hutton
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@dave123 wrote:
There is quite a lot of over ambitious projects that were given the dead end,
Dublin will be the only city in Europe that will have no dual lane through road in the city of any kind.
I think these roads are very efficient in getting traffic moving.Maybe this is what Dave was talking about… Gosh wasn’t filling in the canals such a missed opportunity :rolleyes:
Come back Travers Moron, all is forgiven :p
I’m just after noticing that Dave 123 has never since posted since his count reached 321… How very odd – another archiseek member gone MIA – maybe his number was up!
Looks as if Goldhawk/ Phoenix was on the money about O’Toole afterall. But where was he when objections were being lodged; permission has already been granted (on the 8th) to whack the house. The scheme is a monstrosity and will be comparable to that other close-by delightful development on Henrietta St which DCC was so enlightened in giving the go ahead to.
There isn’t even a set of photos of no 12 in the “conservation” report – and yet there are 2 red-herring sets of the Moy bar; FFS. For anybody wanting a textbook lesson in ruthless development, this is it.
Well done DCC you have outdone yourselves in letting the north inner city get shat on – again 😡
The Irish Times Saturday 16th February 2007
Build them up and knock them down
Fintan O’TooleCulture Shock: We use our great writers as a unique selling point, but we can’t even be bothered to preserve the houses they lived in.
Recently, when the Abbey Theatre staged Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s great comedy The School for Scandal, even its management was taken aback by the popularity of the production. Over the last 20 years, only around half a dozen Abbey productions have managed to sell 550 seats or more every night of their run. The School for Scandal, along with such huge hits as The Shaughraun and Dancing at Lughnasa, was one of them. This success, though, was not, on a long view, all that surprising. The School, along with Sheridan’s first play The Rivals, are the only 18th-century plays that still hold a place in the international English-language repertoire. Given any kind of decent production (and the Abbey’s was more than decent), their energy, their vividness, their linguistic invention and their rich characterisations still get through to audiences.
It says something about the fecklessness of Irish cultural memory, however, that just as the Abbey was putting Sheridan back in an Irish context, permission has been granted to demolish the house, 10 minutes walk from the theatre, where Sheridan was born in 1751. That house, 12 Dorset Street, is saturated with Irish theatrical and literary history. Sheridan’s father, Thomas, was one of the greatest Irish actors of his age and, as manager of Smock Alley theatre, a revolutionary figure in the development of theatre here. It was Thomas who, at the cost of riots and ultimate ruin, insisted on the professional dignity of actors by removing audience members from the stage and refusing to repeat speeches on demand in the course of a performance. Sheridan’s mother, Frances, is easily the most important Irish woman writer of the 18th century, a pioneer of the epistolary novel and a considerable playwright whose A Trip to Bath was a huge influence on her son’s work.
Sheridan himself, though he left Ireland at the age of 11 and never returned, was a self-consciously, even insistently, Irish figure. In the course of his long political career, he campaigned for Irish independence, developed ties with the United Irishmen, devoted himself to the cause of Catholic emancipation, spoke out against the abuse of Irish political prisoners, and conceived an idea that would have a huge bearing on Irish history after his death – the notion of an Irish party in the Westminster parliament. He was regarded in his time as a great adornment to Irish national pride, not least for his sensational speeches against the governor of India, Warren Hastings, which are milestones in the development of international human rights law.
The idea that Sheridan’s birthplace should be preserved has been around for at least 50 years now. In 1956, for example, the Longford-Westmeath deputy, Frank Carter, raised the issue in the D
@publicrealm wrote:
Hutton
The Part 8 procedure is intended for when the local authority carries out work (or has others carry it out on their behalf). The site notices would be erected by the local authority. I don’t think that is the case here? Extract from Regs below:
Notice of proposed development.
81. (1) A local authority shall, in accordance with this article,—]
I give up on the ‘disposal of public lands’ issue.
Fair enough; but do you not think that its a basic that one cannot be judge and jury in their own court – which is exactly how the council have so far acted?
Lets try and tease it out a bit more. If I am right above then the move is unconstitutional. It is my understanding that there is the precedent with the Devaney Gardens PPP redevelopment; in that case, as should be with any PPP, the application went straight to An Bord.
