High Specification Shroud Advertising

Hi everyone,

and thanks for all your comments. I’m now going to try to answer a few of the issues concerns which have been brought up. My company specialises in co-operating with city councils in order to introduce scaffold-shrouding in an organised structured and limited fashion. We only place shrouding on scaffolding and we only place shrouding using a permit system which is tightly controlled by the city planners. Also, we only produce shrouds to the very highest possible visual standards – and all shrouds must be properly placed within a speciallially measured and fitted framework.

In terms of the buildings which these shrouds are put on, they are only permitted on buildings which have been identified with the aid of the city council planners and which would benefit greatly from a serious injection of funding to carry out conservation works on them.

(I) my company has approached all of the city councils here in Dublin and have proposed a number of different buildings which we feel would be highly appropriate and would benefit greatly from the kind of funding that this concept can create. In most cases, we have been told that the Senior Planners are not interested. We have invited senior planners to come and visit any of the 15 other cities which we have introduced our concept of ‘building-conservation sponsorship’, where we will introduce them to other city planners who have for the last 5 years seen the benefit of introducing this concept to their cities. Any perceived difficulties or questions regarding the concept could at this point be answered. To date, all city planners have declined, or have not even answered our offer.

There was a fantastic opportunity to sponsor the conservation costs of cleaning the statues in Dublin city, and this proposal was made to the city 4-months before any cleaning work commenced on the statues. We believe that approximately, Euro 100,000 could have been raised by A-Class Advertising firms who are used to the concept of high-specification shroud advertising and who would have been very happy to use these A-Class locations as a very temporary advertising opportunity.
Please remember, the shrouding goes on the scaffold, not on the monument themselves.

Our offer to raise this kind of money to carry out these works, was also declined by the city.

I have very strong opinions on the matter of having a filthy dirty Dr.Quirky’s shroud hanging on O’Connell street – but it is probably best not to draw me out on this subject, I was hoping to have a relaxing evening.

We have made every effort to introduce this concept to Ireland in an open, honest and socially beneficial manner, and to date to say that we are being ignored would be an understatement.

As an outdoor advertising company we are completely against long-tem advertising of any form. Outdoor advertisng by its very nature must be very temporary (3-months max), must be of the very highest standard possible so that the general public like it, and must only be put on building sites (not derelict sites, as it is far to easy for the this definition to be abused).

I personnally strongly believe in high specification shroud-advertising, and this does not include any of the rubbish banners which are currently being placed all over Dublin city without any permission from the planning authorities. What seems to surprise a lot of people when I tell them is that I am also a lover of buildings and built-architecture – I strongly believe, and I have seen it work very successfully in other cities – that this concept has the potential to do a really graet amount of good for our cities’ built-architecture.

Does anyone have any tips on how to convince Irish Planners that there is some really great ideas and concepts happening in other great cities which need to be investigated…..and as a city planner it is essential to keep abreast of what new developments are happening in other cities.

Oh and absolutely abhore billboards in Dublin…they are placed anywhere and everywhere with seemingly no controls. Also by there very nature poster boards and billboards should not be allowed anymore in cities – their advetisements are made from paper, so as soon as it rains the posters fall apart and leave litter everywhere…..they’re a disaster

Unfortunately, outdoor advertising has a very bad name because of this kind of thing…however this should not mean that new ideas and new concepts should thus be always ignored

One final answer to one of the above questions…..no my company will not do any business with any company that wants to put up a banner advertisement illegally. We have spent 10-months trying to convince senior planners in Ireland that shroud advertising can be a good thing if properly introduced. To date we have gotten nowhere. During this time we have not done any shroud-advertising business in Ireland – this despite the fact that shabby banners continue to go up on buildings all over Dublin on a regular basis.

My company has begun to focus its energy on UK where shroud-advertising is permitted under British Planning law. We are currently talking with Brighton city council, in using our concept to help pay for essential conservation works to be carried out on the Brighton Pavilion.

I can’t help but feel that a great opportunity has been lost in Dublin due to lack of interest.

Has anyone any good advise on how to progress this ? We strongly feel that if we are given the right opportunityto present our case to the right people (in Govt./ or elsewhere) that common sense will pull through on this matter.

