Submitted by Mighty_L_LORT t3_11o4uhe in nottheonion
dew22 t1_jbuthbb wrote
Reply to comment by vpi6 in Developers who destroyed historic Lancashire pub ordered to rebuild it by Mighty_L_LORT
This isn’t even a debate about the plot being used for housing, it’s about the hideous paint job the new tenants put on the building. Just because the planning board denies it being put on a registry doesn’t mean it’s not worth saving.
vpi6 t1_jbuw5qr wrote
100% wrong. The vote last month was about whether to add the dry cleaner building to the historic register - a process that was already in the works when the new tenants did the paint job. The county took no action about the paint job because it legally could do nothing about it. The family that owned the site and a restaurant next door were hoping to develop the site into something that very likely would have been housing. Something that would have been impossible with the completely unwarranted historical designation forced onto them by stupid people who think it’s their inalienable right to look at old buildings no matter the cost.
If you’re in love with the dry cleaner so much then BUY IT. Don’t use the to coercive powers of the government to maintain it at someone else’s expense. That’s morally reprehensible.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments