1st March 2007, 02:45 PM
Maybe this indicates that there is a potential need for some form of cross-funding on schemes such as this one, which has led to the retention and reuse of a Scheduled Monument, rather than letting some deluded/inspired family put their entire financial future on the line. OK - so now they have a nice house etc, but it could easily have gone horribly wrong.
Was I right in thinking that at the end of the job the castle had been de-scheduled but remained listed ?
I though that EH did very well in the circumstances, especially in allowing the roof terrace. It was a bit unfair to portray them as having been dragged kicking and screaming into the concept of restoration as opposed to fossilisation, as EH themselves have been advocating this approach for some time now.
Of course on the matter of H & S, how did the stonemasons think that they could prop up the inner wall of two planks and a couple of accros - makes archaeologists look postively virtuous.
Beamo
Was I right in thinking that at the end of the job the castle had been de-scheduled but remained listed ?
I though that EH did very well in the circumstances, especially in allowing the roof terrace. It was a bit unfair to portray them as having been dragged kicking and screaming into the concept of restoration as opposed to fossilisation, as EH themselves have been advocating this approach for some time now.
Of course on the matter of H & S, how did the stonemasons think that they could prop up the inner wall of two planks and a couple of accros - makes archaeologists look postively virtuous.
Beamo