Forum Replies Created
November 28, 2007 at 4:37 pm in reply to: Dublin Airport Metro to have unconnected terminus? #749683JoePublic wrote:From what I recall of the media coverage of the cost-cutting measures a while back in terms of station finish, it was said that the Dublin metro WON’T have high quality finishes like the Copenhagen metro – personally I haven’t been on it.
Well, thats certainly interesting. I hadn’t heard that comparison being made. There definitely is a point to be made about the quality of the public environment in the metro as anything that ages/deteriorates quickly has the potential to cause problems in the medium-long term. Lets just hope that a lower budget can be utilised with a bit of imagination to provide something that is acceptable.November 28, 2007 at 4:10 pm in reply to: Dublin Airport Metro to have unconnected terminus? #749680
The ‘stripped back’ style of the stations is very reminiscent of the Copenhagen Metro which I saw last year. I thought the overall feel was minimal but sleek and modern also. Certainly did not feel cheap/tacky or in any way dangerous.
Some of the big concert promoters are looking to erect temporary structures (big tents) in the Phoenix Park and perhaps at the Museum of Modern Art while the Point is closed. No doubt other options will also be suggested.
As for Grand Canal Square – Hanby Wallace solicitors has signed up to move to one of the new buildings under construction in the area. Looks like this is turning into the new legal quarter.Quote:[Would a glazed surface not have given a little more class?/QUOTE]
Better avoid putting in glazed surfaces for the moment, with all this rain – personal injuries cases could abound…
The ‘interconnector’ title given to the project doesn’t help either, people don’t have a clue what it is or of the benefits it would bring …
Seems like someone agrees with you Peter FitzPatrick. Farewell Interconnector, hello DART Underground!
Couldn’t agree more. The M3 would never even have been an option if Dublin had been planned properly over the last 10 years and sprawl across Leinster had been contained.
Providing a motorway to Navan and Cavan will only continue to encourage developers to provide inappropriate housing on the edge of small towns and villages for long distance commuters along this route.
We still aren’t learning – the proposal to redevelop Ballsbridge at a higher density (and yes, with high rise – OMG, how scary!) would provide for hundreds of housing units close to the city centre and beside a major public transport service (DART). Going for higher densities in Dublin (not just in Ballsbridge – this will be very expensive accommodation and not a likely draw for 1st timers) surely makes better sense than forcing people to look as far away as Cavan.
Also balance this with competing urban centres other than Dublin that can provide jobs for people who live close by and stop the relentless commuting to the capital.
Point is – the M3 is simply adding another major error to the litany of mistakes already made.
Once a bypass goes ‘active’, it seems common enough to lower the speedlimit on the old road to 80kph. The old N7 route through Nenagh has seen the same thing since the bypass was opened. The new N7 (bypass) has a 100kph limit while the old road has been reclassified and the limit has been lowered to 80kph. This has the advantange of applying a consistent approach to the road network which makes sense to me.
It looks like a new lighting scheme is going up through Phibsboro too, around the junction with the NCR. Don’t have photos but the light fittings are a very peculiar wide cone shape mounted on very high poles. Battleship grey in colour. Haven’t seen anything else like them in the city and don’t find them particularly attractive. The old poles and lights are still in place too so its a bit of a mess at the moment.
There has been a lot of discussion on this – you should chec k out this thread for starters:
You can find links to similar threads at the bottom of each page on this site, or search for specific topics you are interested in.
The image in the Irish Times looks impressive alright and the cluster of tall towers could really transform this part of the city. The proposal to insert a series of eight story blocks into the gaps between existing three to four floor buildings facing on to Thomas street looks a bit more problematic though. Reads a bit like a set of broken teeth IMHO.
I saw Minister Dermot Ahern interviewed on ‘The Political Show’ over the weekend. Asked about whether the decentralisation plan complemented the National Spatial Strategy he said that he thought it fitted in perfectly because it was all about ‘spreading development as widely as possible around the state’.
And there was me thinking spacial strategy was about avoiding that entirely and concentrating development in a few key areas to provide a counterweight to the development of Dublin…
Ah well, now that the probation officers aren’t going to Navan and FAS looks like turning down Birr, the number of locations may be about to decline somewhat from the original 53 that were proposed.
My understanding is that the metro will terminate at a new station at St. Stephen’s Green which will also house a station (at a separate level) for the interconnector between Heuston and Connolly. This should allow for transition between all modes.
One of my pet hates is the destruction of High Street and Clanbrassil Street during the ill-fated attempt to build the now abandoned ‘inner tangent’. The failure to rebuild both sides of these streets with suitably scaled developments (higher than the prevalant 3-4 stories) means that the sense of enclosre that used to mark the character of the area is totally lost.
One of the most depressing streets in Dublin has to be Mount Street from Merrion Square to the canal (can’t remember if this is upper or lower) – some of the worst examples of speculative office buildings all collected together in one place.