Many thanks

PAUL O’MAHONY

,

Thanks guys once again for your comments and your guidance.

I am personnally very happy that the Council – at last – seems to be taking a more active role re.removal of the terrible examples of advertising and shop facade advertising that surround the O’Connell street area. I think we have to ask ourselves the question how on earth a lot of this advertising was permitted in the first place. As you know, the Council has recently designated a large area of inner city Dublin either a ‘conservation area’ or an ‘architectural conservation area’. This designation means that the Council now has far reaching powers to rectify what it sees as obvious breaches of planning rules re.architectural developments.

Whilst in theory, I fully agree with what the Council is doing with this designation, I also believe it is imperitive that the Council fully informs itself in relation to planning developemtents from other cities/countries. I am not saying that what is good for another city should be good enough for us here….what I am saying is that it is imperitive that the planners investigate this subject. Without equipping itself with full knowledge on any area of development it is not possible for a Planning Department to make a any sensible decisions.

All of our city councils have in their possession a listing of hundreds of derelict-sites, or properties with which there is no ownership papers for. It is usually, these very same properties which show us the worst cases of examples of billboards, 48-sheets, 96-sheets, posters etc. We need to ask ourselves the question why ? The reason that it is normally council sites which are covered in posters and billboards is because by offering a licenece to use these sites the Council is creating a significant revenue itself. Tenders are usually made out for these sites by city councils, with only one very large international outdoor advertising company in a position to win this tender. Because it is only possible to win this tender if you are an exceptionally large outdoor advertising company with very deep pockets, smaller advertising companies never get a look in. This is the reason that there is so many comapnies so quick to abuse the system.

I can understand people’s dislike of outdoor advertising. You may find it difficult to believe but 95% of the outdoor advertising I see around me everyday I believe to be a disgrace…..but this does not mean that all forms of outdoor advertsing should be banned. There is room in our cities for outdoor advertsing but it has to be severely regulated, by well-informed planners – and it should only be allowed if it is done to the highest possible standard.

I believe that high-spec shroud advertising done to the standards that can be seen in many other cities in Europe can breath life, fun, and energy into areas of our cities which hitherto were dark ugly places. If the shrouds also add funding to help restore the building it is placed against then in my view the social benefit of having shrouds far outweighs the negative effects.

Mr.Thomond Park.

Thanks for your comments and advice…..I think that a share purchase on this one would be a very good investment….you may have to wait though….it may take me another while yet….you could say at this point that they have worn me down but I’m not going away. As you can probably tell I am a very strong believer in this concept…it does work, it is working elsewhere, and there is no reason why it should not work here. The fact that planning decisions in Ireland sometimes seem to be moreoften based on emotions rather than on common sense is changing in Ireland. Having recently returned to Ireland from living abroad for a number of years, I strongly feel a change in Irish people and the way they perceive things. Young Irish people today are demanding change. This applies to the way that planning decisions are being made as well as everything else. I believe that our senior planners are at last beginning to think outside of the box on a number of very important subjects…to date the changes have been tentative but this will quickly change in the months ahead as it becomes clear to our planners that sometimes taking a risk on something different is worth it.

I would like to believe that our planners will investigate all potential new ideas that have the potential to increase people’s enjoyment of our cities…..

….I just haven’t figured out a way to convince the planners that they really need to further invetigate this one.

Now is the right time…..it is simply a challenege of getting to sit in front of the right people to have my case heard in an open fair, and transparent manner.

…in other cities when we completed our first ‘building-conservation project’ we paid a company to carry out an on-the-street survey of people’s opinions on what we were doing. The results were astonishing. In Amsterdam, 89% of the people questionned said that they thought our building shrouds were beautifula nd added in a positive way to the street landscape. This figure rose to 95% when the respondents were told that by having the shoud there it was helping to pay for the conservation works to be carried out on the building…

.

