New Advertising in Dublin
- This topic has 669 replies, 66 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Surely it’s an improvement to see the giant hoardings go, but where’s the benefit in replacing them with a horde of little hoardings? Crap is still crap. Whether it’s one heap of 18 sq m crap or crap parceled out into 70 bitty .295 sq m pieces, I still don’t want it. If anything, dividing up the scheme as such only spreads the rubbish around. Great—instead of a heap of it all at once, we get the equivalent of Mars wrappers and crisp bags and Red Bull cans scattered throughout the city—where it won’t be so obtrusive!
OK JCD, try out the bike stands, go on and put up a silly ad or two if you must (ads or ‘civic information’ are the listed possibilities for ‘the product’… I wonder which will win out?), then leave the streets and public spaces alone. Please?
PS Unless by ‘heritage trail plaques’ you mean more cheap record albums plastered on walls around the city: ‘Bono bought sunglasses here in 1982.’ Because I think those would be really useful.
Call me innocent if you will but this type of company have been serial planning offenders for decades and their reward for saying that they will consider removing 50% of their illegal signs in mostly suburban locations is to allow them to errect 70 metropoles in key City Centre locations such as directly in front of the main tourist office in the city.
The majority of locations where metropoles are used elsewhere is generally in the carparks of retail parks and out of town shopping centres; they are also used on ring roads in places like Leeds and Birmingham where such fittings are of a specification that can survive a brick at 70mph the latest ones are also bullet proof. The entire idea of the signs being double sided with the local authority receiving one side is often a red herring as the council always gets the contraflow direction in such situations.
What are used in some cities to a good effect are the circular fittings that look like double height postboxes.
Zero tolerance is just not an Irish concept.
“the 48-sheets will disappear; they’re not a suitable type of advertising for the city and they’re not even very effective,”
DCC’s Ciaran McNamara comments on how existing ineffective sites will be superceded by better provision for the advertising industry.
The last couple of posts have been fairly informative and helpful – good work there PVC and Phil for further informing the debate.
A couple of anomilies seem too be appearing – Councillor Daithi Doolan yesterday said the city would benefit to the tune of €50 million – yet the Times article from last April gives €90 million as the figure. Very odd indeed :confused:
@PVC King wrote:
the latest ones are also bullet proof.
Oh good, I’ll get an opportunity to try out my new RPG so 😀
@StephenC wrote:
The whole point was to reduce all those nasty hoardings
I am afraid Im not convinced that this neccessarily is the case – existing billboards would go first and DCC would make sure to let us know of this…Instead of which it appears that the Lord Mayor was not aware of current scheme until this week. 😮
Separately I am getting the impression that the business community is not neccessaarily unanimous in backing this either.
@hutton wrote:
410 quid per notice????
*heads off to print out cards advertising such service + sets up shop*
Thats some wheeze! 😀
I meant to say something about this the other day, but it slipped my mind. It’s a bit off topic, but relevant to planning in general (and probably not worth a thread of its own).
Rather than being a ‘wheeze’, the service provided by such companies is of benefit to many involved in the planning process, whether architect, planner or developer (and the basic cost seems to be €135 for simple erection and removal, not €410). Site notice sabotage is a very real feature of planning, usually – but not always – in the more controversial or larger scale schemes. Most planners and a good number of architects that I know have had to re-submit applications because some local thought he could thwart the application by removing / vandalising a site notice (a bit like thinking the metropoles can be thwarted by arguing over land ownership, perhaps?;) ).
In addition, a simple calculation of the full costs of erecting a site notice might give a bigger answer than you’d expect- printing, laminating, other materials, mounting, visiting the site to erect the notice etc. Calculated at the hourly rate for an architect or planning consultant, it quickly adds up, and is hardly the best use of resources in an office. And that’s before you factor in the possibility of re-visiting the site to re-erect a notice, possibly more than once.
I don’t think the service is aimed at Mr and Mrs Byrne from Rialto who are building a 42 sq.m. kitchen extension. Any time I’ve used a service such as this, it’s been for larger scale projects. When we’re talking about multi-million euro projects for which the application fee alone is €38,000, a few hundred quid extra to safeguard the passage of the project must seem like a sound investment to a developer. Compare it to the additional interest that would be charged on a bank loan for development should a notice be sabotaged, and/or to the additional office costs incurred in preparing a re-submission, and it seems like a no brainer to me.
Anyway, I don’t want to be seen to be flag-waving for these providers. I’m just pointing out that it’s not the ‘wheeze’ it might first appear to be. Good luck to them, I say. Or to anyone else who might fancy their chances, for that matter- I look forward to seeing the ‘Bespoke site notices by Hutton, Esq.’ ad on a banner above any day now!:D
@ctesiphon wrote:
Most planners and a good number of architects that I know have had to re-submit applications because some local thought he could thwart the application by removing / vandalising a site notice
Maybe it is just an effort to stop their own workers from thinking that they are just more fly-posters and ripping them down 😉
@ctesiphon wrote:
I look forward to seeing the ‘Bespoke site notices by Hutton, Esq.’
😀
Great minds think alike I tell you CTEsiphon!
ctesiphon wrote:the basic cost seems to be €]Darn, initially I thought it might be 410 per week – and now its down to 135 in total. 🙁
Not to worry, its got me thinking – and sure why think small; bigger signage seems to generate bigger profits and bigger leverage so I’m now thinking of “Hutton Hoardings” 🙂
Helpful information has been sent my way in this regard by a pal. It relates to the economics of type of adverts that are being proposed for the city;
” the prevailing rates in comparable places like Leeds or Glasgow are gauranteed payments of £500-1,500 for non-illuminated to £3000 – £7500 for LED stg per fitting per year. Revenue is then split at 50% of net profit once servicing and sales costs are deducted. Revenues are generally double the gaurantees so a well positioned LED Fitting would probably generate €22,500 p.a….All similar proposals for the more attractive cities in the UK such as York, London, Bath, Edinburgh have been shot down.”
Fortunately Dublin now has a more enlightened policy that will facilitate such enterprises. However I am still trying to work out the exact economics – for example when first published in the I Times last April, the JCdecaux deal was worth €90 million to the city – yet this seems to have since halved to €50 million as quoted by Cllr Daithi Doolan on liveline. He should know – he is the chair of the councils Environment SPC, but then so too should the newspaper. :confused:
All quite intriguing and requiring further research before the new venture is launched… Onward “Hutton Hoardings”!
🙂
Just to clarify about Site Notices Ireland, it wasn’t the intention to snub them. They do offer a great service, especially for heavily trafficked areas, or for notices erected in the middle of the public domain like these advert ones are. And the display product they offer is robust and of good quality. As mentioned above, they also can prove invaluable to architects and developers – I imagine especially where updated apps are constantly being erected on large sites.
The basic weekly monitoring product (over the five weeks) as previously stated is still €410 – but yes, erection alone is €135.
Understood, Graham. It was more to hutton’s jokey ‘wheeze’ comment that my post was addressed. I just thought it was worth giving a brief, objective comment.
And also, to clarify- I wasn’t commenting on any single company, more the concept of such a service which, as you say, in many cases is invaluable.
Anyway… back to the issue at hand. As you were, folks. 🙂
Another day passes and where is the Irish Times in covering this, one of the most contentious planning issues in Dublin in recent years? Ah sure its only the capital city, and mostly on the northside :rolleyes:
Maybe it doesnt really happen for the IT if its not happening in Dun Laoghaire or Greystones… Or then again maybe it might ruffle a few feathers to actually analise what the city’s custodians are up to
Irish Times where are you in covering city issues???
From: http://www.bikebiz.com/14000-free-bike-contract-for-Paris-is-halted
An administrative court in Paris has suspended last week’s award of a bicycle-rental contract to outdoor advertising specialist JCDecaux. Rival bidder Clear Channel Communications of the US had filed a lawsuit, claiming ‘irregularities’ in the tendering process.
