Originally Posted by mobertol (Post 992777)

Don't know why but the idea of saving just the facade has me thinking of American westerns where the towns look real and then are just fronts held there by wooden props!

Never heard of it Sue - bit like cutting off your nose to save your face. Replacing solid stone with breeze blocks behind the scenes doesn't grab me as an idea.

Originally Posted by maxthecollie (Post 992787)

Make a good Mosque

Originally Posted by mobertol (Post 992769)

I think the Con Club has a quite a special place in a lot of townsfolks hearts as many of them remember dancing there and going to "dos" of one kind or another. My parents met there and got together at a dance and I also went a few times for dances connected to school and then to work as a caterer sometimes.

It seems a shame to lose it to dereliction. Money for silly marble benches on Broadway and other white elephants around town can be found when necessary but when they just dont want to do something they hide behind the cries of "no money".

Originally Posted by susie123 (Post 992771)

Correct me if I'm wrong but surely one of the stumbling blocks here is that the building is not a "public" building as such and doesn't belong to the council but is in private hands. That means there would be more hoops to jump through if the council did decide they wanted to save the building.

Don't know if it's still a fashionable idea in architectural circles but recently one trend has been facadism - saving the front of a building and constructing a new one behind it. If the Con Club really is in such a bad state then this might be an idea as the front is the memorable bit. It might be cheaper in the long run than trying to renovate what is there already. I don't know, I'm not an expert in these matters, but I wonder if the idea has been given any thought.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 992793)

Well you are right susie, it isn't a public building, don't know who owns it, but I think it is protected by English Heritage, which is a toothless tiger really, its okay saying we can't lose these buildings but do sod all to help fund the upkeep, its the same with Rhyddings mill, that is dangerous and has been for years although the chimney has now been sorted, I think:confused:

Originally Posted by susie123 (Post 992814)

Yes, it is grade II listed by English Heritage but as I mentioned in post 86 they are only interested in the outside, for its streetscape value I guess. The inside is dismissed as unimportant.

AS far as I am aware the listing means that change of use etc is limited and also materials used in maintenance and renovation are strictly controlled. I don't there are any pressures on owners of listed properties as far as upkeep is concerned which is why so many are allowed to decay, probably in the hope they will fall down or have to be demolished thus freeing the land for more profitable development. Either that, or the time delays in obtaining planning permission caused by the building's being listed means that the building's decay is inevitable.

These remarks come from me as an ex-owner of a listed building: the house we lived in before we moved to Morecambe. So they are reasonably accurate I hope.

Originally Posted by dotti34 (Post 993486)

Never mind, all you spring chickens. Let's get serious with this memory thing. Who remembers dancing to Joe Loss and the like at the Con Club, as well as the regular Con Club band in the late 40's early 50's. The old fellow does!!!!!

Originally Posted by dotti34 (Post 993494)

You had to be there......