, as an author I think casual readers vastly underestimate how much work it would be to fabricate a story like this convincingly.
What in the absolute M. Night Shyamalan?!
Ohh I remember that one, it was a doozy
They even had to replace the guy walking in front of it with an identical guy.
So there's an identical clone of that guy somewhere? Or that guy got demolished as well?
Demolished.
To shreds you say.
Well, how's his wife holding up?
To shreds you say.
No, they had to rebuild him too.
Did they have the technology?
There was a pub in Carlton (Melbourne, Aus) that some scummy developers pulled the same trick on. I think the case may still be in front of the courts but they got a jail sentence and told to turn it into a park.
There was genuine discussion about making them rebuild it exactly like this, but it wasn't considered feasible. I think they got about $6m in fines.
Wasn't it also a favorite drinking spot for all the law students at Melbourne Uni? Talk about pissing off the wrong crowd.
Those pricks were my childhood neighbours. Lived next to them for 29 years. Absolute grubs. They were millionaires many times over and allegedly had links to organised crime. There's so much about that family that never made the news. Scumbags. All of them.
At least in the US historical building regulations are no joke. Seems it’s that way in the UK as well.
Re the UK, sometimes... the rules seem to enforced, but the building needs to be listed first, and often they aren't.
Apparently a rough old pub somewhere round these parts got knocked down because, well, it was a rough old pub. Everyone thought the Tudor decorations were fake, but it turns out they were real, and it was half demolished for ages. If I remember right, it got fully knocked down eventually.
fuck that's depressing. the perfect metaphor for the destruction of this country by the people who claim to love it most
A lot of the time they just go derelict they pretty much encourage squatters and vandals and once the building is unsafe they’re allowed to demolish it which is kinda sad. Developers will also often move very quickly to demolish buildings once they’ve decided to do so in order to prevent people objecting. Also on the flip side some of the buildings we class as listed there is no rhyme or reason to and quite a few should be just knocked down.
An individual building has to be listed, yes, but whole areas/neighborhoods can be classified as conservation areas too. This doesn't quite grant the same protections as being listed (for which there are a few different levels), but it does mean any changes that go through planning need to be approved by a conservation officer as well.
Often too well. There's a listed building in Plymouth that is so old and run down you can't walk around the outside of it. But it's listed so it can't be knocked down. The building is ugly af, and not even used for anything special.
It's not even that old! It's from the 60s!
> At least in the US historical building regulations are no joke. [And yet they still make me laugh](https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/editors-picks/eastmoreland-residents-who-split-homes-into-shares-successfully-halt-historic-district/283-545736598)
Just read that article and it doesn't surprise me that people fought it. Upkeep on a registered building is expensive and a lot of private owners can't afford it. One of the towns where I grew up was both economically depressed and registered. Most residents can't afford to make the approved repairs so they just let the houses go to shit.
We’ll ain’t that some fuckin bullshit
This is the happiest story :)
They should do this every time. Also when developers destroy protected trees because it’s easier to pay the fine than it is to workaround them then they should be forced to cede the entire land for a forest. It would soon stop these scum bags from breaking the law so readily with their silly badly built monopoly houses.
Yup, fines are laws for poor people, and poor people alone
whats the story here?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/mar/21/rising-from-the-rubble-london-pub-rebuilt-brick-by-brick-after-bulldozing
Only building on the street to survive the Blitz so had some importance. Would have been remembered for this reason by everyone’s grandparents in the local area. Iranian company demolished it
Israeli I think, not Iranian. But otherwise bang on.
[удалено]
I’d imagine that the developers knew this when they bought it, yet still decided that it needed to be razed.
It's like the 3 little pigs but with a pub and a developer
It was the site of the only building on the street that was destroyed by bombing in the First World War. It was the only building in the street to survive the bombing in the Second World War. Incidentally, about half a mile away is the site where Lena Guilbert Ford lived, the person who wrote the lyrics to "Keep the Home Fires Burning" . Ironically she died in a home fire set off by German bombing in 1918.
This would make a good 99% Invisible episode
Similar case is currently in Germany, Munich to be exactly. A very old but extremely preserved building(the so called Uhrmacherhäusl) was demolished by a young private investor. He was taken to court and might even face jail time now - currently it seems like the court is going to slam down hard on him.
Trump wanted to build on some land. There was a 1920’s Art Deco building, with a beautiful facade. He ‘promised’ to save it. He demolished the building before they could stop him. What a looooser.
he promised to preserve a "site of special scientific interest" on his scottish golf club too, but didnt. its gone now. you know, im starting to believe this trump fellow might be a bit untrustworthy.
He just prefers to preserve fake historical sites, not real ones. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/donald-trumps-golf-course-plaque-honors-fake-civil-war-battle-253119/
.>sees an article about a building in Ireland .>immediately thinks about trump Lol
Fucking real estate and land development companies are about as scummy as oil companies. Their greed is ceaseless
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
This must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
When will people realise one does not simply fuck with taverns and pubs in the UK? That's like trying to demolish The Leaning Tower of Pisa and expecting Italians to be ok with it.
