Aren’t the Irish Independent Property Supplement a disgrace?
- This topic has 56 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
venividi.
- AuthorPosts
- April 8, 2005 at 10:07 pm #752480
Anonymous
InactiveThat particular scheme is particularly bad, if you look at 5 design types only two of them could even be considered pastiche the other three are very poor attempts at period replication. What makes a Country House is its setting; they need to be viewed from a distance across a parkland setting.
Thanks for posting the link Phil it really has opened a can of worms
April 8, 2005 at 11:49 pm #752481Anonymous
Inactive@DublinLimerick wrote:
Aren’t the Irish Independent Property Supplement a disgrace?
You appear to lack grammatical knowledge.
Absolutely. It is nearly as bad as someone saying DublinLimerick! 🙂
April 9, 2005 at 1:48 am #752482GrahamH
ParticipantDublinLimerick you cannot change the title of a thread after noticing an error. If you want to see some real grammatical blunders, visit Phil’s link above…
It also features ‘The Moorings’:

Thank goodness the picture’s that small. Despite what has been said about the ‘luxury’ estate above, I don’t think I’d go for the high density option either…
“The Moorings are a block of luxury apartments / duplex units overlooking the River Liffey designed with the emphasis on space and full use of the panoramic views of the surrounding countryside.”
Yes views from the building, clearly not of it.
April 9, 2005 at 2:21 am #752483Devin
ParticipantThat Nolan Brophy website certainly says a lot. Actually, I’ll just post it again in case Sue missed it;
SUE CLICK HERE: http://www.nolan-brophy.com/html/new_dev.htm#DublinLimerick, yes, I know perfectly well it would normally be “Isn’tâ€. I use “Aren’t†as in “Aren’t they?†because the preponderance of, and positive coverage of, period-style development in the I. I. supplement clearly reflects the group of people who put it together, and to distinguish it from the main paper, who have some good writers like Treacy Hogan and John S. Doyle.
More than anything when I flick through the I. I. property supplement, I find it hard to believe it is 2005. It’s more like we’re in the first wave of ‘Georgian-style’ building of 20-30 years ago (popularised, inadvertently, by the Irish Georgian Society’s campaigns to save real Georgian architecture), except it’s much more sinister now because the sale of development land is a business/income in itself, & all the other reasons mentioned already. It was full of crap again today!
It was the sick phraseology like “stunningly elegant country housesâ€, the building company being called ‘Surestone’ (you wouldn’t find one piece of real stone on those houses), and the parallel ignorance of planning issues that really got me about that I. I. piece. Incidentally, there’s no name on the article, but the name on the top of the page is Valerie McGrath, so I presume it is by her. Hard to believe this piece to appeared in her own paper a few months ago: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=3262
I know I’m stating the obvious here, but estates like ‘Carriglea’ are born out of a vicious circle of bad planning: – sprawl, one-off housing & its associated traffic generation reduce the liveability of urban centres, where the jobs are, resulting in the building of estates like this, supposedly ‘away from it all’. But, being car-dependent, they further reduce the liveability of urban centres & the area around them, generating more demand for estates and one-offs in quiet places. And so it goes on.…
April 9, 2005 at 3:02 am #752484GrahamH
ParticipantI’d agree about the Indo’s coverage of this type of development, and this type of architecture. I don’t want to name names of journalists, but I find coverage of ‘real’ Georgian equally fawning in the Independent’s pages, not least by a person previously mentioned here – with the most fruity of vocabulary applied to the most standard of Georgian and Victorian housing. They also constantly call Victorian housing Georgian.
But the fact that the same voluptuous language used to describe these ‘modern’ developments is applied in equal measure to the most stunning or architecturally significant of period properties makes so much of their supplement all the more preposterous.
April 9, 2005 at 12:02 pm #752485ctesiphon
Participant@DublinLimerick wrote:
Aren’t the Irish Independent Property Supplement a disgrace?
You appear to lack grammatical knowledge.
DL-
The thread title might lack grammatical correctness, but it is logically fallacious to state that its author lacks grammatical knowledge. How can you tell? Maybe (s)he chose not to use it? Maybe (s)he chose the deliberate mistake? (As seems to have been the case.)You want to get nit-picky? We can get nit-picky. I’d rather stick to the point of the thread. 😉
April 9, 2005 at 12:51 pm #752486burge_eye
ParticipantThe property sections of all the papers are the same. They don’t, however, purport to be anything but estate agents’ hardcopy. They aren’t “architectural” supplements although they do sometimes try to bring some innovative houses to our attention. The point is that newspapers make a lot of cold cash out of these supplements – they are, don’t forget, 20 pages of adverts. Newspapers, therefore, are not about to bite the hands that feed them. They only print what the Planning authorities allow to be built.
April 9, 2005 at 1:30 pm #752487hutton
Participant@Areaone wrote:
Sweet mother of Jesus!
I notice the date of the supplement is April 1st…….could it be an April Fools?……It must be suely!!
😮 Ooh my God, its not a joke after all as the link proves – http://www.nolan-brophy.com/html/new_dev.htm#
Still at prices starting “FROM €600,000”, sure isn’t it great value all the same if you want to be tied in to a shite quality of life and a 40 year mortgague. Yes indeed, 24 hours a week stuck in traffic for 600K. Pass me the bucket.
H
April 9, 2005 at 5:11 pm #752488burge_eye
Participant@Lotts wrote:
Shame on Damien Hughes.
That sure is one badly proportioned door.
Could be the very example of curved PVC that you were looking for though Grahamthis is a mid 18C house near where I live. They were neeearly right
April 9, 2005 at 5:38 pm #752489GrahamH
ParticipantBut not quite…
You make a good point about this type of stuff being in their interests, but the fact that it’s often not even kept off the front pages makes it quite ridiculous.
These articles just fuel demand for these developments: fanning the flames of bad architecture, bad planning and bad environmental practice.April 9, 2005 at 7:19 pm #752490hutton
ParticipantFYI – Also from the estate agents website:
“Killenard’s elevated location gives panoramic views over the Kildare Plains to the North and the Wicklow Mountains to the East. It is located in luscious and scenic countryside.The old road running through the village is one of the five ancient roads of Ireland known as the “Sli Dala†(way of the tribes) dating back to Pre-Christian times.
To the North of Killenard, the ruins of Lea Castle at the Barrow River are still visible and it was built in the 3rd Century being one of the more important Castles in Leinster at the time. Also beside the village is Carrig Hill where the first Earl of Portarlington erected a spire in the 1780’s and set the hill aside for the hunting and leisure activities of the local gentry.
In keeping with the area’s ancient history, the developer’s have taken the name of this development i.e. Carriglea from the above mentioned Lea Castle and Carrig Hill combining the two words into “Carrigleaâ€. On the edge of the village is the imposing Mount Henry (Mount St. Anne’s) built by the local Landlord’s the Skeffington-Smiths in 1820.
The entire region is steeped in fascinating history ranging from the ancient and once magnificent Fort at the Rock of Dunamaise (towards Portlaoise) dating from before 1200 listing Strongbow and the Sons of the King of Leinster as its occupants and probably dates back to pre – Celtic days. The nearby Emo Court residence dates back to 1790 and is a splendid architectural masterpiece designed by James Gandon (who designed the Customs House & Four Courts in Dublin). Now Emo Court is owned by the state with wonderful public walks on the adjoining grounds and woods which can be enjoyed by owners in Carriglea. A wonderful facility at your doorstep. “
April 10, 2005 at 8:22 pm #752491finlay
ParticipantSunday Indo even worse, very much driven by advertising ‘cheerleading’, editor strangely tries to infuse the selling pitch with details of his personal life, a la A A Gill or Clarkson but fails miserably. The danger of this misleading hyperbole is it creates a market among the readership, which, apparently is the hightest Sunday readership.
April 11, 2005 at 12:47 am #752492Spitzer
ParticipantWhatever you think about these houses and I have seen much more lavish old style houses there is a definite market for this type of house if there was no market no one would be building them. Personally I wouldn’t pay 600,000 euro plus for anything less than a shopping centre in Laois it is just too far from Dublin and traffic gets worse every year. What they don’t tell you in the ad is that Newlands Cross is worse than its ever been and please don’t get me started on the mad cow.
April 11, 2005 at 5:43 am #752493Devin
ParticipantMore from I. I. property supplement on Friday:

These are being advertised (in a separate ad on the page) as “period homes” – that warrants a complaint to the advertising standards authority.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Newly built? Well why is it for sale then? – some landowner fiddling the system.
The sales pitch reads like an An Bord Pleanala schedule for refusal of planning permission; ‘newly-built for sale’ (no occupancy clause); ‘dormer bungalow’ (obtrusive design); ‘elevated site’ (would have high visual impact on surrounding area)
April 11, 2005 at 9:14 am #752494tomfoster
Participant@finlay wrote:
Sunday Indo even worse, very much driven by advertising ‘cheerleading’, editor strangely tries to infuse the selling pitch with details of his personal life, a la A A Gill or Clarkson but fails miserably. The danger of this misleading hyperbole is it creates a market among the readership, which, apparently is the hightest Sunday readership.
Could not agree more with Finlay about the appaling Sindo supplement. Its even trashier than its weekday counterpart, showing a crass ignorance of all architecutal and heritage issues combined with supercilious schoolboy writing that is meant to pass as wit. If this is the largest circulation Sunday, god help Ireland.
April 11, 2005 at 11:07 am #752495GrahamH
ParticipantAh you’d have to love it all – lol
‘Decorative streetlighting is a distinguishing feature’
‘An impressive custom-made Georgian front door’
‘Unique rounded windows with plaster surrounds’
‘FIVE bathrooms’?!
And why people get away with building speculatively… – I’d hate to see the reality of what AT have to experience daily – I really don’t want to know.
April 12, 2005 at 2:02 pm #752496Anonymous
Inactive@Devin wrote:
More from I. I. property supplement on Friday:

I cannot quite figure it out, but there seems to be a striking resemblance between these houses and the ones being referred to in this link:
http://www.pleanala.ie/REP/129/R129196.DOC
Either way, the description of the Bord Pleanala inspector is quite telling:
“The initial report of the Planner clearly identified the principal planning issues associated with the proposed development. This site is in a remote, unserviced rural area. The layout and form of this development is suburban and the development appears purely speculative. It is wholly inappropriate to be developing such suburban type development in this rural area. Such development would constitute undesirable ribbon development, would undermine the rural amenities of this area and would lead to demands for public services and community facilities. Such development is more appropriate to existing settlements in the area, such as the nearby village of Ballintubber.”
April 12, 2005 at 2:21 pm #752497tungstentee
Participanthey you there, ctesiphon, do you do any work?…. 🙂
great website http://www.idler.co.uk
April 12, 2005 at 2:22 pm #752498doc brown
ParticipantHey ctesiphon, Did you hand that tall buildings essay in yet. No, because you’ve spent the last week on this bloody discussion forum. Do some work for god’s sake.
April 12, 2005 at 2:24 pm #752499Anonymous
Inactivetungstentee, doc brown, should it not be me that you should be directing that at? 😉
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