I will convince the powers that-be that this concept makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, we didn’t get an opportunity during 2004 to make a written submission in relation to the new Dublin city Development Plan, as we were a little late to the table with our approach in 2004. When we did come to the table with our proposal, we were led to believe that our proposal was being taken seriously and was being considered by the powers-that-be. This process dragged our application into early 2005. In early 2005, I made a presentation to the SPC-Economic Planning and Development. After my presentation where I laid all of the facts out on the table in a transparent fashion a lengthy discussion followed. In total, 12 memebers of the SPC attended the meeting including 10-councillors. Each had their say on what we were proposing. 10 of the 12 SPC-members thought that what we were proposing was a very good idea, and said that they endorsed it. Two senior planners were also attendant at the meeting and suggested that this was a complex area and they would like to present a follow-on presentation to the SPC on this subject. The next SPC-meeting was 2-months later, which we were not invited to attend. Following this meeting we were sent a letter from the council stating that the subject had now been fully investigated and they would not be taking any further action on it, as it was felt that our proposal presented a material contravention to the proposed Dublin city development plan and would require an ammendment or variation to the Plan to allow their use, and at that point it was too late to make any further submissions which might delay the presentation of the new Plan.

So, unfortunately, what has happened to us in the last 10-months has left us feeling very much ignored and more than a little duped.

We are now at a point where we questionning should we put any more energy into promoting what is very obviously a very good idea if we are not going to get any real support for the idea from senior planners ?

I have made many submissions to the council regarding the blatent disrespect that the large billboard companies pay to built-architecture in Dublin……to date I have received no reply. It seems obvious that due to no enforcement and blatant inaction on the matter of billboards and posterboards, the outdoor advertising industry in Dublin has been ruined for any legal operators who respect the industry and the environment in which they work.

Hi Lotts, Hutton.

I’m ging to prepare a blog which will show some of the projects my company has completed in other cities….I would be really interested to get some feedback and to hear people’s opinions on the work that has been undertaken using this cncept.

You are also absolutely right that it would seem what we now have to cahse is political permission rather than planning permission…..maybe I have been out of the country for too long but I had hoped that we had moved on from the time when you had to go running to your local politician to get anything done……I’m totally against this kind of political pandering just for the sake of it !

The idea/concept is a good one – there’s no hidden agenda – it seems a pity that the powers that be seem unwilling to even consider that this might be the case.

I’ll let you know when that blog is done

As stated above, as a company we are totally against placing banners on the side of buildings or wrapping buildings for the sole purpose of commercial gain. The wrapping of the cornerstone pub was nothing short of rediculous and it has happened a number of times now….in all cases it took at least 4 weeks before the offending banner was removed by the council.

The BurgerKing banner on O’Connell St. was similarly a disgrace…with seemingly no effort whatsoever from the council to get rid of the banner or to heavily punsih (fine) the property-owner.

We have a concept – that concept is building-conservation sponsorship….our shrouds are only permitted to be placed with the agreement of the planners, and the income must be transparent and used so that the conservation works on the building can be carried out….this is common-sense. Use the corporate companies to raise financing to carryout much needed and much underfunded conservation work on our buildings.

I mentioned earlier that I would prepare a blog-site which will show some examples of my companies work – here it is
http://bcsp.blogspot.com/
In total during the last 5 years we have completed over 700 projects, most of which were on continental Europe. All projects were done legally and with the full support of the city planners.
Of the examples I have given, some of the projects (the smaller privately owned building, the first project) was fully paid for by our concept. This included replacing old windows with original sash windows, repairing the roofing, repair works to the rendering, repainting etc.
The other projects received funding approximating 40%-60% of the overall cost of carrying out the conservation works on the buildings. All works had a conservation-report completed on them by the planning authorities before any works began to identify what conservation work was necessary to be carried out.

I know that the commercial nature of what has been placed against some of these fine buildings will make some people shudder – but I ask that people consider that for those against shrouding don’t knock it until you really see it. Do not make the mistake of comparing ugly illegal banners – which can sometimes be seen in Dublin – to what we do.

It is my belief that the long-term gain to be won with this concept far outweighs the short-term pain which must be endured by some people with this idea….and it is just some people. We have found from carrying out quite a few surveys at the base of the shrouds when we have them erected, that the vast majority of people really like what we do.

There will always be people who do not like what we do ….I would ask those people to try to concentrate on the long-term gain for our built-architecture from using this concept

PS it takes a team of engineers to do what we do, and a number of weeks planning.

