Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Castle in co Laois demolished :O
Comments
-
AngryHippie wrote: »You have pretty much ended your own argument there.
The county archaeologist is consulted on the archaeological impact of planning and development.
There was no safe way to salvage the structure in question here without putting lives at risk. I know it might clash with your save the monument ethos, but human life comes first.
I normally stay out of these argumentative threads but I have to take you up on that. A safe solution can always be found, it may be expensive but there is always a way. Without physically having visited the site after the damage occurred and before it was knocked, I can't present you with a solution but to be honest it actually didn't look that bad from the pictures (and hence not that expensive). As others have said - there are other castles in worse repair still standing.0 -
I normally stay out of these argumentative threads but I have to take you up on that. A safe solution can always be found, it may be expensive but there is always a way. Without physically having visited the site after the damage occurred and before it was knocked, I can't present you with a solution but to be honest it actually didn't look that bad from the pictures (and hence not that expensive). As others have said - there are other castles in worse repair still standing.
It's not about the state of repair, it was in a state of partial collapse, leading to the remaining walls effectively being left without any bracing whatsoever. Due to the fact that it's adjacent a trafficked driveway, and not far from a dwelling, it would pose a serious risk to human life in the state it was in.
As for a "safe" solution for dealing with the structure as it was after the storm, yes there would have been one, which would have involved working on it from above with boom lifts, out of the way of potential collapse to put braces on the remaining structure, with the aim of putting a full bracing frame on it to stabilize the remains. Big cranes, Big Steel Sections, Big Expense What you would have been left with, would have taken weeks, tens of tonnes of steel, and would only have preserved the partially collapsed remains of 3 walls. not really justifiable as a solution.
Aside from the fact that funds from public coffers are urgently needed just about everywhere else.
The decision was made by someone somewhere, that the required work could not be performed in a timely or financially feasible way, should that person have to explain their decision, Yes. Should this be treated as some sort abominable act of desecration ? not really, It's hysterical carry on.Its baffling that you can agree with the decision without even knowing if it was done legally. BTW you don't know its dangerous. It needs assessment for that to be established.
BTW, I can tell you with certainty from the photographs given, that a 13th Century norman tower with serious longitudinal structural cracking, a partial collapse due to high wind, and saturated mortar will be an extremely dangerous structure. Saying that it's uncertain is utter numptidity. It is as self evident as the piano over Wylie Coyote's head. Safety would be land in the realm of luck and good timing. Not good enough for construction in the 21st Century.
You have to be realistic and have a priority on the monuments you can save. If saving this was at the expense of vital repairs/stabilisation to a dozen other examples, would you still be singing out about it ?
Or would you be whining about the NMS and council blowing the money saving this one while a dozen other fell apart ? And before you dismiss this as a strawman, keep in mind that it is a real decision that every effort at conservation under budgetary constraints faces. You cannot save them all. Sometimes nature makes the choice.0 -
Make you sick to think a fraction of the monies pissed away on the Moriarty Tribunal and other such nonsense would make places like this safe to enjoy again, this stupid country does not respect the past.0
-
If a wall being free-standing is sufficient justification for knocking then there are hundreds of structures up and down the length of Ireland that ought to be knocked.AngryHippie wrote: »It's not about the state of repair, it was in a state of partial collapse, leading to the remaining walls effectively being left without any bracing whatsoever. Due to the fact that it's adjacent a trafficked driveway, and not far from a dwelling, it would pose a serious risk to human life in the state it was in.
The safest and cheapest solution would be fencing the structure off and adjusting the driveway a few metres south in his garden or if necessary into the next-door field. I have looked at maps of the area and this would have been a simple straight forward solution.
I am sick to death of this ruthlessly arrogant approach to heritage. The National Monuments Act is not a guideline. Avoiding destroying historic sites is not a charitable act or being nice. It is a moral and legal responsibility. It does not matter if it means losing a few metres of garden or arable land. The national (cultural and scientific) interest takes precedent.0 -
If a wall being free-standing is sufficient justification for knocking then there are hundreds of structures up and down the length of Ireland that ought to be knocked.
