-Donnacha-
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
lexington,
i disagree that a residential/retail mix is less attractive than a hotel – , the proposal, as far as i know, does not include car parking facilities, which is pretty desirable in this central location. my point was that there are far better central locations than cornmaket street for a large scale hotel development with conference centre etc., in terms of accessibility etc. In addition, i dont think that the planners, in this case, can have regard to whether the apartments are overpriced or not, they will sell for what people are willing to pay for them surely. by the way, i have not seen the proposal so i have no idea about design issues and whether the scheme has progressed from the original, but from what you are saying i am not too optimistic. also, the bodega operates from 12.00 and does significant trading during daytime so i think thay would have had genuine concerns.
in relation to what you have said about the mannix proposal, i completely agree, and in addition, as a prominent corner site, one would think that there is a need for a structure with a bit of height at that location.
Jaysus, some people are getting het up over this!
I don’t think the Sacred Heart statue belongs on O’Connell Street because it’s a piece of low-grade religious iconography. I’d lump it in with those plastic Virgin Mary-shaped holy water bottles you get at Lourdes, and anyone who would defend it as religious art would be on very shaky ground.
But saying it should go merely because it’s religious smacks to me of the New Ireland revisionism that would have us believe the country’s history began with the discovery of money some time in the mid-90s and its geography stops at the Dublin commuter belt.
Ireland is not, as Sue says, a multi-denominational, multi-cultural society yet.
Things are changing, but the vast majority of us are still of Celtic stock and are still Catholic, however often we go to mass. It’s still a huge part of our culture, whether some of us like it or not. Personally, I can’t see the big deal if that manifests itself in the odd statue on our streets. As long as the statues are good.Asdad – are you getting mixed up between Rio’s Christ the Redeemer (amazing) and Montreal’s light-bulb cross (crap but strangely appropriate) I agree that Sue’s argument would see both pulled down.
thank god that hotel proposal was rejected, it was TERRIBLE. it was something along the lines of a red-brick confusion of mock georgian and other bits thrown in, cheap, poorly designed. i saw the model in city council’s office a few years back and it was really poor and would have been a disrace if it were permitted. also, the site is more suitable for retail and residential, there are far better sites for quality hotels in the city. as far as i knew residents in the ‘old labourers dwellings’ as well as bodega people objected purely on the basis of loss of amenity i.e. light. in general, i think an taisce, and other residents are entitled to object, and by the way, it had significant local support from street traders etc. in the end, i believe cornmarket street has been ‘saved’ in this regard, and hopefully, the current application, due fairly soon, will represent a more attractive and interesting addition to the streetscape.
I don’t think Dubliners have enough civic pride to treat a water feature in a prominent site as anything other than a rubbish bin/ toilet.
Did anyone notice this very local addition to the Luas overhead wires on Abbey Street:
Last weekend, two pairs of runners dangled above the street, tied to the wires – either junkie skangers marking their territory, or someone’s idea of a joke. I don’t know if they’re still there (near the Liffey Street junction), and I didn’t have a camera. Sorry!Yeah, meanwhile we went to all the expense of hosting the presidency and got nothing but a ‘riot’ to show for it. (Which was disgracefully over-hyped by Sky News.)
It was painful to see the spectacularly revamped O’Connell Street lying idle on what should have been a golden opportunity to show it off. Town was empty.
The official celebrations in Merrion Square were a bunch of tents with tourist officials handing out holiday brochures, and cheesy-looking bands stomping around a makeshift stage in Liederhosen.
Dublin seriously dropped the ball on this one.“But we ask that they be built outwards rather than up. Cut down the heights”
Build outwards? Does this guy seriously think thats a good idea? What is it with Irish people that they think urban sprawl is preferable to taller buildings?
anto, the city council succeeded in persuading the developers behind the hotel application to re-submit and change course completely. An application went in before christmas for retail street connecting cormarket to paul st and approx. 80 apartments (no car parking)
The lift shaft is indeed rising there. With the delay in the towers’ demolition (due to start last November, I think), I wonder if the first residents of Santry Cross will be looking straight out at the not-so-magnificent seven from behind their wooden blinds.
