Cultural heritage being concreted over

Voodoo_rasher

in LImerick according to this..

http://bocktherobber.com/2011/03/obliterating-hidden-georgian-limerick/comment-page-1#comment-120334

how can this be permitted to continue? If you read this, tell somebody who will listen. If he or she is Sen. D Norris , even better. thanks

ScumLord

It's so important to preserve our dilapidated shitholes, they're becoming so rare these days as the rest of the world builds modern technologically sound building and structures to replace them. We can be a mucky example of how bad things can be when your using outdated buildings and technology so our bills can be ten times the cost of other countries.

prinz

I totally knew that there were underground vaults under some of the streets of Limerick. We should totally keep them... and do.... something with them.... a better use that we just can't put our finger on right now..

Maybe Bock could start a campaign to have something done with the dump above street level first.

DrumSteve

That sure is a lot of concrete.

CreepingDeath

Voodoo_rasher wrote: »

If you read this, tell somebody who will listen. If he or she is Sen. D Norris , even better. thanks

Yes, Sen. D. Norris is very interested in holes being filled by workmen.

Voodoo_rasher

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Yes, Sen. D. Norris is very interested in holes being filled by workmen.

i shouldn't inwardly snigger

(but i did)

pragmatic1

Its the Irish way OP. Its why half the country is covered in ugly bungalows and soulless estates. Meanwhile the British preserve their buildings and their villages and towns look much better than ours.

Insect Overlord

The writer of that blog fails to recognise that the vaults, arches and tunnels were no longer secure enough to maintain the weight of traffic that William Street has been and will be dealing with. A similar problem was discovered a few hundred yards away on Sarsfield Street during works last year. It's one of the busiest streets in the city centre. Keeping the current structures would probably have led to the road collapsing in on itself within the foreseeable future.

Duggy747

Just cover Limerick in a concrete dome, all is well then :pac:

Dravokivich

Limerick city has no architect, no conservation officer, no heritage officer and no archaeologist. Therefore, this decision was made by some unaccountable, ill-informed philistine.

Quoted from the article...

...I wonder if they checked with the council why this was being done.

pragmatic1

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Its the Irish way OP. Its why half the country is covered in ugly bungalows and soulless estates. Meanwhile the British preserve their buildings and their villages and towns look much better than ours.

You realise it's underground yeah? And nobody has seen them in years?

Guill

Besides the link, is there any concrete evidence that this is going ahead?

Dravokivich

Guill wrote: »

Besides the link, is there any concrete evidence that this is going ahead?

there's a video, but I'm not too convinced by how it's set...

Guill

This thread paved the way for alot of bad puns.

krudler

where are the Mole Men going to get drunk now?

admiralofthefleet

the whole of limerick should be covered in concrete, a lá chernobyl

Voodu Child

Im mortarfied that this has been allowed to happen.

pragmatic1

Deleted User wrote: »

You realise it's underground yeah? And nobody has seen them in years?

Yes, I'm aware the article is in relation to underground structures. I just wanted to make the wider point that we dont preserve things of value in this country. I've seen people knock down really beautiful old buildings and just build an ugly bungalow in its place.

ScumLord

krudler wrote: »

where are the Mole Men going to get drunk now?

they can use either the new sewer system (I'm assuming Limerick has one and they haven't just blocked up their sewer system without making a new one) or use one of our many fine ghost estates.

Screaminmidget

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Yes, I'm aware the article is in relation to underground structures. I just wanted to make the wider point that we dont preserve things of value in this country. I've seen people knock down really beautiful old buildings and just build an ugly bungalow in its place.

What value do these underground structures have exactly?

ScumLord

Screaminmidget wrote: »

What value do these underground structures have exactly?

They're a great place to pour a load of concrete if your into watching concrete set.

