hutton

@Ihatecowboys wrote:

The road is needed full stop. People who live in the areas where it passes through need and want it….rant… rant… rant… Thats why opinion in the area is completely devided. Its construction alone will create jobs and as a direct consequence of the road property in the areas it passes through will increase in value. Plenty of land can then be re-zoned for more sprawl. Businesses will want to locate close to the road creating more jobs – requiring a further road to bypass the bypass. A few posts in the ground… rant… rant… Well go to any builders providers and Im sure you will find some similar ones. Probably not rotten and probably in better condition. Once you get them i rant… rant… rant…. rant… rant… rant… put the postd in the ground. then go to the butchers and get a few bones and then the beach and a few stones and a few scraps of metal from a salvage shop. Then you can go and have fun looking at these things. the thoughts are exciting me…………..NOT.

THIS ROAD AND ALL SIMILAR ROAD PROJECTS TO FOLLOW ARE PROGRESS

RANT RANT

THE ROAD IS CLEARLY NEEDED

AS IS PROFESSIONAL CARE FOR THE MENTALLY DERANGED

RANT

ITS PEOPLE LIKE YOU PVC THAT SHOULD BE LOCKED UP IN A HOME FOR PROMOTING WASTEFUL USE OF MONEY AND RESOURCES. RANT RANT RANT.

THESE POSTS AND OTHER ANCIENT AREASWOULD RANT RANT NOT HAVE BEEN UNCOVERED IF THIS ROAD WAS NOT BEING CONSTRUCTED. RANT RANT.

RANT RANT RANT

SO THEY WERE BURIED UNDER SOIL FOR THE LAST THOUSANDS OF YEARS SO IT WILL BE NO DIFFERENT IF THEY ARE BURIED UNDER A ROAD [CLEARLY A PROFESSIONAL OPINION HERE]. PROBABLY BETTER FOR THEIR PRESERVATION.

GET OVER IT.

Indeed. *yawn*.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

any word of what it is

From today’s Times –

Tara ‘henge’ will be destroyed – claim
Tim O’Brien

Minister for the Environment Dick Roche has already issued draft directions that would allow for the destruction of the recently discovered “henge” along the route of the M3 in Co Meath, it was claimed yesterday.

The environmental group TaraWatch said Mr Roche had sent draft directions to the National Museum to preserve the henge “by record”, a process that would facilitate photographs and written records being made before the henge is removed.

Under Section 14A of the National Monuments Act 2004, if a national monument is discovered, the Minister is required to consult the director of the National Museum before deciding on what action to take.

Mr Roche told The Irish Times yesterday that he was in consultation with the National Museum, but he declined to elaborate on the nature of that consultation. Asked if he had sent draft directions to the museum to preserve the monument by record, as claimed by TaraWatch, Mr Roche repeated that he was “in consultation with the National Museum” and referred to his department’s previously issued comments on the discovery.

On Tuesday the department said: “The Minister has consulted with the director of the museum on the directions that would be most appropriate in this instance from the point of view of best archaeological practice. Directions will issue as soon as possible after the Minister receives the director’s response.

“The Minister is advised that the surviving elements of the monument are extremely fragile, underlining the need for an early decision on how to proceed.”

TaraWatch spokesman Vincent Salafia said the group had “well-placed sources within the National Museum” who were aware of draft directions that had been sent, which instructed that the monument be preserved by record.

Dr Mark Clinton, chairman of An Taisce’s national monuments and antiquities committee, said: “The discovery of what could be called a temple, after the fashion of a comparable discovery at Emain Macha, seat of the kings of Ulster, is of obvious major significance. Such sites are extremely rare.” He called for full scientific excavation to be followed by reconstruction.

Labour Party environment spokesman Éamon Gilmore said the issue could have been avoided if the Government had accepted a November 2004 proposal that the M3 be developed immediately in three sections, “and that the controversial section, running through the Skryne Valley, be rerouted”.

Fine Gael transport spokeswoman Olivia Mitchell has said she was “stunned” to learn that “more than 500 archaeologists, hired at a cost of €30 million, managed to miss a four-acre historical site while excavating for the new M3 motorway”.

