I refer to the article Labour Calls On Mepa To Protect Old Part Of University (September 23). The true facts are the following. The concrete elements of the library screen have been a source of difficulty for some time. A number of years ago, cracking and spalling in the concrete elements that support the ceramic screen were observed. In 1994, the University decided to carry out remedial work, which it entrusted to Prof. Alex Torpiano.
Unfortunately, the way the screen was built precluded the removal of the ceramic screen to allow either complete repair or even replacement of the concrete elements. The intervention that was carried out more than 13 years ago was therefore not ideal, since not all the affected parts could be addressed. Nevertheless, the intervention added another 13 years to the life of the screen. Cracks continued to appear in various parts of the screen since, but over 2007, it became apparent that the situation was becoming dangerous, since pieces of concrete were coming off and could potentially hurt users of the library.
In accordance with current legislation, in August 2007 Prof. Torpiano wrote to Mepa to advise about the dangerous situation arising from the structural condition of the existing reinforced concrete elements forming part of the library sunscreen.
In accordance with statutory procedures, Mepa satisfied itself that the situation was such that it put at risk the health and safety of students and staff alike, and issued an authorisation to remove the screen, (Ref DS 0112-07). However, Mepa also advised the University that the replacement of the said screen had to be covered by a formal application and a full development permit.
Accordingly, the University first of all took action to ensure that, in the interim, all visibly spalling parts around the entrance area were removed so that there would be no risk of such parts falling on users of the library.
Secondly, the University applied for a full development permit to replace the damaged screen, and is currently awaiting the determination of this application. (Ref PA 01402/08). It is important to emphasise that no works have taken place that are not authorised by Mepa. It is likewise necessary to point out that the deadline for determination of this application, in accordance with the Development Planning Act, was end of June this year.
The original design, way back in 1968, of the new library building was in itself very controversial, as was the whole project. The use of a concrete and ceramic screen for the library was a much-discussed issue.
Those in favour saw it as an innovative way of protecting the books from light and heat without creating a completely closed environment. This was, of course, long before the days of air-conditioning. Those against saw it as a heavy-handed external solution to a problem that could have been solved inside the building.
The opening came and went, thousands of students have studied under its roof, the discussions have faded, and the University acknowledges that the library building had become an iconic landmark.
Forty years on, however, it turns out that the innovative technique used had its limitations. The concrete parts of the screen have undergone various attempts at restoration, but the slenderness of the elements and the quality of concrete available then, have combined to lead to a situation in which the concrete is now deteriorating rapidly (and not only in the concrete elements supporting the ceramic screen).
Sadly, it is simply not possible to rebuild the structure to its original design. It was not possible to salvage the ceramic elements, because of the way they were assembled, nor was it possible to procure new ceramic elements, and to re-build. Even if this were possible, it is surely not wise to repeat a technique, which although intrinsically innovative, has proved much less durable than the other buildings designed and erected during the same period in the University.