We do not pin/hang/attach/drop banners from buildings…..this practice is a disgrace.

Thanks Graham.

I do agree that these shrouds are of a size and nature that they make an impression – but I do not agree that these shrouds becoming dominating within our streetscapes. I am proposing that shrouds be acceptable only in very limited circumstances where there is an obvious and real need for the income being created by their presence paying for conservation works to be carried out on our built environment. Part of the rules that would need to be put in place for permitting shrouding is that on no occassion should two shrouds be allowed to be placed on the same street.

I do not believe that it is only the property-owners that are least in need of conservation-funding that benefit from this idea. I have spoken with over a dozen Dublin city property-owners whose buildings are nothing more than a digrace within the public domain, and who have absolutely no intention whatsoever of carrying out at conservation work on their buildings. In many/most cases it was even said to me “why should we ?”. These landlords are fully aware that because of the lack of enforcement from our city councils regarding making them take care of their buildings, they know they don’t have to do anything to take care of their buildings facades. It was suggested to me that they often do nothing becauise as soon as they try to do anything to their buildings they are immediately put under pressure by the planners/heritage organisations to carry out repairs which they simply will not spend that kind of money on.

Though this dissappoints me greatly – these are the hard facts of the economy-driven society we live in today.

When it was mentioned to these property-owners that they might be able to avail of substantial funding to help them to carry out the conservation-works, but that any money given would be contractually-bound for the purposes of carrying out conservation-works – all of the property owners immediately said that they would be interested in participating in such a scheme.

Unfortunately, it often takes waving this kind of carrott in front of people, before they recognise that what they have in their possession is a great and public asset which needs to be properly maintained for all to enjoy.

Personnally, I would very much like to use this concept to renovate and restore the old Fire-Station building on Thomas Street – once one of the most beautiful buildings in Dublin and now shamedly a falling wreck.

I would personnaly much prefer to see a shroud on this building which is there for the purposes of helping to raise funds for this buildings conservation, rather than to have to look at the ugly posters which are plastered all over the hoarding at this building….and which have been allowed to be placed there uncontrolled for a period now of over 3 years.

I know from conversations I have had re. this building that the building has a shortfall of Euro 700,000 to carryout immediate conservation works…..this has been the staus quo for the last 4 years…..in the mean time this beautiful building cntinues to crumble with no-one willing tolift a hand to save it.

Thanks guys.

I agree Graham, it is a crazy idea that the very thing that most people who have a love or urban architecture abhore…is the very thing that could end up saving it. I fully accept that there are those amongst us who just hate all kinds of outdoor advertising….and if I’m honest, there is very little of any kind of outdoor advertising in Ireland’s city which I find attractive or in any way stimulating. However, this can change….I know this. If you look at what has happened in so many other great cities around Europe the city councils have embraced new forms of advertising and have completely banned the old, worn and ugly types of advertising (ie.posterboards, billboards, 48-sheets, 96-sheets etc.). There is another way, and we have to embrace that, and not decide that all forms outdoor advertising is an attack on our visual liberties.

I would like to take the example of Amsterdam if I could, in my belief one of the most beautiful cities in Europe. My company is responsible for introducing the concept of high-spec shroud advertising in Amsterdam – which is a UNESCO-world heritage site – we were allowed to do so after a public debate in the media and in the general council. It was found that after operating the scheme of building-conservation sponsorship using scaffold-shrouding the city council overwhelmingly voted to continue the scheme on an ongoing basis to continue to allow the scheme to fund carrying out necessary conservation works on urban built architecture. It was overwhelmingly agreed by the council that without such a scheme – the kind of money necessary to carry out work on many of the fine buildings in Amsterdam would never be raised.

Could I also make the point that shroud-advertising is currently acceptable in every capital city in Europe at this present time with the exception of Dublin….this includes another capital city – Edinburgh – which is also a UNESCO world heritage site.

I believe that we have to concentrate on what is for many a small amount of pain for long-term gain. I also believe that to think that our city councils are going to properly enforce property owners to carry out necessary conservation works on their buildings is unfortunately is somewhat innocent. We only have to look around us at present at the gross inactivity in this area to see the truth.