Bock the Robber

Insect Overlord wrote: »

The writer of that blog fails to recognise that the vaults, arches and tunnels were no longer secure enough to maintain the weight of traffic that William Street has been and will be dealing with. A similar problem was discovered a few hundred yards away on Sarsfield Street during works last year. It's one of the busiest streets in the city centre. Keeping the current structures would probably have led to the road collapsing in on itself within the foreseeable future.

Really? Do you have data on that?

Insect Overlord

Bock the Robber wrote: »

Really? Do you have data on that?

Trying to find more, but this is the best I've got for now.

http://www.limerickpost.ie/index.php/navigation-mainmenu-30/local-news/2049-sarsfield-street-works-spring-surprises.html

Bock the Robber

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Trying to find more, but this is the best I've got for now.

http://www.limerickpost.ie/index.php/navigation-mainmenu-30/local-news/2049-sarsfield-street-works-spring-surprises.html

That appears to be a report about Sarsfield Street, and the effect of tidal water on the stability of some arches. If you look again, you'll see that the post quoted is about William Street which is above the level of the river, and unaffected by the issues mentioned in the newspaper.

You seemed fairly certain that the William Street arches are in imminent danger of collapse. What leads you to that opinion? Do you have a view on the potential mechanism of failure?

dr gonzo

Screaminmidget wrote: »

What value do these underground structures have exactly?

Cultural value i think is what the OP was going for. It is sad to see any part of our past get covered with concrete but assuming Insect Overlords info is correct then safety is safety or indeed progress is progress.

Similar was done in Cork many years ago. Many of the streets here began as open channels that were arched over. Over time the arches deteriorate. At one point a section of the South Mall collapsed. This is why the arches are filled with concrete.

I think we have other things to worry about at the moment besides preserving sewers.

Insect Overlord

I am not privy to any information besides what's already known.

I surmised that William Street would probably suffer similar trouble to what was discovered just down the road last year. Considering the bus traffic it gets on the side that just got filled with concrete, and the plans to direct traffic from O'Connell Street up William Street from next year on, it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility that there would be concerns about the structures' continued effectiveness. Re-enforcing the foundations should prevent any such trouble.

Bock the Robber

James -- They're not sewers. Perhaps a little further reading might be in order before dismissing them.

IO -- Arches are inherently stable, as the Romans discovered. These particular ones have stood happily for 200 years, and have carried more weight than they're currently asked to support, so I'm not quite sure what your concern is. Are you worried that the brick from which they're built is decomposing, or that the cumulative effect of traffic over the years might be having some sort of fatiguing effect on the structure?

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

James -- They're not sewers. Perhaps a little further reading might be in order before dismissing them.

IO -- Arches are inherently stable, as the Romans discovered. These particular ones have stood happily for 200 years, and have carried more weight than they're currently asked to support, so I'm not quite sure what your concern is. Are you worried that the brick from which they're built is decomposing, or that the cumulative effect of traffic over the years might be having some sort of fatiguing effect on the structure?

Arches are inherently stable- if they are Roman arches, i.e. a complete semi circle. Ellipitical arches like those pictured exert an outward thrust at their abbutments. Over time the abbutments move away from the centre of the arch and the arch can collapse. The heaviest thing these arches were made to carry was a horse and cart, there were no HGVs back then.

Do you really think they'll just leave them as is until the day they give way? Not a chance.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

Arches are inherently stable- if they are Roman arches, i.e. a complete semi circle. Ellipitical arches like those pictured exert an outward thrust at their abbutments. Over time the abbutments move away from the centre of the arch and the arch can collapse. The heaviest thing these arches were made to carry was a horse and cart, there were no HGVs back then.

On the contrary. Since these arches are thrusting against each other at their springings, they have a natural tendency to become stronger as more weight is added. This is a fundamental physical principle. Arches in this configuration can only fail if the material of which they're constructed crushes.

Screaminmidget

dr gonzo wrote: »

Cultural value i think is what the OP was going for. It is sad to see any part of our past get covered with concrete but assuming Insect Overlords info is correct then safety is safety or indeed progress is progress.

