On Saturday afternoon, there is a second public meeting hosted by the Town Walls Trust, chaired by heritage expert Colin Richards CBE.
This has been called to give an update on discussions between the trust, the parochial parish council and the town council, along with Shropshire Council and Historic England.
A previous meeting chaired by Stuart Anderson MP, concluded that all parties should work together to work out how to fix the wall and how that might be financed. Who was legally responsible for the repairs was put to one side. When we don’t know what to do, how can we go forward?
Ludlow Town Council reserved its position on being involved at that meeting and has stated its position since. I am sure the council will have a strong presence on Saturday to explain how it will help the repair of the wall go forward 12 years after it fell.
The Morton Report (PDF 15.1MB) is central to the town walls debate. The Morton Report contains a series of technical reports which rehearse the history of the wall, explain its previous and present condition, examine archaeology and soil conditions, and sets out options for a repair. Influencing those options are several factors including that it acts as boundary to a historic graveyard, the properties nearby and the five closest hornbeams in the garden of rest. Explorations also show it wasn’t built as retaining wall but as the level of the churchyard rose, it became such.
Morton set out seven options for repair.
In conclusion Morton says on page 9ff, “It seems likely that the trigger for the collapse was a build-up of water in the sub-soil, which will add pressure and apply greater force to the wall.”
“Seven options have been presented in the report for consideration. Options A, B and C have significant impacts on the churchyard and burials and to the extent where we suspect they are not viable, either from impacts, costs or practical buildability difficulties.”
Morton says Option D appears to be viable. Option E and Option G appear to be viable. “Option F is probably the least interventionist option to the wall itself but has impacts on the churchyard” and needs other works.
“We do consider that it would be beneficial for the long term good of the wall that the trees are removed.”
No cost estimates are given for these options so it is not the source of Ludlow Town Council’s estimate “that the cost of the repair works will exceed £3 million pounds.” Even at current prices for heritage work, this seems a fantasy. Ludlow Town Council should publish or explain the source of this figure.
Those working to find the best option for a repair of the walls may chose one of the seven options or develop an alternative scheme. That’s fine. We need to get on with this. The energy, cost of staff bills and legal bills over 12 years would have made a decent contribution to the cost of repair.
Ludlow Town Council should stop running scared of the town walls and get fully engaged. Otherwise, we will be here in another 12 years time, arguing, not acting.
I urge everyone to come on Saturday to make their views known and hear what the heritage experts and the town council has to say. If we don’t act now, I don’t think repair of the town walls will ever happen and they will remain a blot on the landscape in Ludlow.
Dear Andy
Thank you for actually including a link to the Morton report and thus allowing us mear mortals who are paying for it, to actually read it ( why on earth was it kept secret )
one question not directly relevant to the repairs update on Saturday, but is there a procedure to hold LTC officers to account having produced that fictious figure of 3 million at the annual Town meeting?
The £3 million figure, given by Counillor Ginger, is probably not fictitious. We just don’t know where it came from as the town council regards everything about the town walls as top secret.