ctesiphon
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Cheers, KB. Silver Cross I had heard of (when I saw your post last night I had to resist the temptation to post a photo of ctesiphon aged 1 asleep in a Silver Cross, all the more tempting given the presence of The Brother in the same photo! :)), but not the others. My grandfather’s shop (none of the names you mentioned, btw!) probably served a similar function, as it dated from a time when Donnybrook was far more socially diverse than today (Sean Dunne, take note- it’s only two generations since Dublin 4 had an established working class population).
Prams today would probably have more in common with SUVs than bikes, alas: ATPs. 😉
c. (Currently enjoying a Shimano Nexus hub gear, and coveting a Rohloff speedhub.)
What’s the connection between prams and bikes? My grandfather used to have a bike and pram shop in Donnybrook in the 1940s-1950s, and the combination struck me as odd, but Eurobabycycles and Mr Whelan would suggest that it was a fairly common occurrence. (Oddly, two of the 4 sons of that grandfather went into the electrics game- again, like Paddy Whelan.)
Is it that they both require similar types of maintenance?
Great photo by the way, gunter.
Graham- from a quick look, I think we’ve little to worry about. On a random viewing I got about 90% right.
Pfft- pretenders.
(Also, jdivision- sleeping around, I see!)
@GrahamH wrote:
First Boards Dublin City blatently steal the idea running it into a gazillion-page extravaganza,
Really?
I’d ask for a link, but I know B****s is frowned upon ’round these parts.
Now I think I know why. 😉
gunter- is it Grangegorman?
@johnglas wrote:
If you want contemporary, why not a design competition/consortium approach as in Group 91 and Temple Bar?
@BTH wrote:
Sounds good to me – there’s a whole new generation of great Irish architects that could do with something like this to raise their profiles and give them the bigger jobs they need to develop.
From p.7 of the Planning Application Report:
“In 2005, the Dublin Central developers, Chartered Land, staged an international urban design and architectural competition for its 5.5 acre site on Upper O’Connell Street. The competition was won by a consortium of Irish architectural practices- BKD, McGarry NÃ Eanaigh and Donnelly Turpin, which now form Dublin Central Architects.”
Thanks for the clarification. I’m broadly in agreement with what you say, and the analogy with the house-building boom is spot on, sadly. All the more depressing, in fact, when you think of just how long these projects have been proposed. Why wait until the 11th hour to get the detailing right? Baffling.
Also, I thought of you – and this thread – at lunchtime, as I walked along the full length of the solid white line that separates north- and south-bound traffic between TCD and BoI (i.e. connecting the Dame Street traffic island to the College Green one). Not for the faint-hearted!
PS If I were a betting man, my money would be on BX not happening. Sadly, I don’t think this would prevent the Hawkins bridge being built, nor would it ensure its removal after the ‘temporary’ phase that seems inevitable- doubtless, DCC will find a use for it (the memory of the forlorn poles from the Brennan-DCC spat being used [eventually!] for the ‘5-axle ban’ signs in the city centre springs readily to mind :().
@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:
I imagine they consider it to be yet another ‘feature’ of the project, vertical planting running up to the ‘sky park’ thing. Very difficult to achieve & even more difficult to sustain, i.e its another non runner imo.
The accompanying images of planting (Musee Quai Branly, Paris, and Marché des Halles, Avignon) wouldn’t inspire confidence that it can be achieved over an area larger than a house facade, if even that (hence, presumably, the reason it’s been dubbed the ‘Extraordinary Green Wall’). So what else to use that elevation for instead?
Anyone have a number for JC Decaux?
@gunter wrote:
they have to be partners in this scheme to some extent.
It would be useful to know precisely to what extent- a whole other set of rules applies to local authorities acting as developers.
(As an aside, I note that Archiseek gets quoted on p.19 of the Planning Application Report, as the source of the news story re the new city library. So a big hello to all the staff at SL&A!)
@BTH wrote:
Sorry to be harping on and on about this
No apology necessary- you’re saying pretty much what I’d be saying (but with a slightly more even tone, perhaps;)).
I was looking at the detail in the application yesterday. The Henry Street part really is an abomination, and there are so many little things wrong that aren’t obvious from the images posted on here- oddly placed snaking circulation corridors, dead frontage onto Moore Lane comprising a wall of substations, and don’t mention the bridges! Or are they skyways?
I do like some of the proposal, but as you say BTH, it is starting from flawed premises at the city level.
Also, re gunter’s image above, does it seem that the full height of that south-facing elevation will be planted? Seems like an odd choice. What’s the intention? Combat the overheating that would arise if it were all glazed? Not that I’m advocating this as a solution, but turning the slope through 180 degrees would seem like a better option for that element. I suppose this shows how muddled the concept actually is- they propose a north facing park that is essentially a green zig-zag staircase (anyone else reminded of the Simpsons’ ‘escalator to nowhere’?) and a south-facing elevation requiring screening. Huh?
Slightly off topic, but I can’t believe that a planner could read all of the documentation and whatever letters will be submitted within the statutory time period- the application documentation is physically huge.
I presume there was pre-planning consultation…
To the best of my (admittedly limited) knowledge, the primary driver of red/green phasing is the SCATS system in Dublin City Council. Buses are part of it, yes, but not the sole concern, although the end result is similar, yes- the pedestrian suffers.
I can’t say I’d favour your proposal to re-surface the roads. Banning turns and through routes is the most time- and money-efficient approach, regardless of how slow it seems. But I agree in principle- as I’ve said many times before, the pedestrian should be at the very top of the food chain in the city core.
@GrahamH wrote:
I find it all quite disturbing that a bunch of suburbanite TDs who come into the city for Dáil sittings and a frolic of a Sunday afternoon before Christmas who listen to the grand projets of a handful of quango invitees to their sittings, are making decisions that affect the very grain of a city of which they know absolutely nothing about.
Depends on the quality of the advice, really.
But how else should it happen? If we were to wait for full public support I’d have long since packed my bags for fairer shores. (The only thing that gets full public support is ‘I want to drive my car where I want’ which is all well and good until we realise that they’re not talking about one car, they’re talking about one car each.) Sometimes – especially when extended periods of pain are involved – it can be convenient to play the ‘my hands are tied by the “experts”‘ card.
Also, you make it sound as if the ‘grand projets’ are discrete proposals from various bodies. Not so. There was a time when they were planned as an integrated system. Yes, the implementation is the responsibility of different bodies, but not the decision to provide them at a strategic level. And while the datails might leave a bit to be desired, the implementation should be separated from the policy when criticism is being levelled.
gunter-
I know no more details other than the above, really, gleaned from someone who was in attendance at the Clarence hearing, and who would know some of the players involved in that case. I agree about the hiring of a replacement, but equally it must be a bit a poisoned chalice at this stage, no?Stephen-
I don’t think the previous comparison I made was slanderous, and I stand by the point I was making (that letters after one’s name do not automatically lead to ‘right thinking’), but if it keeps the Feds off our tails for another 48 hours, I’m happy to make the change. For the team, you understand.@gunter wrote:
This cannot be true, ctesiphon!
Why can’t they make the bad stuff disappear?
You can’t just replace a dynamic conservation action figure with a planning officer. How is that legal? This is a wind up, right?
I understand she has a conservation qualification.
Then again, Eddie ‘The Eagle’ Edwards was a ski-jumper.
To the best of my knowledge, Claire Hogan has left the building.* Her replacement, I think, is Patricia Hyde who, according to my sources, would have… eh, a ‘broader understanding’, of conservation philosophy and principles. (And in case that’s too ambiguous, I mean ‘lack of sensitivity’.)
If anyone knows more, please confirm/correct my statement.
*Oh look- two Elvis references in as many posts!
@PTB wrote:
How much control did McCauley Daye O’Connell have in this project? Could they have led to poor final state of the building?
Which leads me to wonder about the potential gulf between the graphics of the Abbey Street scheme and the final artefact. 😮
@gunter wrote:
Obviously, notjim, ctesiphon are sensible all the time, that goes without saying
Have we a fourth for whist?
@johnfp wrote:
Anger management ? schizophrenia more like.
It is noticeable you couldn’t make reference to one single development of note on the street since this thread began and it is probable that nothing worthwhile will occur for donkeys years because DCC, ABP and Taisce will see to that.Using a mental illness as a slur? Oh that’s good, that is.
And your second sentence shows a breathtaking lack of familiarity with the planning system. But please, carry on! You’re saving the rest of us from having to show up your nonsense for what it is.
@johnfp wrote:
I mean, look at this particular thread on O Connell Steet, 120 odd pages of pure bullshit.
Do you really expect your opinions to be taken seriously when this little nugget of poo is lodged in amongst them?
When the roof of your house is leaking, painting the walls gold won’t fix the problem.
@notjim wrote:
I thought that was never built?
Hence the fact that I’ve yet to see it in the flesh! (Sorry. :o)