I wouldnt mind if the tunnels were open or if people even knew about them and were accessible, but the fact that they were closed and not many people cared suggests to me that they werent that significant in the first place...

Bock the Robber

Screaminmidget wrote: »

I wouldnt mind if the tunnels were open or if people even knew about them and were accessible, but the fact that they were closed and not many people cared suggests to me that they werent that significant in the first place...

What it suggests to me is that, as usual, we don't make the most of what we have.

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

On the contrary. Since these arches are thrusting against each other at their springings, they have a natural tendency to become stronger as more weight is added. This is a fundamental physical principle. Arches in this configuration can only fail if the material of which they're constructed crushes.

A: The arches have to end somewhere, and those end arches are vulnerable to the type of collapse I mentioned. This could lead to a situation of progressive collapse, with each arch collapsing in turn as the one outside it gives way.

B: Limestone mortar and clay bricks can turn to dust over time when exposed to moisture.

If the people who built those arches had access to concrete and a mixer truck you can be sure they would have done the exact same thing.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

A: The arches have to end somewhere, and those end arches are vulnerable to the type of collapse I mentioned.

B: Limestone mortar and clay bricks can turn to dust over time when exposed to moisture.

If the people who built those arches had access to concrete and a mixer truck you can be sure they would have done the exact same thing.

The arches have to end somewhere, and that's precisely the place to strengthen them if required, instead of demolishing everything. A neater, cheaper and more elegant solution, but one requiring skill and knowledge. Any monkey could come up with the solution currently being adopted because it required no understanding, no analysis, no judgement and no finesse.

Incidentally, I have to correct you about lime mortar, which performs better in moist conditions and suffers if allowed to dry out.


You make a very good case for abandoning all conservation everywhere in favour of utilitarian drabness.

dr gonzo

Screaminmidget wrote: »

I wouldnt mind if the tunnels were open or if people even knew about them and were accessible, but the fact that they were closed and not many people cared suggests to me that they werent that significant in the first place...

I know what you mean but at the same time the general publics access to a monument is probably not an appropriate means of judging its cultural importance, if that makes sense. Im not arguing for these mind, the simple fact of the modern world is that archaeology is precious but it cant always trump new development, especially in a scenario like this where it appears to be in a very central area. I just meant that its sad (albeit often necessary) to see little bits of culture get destroyed.

Bock the Robber

dr gonzo wrote: »

I know what you mean but at the same time the general publics access to a monument is probably not an appropriate means of judging its cultural importance, if that makes sense. Im not arguing for these mind, the simple fact of the modern world is that archaeology is precious but it cant always trump new development, especially in a scenario like this where it appears to be in a very central area. I just meant that its sad (albeit often necessary) to see little bits of culture get destroyed.

I don't know if people here are aware that many of these vaults are in everyday use by the houses and businesses on the streets where they exist.

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

The arches have to end somewhere, and that's precisely the place to strengthen them if required, instead of demolishing everything. A neater, cheaper and more elegant solution, but one requiring skill and knowledge. Any monkey could come up with the solution currently being adopted because it required no understanding, no analysis, no judgement and no finesse.


You make a very good case for abandoning all conservation everywhere in favour of utilitarian drabness.

Come on now, it's under the road and never ordinarily seen. Maintaining them would cost a fortune. This solution may not be the most elegant, but it's certainly the most effective.

Anyway, you've painted yourself into a corner on this one and are clearly not going to publicly change your mind.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

Come on now, it's under the road and never ordinarily seen. Maintaining them would cost a fortune. This solution may not be the most elegant, but it's certainly the most effective.

Anyway, you've painted yourself into a corner on this one and are clearly not going to publicly change your mind.

Could you explain how I've painted myself into a corner?

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

Could you explain how I've painted myself into a corner?

You came out strongly against this saying it was unnecessary and a terrible shame etc.

It's been pointed out that it is a structural necessity.

Instead of accepting this you've tried to pick holes in the engineering reasons behind it.

