Forum Replies Created
Therefore, to be clear, my problem is with the defeatism inherent in the term “irreversible”. That plays to the Car lobby.
Colm McCarthy is one of the best readers of Urban Economic trends in the land.
You’re trying to impress me with credentialism. That never works. I am now watching a BCC2 programme about the vandalism of sixties architecture by people who were well credentialed indeed.
Anyway, I still say he was being misleading in saying the city lost people in the last 21 years, without clarifying ( at least in the Independent report) that it had increased sunstantially in the last 7 years, or so.
I suppose we are all on the same side here, and oppose an “irreversible” car dependant city; I also believe that that such opposition is becoming more or less the popular view, which is much better than only having the bien pensant realise that we cannot go on like this.
never trust a consultant for the banks, or special interest groups. i suspect the figures here are misleading, while Dublin City ( the central area) has lost population in the last 21 years, it probably has seen some reverses of that in the last 5 – 10. Most of the decline, then, happening in the previous eras of neglect.
We don’t have to be an American type city. We can chose not to be, and clearly most general opinion has moved against sprawl. It is not as if the poeple buying houses in the suburbs have an affinity to travelling 2 hours each day. They would prefer less sprawl and cheaper houses closer to the centre, or even appartments.
And Dublin is not an American type city anyway. We socialise, and shop ( often), in the centre. They do not.
The city is not “irreversibly car dependent”, it has gotten so bad that there is apolitical and general will to change things now.
Medium sized towns can offer a better lifestyle as you look to settle down, but young people will always ( if ambitious at all) prefer Cities.
Dublin, however, is not Manhatten. A suburb in Dublin can look much like one in Sligo, or anywhere else.
I prefer having both, myself. One of the advantages of being a culchie, and Dublin resident, is that we have acheap place in the countryside to visit when the City gets tiresome, you know 🙂
I think De-Centralization should proceed with one area chosen, Cork or Limerick. Just choose an area, and nowhere else. The civil servants who are opposed to it should get compensation.
Well. I have just toured the city as as tourist with American friends and nowhere, in no literature, was the building mentioned as a potential tourist site; nor is it on any guided tours.
Right, so it is open. Must go in.
It is beautiful, and that is my favorite part of the Liffey. The very existance of this bridge will bring people to it, and encourage walkers.
( Amazing how quiet, now, the quays get past Liberty Hall). I also wish, while I am on the subject, that the Custom house was open, in some way, to the public – museum maybe, though we have many already, rather than just being a pretty building owned by some government department.
notjim, I assumed that this photo was taken from Sir John Rogersons key, with Liberty Hall and the custom house on the far left.
So what is all that stuff behind the bridge in the Photoshop montage? Not there now, is it?
The new developments at Spencer dock?
What is the pole like structure?
Where is that street?
I assume that the bridge is in , or around, the Specer Dock non-development.
Well, 2 friends of mine who were in Dublin from the US were impressed by the new median and wish it to be completed ASAP, so when they can come back it’s done. The northern part of O’Connell street would in fact look better than the central median when finished , as there are less interruptions. I still like it. And I love to walk the median too, although it is true that very few people do it. Thats fine with me, though.
I do wish there were was no parking of bikes or motorcycles there, however.
They liked the city, we had good weather – one improvement which they mentioned was a boardwalk on both sides of the liffey all the way to Heuston. i told them that there were money issues with that:-)
I am inclined to believe in a federal ireland, as well, to a limited degree; but if I have to side with semi-literates who can’t spell, use ‘u’ instead of you, and say “I be at work”, I demur.
In any case Sean you find that the thread you started so inarticulately mentioned that it made you laugh that Dublin was considered a Metropolis. Turns out it is.
Makes you feel stupid? It should.
Thats just horseshit, Morlan.
It’s also fundamentally unfair that the Burghers along the Luas line get to see their property values increase at the cost of National taxes taken from everybody for what is decidedly not a national railline.
I think that Dubliners can never spot the plank in their own eye.
( I suspect that many one off houses are built along roads with existing powerlines).
Still waiting for the debate about Howth head, an area of national beauty which is still being built on.
I always get a laugh out of the “Jackeens paying for the country” nonsense.
Jackeens tend to get away with non-payment of local taxes, it seems to me. Not the country folk.