Like it or not, we now live in a market-driven world….what we need is clever and unique ways to properly drive these market economics so that some social good can be achieved.

“When properly organised and introduced using the right guidelines, rules and enforcement this scheme will create significant funding for carrying out conservation of our urban built-heritage” ……I’m not sure that I can say it any more clearly than this.

This is not me just saying this to ‘muddy the waters’…..I am taking the example of what is happening in over 20-large cities in western Europe. This concept was used to help fund repair work on the stonework at the Brandenburg Gate. It is regularly used to help fund restoration projects on historic buildings in London. I am currently talking with Brighton City Council’s and their Heritage Officer re.using this concept to help fund carrying out conservation works on the Brighton Pavilion.

This concept needs to be properly investigated before being disgarded…..we are too quick to do this in this country !

I was wondering if anybody was familiar with the following building on Grand Parade in Cork. The building has remained derelict for some time and I was wondering if anybody new of any recent or future efforts in store for restoring this building to its former glory.

http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/niah/search.jsp?type=record&county=CO&regno=20514098

I am interested in talking with anoybody who is interested in saving this building….and is interested in getting involved in a concerted effort to do so.

Thomond.

For the last 10-months we have tried – unsuccessfully – to get senior planners to work together with us on this idea in an open co-ordinated fashion. Our strategy was to inform city councils of this concept and to show them how this concept can successfully work at raising significant funding to carry out necessary conservation work on our urban architecture. We thought that Dublin would be ideal – with so many buildings which are crying out for attention and the need for funding contributions. We have approached both the Dublin Civic Trust and the Cork Civic Trust regarding what we do and we have the full support of both organisations. Our hope was that we could work together with the civic trusts to identify buildings which are most suitable for this idea, in this way ensuring the right buildings were chosen and that any/all conservation works carried out was done so in the right manner.

I have made significant links with a lot of senior people who are operating in Ireland’s built-heritage who privately think that our idea is a really good one, but are unwilling to give our idea public support because they believe their organisations cannot be seen to support a private enterprise….and it would cause a conflict of interest in their positions.

My stategy is a simple one Thomond – it has been from the beginning. I need to build links with those operating within the built-architecture environment in Ireland – people who have a say and can make a difference to the decision-making process. I truly believe that if we are given the opportunity to talk to people and show people in an honest open fashion what we are trying to achieve we will win people over – of this I am sure. The majority of people I have had the opportunity to meet with in person – and decribe our work to them and show them previous examples of what has been achived using our concept – I have
managed to win over to our way of thinking.

There are so many people/organisations that I still need to meet with and convince that this is the way forward for raising funding for urban conservation works.

Despite numerous efforts to get to speak with someone/anyone from the Heritage Council – it would seem I am being avoided. I think this is a really great pity….it would seem that just the very word advertising has urged this reaction. I am continuing my efforts to at least be given the opportunity of a meeting…I really didn’t expect to be just ignored.

I have also hired the services of a Senior Council to investigate the legality of what we are proposing under Irish planning law. The SC I chose was a very well-known SC in planning in Ireland, and he produced documentaray evidence which showed that what we are proposing is permissable under Irish planning law, and in many ways provides a very inventive idea which should be very seriously looked at….still nothing.

I have made various efforts to approach the Minister of the Environment, to arrange a meeting – still nothing.

Thomond, I am open to all suggestions as to what might be our next best step here. In co-operation with Dublin Civic Trust, I have already proposed quite a few buildings to the city council which my company was willing to sponsor to carry out immediate urgent repair work to…..my proposals have all fallen on deaf ears at council level.

I think what we need is the support of the Dept.of the Environment here…..but to date we have not succeeded in getting any kind of real response

…..I don’t suppose that you have any friends in the right places….all we want is an opportunity for a face-to-face meeting with some of the key decision makers to show examples of what we have achieved with our concept elsewhere……I am sure that
once the facts are known, and pressure comes from the right circles, that the city councils will be forced to take a closer look at what we are suggesting.

…..without this pressure it seems that the city councils are not really bothered with providing extra funding for urban conservation works to be carried out on buildings which are government-owned or privately-owned…..it has been said to me many times by senior council members that the privately-owned buildings should pay for their own conservation work to be carried out. True as this may be – this not happening, and it is not going to happen in the next 10-years without proper enforcement legislation being enacted.