With strong confirmation bias, you've ignored evidence that contradicts your now entrenched position, while searching for evidence that supports it.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

You came out strongly against this saying it was unnecessary and a terrible shame etc.

It's been pointed out that it is a structural necessity.

Instead of accepting this you've tried to pick holes in the engineering reasons behind it.

With strong confirmation bias, you've ignored evidence that contradicts your now entrenched position, while searching for evidence that supports it.

You didn't make any engineering arguments. You made some unsupported assertions which I responded to rationally.

Now, let's just go back to two little fallacies you slipped in earlier.

First, you're mistaken in saying that the vaults are never ordinarily seen. In fact, as I pointed out, many of them are in daily use.

Secondly, perhaps you could come up with facts and figures about their maintenance instead of simply stating baldly that it would cost a fortune.

diddlybit

I find that actually quite sad. Was over in Manchester and you can walk through the old foundations and there is a chronological history of the city from the settlement until it was rebuilt in the 1990's. Why couldn't they have done something like that?

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

You didn't make any engineering arguments. You made some unsupported assertions which I responded to rationally.

Now, let's just go back to two little fallacies you slipped in earlier.

First, you're mistaken in saying that the vaults are never ordinarily seen. In fact, as I pointed out, many of them are in daily use.

Secondly, perhaps you could come up with facts and figures about their maintenance instead of simply stating baldly that it would cost a fortune.

Clay brick + lime mortar + moisture + time = dust

Sure they could be fixed up but it would cost a whole lot of money. Do I know exactly how much? No.

It is a shame they have to be destroyed in this way but there is no financially viable alternative.

As I said before, the same was done in Cork after sections of road started collapsing.

In this case they are making a pre emptive strike, a rare example of forward planning.

Would you like if it was you or one of your family that was passing over when they finally give way?

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

Clay brick + lime mortar + moisture + time = dust

Sure they could be fixed up but it would cost a whole lot of money. Do I know exactly how much? No.

It is a shame they have to be destroyed in this way but there is no financially viable alternative.

As I said before, the same was done in Cork after sections of road started collapsing.

In this case they are making a pre emptive strike, a rare example of forward planning.

Would you like if it was you or one of your family that was passing over when they finally give way?

Lime mortar not only survives better in moist conditions. It actually needs moisture. I thought you'd know that.

Anyway, I''m not too interested in a pissing contest. You raised a number of engineering concerns and I provided the appropriate answers. I don't intend to go into a dissertation on circular, elliptical and parabolic arches.

The pre-emptive strike undertaken by Limerick city council in this case is a clumsy, heavy-handed admission of defeat, in my opinion, and not something that any professional ought to be proud of. It's like shooting the patient to get rid of the headache.

Those arches are not just an archaeological curiosity. Used with imagination, they could have been, and still could be where they remain unvandalised, a valuable resource.

I don't know about you, James, but this town is where I grew up. I value my town and its heritage. For too long, our country was controlled by bean counters and look where that got us. Maybe it's time we got back to a place where we value things that aren't measurable on dials and gauges.

In other words, let's get back to being civilised, and start to value what we have before it's all gone.

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

Lime mortar not only survives better in moist conditions. It actually needs moisture. I thought you'd know that.

Anyway, I''m not too interested in a pissing contest. You raised a number of engineering concerns and I provided the appropriate answers. I don't intend to go into a dissertation on circular, elliptical and parabolic arches.

The pre-emptive strike undertaken by Limerick city council in this case is a clumsy, heavy-handed admission of defeat, in my opinion, and not something that any professional ought to be proud of. It's like shooting the patient to get rid of the headache.

Those arches are not just an archaeological curiosity. Used with imagination, they could have been, and still could be where they remain unvandalised, a valuable resource.

I don't know about you, James, but this town is where I grew up. I value my town and its heritage. For too long, our country was controlled by bean counters and look where that got us. Maybe it's time we got back to a place where we value things that aren't measurable on dials and gauges.

