Kimball Castle Fire

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

According to the news report it says "the floors ceilings and roof collapsed in the fire"...Correct me if I'm wrong but the floors ceilings and roof have been collapsed for many years or did the new owners actually get that far in renovations??...

The pictures I am seeing on the news look exactly the way I last remember seeing it a few years ago...

Dan

We looked at it quite a few years ago when it was on the market, it was a wreck then. There were some shaky stairs going up to the second floor and a catwalk around, but nothing I would dare walk on. There is no roof except for one turret that had a small one left. Daresay it was ready for a wrecking ball then, I can't imagine it has gotten any better!

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by codeman671

We looked at it quite a few years ago when it was on the market, it was a wreck then. There were some shaky stairs going up to the second floor and a catwalk around, but nothing I would dare walk on. There is no roof except for one turret that had a small one left. Daresay it was ready for a wrecking ball then, I can't imagine it has gotten any better!

That's pretty much exactly how I remember it! I definitely remember no roof at all!

Dan

[codeman671]

They didn't waste any time; it has already been leveled. Just a pile of rubble now.

[tis]

Originally Posted by codeman671

They didn't waste any time; it has already been leveled. Just a pile of rubble now.

Wow, really? That's sad.

[Weekend Pundit]

Originally Posted by codeman671

They didn't waste any time; it has already been leveled. Just a pile of rubble now.

What was left was unsound now that the interior support was gone. Once the State Fire Marshal had finished examining the wreckage as part of their investigation it was knocked down as per the Building Inspector's recommendation as what was left of the castle was very unstable.The last thing anyone needed was for some curiosity seeker to be hurt or killed while poking around inside.

[BroadHopper]

Back in the 70s after the auction, a multimillionaire offered to renovate the place to its former glory and will it to the trust for future use. The only thing he ask was to live in it until death. Of course, the estate says no. It's a damn shame.

[Riviera]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Back in the 70s after the auction, a multimillionaire offered to renovate the place to its former glory and will it to the trust for future use. The only thing he ask was to live in it until death. Of course, the estate says no. It's a damn shame.

I can’t speak to the multimillionaire, but the trust and estate issues were (and are) much more complex. Originally, Lockes Hill and the castle property were deeded by Kimball heirs to a public trust, with the stipulation that both be open to the public in perpetuity. The trust ran out of funding for maintenance, and tried to give control to the Town, in exchange for funding. The Town declined the offer. Ultimately, the State Atty General (who oversees trusts) granted approval for a private sale of the castle property (excluding the Lockes Hill land), subject to a restoration plan for an Inn that would be open to the public. The owners of the Red Hill Inn acquired the property, and sought investors for the renovation, including a long (and expensive) new driveway off Route 11. The residential structure was to be a caretakers facility. The restoration plan wasn’t economically viable, and eventually the property sold to somebody else.

The issue is that the stipulation to restore the castle, and make it open to the public, still exists. Further, the entirety of the property (not just the castle) is subject to the National Register of Historic Places, which is administered by the State Office of Historic Preservation. Under the laws, if more than an acre of land is disturbed, an EPA Stormwater Permit is required, which triggers approval requirements from the State Office of Historic Preservation. That approval can be long and arduous, with unknown standards to gain approval. (Same issue with the Weirs Drive In). There is a lot more to the story, but the quick synopsis above is reasonable summary.

Ultimately, the owner of the property is going to need to deal with both the Trust stipulations imposed by the State AG, along with historic issues, if they ever want to use the property for much other than a caretakers residence, particularly if they want to disturb more than an acre of land. It will most probably never be developed for private use beyond the caretakers home. A use open to the public is plausible, but the State is going to impose some pain, particularly given that private ownership let the castle fall into such a state of disrepair.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Riviera

I can’t speak to the multimillionaire, but the trust and estate issues were (and are) much more complex. Originally, Lockes Hill and the castle property were deeded by Kimball heirs to a public trust, with the stipulation that both be open to the public in perpetuity. The trust ran out of funding for maintenance, and tried to give control to the Town, in exchange for funding. The Town declined the offer. Ultimately, the State Atty General (who oversees trusts) granted approval for a private sale of the castle property (excluding the Lockes Hill land), subject to a restoration plan for an Inn that would be open to the public. The owners of the Red Hill Inn acquired the property, and sought investors for the renovation, including a long (and expensive) new driveway off Route 11. The residential structure was to be a caretakers facility. The restoration plan wasn’t economically viable, and eventually the property sold to somebody else.

The issue is that the stipulation to restore the castle, and make it open to the public, still exists. Further, the entirety of the property (not just the castle) is subject to the National Register of Historic Places, which is administered by the State Office of Historic Preservation. Under the laws, if more than an acre of land is disturbed, an EPA Stormwater Permit is required, which triggers approval requirements from the State Office of Historic Preservation. That approval can be long and arduous, with unknown standards to gain approval. (Same issue with the Weirs Drive In). There is a lot more to the story, but the quick synopsis above is reasonable summary.

Ultimately, the owner of the property is going to need to deal with both the Trust stipulations imposed by the State AG, along with historic issues, if they ever want to use the property for much other than a caretakers residence, particularly if they want to disturb more than an acre of land. It will most probably never be developed for private use beyond the caretakers home. A use open to the public is plausible, but the State is going to impose some pain, particularly given that private ownership let the castle fall into such a state of disrepair.

Who would want to go through all that? It's hard enough to get permitting without all that extra.

[Weekend Pundit]

Unofficially, it appears the fire may have been set by 'kids' trespassing on the property. No word on whether the fire started outside or inside the castle.

I have also heard 'talk' that it might have been a hit team from a town on the other side of the lake who didn't like the idea of there being two castles on the lake, so they boated across the lake during the early morning hours and launched a balsa wood drone carrying some kind of liquid fuel which crashed into the castle and ignited.

But it's only a rumor...

[BroadHopper]

Rivera is right. Too much red tape. I was also told by local sources that a certain lawyer that once lived on the road to the castle did not want traffic on the road and made sure that the castle did not get developed.

[Weekend Pundit]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Rivera is right. Too much red tape. I was also told by local sources that a certain lawyer that once lived on the road to the castle did not want traffic on the road and made sure that the castle did not get developed.

One of the last site plans brought forward by the owners included a driveway from Rte. 11 up to the grounds of the Castle, the driveway being a switchback style. That certainly would have reduced any traffic on Locke's Hill Road.

[TiltonBB]

Gilford Police have applied for search warrants for the electronic devices belonging to three "people of interest".

From the Laconia Sun:

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...443c34c3a.html

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Gilford Police have applied for search warrants for the electronic devices belonging to three "people of interest".

From the Laconia Sun:

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...443c34c3a.html

I'm neither a detective nor a criminal mastermind, but if I wanted to search somebody's house or phone, I don't think I'd be broadcasting in advance

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I'm neither a detective nor a criminal mastermind, but if I wanted to search somebody's house or phone, I don't think I'd be broadcasting in advance

I'm guessing that location history and access to text history is under the umbrella they're seeking that may be permanent/non-erasable data?

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk