-Donnacha-
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
But is it not the case that if no ESB service exists, or the existing line would need upgrading to service a one off rural house, that the homeowner picks up the tab for installing the new line / upgrading the existing line? Or is it a nominal charge and the balance picked up by the taxpaying public?
I accept the fact that roads need maintenance and more cars means more wear etc. but can this new infrastucture charge not be graded to hit the rural new builder heavier than the urban developer.
I write this an urban dweller with ideas of living in a rural setting, but the idea is shrinking from building to buying fron the existing bungalow bliss housing stock. That said, I would much rather live in a 1970’s bungalow than a 1990’s semi-d.Originally posted by ewanduffy
And let the Jackeen gobshites pay for the extra cost of services to these one off houses through increased taxation. Rural Ireland seems to want the benefits of urban Ireland without the costs.I would like to know roughly how much more it costs the ESB to supply electricity to a house in a rural setting. My understanding is that if no service passes the site – new poles etc have to be provided at the cost of the owner of the site they are to service. Add to this that water and sewerage are not linked to a public supply and we are only left with roads. Simply driving in rural Ireland should give the “Jackeen Gobshites” peace of mind that their hard earned tax dollars are not being spent on country lanes.
Is this service cost to rural sites a moot argument? If not, please feel free to enlighten me.Bloke
no decision from ABP yet on Frinailla’s Blackpool Development, although I expect a refusal on that one, have heard nothing on Albert Quay as yet
i agree – the bus station refurb is a joke – a half assed effort and it is a disgrace – however, i think that it is a short term effort to save face for the Capital of Culture – and nothing more. Its pathethic that neither CIE nor Bus Eireann can put their heads together and deliver an integrated public transport hub on horgans quay – as proposed many years ago – it just shows how these state bodies under perform and how completely incapable and unambitious they really are. its depressing.
How about The Helix? Or is that too far across the Liffey? I have to disagree with Swords being too far to go to see Fingal County Hall – five fecking minutes from the airport?!
Also, I think Ballymun is worth a look, if only for the scale of what’s being done.I used the BS system before. Its OK in a large practice when everyone tries to use it. Its not very obvious (or doesnt even hint towards) what element is on what layer. There is a simplified version at the back of the RIAI good practice guide – looks pretty user friendly to me.
d_d_dallas
i’d say you’ve already made a good guess on where lexington was referring to – capitol cinema grand parade by any chance?
Hardly surprising, but this can’t be allowed to be a permanent drain on the city’s budget. Someone is to blame for this – either Ian Ritchie or the contractors. DCC should pursue this legally and let whoever is responsible either fix it or foot the cleaning bills.
the redevelopment of the mill building on father mathew quay was about to commence until the applicant put in another application for a slightly modified design – i presume they encountered something unexpected and needed to deal with it
there are 18th century buildings on the water street site, but they are being retained as part of the proposal, i think An Taisce have little basis for this submission, although I have not seen it yet. i think the an taisce submission will give CCC the ammunition they need to refuse it and an taisce can take the heat, a bit sad really. its a pity that CCC and AT arent firmly supportive of this first docklands scheme – Cork City Docklands needs a catalyst badly – and it wont come from horgans quay/kent station – here we have a developer willing to be the first to put his hand in to the docklands and he’s going to get burned. cork has a reputation nationally and internationally of a city that is traditionally anti -development, and that image needs to change if the city is ever going to expand eastwards towards the city docks – this decision would confirm that belief and will be a highly symbolic decision and will send a very strong signal out to prospective developers at national and international level.
all new buildings in Limerick have to come with red brick, it’s a rule!
Shouldn’t that be all new buildings in Ireland?
Anyway, this one is appalling.
I didn’t know it had changed hands. Anyone know who owns it now?
It is actually on the Kilkenny side of the River Suir, but I don’t know if that explains why it was built where it was. I’m sure the former Waterford Corpo had some planning jurisdiction over the area…I don’t think the Parnell Street one is particularly bad. The Jury’s blot on the landscape prize, in my book, has to go to the one in Waterford.
lexington,
what site on bachelor’s quay are you talking about, i can’t think of any site there available for development??
Em… is those very precarious steps down from the Charlemont bridge to be used by the public? There are no handrails!
In relation to the Water St. Development Proposal – I am wondering whether An Taisce will object or not, I have a feeling (and I could be very wrong) that An Taisce will not object, although I am sure that neighbouring residents probably will. However, I do not expect or sense any discernible ‘ourage’ nor should there be.
If An Taisce object, on what grounds would this objection be? Building Height ? – The Cork High Buildings Study identified this location as a candidate for high buildings, as did the Cork Docklands Development Strategy and the current Cork City Development Plan. It is a brownfield site on the waterfront, facing south over the city at a gateway location in terms of vehicular and maritime traffic. A high building is essential, appropriate and sustainable. If it were a four storey building, would An taisce object on the basis of it being too low, contrary to City planning Policy and govt guidelines on density and sustainable development?
In terms of design, it, to me, seems quite attractive, although i agree that it can appear monotonous. However, as is often the case in docklands projects, the initial scheme often acts as a catalyst and compromises can be made – eg dublin docklands, canary, bristol. I really hope that CCC give it support because it will kickstart the north docks and the city cannot afford to wait for CIE or Treasury to move on Horgan’s Quay.
I hope also that CCC do not take a number of floors off just to appease the inevitable gombeen local slopitician who is guaranteed to get involved and create pathetic references to Ballymun, the glen etc. Taking four or six floors off this will ruin the opportunity to set the tone for Corks new urban quarter, will institutionalise a conservative approach to design/height/architecture and would be irresponsible and, i believe, contrary to proper planning and sustainable development Cork should learn the lessons from the early approach to dublin docklands and see a project like this as a strategic opportunity to deliver positive developemtn for the entire city
Also, I do not think the site includes or adjoins a protected structure, will not compromise neighbouring dwellings sun/day light. If An Taisce object, on what grounds will this be? By the way if they do object on sound planning grounds (although i cannot anticipate these), leave them, they are entitled, lets have no abuse.