In other words, let's get back to being civilised, and start to value what we have before it's all gone.

I admire your idealism, I just don't think it's particularly feasible in this case. Stregthening old masonry arches to the point where you can be confident they can support HGVs and so on is very difficult, time consuming and expensive. I don't think the people of Limerick would be particularly happy to have large sections of the city's streets shut down for weeks on end so that subterran arches can be restored, when filling them with concrete is so much cheaper and faster.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

I admire your idealism, I just don't think it's particularly feasible in this case. Stregthening old masonry arches to the point where you can be confident they can support HGVs and so on is very difficult, time consuming and expensive. I don't think the people of Limerick would be particularly happy to have large sections of the cities streets shut down for weeks on end so that subterran arches can be restored, when filling them with concrete is so much cheaper and faster.

It isn't idealism. If anything, it's pragmatism, since these vaults could be used to generate money for the town. I'd be interested to see precisely what signs of failure have been observed in William Street. Are you aware of any?

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

It isn't idealism. If anything, it's pragmatism, since these vaults could be used to generate money for the town. I'd be interested to see precisely what signs of failure have been observed in William Street. Are you aware of any?

Yes, I have personally conducted several detailed surveys of all the arches under William Street. :P

Obviously I haven't, but, as I've said several times now, similar arches have collapsed before, leading to large sections of street disappearing into a hole in the ground. It is a known risk with this type of structure.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

Obviously I haven't, but, as I've said several times now, similar arches have collapsed before, leading to large sections of street disappearing into a hole in the ground. It is a known risk with this type of structure.

We can only deal with what's in front of us. Some of the commenters here have been quite specific in stating that the William Street arches are about to fall down, despite an apparent absence of evidence in support of that claim.

Normally, when making a categorical statement of this kind, the least one might expect is an empirical observation indicating that a problem exists.

Yes?

Bock the Robber

Bock the Robber wrote: »

We can only deal with what's in front of us. Some of the commenters here have been quite specific in stating that the William Street arches are about to fall down, despite an apparent absence of evidence in support of that claim.

Normally, when making a categorical statement of this kind, the least one might expect is an empirical observation indicating that a problem exists.

Yes?

What do you want? Pictures? Observing that similar structures have failed is an emperical observation.

I'm sure the council engineers have examined those arches and decided there is sufficient reason to go ahead with this.

Have you tried getting in touch with the council? Maybe you could speak to one of their engineers, they would know more about the specifics of the case.

Bock the Robber

Deleted User wrote: »

Observing that similar structures have failed is an emperical observation.

I'm afraid it isn't. That's simply an indication that it would be prudent to survey these ones.

Empirical observation happens when someone studies the arches in William Street to check for signs of failure.

Insect Overlord

Bock the Robber wrote: »

First, you're mistaken in saying that the vaults are never ordinarily seen. In fact, as I pointed out, many of them are in daily use.

They're in daily use for pub cellars and shop storage. They've never been used as a tourist attraction. The arches and tunnels are not ordinarily seen by pedestrians, tourists or motorists. What's rare is wonderful, so I doubt the people who do see them frequently marvel at their architectural soundness every day.

Bock the Robber wrote: »

I'd be interested to see precisely what signs of failure have been observed in William Street. Are you aware of any?

Not what you're looking for, but the proliferation of bargain/€2 Shops on that street certainly stinks of FAIL...

Bock the Robber wrote: »

Some of the commenters here have been quite specific in stating that the William Street arches are about to fall down, despite an apparent absence of evidence in support of that claim.

Perhaps I should have phrased my first response differently. That said, I did not suggest the road's stability was in immediate danger. By "foreseeable future" I was considering a 5-7 year time-frame. Admittedly I didn't clarify that at the time, but it's still incorrect to suggest I said we were in immediate peril!

Bock the Robber

Insect Overlord wrote: »

By "foreseeable future" I was considering a 5-7 year time-frame.

How did you calculate the figure of 5 to 7 years?