• MethodicalSpark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      This has been floating around the internet for some time.

      The funny part is that heritage zoning is the reason the addition looks the way it does. The upper floor was inaccessible and stairs needed to be added. Local regulations state that any additions must be visually distinct from the original structure so this monstrosity was the result.

      Look up Caldwell Tower in Scotland for more information.

        • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Here is the episode of The Restoration Man that documented the project - they go into the planning side of this in-depth because it’s really a head-scratcher. The owner tried many times to get planning for more subtle alternations but they kept getting knocked back because it has to be distinctive enough that it’s clear what is the old building and what are the new additions. What you see is the result of that messy process.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            That’s dumb as fuck, literally even if it was brick you’d be able to tell from the weathering of the original stone. NIMBYs are fucking idiots.

            • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              if it’s so important that we must be able to tell when it was built, just fucking carve the date into each brick lmao

            • SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I work in stone conservation and for the body that dictates these regulations, even if it was built out of stone it would be required to be visually distinct. The only exception is if it were reinstatement of an original feature that had been demolished or decayed to the point that it had to be removed and fully rebuilt. In that case every effort should be made to source the stone from the same quarry, and the same mortar mix should be used.

              • BakerBagel@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                An easy way to do that is make the addition not flush, or use a different kind if masonry. The linked documentary includes an interview with the local planning council who recommended finding a local architect with expirience to do it.

                Instead the chrap English bastard just used the cheapest options he could find in Essex and wore the council down to approve this monstrosity.