Bin charges are payed down the country , and water charges too. My parents have been paying them all their lives. They also recycle, and pay for that. It is Dubliners that demur, and demand that the (natonal) “gubberment” pay for everything. National “gubernment” does not, however, pick up the bins.
One off houses should pay more for these charges, if necessary; but, if we were to go to a system of local taxation for local infrastructure, Dubliners would be paying more – not less – than down the country. The Luas does not benefit Killarney.
I live in Dublin, by the way, and keen to see it progress. If we are to build a metro, let’s get Dubliners to pay for it. The houses and businesses on the line should pay in property taxes, rates etc.
As for the one off housing, I believe that people should be allowed to build on their land. If An Taisce has a problem with the design, that is fine. I abhor many of the monstrosities down the country recently built, but not the building of them, unless in obvious scenic areas ( like the West Coast). We could protect these areas with seperate laws.
the whole of ireland isn’t equally scenic after all – although the part of it that is among the most scenic in the East Coast is riddled with one off housing ( Howth), and ribbon development ( the road to Howth), albeit that ribbon development has now joined up the dots.
Thats ok with An Taisce because there is no rich mine of culchie bashing in it.
However, they still do own the land. Unless we live in a communist system, or a system of serfdom, then land owners own land and should get to build on it – within limits.
I am sure that there are plenty of legitimate cases where people are denied the rights to build for their children on land owned in that family for generations. Elites from Dublin then move in and get the land. Why isn’t Tasice condeming that?
Stainless steel doesn’t rust unless the outer layer is damaged. The Spire looks fine to me, better than when the bottom part was removed from it’s packaging and seemed to show the discoloring from the dirt of dublin on the rest of the structure.
Now it looks nice and clean, maybe becuase there is less activity around it, less traffic on the street, and less construction. And it rained. which is what they said would happen – the accululated soot and dirt would be removed by rain.
The “rust” on the top ( which is clearly not rust, the article uses scare quotes to emphasise the fact even though they felt the need to add rust to the headline) is no big deal. Why bother cleaning it, why is this ‘rust” a problem, and why does anybody on this forum think it needs to be cleaned?
The article says
“After being billed as a blade of light for the new millennium, the Spireâ€™s weather-beaten appearance is in danger of perpetuating Dublinâ€™s dirty image.”
Weather-beaten? Do they know the meaning of the word. I dont think this money needs to be spent, at least not for another few years. Look at the photos of th spire on the thread about O’Connell street, it looks fine to me.
And if it was Old Victoriana would we like it, regardless?
Ok, I take you point if that is the case.
In fact in thinking about this between my last post , and this, it occurs to me that architecture is not really like software. It is probably better to hire an Irish architect for Ireland, if that architect is as good as a foreigner, and all else been equal – given that a country needs to define it’s identity somehow, and an indigenous building style would be a way to do that. I am always wary of free market fundamentalism, like any other fundamentalisms.
Still, on this building. I like it, in photoshop as least – even if it is a copy of a building elsewhere, and regardless of who designed it.
What if the substandard work from an international star is better than the best work from Ireland? I still smell protectionism here. The best Athlete from America, giving a sub-standard performance in the Olympics will almost certainly beat the best Irish Athlete.The pool is bigger.
If the best Irish Architect was really good, he would be an international star anyway. It’s not as if, I presume, there is an Irish school of architecture with everything deriving from a similar pardigm, or look, which in future generations will mark the era: instead all architects have their own signatures. I am not an archiect but maintain an interest in the environment around me, and the stuff chosen for the grand canal seemss way better than the IFSC – which was not doubt an Irish designed block.
I liked that building without knowing who this “famous” architect was. It seems that that AlanD wants a protectionist market for Irish architects, while everybody else has to compete on the open market? I am writing software which should compete globally: should I demand that the gubberment buy it and ban imports of competitors?
If Irish architects could compete, they could compete anywhere : in this small market and abroad, and be famous themselves. Like the rest of the Island, or the parts of it that are private sector.
Does it? I don’t see it myself, and in anycase turning a building which doesn’t exist in Dublin yet 90 degrees seems fairly spectacular to me.
Is this local sour grapes? I don’t know, but I know what I like and I like this – as an non-architect and a non-expert, of course. Seems marvelous to me.
Best new building suggested for Dublin in my lifetime ( 30 years).