The safest and cheapest solution would be fencing the structure off and adjusting the driveway a few metres south in his garden or if necessary into the next-door field. I have looked at maps of the area and this would have been a simple straight forward solution.
I am sick to death of this ruthlessly arrogant approach to heritage. The National Monuments Act is not a guideline. Avoiding destroying historic sites is not a charitable act or being nice. It is a moral and legal responsibility. It does not matter if it means losing a few metres of garden or arable land. The national (cultural and scientific) interest takes precedent.
Second that mate0 -
Advertisement
-
If a wall being free-standing is sufficient justification for knocking then there are hundreds of structures up and down the length of Ireland that ought to be knocked.
The safest and cheapest solution would be fencing the structure off and adjusting the driveway a few metres south in his garden or if necessary into the next-door field. I have looked at maps of the area and this would have been a simple straight forward solution.
But unless the structure is stabilized, what will this have accomplished ?
It will have isolated the danger zone, wonderful, but that doesn't mean that the structure itself is any safer from further collapse, or that it can be preserved for a definite period of time.
So you would advocate spending tens of thousands of euro on fencing and re-routing a driveway to achieve......nothing.
Can you see where I am coming from here ?
Those tens of thousands of dollars will come from the purse that has to pay for preservation of the ones that can be saved.
My point is that they cannot all be saved. Not with finite resources, some people on here seem to disagree with that. Unfortunately they seem to working on a false assumption that all of the structures are of equal importance and value, and that there are resources to deal with all of them ?
Yes, I agree that the decision making process on demolishing the structure seems to have been very brief, and not so comprehensive, and that measures should be taken to improve on that and prevent it happening in this way again.
On the other hand, will it happen again.....definitely. Is there any way of avoiding it ? probably not.0 -
Its remarkable that you can say that without any formal assessment of the building. ...
Lots of statements but no evidence. Even if it was as dangerous as you claim there is no reason that due process should be avoided. .
+1
Could the Higher section of the building have been knocked with the lower section remaining in place for study and assessment ?
We'll never know.
Could one, two, or sections of facades have been saved, thereby making study and possible preservation of some of the building possible ?
We'll never know.
When I bought my house, if I had listened to the architect and the first builder who saw it, it would have been immediately pulled down (it was old and hadn't been lived in in years).
Aren't I glad I promptly requested the services of a builder with a different outlook.
It was a hasty decision.
It is easy to retreat behind statements about safety when the building is now rubble.
edit : completely agree with robp btw.
A driveway is just that, a flipping driveway for heaven's sake.
One could argue that placing a driveway along the castle walls was a wrong decision to start with. After all, how old exactly is this driveway ? Was the castle in spick and span condition when the driveway was freshly covered with tar and chip ?
The house is not within a perimeter that would make it unsafe should the castle have tumbled down as far as I can see. In fact, the castle did tumble and without damage to the house.
By securing the area, you would have bought time to think of solutions, to possibly knock some sections (or let them naturally crumble), and then come back and presumably get to work on the stronger sections that would have remained.
If indeed the standing sections of the structure were so close to collapsing, is there a chance some lesser action than boomlifts might have done the job ?
Oh wait, we'll never know.0 -
It sets a precedent. .thats all...I wonder how long before 'little jonnie' from next door is building on /beside the bulldozed castle..not long id guess0
-
AngryHippie wrote: »
My point is that they cannot all be saved. Not with finite resources, some people on here seem to disagree with that. Unfortunately they seem to working on a false assumption that all of the structures are of equal importance and value, and that there are resources to deal with all of them ?
...
On the other hand, will it happen again.....definitely. Is there any way of avoiding it ? probably not.
I completely disagree with this outlook. Imo :
When something is not right, we try to fix it.
We do not simply shake our heads and move on, crucially not when it concerns heritage.
That a weather event should take its toll is natural, and something that can be accepted.
The weather event did not flatten the castle however, the local authorities did.
Had a 4 meter high base section of the castle remained, a footprint of it, it would still have held an interest, and have been of some historical value. There are many 4 meter high, consolidated at reasonable cost chapels, ancient churches, houses, and castle foundations in Ireland. Are they uninteresting and of no value ?0 -
AngryHippie wrote: »It will have isolated the danger zone, wonderful, but that doesn't mean that the structure itself is any safer from further collapse, or that it can be preserved for a definite period of time.