If not a brick has come down on the old towers when they are trying to flog these new high-rise apartments, surely the developers will be entitled to blame DCC for letting down its side of the bargain.
Even if the old Ballymun was gone in the morning, I think trying to sell private homes in a big, blank, modernist tower in that area is chancing your arm and will surely be the biggest test so far of the housing market for first time buyers in Dublin.
Well, one of the trams did derail on a test run during the week. I don’t know if this was the cause…
On the Easter holiday traffic thing – maybe the Government could have saved a few euros on Luas and the like by instead starting a proper school bus scheme across the city.
The difference in the traffic the last couple of days is unbelievable.
Surely a Dublin bus or two allocated to each school would be money well spent compared to the exorbitantly expensive sagas of Luas/ the port tunnel.
Convincing parents that there may actually be an alternative to driving your little ones a half mile down the road every morning may be another matter.
Of course in my day you walked if school was close and cycled if it wasn’t.
Now where’s me pipe and slippers…?On the Easter holiday traffic thing – maybe the Government could have saved a few euros on Luas and the like by instead starting a proper school bus scheme across the city.
The difference in the traffic the last couple of days is unbelievable.
Surely a Dublin bus or two allocated to each school would be money well spent compared to the exorbitantly expensive sagas of Luas/ the port tunnel.
Convincing parents that there may actually be an alternative to driving your little ones a half mile down the road every morning may be another matter.
Of course in my day you walked if school was close and cycled if it wasn’t.
Now where’s me pipe and slippers…?What are the alternatives for a person who wants to build their own home? Its pretty much live in a poorly constructed & designed but well marketed shitebox – full stop. And I think the poor services in rural areas is a very weak argument. By living in a high density urban development the services are not much better – but there is some benefits to the developer.
Any land earmarked for housing is just that – not High Density, medium density etc with minimum lot sizes & such – hence 16+ units acre are lobbed in – in the same fashion as the “estate” next door.fin,
i think the rural housing problem, as a planning issue, has become contentious because of the high level of urban generated demand for housing (dormitory housing, second homes etc), not because of an increase in the demand for housing from those with real socio-economic connections to rural areas. i do not think anyone has a difficulty with a farmer’s or someone working in rural areas’ right to build on his/her own land. it is an urban issue because it relates directly to the urban housing market and the way that affects demand for housing in the countryside.
my point on ‘ownership’ was probably ambigious. what i was trying to say was that the ‘countryside’ is a valuable resource, and that this ‘value’ is both tangible (agriculture, forestry, tourism) and intangible (amenity, visual, environmental), and that what a person does on their own patch of land can have implications on a wider scale (in terms of water, drainage, flooding, visual pollution), and that perhaps there should be more consideration of this. i was not advocating an elitist/condescending attitude of an urban clique demanding a pure and untouched countryside for their enjoyment.
why all of a sudden has there been a seemingly complete abandonment of sense in relation to the rural planning debate, i have heard some of the most ridiculous arguments from the pro-bungalow blitz brigade (IFA, ICMSA, IRDA) recently, about the communist style diktat forcing the oppressed people from the countryside into clusters, and basically telling anyone who doesnt agree that allowing a free-for all to xxxx off and mind their own business.
i believe that a person who lives in an urban settlement (the majority of the Irish population) have a right to be concerned about what happens to the irish countryside. i really can’t see why anyone can have a problem with that.
i think the problem is that many people living in the countryside now are concerned about the viability of rural communities and believe that housing is the solution. but its not, building houses in a free for all, the majority of which will have no contribution to rural communities as they are merely dormitories for towns and cities, will actually further contribute to rural decline.
rural areas are a resource as well as a place that people live in, however, no-one in the debate should be claiming ‘ownership’ of the countryside, or its values, meanings, importance etc. when will there be a rational approach to rural planning? anyone?
