5 ms·

One thing worth noting is lack of fire safety. Not only did the crystal palace burn down but also most of the similar steel and glass exhibition centres built i

One thing worth noting is lack of fire safety. Not only did the crystal palace burn down but also most of the similar steel and glass exhibition centres built internationally (of which the crystal palace was the first very large one)

lukasb 2y ago
Odd. I wouldn't expect these buildings to be an above average fire risk ...
- ahazred8ta 2y ago
  The contents were flammable and there were no firewalls.
- FerretFred 2y ago
  The underfloor heating was to blame: hot flue gases and an old and increasingly flammable timber floor... https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/9413492.exhibition-at-crystal-palace-museum-recalls-landmark-blaze-of-the-crystal-palace-after-75-years/ https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/9413492.exhibition-at-cry...
bruce511 2y ago
Not only that, but construction in general operated in a far different regulatory environment. Imagine King Charles today proposing a 990 000 square foot structure in Hyde Park. Get Design. Build structure. How hard could it be? Today there are more voices. Queen Victoria simply decreed, and it was done. Today building the structure would be fast. Getting permission to build it would take decades (even for the King) and cost a fortune. Savehydepark.com would be a domain in seconds. The mulberry harbours were built in a day with scant regard to the views of the locals.
- neilwilson 2y ago
  We retain the capacity in the UK to do just that. Parliament sits above the courts as effectively the Supreme Court of the UK, where everybody's interests are notionally represented (the current mis-named 'supreme court' is really just the Court of the United Kingdom). The King, via the Ministers of the Crown, could propose a building as a Bill in Parliament. If Parliament then passes that as an Act, then it will happen and nothing can stop it from happening. Including using the Army to detain and remove protestors if necessary. All it needs is the relevant sections in the Act. Recovering this power is why Brexit was so important. With it we can build the green infrastructure we need as we built the railways - via dictatorial Acts of Parliament that brook no opposition. Now all we need are MPs prepared to use that power to save us from oblivion.
  - Angostura 2y ago
    Are you unfamiliar with the process known as judicial review?
    - YawningAngel 2y ago
      While the above poster is a little overenthusiastic, there is no judicial review of acts of Parliament. Judicial review seeks to challenge whether a public body reached a decision lawfully, and acts of Parliament are always lawful provided they are passed in the property manner https://davidallengreen.com/2023/01/courts-and-politics-and-the-job-of-judicial-review/ https://davidallengreen.com/2023/01/courts-and-politics-and-...
  - jimnotgym 2y ago
    >Recovering this power is why Brexit was so important. Yet public infrastructure in Britain still costs 2-3 times what it costs in continental Europe. It strikes me that blaming the EU was a very convenient excuse.
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      To some extent that explains the current disarray of the Tory party. Almost since the UK was brought into Europe (by the Tories, mind you!), the British right, and parts of the left, have adopted a position of simply blaming Europe for everything (including entirely imaginary things; see euromyths). After Brexit, this is an increasingly implausible platform, so you see a casting around for new scapegoats (I’m pretty much convinced that’s where the Tories’ newfound obsession with trans people comes from, say), and new fantasies (see Liz Truss’s great economic plan).
  - hnlmorg 2y ago
    That power existed before the referendum too. The leave campaign was full of intentionally vague statements that were emotionally charged but lacked any factual substance. Our “sovereignty” hasn’t changed. The NHS didn’t get any additional funding. Trade deals have gotten worse not better. The whole thing was just smoke and mirrors. Literally the only thing the referendum was sincere about, was David Cameron’s desire to consolidate votes and reduce the number of his own MPs leaving for other right-wing parties. He succeeded at that, but its cost the economy literally billions.
- rkosk 2y ago
  Victoria didn't decree anything. There was a commission set up by the government a year or two before the Great Exhibition to oversee things and the purchasing of land and funding for construction was subject to parliamentary debate and approval. Your comment about the Mulberry harbours is quite baffling. Are you seriously suggesting that a modern day military operation on the scale of Overlord would be subject to local consultations?
  - crop_rotation 2y ago
    > Victoria didn't decree anything. I think there is a tradition in the UK to assign all government actions to be by the crown. As if the crown takes decisions on everything and everyone else just recommends.
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      … No, insofar as anything like that exists it’s the _crown_, not the person, but no, no-one really thinks of it like that.
- ignoramous 2y ago
  > Savehydepark.com would be a domain in seconds Right... https://www.savewimbledonpark.org/ https://www.savewimbledonpark.org/
- rsynnott 2y ago
  > Queen Victoria simply decreed, and it was done People seem to get incredibly confused about British constitutional history… No she didn’t, don’t be silly, she wasn’t a dictator. About the only European monarch who could got around decreeing stuff left right and center in this period was the Russian tsar; there just weren’t that many absolute monarchs left. You’re correct that they didn’t have, like, modern planning law, but it was nothing to do with Victoria.
- tim333 2y ago
  >Opponents of the scheme lobbied strenuously against the use of Hyde Park (and they were strongly supported by The Times). The most outspoken critic was Charles Sibthorp; he denounced the exhibition as "one of the greatest humbugs, frauds and absurdities ever known" (reaction from 1851, wikipedia)
- lostlogin 2y ago
  > The mulberry harbours were built in a day with scant regard to the views of the locals. One lasted just weeks before it was destroyed in a storm. The other did better, and was used for 10 months. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbours https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbours

lukasb 2y ago

Odd. I wouldn't expect these buildings to be an above average fire risk ...

