ctesiphon
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@t.scott wrote:
i get the impression that ABP tend s to react with a knee jerk rather than face the hassle of proving to opponents and detractors of schemes, the merits and benefits of such projects.
It’s the job of a developer, or his planning consultant, to make the case for a project. ABP won’t do it for you. It’s ABP’s job to adjudicate on matters where there’s disagreement between the two opposing sides and, though this is my subjective view, to represent the interests of the entire country rather than just a particular area.
In the case of Morehampton Road, while the locals may have been well organised, I’d be of the opinion that the building was very wrong in that situation- totally out of keeping with the character of the area, the preservation of which is a stated objective in the DCC Dev Plan.
Another reason for sending the tall ones (if we decide they are needed) to a more ‘blank slate’ area such as the docklands.Agreed, hutton. Where social history is concerned, which is not always immediately apparent from the physical fabric of a building, it is important to tread softly. ( ๐ฎ I’ll get my coat…)
@aj wrote:
i think maybe the issue is patriotism not nationalism.
This from an An Taisce book from 1982 called ‘Ireland’s Architecture- a shared heritage’, on conservation north and south of the border:
“Are we in Ireland suffering from too much nationalism and too little patriotism? … We are so proud of the colours (orange and green) that we have painted our house that we have forgotten to be proud of the house itself.”
(John Lewis-Crosby, Chairman of the Ulster Architectural Heritage Society.)@PDLL wrote:
on the basis of my socio-cultural and ethnic identity
I don’t think you can equate Ireland with homogeneity any longer I’m afraid, PDLL (if you ever could). You’d find more commonality in football, where choice operates more than in the arbitrary area of nationality, which is only an accident of birth. As jimg says, human first, Irish second.
Have we forgotten what the three colours in the Tricolour represent?
If it’s not a Protected Structure, or abutting a PS, then the owner can pretty much demolish at will. Have you checked the RPS of the Dublin City Council Development Plan? That should be your first port of call.
If they intend to replace a single dwelling with a single dwelling, there would be slim grounds for objection- injury to the character of the area or to the setting of a Protected Structure in the area would be one avenue, but it can difficult to prove.
Your best bet would be to engage a planning consultant if you feel very strongly, as they would be able to give you specific direction and advice. In the long run it can be worth the couple of hundred euros fee if it protects the value of your house or your area. Not knowing the particular property in question I can’t say much more than that.
You could also make an Observation on the application rather than the standard Objection- a chance to say what kind of development you’d find acceptable.
If you’re looking for info on the park, ‘Four Roads to Dublin: A History of Rathmines, Ranelagh, and Leeson Street’ by Deirdre Kelly might have something, or the local library.EDIT: Cross post with Graham! ๐
That seems to be a pretty fair assessment of the man. You are right to note that he was a human being too- flawed and all as he may have been. It can’t have been easy for his family in the last few years to hear it all paraded about, and it would be unpleasant for them to hear or to hear of the gloaters appearing out of the woodwork to assassinate what’s left of his reputation.
Having said that, there can be little doubt that he was consistently involved in dealings that could be described, at best, as less than clear- dealings that cast a long shadow over the planning system and may continue to do so for some time to come. If any good comes from it, it could be that in the long run the role of councillors and TDs in the planning system is scaled back, with the associated parish pump clientilism we all know exists. Not necessarily what he would have wanted, perhaps, but ultimately for the better.
Concerning the crash, he wouldn’t be the first public figure (should rumours be true) to seek solace, from the loneliness of long nights and unfamiliar cities, in the arms of a local comely maiden. It has no bearing on his past as a politician, or on the points that could be debated on a forum such as this.
The great tragedy, apart from the loss for his family, is the effects it could well have on the future of the tribunal. After 8 years, the thought of not getting a result is difficult to entertain- and I don’t just mean in relation to LL himself. It will be interesting to see how many of those under scrutiny use this as a screen behind which to hide in the future proceedings. I feel it is probably too much to hope that it clears blockages in the consciences of the same people, but I never give up hope.@PDLL wrote:
Architectural conservatism in Dublin??? Just a couple of images which might be of interest. All of the talk about how modern/high-rise buildings fit in with the Dublin skyline, reminded me of an art musuem built in Graz, Austria for when it was European capital of culture in 2003. If conservative southern Austrians can build and accept this amidst an absolute architectural paradise, why cannot Dublin manage a few nicely designed high-rises. Are we that conservative????
I’ve long been deeply suspicious of people in grey suits with Looney Tunes ties or deliberately non-matching socks.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
From the vague plans I’ve seen, the expansive altar interventions look like the flooring scheme of an 80s television chatshow – is it intended to cap it off with a salmon pink carpet?
With Anna and Blathnaid from The Afternoon Show giving out communion? Or Thelma and Derek?
Good point about the difference between this and the post-Vatican II changes too.
๐
I thought it might be something as simple as that. I guess it’s just a plea for people to get stuck in and to check in above every so often. I know it takes time for things like sub-forums to get going, which is why I posted my plea down here in regular Ireland land, where it will probably reach a wider audience that it would have above.There are special DEHLG guidelines for churches that are protected structures, such is the sensitivity of the area. Ultimately, liturgical requirements take precedence over conservation requirements. But interestingly, when Ratzinger was a Cardinal he wrote a piece (don’t know the chapter and verse, sorry) saying that there was no liturgical rationale to remove altar railings or other features, which is the reason usually cited by those trying to change things.
And didn’t Jesus himself say ‘wherever two or three are gathered in my name’ or words to that effect? Christianity began in caves and back rooms, so the setting is surely incidental to the practice. Why can’t the Bishop understand this?
