manxchatterbox Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 what a load of t**s - some bright spark in Douglas Corporation thought wouldn't it look good if we could refurbish the lights or replace them on the Tower of Refuge - well done.... then when the guys got out there and started to do some work they found that, no big surprise really if you think about it, the structure built in 1832 and sitting on a rock in the bay and exposed to stormy seas is crumbling and falling to bits.... You can almost here the cussing ..Oh s**t we only came out to put some lights up and we haven't any money to do repairs ..in any case does it belong to Douglas Corp? Hey I know lets try and get someone else to pay - like the RNLI surely it must be theirs - it was the idea of Sir William Hillary the RNLI's founder and he chipped in £25 to make sure the public subscription building fund had enough to get the Tower built...and if the RNLI don't hold there hand's up then lets stick it in the direction of Government...... So what happens.... the RNLI see a big bill heading their way so say "nothing to do with us - go away"... Govt DOT see a bill bill heading their way so say "its not ours, nothing to do with us - go away" Now the situation is the Corpy have high-lighted the Tower needs repairs... so its going to be a big squabble about who pays for the necessary work....with the Douglas Corporation looking favourite.... So whose idea was it for the Corpy guys to go out and put the lights up??? Lets have a name...'cos surely that is the person to whom the bill should be sent - which will serve to teach the sap to engage the brain before opening the mouth. In any case as the Tower was built using monies from public subscription...then surely a public subscription renovation fund should be opened...and whatever monies collected are used to do whatever can be done for the amount raised...if it means that not much is raised then that will be an indication that the Tower isn't thought to be worthy of saving and so just let nature take its course and eventually wipe it from Conister Rock... Whatever - Douglas Ratepayers shouldn't have to foot the bill. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Boring fact: My great, great, great grandfather was one of the men who actually constructed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumlin Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 So we can blame him then for its condition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxchatterbox Posted December 14, 2005 Author Share Posted December 14, 2005 so does that mean Ans is first in the queue to donate money to a restoration fund..or is happy to join a work party with sledgehammers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deejay Denzel Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Sell it to heritage who will be happy to build 174 apartments on the site and offer a great sea view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 In any case as the Tower was built using monies from public subscription...then surely a public subscription renovation fund should be opened...and whatever monies collected are used to do whatever can be done for the amount raised...if it means that not much is raised then that will be an indication that the Tower isn't thought to be worthy of saving and so just let nature take its course and eventually wipe it from Conister Rock... Whatever - Douglas Ratepayers shouldn't have to foot the bill. B) No way should we ever leave it to rot, get it fixed, don't care who pays. No doubt Douglas Corpy will spend £20-30k on "reports" "inspections" and "surveys" whilst they once again try to wriggle out of ever actually paying for something. It's in Douglas, what's wrong with ratepayers paying for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTool Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Now you know how we feel about the Iron pier in ramsey, another heritage site that has been left to disintergrate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripsaw Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Did Douglas Corpy obtain permission from the "owner" to install the lights, that would maybe establish responsibility for maintenence and upkeep. On a similar vien, the "keep it, lose it" arguement has been levied at Queens Pier for years and look at how far that debate has progressed in 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhumsaa Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 It won't join the Iron Pier as it is in Douglas so therefore far more important it should be saved though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Anyone got the vaguest idea what the restoration would cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puddy Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 I've never been to the Tower of Refuge so I have no idea what sort of condition it's in or what sort of condition it needs to be in. I mean, Peel Castle doesn't even have a roof and lots of the walls have fallen down over the years but it still does what it needs to do, which is look like a nice old ruin and not fall down on people's heads. Anyone know how bad the condition is? Are the walls actually crumbling? The reason I'm so interested is because if it's not as bad as they all seem to think it is, then they (whoever "they" are) can sell it to me for 25p and I'll fix it up. Then I'll move in and stick a barbed wire fence around Conister Rock and I'll tell any walkers who attempt the journey there at spring tide to get off my land and shoot their dogs for worrying my sheep. Then I'll kick you lot out of this thread for talking about my property and next Christmas I'll have a giant blow up Father Christmas stuck to the side of it and I'll outline it with musical coloured flashing fairy lights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speckled Frost Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 Sorry, but you can't really compare the Iron Pier. I'm no expert but I'd bet the pier would cost much more and was in a far worse state. And, let's be honest, the ToR is iconic, far more so than the pier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 info on the state of it and some pics here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhumsaa Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 You can compare the 2 as they are icons for their locations The Iron Pier will cost a lot more but it depends how you want to restore it.... also the ToR will never bring money back - the Iron Pier can (ok not it's cost I would suspect but something) The Iron Pier in Ramsey is the 6th longest Pier in Britain and could become a tourist attraction rather than a decaying monument to how little the Isle of Man cares about outside of the capital Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 14, 2005 Share Posted December 14, 2005 We've already lost one potential monument to Sir William Hillary - the Fort Anne that was his home, that became a hotel and, after being left to decay, was pulled down and replaced by offices. The Tower of Refuge - initiated by Sir William, built by public subscription funds, given it's name by William Wordsworth - is a worthy memorial to those who risked their lives saving others from shipwrecks and it ought to treasured. It is the first thing that most people see as they arrive on the island - something that everyone involved in the tourist trade has to know about, because questions are always asked. It is not the sixth largest/longest/highest anything - it is unique. It is an important part of our heritage - a genuine historical monument that belongs to the people of Mann. It must be restored! As to who pays - we do, through our taxes. The money can come from the budgets for the DoT and the DTL. It is certainly a more worthwhile project than providing comfort for the inhabitants of the 'Wedding Cake' and will almost certainly cost a great deal less! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.