© 2007 The Irish Times

@publicrealm wrote:

Today’s image :confused:

WTF?

There’s no excuse for this 😡

City Development Plan – Conservation Area Policy H13

“It is the policy of DCC to protect…the historic fabric of conservation areas in the control of development”

Maybe this isn’t a C.A. – sure its only abutting Dublin Castle afterall :rolleyes:

Aye, being stuck on that ledge not good. good snaps of desperate days of Irishman fighting Irishman.

Btw, without being a pedant, are you sure that the men in above photo are ‘staters’? if so are they medical corps – just the red + on white armbands etc are intriguing…

This release has just been issued by Cllr Daithi Doolan, who as chair of DCC Planning SPC is supporting the billboard scheme, in the abscence of an EIA, and as with Gobshite AM, Doolan is also not privy to a contract’s contents.

Doolan is aware, however, that arising out of the duplicitious project-splitted fashion by which this has been made, that comprehensive adjudication by An BP would cost 25K.

Happily he seems to see no contradiction between standing over the DCC/ JCD deal on one hand, while at the same time soap-boxing to the rest of the world about “outrage at hearing costs” regarding Poolbeg.

Who are you fooling Doolan?

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

speaking of the carlton, does anyone know what stage its at?

Just thought this might be of interest – the original idea to develop a mall from O’Connell St thru to Moore St dates as far back as 1853.
Do you think it’ll be completed in another 150 years – or do you reckon the site will still be dogged by the “Curse of the Carlton”??? Bets being taken now, at generous odds of 10 to 1 – redeemable in 2161 :p

@From “Lost Dublin”, by Frederick O’Dwyer (page 80) wrote:

Moves to redevelop the MOORE STREET MARKET go back as far as 1853
when a Dublin engineer, John S. Sloane (d. 1886) promoted a scheme at
the Great Exhibition. He proposed to build lodging houses, baths and a
market house, and lay out an arcade between Moore Street and Upper
Sackville Street emerging betwen the Bilton Hotel and the Dorset
Institution (q.v.) in Upper Sackville Street. He also proposed the
removal of St Thomas’s Church, to extend Gloucester Street and to
remove Nelson Pillar. The ‘Irish Builder’, commenting on a revived
attempt to promote the project in 1881, thought this last proposal the
only good portion in an otherwise ‘absurdly utopian scheme’.

The most important element in Sloane’s project was the market house
which was to be circular like the reconstructed Ormond Market off the
quays. He planned to accomodate one hundred victuallers, fishmongers
and greengrocers, twice the number previously in the area. The
building was to be covered with an iron and glass roof, supported on
external walls, and a central cast-iron column which would also
discharge rain-water to cleanse the floor. In answer to the concern in
the city at the presence of slaughterhouses in insanitary
surroundings, Sloane proposed to accommodate abbatoirs around the
perimeter of the building. However the financial failure of the South
City Markets, opened in 1881, ensured that Sloane never got the
backing he desired.

@jdivision wrote:

…The Sunday Business Post… I wrote about it having seen the document.

Yikes – just after noticing that now, so my apologies to both yourself and PVCKing for making a complete hames in my off-the-cuff remarks about not punchily written. No offence intended – the real crit I had with that article was with the heading, which would have been a subeditors flaw. 😮

@GrahamH wrote:

As far as I recall hutton, the O’Connell Street Project cost €40 million, not €100 million.

Phew, that’s 60 M saved so :p

@johnfp wrote:

I`ve noiced in my recent net surfings that Dublin is being increasingly portrayed by images of the Docklands which I must say, , gives a far better impression of the city. O Connell Street , the recognised main thoroughfare of the city , is increasingly fading into the background, which is sad really given it`s historical importance. I mean , if you stand back from O Connell bridge and look northwards, you cannot help but admire the structural elegance of the street and what it once represented, long since destroyed by neon lights, atrocious advertising, despicable shop fronts, fast food outlets and horrendous traffic congestion. What an opportunity the IAP presented, and what did we get ?
A totally disproportionate spike (representing drug abuse in the area ?) and a resurfacing / paving exercise that seemed to take an eternity. You wouldn&#8217]