Though not a believer, I have been to mass in the Cathedral on the basis that a building comes alive when serving its purpose, and it was a fine sight indeed.Most of John O’Connor’s comments are on the money (pardon the pun), and it’s particularly nice to see objective design criteria being applied to decisions. And it’s not even as if they’re nit-picking over the colour of the bricks or something- single-aspect north-facing apartments are a very basic no-no in planning/design terms. I don’t think there’s one architect or planner out there who’d disagree. Or, put another way, I don’t think there’s anyone out there who’d want to live in one (which is a sliiiiightly different thing).
However, can I ask why this was posted in the main Ireland section rather than in the Irish Planning sub-forum? This is a planning matter at heart and, as such, belongs in the other place. Or do most people on this board not bother looking above the line? There’s some good debate going on up there ^^^ in the purer air ๐ฎ of the planning world that could really benefit from the input of non-planners. Some of the debates are slow, but that can only be the fault of the board members (not the Board members though ๐ ). It’s up to all of us to get stuck in. I’d like not to read this as a reflection of the division between the two disciplines and, by extension, as a confirmation of some of the comments in the Board’s Annual Report, but it’s hard. While we mightn’t always agree (godforbid!), we are technically all in this game together- architects, planners, enlightened laypeople.
So come on in- the water’s lovely (and I hear the sharks have gone into hibernation, so there’s no better time). Lexington, one of the few to dip a toe in so far, has just started a discussion on the use of CAD modelling and photomontages on which I’m sure many here would have an opinion, to name just one thread.Probably true, Richards. They are certainly abandoning the bikes in Beijing as fast as humanly possible- coming to view them as a sign of a ‘backward society’ that doesn’t tally with their new hi-tech Olympic image. I heard Richard Rogers on the telly not so long ago tell a story about being in Beijing and commenting to the mayor (?) about how great it was to see the number of bikes in the city (9 million, if Katie ‘litejazz’ Melua is to be believed ๐ ), and the mayor misunderstood and pretty much said ‘I know, but we’re doing something about it, they’ll be gone before too long.’ RR’s point was that they are the ultimate form of sustainable city transport.
I agree, Graham, the number of Asian cyclists in the city is remarkable. However, quite a few of them are pretty bad cyclists- meandering along roads, wrong way on one way streets, wrong way in bike lanes, and few lights/reflectors. I’m guessing it’s in large part due to the fact that they come from a very different cycling culture where bikes have freer reign in towns. Hard to make these points without attracting the wrath of some right-on wet-lib, but I don’t think my eyes deceive me. I do welcome them onto the streets, as the more cyclists there are the more visible we all are, but their behaviour still frustrates me as a fellow cyclist.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
No doubt if you were wearing a novelty hat with a siren and flashing LEDs they wouldn’t have seen you.
You’re probably right. Now where did I put that receipt for Hector Grey’s?
Lex-
Are you suggesting that CAD should replace photomontages, or do you see them as somehow equivalent? I think there’s a danger with each, as tungstentee says, of seductive images obfuscating content. Whether there is greater potential with these than with regular drawings I’m not sure.
It’s late- I’ll try and dream about it.A hardcoir gaelgoir, I see!
Bfheidir go bhuil some information ansin. If not, tar ar ais anseo and we’ll feic what we can do.Y’know what, I might apply myself. My grasp of the Gaeilge couldn’t be worse than some over there.
In case I wasn’t clear in my last post, my reference to the Rural Housing Guidelines was to do with accommodating the needs of farming family members who can’t seem to cut the apron strings. At least until their house is magically built, at which stage they suddenly develop their independence.
I’m sure you knew what I was getting at.@crestfield wrote:
Its just that cyclists appear to protray themselves like upstanding people being hindered by other road users. Instead their just as bad as the rest!
Not guilty to the latter]do[/I] have a place on a board such as this, I’d have thought. Not just in posts, but as rules of thumb for citizen interaction. I don’t think you can divorce the citizen from the city.
ctesiphon.
(Fresh from nearly being knocked down by a BMW SUV and one of those stupid steroid Minis at Donnybrook church. Front and back lights, 4 reflectors and a wally band, if you must know. ๐ก )tommyt- quick question. I’ve heard the phrase ‘shank’s mare’ before, but do you know where it came from?
Ta.PS Rather than move to a more civilised society, couldn’t we just create one here instead? By, say, not cycling across ped crossings when the peds have a green man? It would be a start.
@what? wrote:
I Tried to post this in the architects section but got no response, perhaps the planners can help me out:
Ha! Planners to the rescue! ๐
Re Planning rules: I don’t know for sure, but I’d have thought that there were similar provisions in the Arans as there are in, say, Co Clare (and all over the country since the intro of the ‘sustainable’ rural housing guidelines- don’t get me started…).
Does the Dev Plan not say anything about the islands? (Galway CoCo, if I’m not mistaken.)Re Purchase: This is a different matter as you indicate- common sense would tell me that it’s a free market, unless specific language provisions apply, as with the Gaeltacht areas of Co Galway. They are belatedly trying to apply these rules after years of the ‘cupla focal’ brigade saying ‘sea’ and ‘go raibh maith agat’ to the CoCo. Again, the Dev Plan should have this in it, or the CoCo staff would know. Have you asked them?
@Thomond Park wrote:
sink it down by 30-50 metres into the ground as was done on a grand scale at the San Siro in Milan.
Turning it into a double-size olympic swimming pool by default? ๐
Very high water table in the area- possibly prohibitively costly.What’s the book, KB2?
Interesting that it’s spelled with a ‘Y’, but nice to have the confirmation. ๐