ahazred8ta 2y ago
The contents were flammable and there were no firewalls.
FerretFred 2y ago
The underfloor heating was to blame: hot flue gases and an old and increasingly flammable timber floor... https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/9413492.exhibition-at-crystal-palace-museum-recalls-landmark-blaze-of-the-crystal-palace-after-75-years/ https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/9413492.exhibition-at-cry...

bruce511 2y ago

Not only that, but construction in general operated in a far different regulatory environment. Imagine King Charles today proposing a 990 000 square foot structure in Hyde Park. Get Design. Build structure. How hard could it be? Today there are more voices. Queen Victoria simply decreed, and it was done. Today building the structure would be fast. Getting permission to build it would take decades (even for the King) and cost a fortune. Savehydepark.com would be a domain in seconds. The mulberry harbours were built in a day with scant regard to the views of the locals.

neilwilson 2y ago
We retain the capacity in the UK to do just that. Parliament sits above the courts as effectively the Supreme Court of the UK, where everybody's interests are notionally represented (the current mis-named 'supreme court' is really just the Court of the United Kingdom). The King, via the Ministers of the Crown, could propose a building as a Bill in Parliament. If Parliament then passes that as an Act, then it will happen and nothing can stop it from happening. Including using the Army to detain and remove protestors if necessary. All it needs is the relevant sections in the Act. Recovering this power is why Brexit was so important. With it we can build the green infrastructure we need as we built the railways - via dictatorial Acts of Parliament that brook no opposition. Now all we need are MPs prepared to use that power to save us from oblivion.
- Angostura 2y ago
  Are you unfamiliar with the process known as judicial review?
  - YawningAngel 2y ago
    While the above poster is a little overenthusiastic, there is no judicial review of acts of Parliament. Judicial review seeks to challenge whether a public body reached a decision lawfully, and acts of Parliament are always lawful provided they are passed in the property manner https://davidallengreen.com/2023/01/courts-and-politics-and-the-job-of-judicial-review/ https://davidallengreen.com/2023/01/courts-and-politics-and-...
- jimnotgym 2y ago
  >Recovering this power is why Brexit was so important. Yet public infrastructure in Britain still costs 2-3 times what it costs in continental Europe. It strikes me that blaming the EU was a very convenient excuse.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    To some extent that explains the current disarray of the Tory party. Almost since the UK was brought into Europe (by the Tories, mind you!), the British right, and parts of the left, have adopted a position of simply blaming Europe for everything (including entirely imaginary things; see euromyths). After Brexit, this is an increasingly implausible platform, so you see a casting around for new scapegoats (I’m pretty much convinced that’s where the Tories’ newfound obsession with trans people comes from, say), and new fantasies (see Liz Truss’s great economic plan).
- hnlmorg 2y ago
  That power existed before the referendum too. The leave campaign was full of intentionally vague statements that were emotionally charged but lacked any factual substance. Our “sovereignty” hasn’t changed. The NHS didn’t get any additional funding. Trade deals have gotten worse not better. The whole thing was just smoke and mirrors. Literally the only thing the referendum was sincere about, was David Cameron’s desire to consolidate votes and reduce the number of his own MPs leaving for other right-wing parties. He succeeded at that, but its cost the economy literally billions.
rkosk 2y ago
Victoria didn't decree anything. There was a commission set up by the government a year or two before the Great Exhibition to oversee things and the purchasing of land and funding for construction was subject to parliamentary debate and approval. Your comment about the Mulberry harbours is quite baffling. Are you seriously suggesting that a modern day military operation on the scale of Overlord would be subject to local consultations?
- crop_rotation 2y ago
  > Victoria didn't decree anything. I think there is a tradition in the UK to assign all government actions to be by the crown. As if the crown takes decisions on everything and everyone else just recommends.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    … No, insofar as anything like that exists it’s the _crown_, not the person, but no, no-one really thinks of it like that.
ignoramous 2y ago
> Savehydepark.com would be a domain in seconds Right... https://www.savewimbledonpark.org/ https://www.savewimbledonpark.org/
rsynnott 2y ago
> Queen Victoria simply decreed, and it was done People seem to get incredibly confused about British constitutional history… No she didn’t, don’t be silly, she wasn’t a dictator. About the only European monarch who could got around decreeing stuff left right and center in this period was the Russian tsar; there just weren’t that many absolute monarchs left. You’re correct that they didn’t have, like, modern planning law, but it was nothing to do with Victoria.
tim333 2y ago
>Opponents of the scheme lobbied strenuously against the use of Hyde Park (and they were strongly supported by The Times). The most outspoken critic was Charles Sibthorp; he denounced the exhibition as "one of the greatest humbugs, frauds and absurdities ever known" (reaction from 1851, wikipedia)
lostlogin 2y ago
> The mulberry harbours were built in a day with scant regard to the views of the locals. One lasted just weeks before it was destroyed in a storm. The other did better, and was used for 10 months. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbours https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbours