alonso
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Great Stuff. To be honest I was taken aback by the vitriolic nature of the opposition to what is a use that was established long before the residents were even twinkles in the eyes of the D4 massive of yore. Maybe they can still tear down the West Stand over Easter. But remember one thing. This will be THE development in the city over the next decade. It will dwarf everything else. Already we can forget the Point tower, now this mornings old news. Feck the Port tunnel, the interconnector, IKEA. This arena will drag Irish sport into the 21st century (until 11 clowns get on the grass of course) and will glow like a beacon over Ballsbridge…
Jaysus just saw that the Inspector recommended refusal!!! WTF?? What was he thinking? Sometimes i believe that there’s some sort of arrangement between the Inspectors and the Bord, whereby the Inspector knows the decision, especially on high profile politically sensitive developments like this, and then writes what he likes, as some sort of sop to the appelants
I reckon Dublin is the only city in Europe where at 5 am it’s not a disaster if you run out of smokes, milk, newspapers, waifos, coca cola, bogroll, deodorant, dog food, crisps, hair gel, porn, toothpaste and fairy liquid, coz you’re guaranteed there’s a spar/mace/centra/garage looming around the next corner with it’s numbing glow soaking the pavement in front of you…
While I’m not advocating allowing retail in the city to die a la Londonisation or “Tallaghtfornication” (c) the proliferation of vomit-worthy muck into our old streets has gone beyond saturation
The DTO stated at the public inquiry into the Cherrywood extension, that the upgrade was needed sooner rather than later, as they had the data on proposed land uses along the line vs LUAS capacity. The reaction from the Dept of Transport Inspector was that it would not be needed for another 20 years!!! But it’s obvious to the dogs on the streets that a Metro is already needed. You mention Sandyford and Dundrum, but add in Cherrywood, Rathmichael, Old Connaught and Fassaroe and it’s insane to believe that a LUAS is sufficient.
I think it’s a joke that the alignment has been determined by landowners, land rezoned on the basis of accessibility to public transport, while the public transport being funded by these landowners is wholly lacking for the quantum of development proposed.
I can’t see the upgrade being kept on the long finger. Things will collapse around Cherrywood by 2015
The Luas to Bray via Cherrywood and Sandyford is to be upgraded to Metro. It’s not in T21 but it is part of the DTO strategy, which is still government policy. T21 is just a capital investment plan, not a transport strategy. LUAS and Metro can run at the same time on the same tracks. In fact this is how it is envisaged that services will be gradually ramped up
Anyway:
Luas Green Line will run from Ranelagh to Liffey Junction (remnants of line B post Metro upgrade + Line BX + Line BX cross city line extension). This could eventually be extended to Finglas, where the original plan for Metro north went in the DTO Strategy
Metro will run from Bray West (Fassaroe) all the way to Swords (Lissenhall P+R). It will run on the luas alignment (ie Harcourt line) as far as Ranelagh (I think!!!) where it will go underground through the city as far as the northside suburbs.
The Luas upgrade to Metro is a very long term plan. It is already necessary but as it is outside the 10 year investment programme it’ll more than likely be 2020 before it’s done.
@PVC King wrote:
Pure concrete fantasy
Makes you wonder what they would think of the aboveI believe that’s a listed building now… a classic
yeh but jdivision, many Irish people, when confronted with any residential building over 4 storeys ,compare it to Ballymun. Unless of course you work with architects and planners? then i’d be concerned..
public realm, i think the step out is within their own boundary. It looks like it might be level with the railings and the platform. Otherwise yeh they’d require consent
Anyway that roof is bloody atrocious. On and on it goes
True Peter. The feeling at the time of the NTR contract was “sure who the hell would want to pay to drive over a bridge way out there?”, while councillors were taking backhanders for Liffey Valley etc etc, ensuring that thousands would eventually have no choice but to pay the troll
ah the inner tangent how are ye? That one map managed to destroy the quays, Parnell St, Bolton St, High st, Clanbrassil st etc etc etc. Not a bad achievement for such an innocent looking jpeg
I wouldn’t go too mental on the LUAS and Bus situation. On main street Dun Laoghaire, we have just buses. But due to the material used and the shared space feel to the town, the buses have little impact. Granted there’s only 1 over 3 or 4 minutes at it’s busiest. So it might not be that bad. There are various ways to appropach this. It is a very large space after all. I’d give the scheme a cautious welcome for now and have a closer look as details emerge…
PLease please God, let some vision shine upon Wood Quay that day. I think I posted elsewhere that planning in Dublin will always be regarded as a failure until the day we get College Green back for the people. This plan has been talked about for years. Hopefully action will begin to follow these words
PVC King wrote:The DTO were neutered after they objected to the Liffey Valley extension in 2000]I don’t know what happened re Liffey Valley, but the DTO are part of the group now looking at Liffey Valley and they submit observations on many many planning applications and development plans all the time. Recently they’ve been vocal on IKEA, Greystones Harbour, Lansdowne Road, T2, the Arnott;s redevelopment etc etc. However they don’t take appeals a la An Taisce as you say.
No “latest transport quango” has been appointed yet. If it;s the DTA you’re referring to, if that is set up pre-election I will donate 5 million cyber euros* to your good self. The DTO never ever had any authority. They are a co-ordinating and monitoring organisation. visit http://www.dto.ie and see what they get up to. And this monitoring role is connected to all planning applications in the Dublin Region. I don’t know whether they’ll submit on these or not, as they tend to keep to the massive developments.
*not real
I hope you guys forgive me but I referred this thread to the forum on http://www.politics.ie. The forum there is read by and contributed to by a number of Dublin representatives, of both Leinster House and the City and County Councils. It will be interesting to see if, and how, they react. I copied sections of the discussion here, as I couldn’t have put it any better myself, mostly the wealth of information garnered by various archiseekers, especially on the proposed locations. If there’s any problem with me doing so, i’ll take down my post.
If there gonna be described thusly “red, throbbing poles”, I can think of one word that rhymes with docks, but let’s not go there.
Ah this whole debate is just a load of bother by the Dodder and banal on the canal, in my opinion.
is it time to resurrect “stiffies on the liffey”?
Given the theatrical element of the development “the rods in the gods”?ah they’re sh1te. The old ones were the best though
My apparent lack of experience and misinterpretation seems to lead me to the same conclusion as yourself so welcome to the club. I’m fully aware that guidance and leadership is given to developers. Perhaps I should have said “more leadership” to the point where they simply throw out their developments, no matter how large. Does that happen? I know of one recent major development that the consultant advised against in no uncertain terms, but under direction, lodged it. It was refused for one simple blindingly obvious reason that any taxi driver could have told you. In other words it was a waste of time, money and resources. That’s just plain wrong and belittles our profession in the eyes of the public.
I’m also fully aware that a large percentage of applications that go in from respected consultants are bloody awful and should not be granted. This is not just from a development plan macro point of view ie zoning, but from design, layout, parking, assessment points of view. However they are granted, which highlights that bad planning happens in both sectors and neither can claim to be “better” than the other.
I may have been unfair naming those 2 companies, but I did so as they are among the best,largest, most respected consultancies and ones that people interested in planning would know well. I’ll edit my post to remove them and I’d request you do likewise in your post. It wasn’t my intention to highlight them or in any way question their competence. I’m familiar enough with their work never to do so.
I would be extremely disappointed if planners did not push developers to do the right thing re planning gain. However my point is, as you said, that the overriding “aim of Private sector planner is to obtain planning permission for their client for a planned scheme”. That’s all I was saying., That aim sometimes has the effect of compromising rather than maximising the common good.
Some may not be comfortable with that. I agree with your final paragraph and had already said as much. I have worked in both sectors also and found the private sector more rewarding in terms of variety and influence. However some of my experience in the public sector has also highlighted that the development industry sometimes seeks to exploit failings in the planning system to their own benefit.
“It is very interesting to note that the number of Senior Planners who leave public office and venture out on their own!”
Yes especially having written and promoted a development plan which rezones their prospective clients’ lands. This has happened spectaularly in one County to the extent that it featured a number of times in the national press. Where’s the common good in that? And I presume, as a planner, you know who and where I’m talking about.
There was a public notice in the back of the IT yesterday Wed 17th, of DCC’s Application for a Foreshore Licence
“for permission to occupy an area of the foreshore in the River Liffey for the purpose of constructing a new bridge linking Guild Street to Macken Street”
Another step slightly closer
yeh nice to see a good pic of proper oul Dublin. They’re bloody good, esp those to the right. A great example of Dutch-style flats, like North Strand and the neglected and destroyed Sheriff st.(probably for the best, in that case) Although could you imagine those ESB towers gettin PP these days. Visulaise the before and after photomontage using the above pic.
@ctesiphon wrote:
Can a citizen be prosecuted for criminal damage if the damage is done to an illegal structure?:rolleyes:
.only if they’re caught
something to do with internal works which were done outside the remit of the lease agreement
http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/…ive=10/01/2007