16:45, Feb 8th by Carlton Reid
JCDecaux’s Somupi unit was to establish a free bicycle hire service with 14,100 bikes in place by the summer.
Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings Inc had formed a consortium with Electricite de France, France Telecom and Vinci Park.
JCDecaux operate Lyon’s successful Cyclocity rental scheme, a cycle hire service originally called Vélo’V and started in May 2005.
The Cyclocity bikes were ridden almost 12 million kms in 2006 – that’s 5,000 kms per bicycle. There were 5.5 million rentals during the year, an average of 15,000 rentals per day with peaks that exceeded 30,000 during exceptional events such as Lyon’s Festival of Music. Cyclocity schemes are also operated in Marseille, Aix en-Provence and Brussels.Wow. I’ve been out of the country for the last two weeks and didn’t have time to check archiseek while away. I was almost expecting this thread to just wither away. What a change – I’m delighted! 🙂
I’m so relieved that this issue is receiving the critical attention that it deserves – not only here but politically and in the broader media.
Talk is relatively cheap – it’s easy to post moany messages on internet message boards; I’m a master at it. I’ve great admiration for the others who’ve made the far more significant effort to take this issue to the people who count like politicians and media workers. I just hope this horrible proposal will be defeated but at least the situation certainly looks a bit more optimistic than it did when I was packing my bags 15 days ago!
I have actually had a chance to look at the whole package of street furniture that JCD are installing. There are bike stations, public conveniences (surely long over due in the city), street signage and maps (more or less the same as the stuff recently put in around docklands, high quality, colourful and also much needed), a heritage trail (also good stuff) and finally these advertising structure which actually do not look half bad, the smaller units especially. There are problems with the scheme not least the complete lack of information and public display being offered by DCC however the ‘family’ of street furniture (as they call it) is really quite attractive and very functional and I think would transform the streets. Its very important however that for what goes up, stuff comes down. This means billboard and assorted street junk. But most of all this needs an urgent PR exercise to salavage what could potentially be a very good things for the city.
I will eat my hat if they site ‘bicycle stations’ in Sheriff Street and Summerhill.
These things do nothing more than make an advertising trail for the car owning middle classes that rips its way through areas where people actually live.
How original – a middle class vs working class slant to the whole debate. Its true I have never seen a working class person (from Sheriff Street by the sounds of your post) driving a car – how novel would that be. And of course most working class people are also immune to advertising.
@StephenC wrote:
How original – a middle class vs working class slant to the whole debate.
You think the siting of these things is an accident?
Why do you think the Howth road in its entirety was overlooked?
A lovely road, ideal for bicycles I would have thought. Nice footpaths too.@StephenC wrote:
How original – a middle class vs working class slant to the whole debate. Its true I have never seen a working class person (from Sheriff Street by the sounds of your post) driving a car – how novel would that be. And of course most working class people are also immune to advertising.
In fairness – one does occasionally find oneself driving through these areas en route to the Yacht club.
A ‘kerchief soaked in cologne is a reliable remedy in my experience.
I confess I haven’t seen the whole “package”. I’ve only seen the planning notices for the metropoles on the Swords Road, along with misleading tiny x’s on the footpath, which show the location of the ads, but not the extent to which they will jut across the pavement. I suspect few people realise they will have to walk , jog, drag their shopping or push their prams around these things as well as look at them sticking out at alarming right angles to the road.
If the package included bike stations in the same locations, you would at least feel there was an attempt at a quid pro quo to the local community. But where are these free bikes going to be? Killiney? Blackrock? Putting the shite on the northside and the trade-off on the southside should not be allowed in this day and age.@publicrealm wrote:
In fairness – one does occasionally find oneself driving through these areas en route to the Yacht club.
Well-known Dun Laoghaire yottie approaches Howth YC for a post Regatta drink.
Security man on door – “Are yous members here?”
Dun Laoghaire yottie – “Certainly not!”
KB
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
