Re: Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!
The appellant body you presumably refer to is an environmental charity and so, like yourself, doesn’t have limitless funds. It doesn’t do crummy appeals though 🙂
it’s your post-match reaction that came across a bit Eamon Dunphy. It seemed like you couldn’t wait to jump in there with your bucket of cold water when we’d only just got a bit of a celebratory bonfire going.
Ok, ok congratulations. Yes, absolutely, the various parties involved should deservedly celebrate! It wasn’t the intention to throw cold water or anything like that ….. perhaps just jaded from the umpteenth DCC decision on a sensitive site beaten into shape by BP.
‘twin Billy’ analysis of no. 32 . . . knowing how deeply this troubles you
Speak for yourself !!!!
In fact also, I rather thought that I had gone out of my way not to mention that the second inspector found the ‘twin Billy’ analysis of no. 32 ”very convincing”
Ok well you know my feelings there and we really shouldn’t go back into that. A related point which might be made at this moment is that 32 Thomas Street doesn’t appear on Rocque, 1756. There’s a distincly different configuration of buildings in that location, confirming my own feeling that it’s not an early building. And Rocque is known to be pretty accurate – see here
issues with Harcourt Terrace Garda Station ……. why don’t you stick it up for comment.