So you would advocate spending tens of thousands of euro on fencing and re-routing a driveway to achieve......nothing.
Those tens of thousands of dollars will come from the purse that has to pay for preservation of the ones that can be saved.
My point is that they cannot all be saved.
None of the posts since have addressed the elephant in the room - If money is spent on this one, with no guarantee of any success, then there is less money to spend on others.
Call it what you like but it boils down to a .....waste of money.
It doesn't matter how much you agree or disagree with it, the cold hard reality is you need to use the resources you have efficiently to achieve the best result. It's up to the NMS and Local Council and OPW to make these decisions, if you aren't satisfied with the job they do, get on to your representatives about it.
It's not a particularly proud point of Irish behavior, but for generations, many elements of our heritage have been subject to head-shaking and subsequent moving on. To suggest that it hasn't sounds like a touch of denial to be honest.We do not simply shake our heads and move on, crucially not when it concerns heritage.
By all means, try and fix it, don't be happy about it, raise a stink, but do it in a productive way ?
As for precedents, I'd be more upset about the monuments that there aren't similar examples of....
Regarding Little Johnny next door building on it, That might be a step to far in your extrapolations.0 -
Advertisement
-
Just a quick point,
Regarding the access road beside the castle, who did that belong to?
If it belonged to the Castle estate then the house owner should have built a separate entrance way, if the drive-way belonged to the house holder, then they should have had the common sense to build it further away because the castle would have been unstable anyway, finally, how come the property owner was allowed to lay a driveway so close to a historic site/monument in the first place?
"There is a special place in Hell for those who selfishly destroy history for they're own personal gain"0 -
Now that the damage has been done, could the stones not be used to restore other buildings of the same age/type in the same area(same stone)?
Don't tell me that all those lovely corner stones and possibly other carved lintels etc are going to be used as hardcore.What will happen to the 'rubble'?.0 -
AngryHippie wrote: »None of the posts since have addressed the elephant in the room - If money is spent on this one, with no guarantee of any success, then there is less money to spend on others.
Call it what you like but it boils down to a .....waste of money.
It doesn't matter how much you agree or disagree with it, the cold hard reality is you need to use the resources you have efficiently to achieve the best result. It's up to the NMS and Local Council and OPW to make these decisions, if you aren't satisfied with the job they do, get on to your representatives about it.
This is the issue though here, it was my understanding that NMS had more of an input in these decisions (directly related to the retaining of a historical structure) than the council. This did not happen. NMS recommended to retain what could be saved, Council took the decision to flatten it. NMS did not have a chance to assess potential cost of potential consolidating measures, so the decision to spend money on it or not did not arise, not from the concerned body.
This is what I and others on here are not happy about, this is what we are speaking out about.
I'm French so not really in denial about the lack of protection for heritage in Ireland, but appalled at the poor record.It's not a particularly proud point of Irish behavior, but for generations, many elements of our heritage have been subject to head-shaking and subsequent moving on. To suggest that it hasn't sounds like a touch of denial to be honest.
Again I don't take it for granted that because that's the way it's always been, that's the way something is going to remain.By all means, try and fix it, don't be happy about it, raise a stink, but do it in a productive way ?
Drawing attention to, giving due importance to, and talking about a problem is/are a productive way(s) to ensure that the problem may be fixed in the future.
Mobilisation on social networks for example, is a valid way to highlight a problem, and people's concerns about an issue.
In fact, the above are probably the most powerful tools to let State representatives know what our concerns are at this moment in time. Along with email, or maybe a call into a clinic.
By talking about, and drawing attention to an issue first, though, we can add weight to our arguments since not just one concerned, isolated person is going to call to a state representative clinic, or email them, but a more meaty portion of the population can ask for representation/support.
So really, since as has been rightly pointed out :
~ there is already a very handy list of historical monuments and places in Ireland for people to go inspect,
and
~ since it's not really the general public's job (and it is kind of dangerous that they should) to go inspect and assess such monuments for state of conservation,
>> that part of the job to be done, that would probably appear more "productive" to you, is not really something that I can or should do.0
Advertisement