…..or without convincing our planners to think outside of the square in terms of raising sufficient funding to carry out necessary conservation works. However, it is my belief that the will-power is simply not there at planning-level….most senior planners are only interested in concentrating on the new more modern developments that are taking place in Dublin. I think many senior planners view our older buildings as a head-ache and a quagmire of legal difficulties in terms of carrying out enforcement…the result is inactivity and avoidance ! Meanwhile our beautiful older buildings coninue to decay.

Graham, I have two views to your question which for me sit very comfortably;

Firstly, I do believe it is essential to find a way to encourage the planning authorities to do their job correctly and properly enforce legislation which is in place….unfortunately, however, since I began my campaign of identifying buildings to the council which may only be described as buildings-at-risk, I have not seen much evidence of that this is going to happen any time soon. I have played a very active role during the last 10-months in trying to encourage the planners to take some kind of action on a number of blatant breaches of enforcement legislation re. some very fine and prominent buildings in our city….95% of the time my letters, emails, phone calls to the senior planners have been ignored.

My second answer to your question is that in my opinion I find high specification shrouding beautiful on the city landscape – it adds colour, vision, and vibrancy to a streescape when done properly. It also is an indication to me that that the planners are willing to look outside of the box on occassions, and are willing to try new ideas to deal with old problems.

From my dealings with the planners the last 10-months it has become evident to me that some senior planners do not want change – it seems that too many changes are just beyond their scope of ability. However, I have also seen that some planners do want change but are afraid to take any steps to stretch their necks too far outside the box, as too often they get it chopped off.

It is my view that planners need to be encouraged to think outside of the box, to try new ideas, to be encouraged to push-out-boundaries to bring the best to our city. It is very unfortunate that as Irish people we tend to be a very cinacle race – so when new ideas come along they are often quashed before they even get to the drawing board. This has to change in our planning environment….planners need to be allowed to try new things after a thourough period of investigation of th ebest options….we need to get away from mediocre solutions to our planning problems, and we need to embrace vision.

All of this must lie on a bedrock of proper planning-enforcement, which can only come about with a complete rethink of expenditure funding in this area.

Hi Frank.

The Dr.Quirkeys banner on O’Connell Street is legal in the eyes of Dublin City Council – the reason it is considered to be legal is because it is thought not to be promoting anything commercial – it is instead meant to represent the facade of the building as it once stood…..I agree with you, it is dirty, tatty and is an embarassment to Dublin City’s main street.

I have written to the council on this matter and have suggested that something a little more appropriately designed and installed might be considered instead. I have suggested that my company would be very happy to submit a proposal to do something beautiful using shrouding technology at this site, so as to showcase what shrouding technology can do to brighten and improve a particular area in a streetscape….my company’s offer has never been answered.

We would truly love to do something on this site…..but it seems there is absolutely no-one in the council interested in taking any action at the site.

Mr.Park,

if you are interested in meeting with me to discuss working with me to submit an appropriate shroud for this site then I would be very happy to do so. I have a feeling that you probably have a little more experience than I do in dealing with Dublin City Council….I would be happy to talk through with you our difficulties to date in making a formal submission to the city council….are you available to further discuss this issue over a cup of coffee ?

We’re always open for new ideas and new suggestions. We would love the opportunity to show the council what it is we mean by high spec shrouding. We could perhaps organise a competition and get architects to submit drawings of what they would like to see the new Abbey Theatre looking like – if the drawings are good enough then they should be good enough to superimpose the image onto the shroud ?

I’m pretty sure that that would raise a few eye-brows !

I was also thinking it would be a great opportunity for the Heritage Council to do some self-promotion. Part of the remit of the Heritage Council is to inform the general public about our heritage – both archeoleogical and architectural. However, because of insufficient funding the Heritage Council simply doesn’t have the budget for any significant kind of proper media promotion of its work. I would have thought that what we do offers a great opportunity for the general public to get see what taking care of our heritage is all about. Unfortunately, it seems I am way off with this opinion – the Heritage Council to date have fully avoided meeting with me. I haven’t even been offered the opportunity to show how this concept can really work. I find this a great pity. We work a lot with the Heritage Council’s in other country’s city’s, all of whom embrace this idea as a means of promoting their Heritage Council’s work.

