Quote:
Originally Posted by Tealeaf
As usual, Garinda is wrong. The houses that were pulled down in the late '70's were in the old Henry/Walmsley/Ernest street area. Unusually, many of these were brick faced and of a very poor 19c construction; few at the time had indoor bath/toilet facilities. These dwellings were certainly of no architectural merit and it was far more cost effective to pull 'em down.
The demolition of some of those replacement houses more recently was simply as part of the Church Gateway improvement plan, although it is somewhat debatable as to whether this exercise should have been carried out in the absence of a fully funded scheme.
|
Very few Victorian terraces were built in Lancashire with indoor bathrooms, my present house included. Those house in Church could easily have been improved to offer the modern amenities we've come to expect.
As for their architectural merit, there were probably similar Philistines who thought that the terraced artisans cottages in Battersea in London, should have been demolioshed in the sixties. All of which originally had no indoor bathrooms, but which are now seen as very desirable homes, and easily sell for over half a miilion quid.
I stand by my statement that the older houses in Church were better built than their replacements, which only managed a life of twenty odd years, as opposed to a hundred.
A simple case of economics.