Whilst walking past the sorry remains of the Tudno Castle Hotel in Llandudno a few days ago, I got to thinking...what's better - renovating an existing Victorian building or rebuilding it to create an exact replica?
In an ideal world, of course, the question would not need to be asked - it would be renovation every time. However, the world in which we live dictates that a more pragmatic approach must be taken if anything is to be achieved. So, to a large extent, I believe the answer must depend upon the particular building and whether it has significant historical importance. In the case of the Tudno Castle Hotel, its contribution to the townscape is significant but only really in terms of its architecture. The plans mooted for the conversion of the building into a 70 bedroom Travelodge stalled because the Planning Authorities dictated that the building's façade must be retained and incorporated into the new development, a condition that would have added considerably to construction costs. By the time the plans were eventually approved, Travelodge had lost interest and pulled out of the deal.
As a result of the stalling, we are left with a derelict, eyesore building in the centre of town, when we could have had an £8m investment from Travelodge that would have created 35 new jobs. What if the Planning Authorities had instead said that the entire building can be demolished (after any significant architectural elements, such as the decorative iron porch, are removed for reuse in the new building) but the new building must be, externally, an exact copy of the old building? Personally, I would say that would be acceptable (and far preferable to the current situation) - what do you think?
In an ideal world, of course, the question would not need to be asked - it would be renovation every time. However, the world in which we live dictates that a more pragmatic approach must be taken if anything is to be achieved. So, to a large extent, I believe the answer must depend upon the particular building and whether it has significant historical importance. In the case of the Tudno Castle Hotel, its contribution to the townscape is significant but only really in terms of its architecture. The plans mooted for the conversion of the building into a 70 bedroom Travelodge stalled because the Planning Authorities dictated that the building's façade must be retained and incorporated into the new development, a condition that would have added considerably to construction costs. By the time the plans were eventually approved, Travelodge had lost interest and pulled out of the deal.
As a result of the stalling, we are left with a derelict, eyesore building in the centre of town, when we could have had an £8m investment from Travelodge that would have created 35 new jobs. What if the Planning Authorities had instead said that the entire building can be demolished (after any significant architectural elements, such as the decorative iron porch, are removed for reuse in the new building) but the new building must be, externally, an exact copy of the old building? Personally, I would say that would be acceptable (and far preferable to the current situation) - what do you think?