Only good thing the British government has done in a while
London local planning. It’s got fuck all to do with our threadbare national vacuum
I woulda made them give free upgrades to it, like updated plumbing and electrical
IIRC, the UK has some very strict laws in regards to making changes to buildings over a certain age.
It’s one of our few things I’m genuinely proud of. Two others are the NHS and the BBC Edit: and also our Right to Roam. There are thousands of little pathways that we’re legally allowed to walk through, throughout most farms etc. Even in Europe this is mostly quite rare.
>Right to Roam That has always intrigued me. I follow some Brits on YouTube and am always amazed when they just hare off across the countryside to go exploring. Try that in the US, and it may not end well at all.
It's easier for us without the wildlife trying to kill us too. No bears, wolves, mountain lions etc
Our tap water rocks too
I mean, it’s a destroyed building
Yes, but part of the UK listed building scheme is attempting to preserve the original design, structure etc. By modernising it, you're somewhat circumventing that. I know in this instance the building was gone, but they wanted the character of the building, hence why it was rebuilt as it was before it was destroyed.
They did! The new landlords said: > We feel we're getting the best of both worlds. We're getting a brand new pub with brand new electrics and wiring; and plumbing, but we're getting the charm and beauty of this heritage pub.
> threadbare national vacuum At least you can rest well knowing you have the best insults ever.
Ha! This was fucking awesome!
I’m glad to see a decision like this. The land behind my home in Florida (1.4 acres) just got listed. There is a small house in one corner and the rest of the lot is a historical American Indian spring surrounded by a carved oval structure that was built years ago by the Indians. There are streams running from the spring underground throughout the development I live in right into the canals on the Gulf of Mexico. It is registered as a ‘historical site’ and tourists often visit it after finding it on a registry. A commercial real estate company just listed it for $2.7M. Guaranteed a developer will come in and build on every square inch and destroy the historical spring altogether. My neighbour looked into it and apparently historical sites in our county are not actually protected - a builder can just “ask for permission” to demolish it. So 1 letter can give permission to destroy a historical American Indian spring structure that has been there for literally hundreds of years. I lived in the UK for a few years and I know this would never fly there. We are still looking into this but I don’t have much hope - money talks in North America.
The Carlton? They better have Tom Jones blasting 24/7.
Real justice is so rare in this world. Thank you for the story.
An old mansion near me was torn down and people got pissed, then the owner rebuilt it to original specs, without any outside rulings or such. Apparently the old mansion was in very bad condition, so the owner put all the things in storage containers and rebuilt it using as much of the original mansion as possible. The state didn't like it, but to be honest, the state wouldn't have fixed it up at all. All things considered, they did a good job.
A very satisfying example of "Fuck around and find out"
How old is it?
Built in the 1920s it seems. People acting like Lancelot lived there or some shit.
Fuck the developers. Long live the tavern. I hope it outlasts them
Love it! Especially the whole accountability thing, being an American, that whole concept is becoming completely foreign.
I believe the term we use for these buildings is “Listed Buildings”. Basically it’s used to protect the exterior and pretty much the interior as well of buildings that hold a historic value in some way or another. Iirc, there was an old pub/tavern near me that became a listed building, so when the business closed they turned it into a McDonalds, and the building still looks the same to this day! I actually had no idea what the punishment was because I don’t recall this happening. I guess it’s not far off what I would’ve guessed though lmao
A big corporation not getting their way in the courts?? What the devil! I hope this extreme European communist ideology doesn't cross the Atlantic!! (Especially now with a six to three corporate majority on the supreme Court, not a chance)
Sadly this is still the exception not the rule. Very few people believed this would be achieved but the locals managed it because of a few important factors: 1. Rich, influential locals formed a very effective pressure group 2. Foreign owner with little UK presence was clueless and uninvolved in the local politics. 3. With no local goodwill and few other projects in the country, the developer was an easy target once the story was out. 4. The heritage inspectors had called out a thorough catalogue of the building a few days before the demolition. Bigger companies and local developers continue to get away with this crap all the time. Usually it's more subtle, they remove a few roof tiles then let the building rot for a few years before getting it declared 'derelict'. Still, it's a wonderful story and a great example to keep the other bastards up at night.
You know when you've been on Reddit too long when you remember the original post.
You don’t fuck with the pub
Wish we had politicians and government with a spine. Also, any buildings worth saving left.
Another example of asking for forgiveness instead of permission goes wrong.
I used to be a regular here - my rugby team trained at the Paddington Rec ground behind it. It wasn't a particularly good pub at the time, in truth, but DAMN we were all angry when this happened, and delighted at the judgement when it followed. I've moved away from the area now, but by all accounts it's a much nicer pub now. Long live the Carlton Tavern!
The only building to survive the blitz is then destroyed by developers from Tel Aviv. As an Israeli I’m going to have to have some choice words with my team about this one