I like the superimposition though, you definately have potential in this area.

Frank,

as stated earlier in this thread, what we are proposing is nothing new. High-specification shrouding is now present in every capital city in Europe. Planners in these cities have embraced the idea nad put rules and regulations in place – strict controls – as to how it should operate.

….I believe it was said to me in one particular meeting here in Dublin – its not happening in Liege so its not happening here….it would seem that there is now a concerted effort to make Dublin a copycat city of Liege…..the mind boggles !

Thanks for your views Frank. I think it is very hard for people to accept this idea until they actually see it for themselves in other cities…..when done properly, these things look really great and can really add something special to a city in some circumstances….I really do believe this

At a time with so many ugly scaffold sites around our city….wouldn’t it be nicer to have something which adds colour and structure and really can make people smile and say “that’s clever !”

…the key is rules, structure and proper enforcement !

Phil,

point taken. This idea can only work if it is introduced in a proper manner – that means two things Rules and Enforcement. In Ireland we tend to be great at introducing the first of these, but carry on like ostrich’s with our heads in the sand for the latter.
It is essential that each building that is being used for this concept must individually apply to the planner sto carry out the restoration works on theit building – this planning application is done seperately to what we do. It is only when this planning application for works to be undertaken have been given permission by the planners, we then take this permisssion and make our own submisssion for what we do…there is no room for trickery….if properly introduced the padwackery element is curtailed. I am proposing that only a limited numbers be allowed to operate during a 12-month trial for this concept. All operators operate under licence – on the first occassion that an operator is seen to abuse the trust that the planners give to them, his licence is revoked and he not permitted to operate in the scheme again.

If we can get a trial run to go ahead I would be interested in carrying out an independant survey at the base of the shroud to ask people’s view on whether they find the shroud’s presence positive or negative on the streetscape….I think you might be surprised withthe results.

….and I loved the shroud of the girl with the goose on the National Gallery 18-months ago….it wasn’t us though, I believe that they brought in a company from England to do that work….pity I think we could have done a really nice job on that one.

Hi Sue,

what we do at the end of the day is advertising. In order to correctly place any form of advertisiing in a public place you either require planning peremission from the authorties, or you need to be allowed to operate under licence. This applies whther you are placing a shroud or whther you are placing a small poster somewhere.

In other countries we apply our concept to restoring city council owned buildings, government-owned buildings, private buildings, listed buildings and non-listed buildings….it really doesn’t matter the ownership/or listing of the building as long as the concept is applied correctly and a substantial part of funds raised is used directly to fund the conservation work being carried out.

Our strategy in trying to introduce this concept to both Dublin city and Cork city is to work together with the senior planners in doing this the right way. If we were to just go ahead and do it anyway, we would only make enemies within the planning department and that is not our goal. My company has already been indirectly compared to some of the unscrupulous banner-advertising companies which have, for the last number of years, put banners up in an illegal fashion in Dublin.

We don’t do this…..we are a legitamite company, with a legitamite concept that works….we have to make this clear at all times to senior planners….we do not place advertising anywhere illegally ! We are against all forms of illegal advertising, we are against all forms of low quality advertising, and we are against all forms of long-term outdoor advertising. Outdoor advertising must be legal, high quality and transient in nature.

Hi Jack.

I am unclear what your question is asking. If you are referring to illegal placing of posters on hoardings then I would propose a simple solution. When it is found that a number of similar posters are appearring at different locations in an urban setting, promting the same gig or event, and when no licence has been issued for there placement, I would propose that the council place there own cancelled stickers over the posters in a manner that would suggest the gig/event had been cancelled.
This is one way to ensure that the council is not running around chasing its tail with poster companies.

If your question relates to placing illegal banners on scaffold or buildings, the planners should have the power to immediately take down and destroy the illegal banners and also to heavily fine the property-owner for allowing the banner to be placed on the building. Every effort should also be made to find out which company placed the banner and they should be immediately heavily fined for their trouble.