@Alek Smart wrote:

Interesting bit of Ass-Covering codology goin on presently at Princes St/O Connell St.
Somebody has obviously costed the amount of Garda man-hours which has to be spent here at peak times.
The result is a flurry of digging and setting in of some tactile edging at each “side” of the entrance to Princes St.
Added to this is yet another Stainless Steel Pole or perhaps two in anticipation of some additional signalling to augment the present ped crossing array.
Slight oversight on the original comprehensive safety-audited IAP design no doubt.
Nothing to be concerned about…Nobody killed,Nobody Dismissed,Nobody responsible…..However…I wonder if the City Manager,Asst City Manager,Director of Traffic and Chief Engineer have considered the possible negative effects of yet another Pole on the Reversing Artic which appears there each evening at 18.45 ish…..

What did we get indeed! Its always the little things that bug – you ignore them for a while and, despite the best attempts at optomism, they just add up 🙁

Well to begin with, we got a street where Quirkey’s amusement arcade is still operating good-oh – except now the slot/ gaming machine section is larger than ever. Totally against DCC policy of course and a real two-fingered salute to the municipality and its citizens. Will there be enforcement? Dont hold your breath is my advice – it hasnt happened yet, and is unlikely to in the foreseeable future. Of course the real question is why is there no enforcement?

Then theres the Carlton site, where Sean Carey assisted by Ciaran MacNamara saw fit to initiate CPO’ing the site, only 2 years after it got permission, and apparently just after the UK based Grosvenor Group had indicated their interest in being the anchor investors. This was well covered in both Village and Phoenix last year. Happily although the CPO is not yet complete, DCC thru its agents saw fit to sell off Carlton for less than 50M in an untendered deal to Joe O’ Reilly of Castlethorn. Among the more interesting clauses in the deal is one which apparently give JoR up to 7 years to develop, and if not satisfactory he can sell it back to DCC at full market price. Nice when you can get it. Suffice to say, no section 183 had been passed by councilors releasing the sites, and the first they were aware of the deal was last year – after the 16 Moore St people started kicking up a fuss. How, eh, interesting :rolleyes:

And then there’s the public domain itself, where great concepts seem to have taken priority over the practical application. The cycle way on the right-hand side; now you see it, now you don’t. All gone now – cycleway, sure what would you want one of those for in a renovated st? Sure aren’t DCC doing a great job for cyclists by getting “free” bicycles for them? But in reality, how much more of a cycle-unfriendly environment could you have than the renovated O’C St – all the junctions left as they are. And for a real treat, try turning right on to Parnell St east, or left coming from same st – you simply can’t without breaking the law. Absolutely outragous and indicative of the real level of committment by DCC towards cycle provision.

Or there’s the pedestrian crossing at the south-bound, southern end of O’C St, outside Irish Nationwide. An excellent folly – the sequence is still the same whereby its green man for pedestrians, then red, then green again – all while traffic has a red light. Its been like this for at least 10 years, and will most likely be the same in 2017.

I have made criticisms on this thread already re the lack of seating, amount of poles, narrowness of the central median, and how poor design choice has of paving at the central section has resulted in a dangerous blur for pedestrians where it is not automatically clear where the pavement ends and the road begins – this last issue of dimensional ambiguity also arises with the side of Clerys. Anyway rest assured I am not going to repeat my crits on those again.

Personally I think the real monuments on O’C St is the concrete block at Abbey St and the adverts that are going to soon festoon the place, courtesy of deals such as with JC Decaux.

7 years of disruption and €100 million on, was it worth it? Not as it is, imo. 😡

@publicrealm wrote:

Absolutely. Time to move on from the old ways, rising tide levels playing pitch etc.

For years now many northsiders have been living happily in Ranelagh, and my neighbours and I fully accept them and consider them a colourful addition to the area.

Their sunny and carefree outlook makes a pleasant contrast with that of the indigenous population and, when treated properly, they prove very loyal.

Hear hear. LMAO 😀