Publicrealm (apptly named 😀 ), can you or anyone else throw some further light on this? Ta in advance. 🙂
ps publicrealm this was the link that gave me that interpretaion of part 8 as quoted above: http://www.dublincity.ie/sitetools/faq/faq_planning/planning_-_local_authority_works_laws_.asp …or google it with this: What are Local Authority Works (LAWS)? #5762
^^ Mmm Nice :rolleyes: Thats only one of the smaller ones btw – the so-called metro-poles are far larger + much more intrusive; in any event in Dublin the smaller ones are to be at ground level.
The more this saga goes on the worse it becomes –
Helpful place that the DCC website is, it provides the law as to how applications ought to be made when the LA is a direct beneficary:
“These are planning applications by internal departments in Dublin City Council, made under Part 8 of the Planning & Development Regulations 2001. Members of the public have 6 weeks from the date of lodgement of the application to make objections. There is no fee in this case. A recommendation is made by the Planning Department, and then listed on the Agenda for City Council meeting for approval by elected members, prior to commencement of development.“
So remind me again – no Part 8 and no section 183 by councilors disposing of public lands???
The public have been shafted by a sham proceess.
@lostexpectation wrote:
its till very unclear if the bikes are directly connected to the new large signs?
The advertising hoards have nothing to do with the location of the bikes. From todays independent:
It’s city bikes for all – but they have to be recycled!
ON yer bike Dubs – but don’t forget to leave them back.
The 500 public bicycles which are to be located around Dublin are “virtually vandal proof” according to the City Council, in what surely smacks of “famous last words”.
Sceptics might fear that some less civic-minded Dubs may not be inclined to return the bikes, which will be emblazoned in Dublin colours.
There are fears the bicycles might suffer the same fate as that perennial urban unfortunate – the abandoned shopping trolley. However, each bike has an on-board computer to track its movement.
Their unique design ensures they cannot suffer punctures and there are no visible wires.
“The proposed Dublin City Bicycle is of a new generation and the result of over a decade of continuous and extensive investment,” says the council.
The bikes are to be located at 25 key locations such as St Stephen’s Green. They will be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week and will be branded with the Dublin City Council logo.
They are being introduced across the city by one of the world’s largest outdoor advertising companies, JC Decaux, in exchange for permission to erect 120 permanent advertising billboards.
Over 60pc of the new advertising space will be dedicated to giving civic information to citizens and visitors to the capital.
Part of the deal involves the removal of 1,800 current billboards. The bicycles should be in place within the next six months, along with the new network of variable message electronic billboards.
Fine Gael Councillor Naoise O Muire said yesterday that criticism of the plan was unfair.
He said that the scheme had showed creativity and was a worthwhile step in the right direction.
Amsterdam pioneered the free bicycle system, but in Dublin there will be a small charge for their use.
Treacy Hogan
The usual hooray-for-everything, misleading piece by Hogan]does not [/U]involve the removal of 1,800 current billboards – but in fact only 25% of the billboards belonging to JCDecaux. There is going to be a lot more on this…
From: http://www.bikebiz.com/14000-free-bike-contract-for-Paris-is-halted
An administrative court in Paris has suspended last week’s award of a bicycle-rental contract to outdoor advertising specialist JCDecaux. Rival bidder Clear Channel Communications of the US had filed a lawsuit, claiming ‘irregularities’ in the tendering process.
16:45, Feb 8th by Carlton Reid
JCDecaux’s Somupi unit was to establish a free bicycle hire service with 14,100 bikes in place by the summer.
Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings Inc had formed a consortium with Electricite de France, France Telecom and Vinci Park.
JCDecaux operate Lyon’s successful Cyclocity rental scheme, a cycle hire service originally called Vélo’V and started in May 2005.
The Cyclocity bikes were ridden almost 12 million kms in 2006 – that’s 5,000 kms per bicycle. There were 5.5 million rentals during the year, an average of 15,000 rentals per day with peaks that exceeded 30,000 during exceptional events such as Lyon’s Festival of Music. Cyclocity schemes are also operated in Marseille, Aix en-Provence and Brussels.The analysis by Graham is as per usual spot on 🙁 . This snap is from a few months ago. The owner has since carried out works, as evident when one passes today, such as corrogated steel etc… Which throws up the question as to works carried out on a listed building. Hmmmm….
Another day passes and where is the Irish Times in covering this, one of the most contentious planning issues in Dublin in recent years? Ah sure its only the capital city, and mostly on the northside :rolleyes:
Maybe it doesnt really happen for the IT if its not happening in Dun Laoghaire or Greystones… Or then again maybe it might ruffle a few feathers to actually analise what the city’s custodians are up to
Irish Times where are you in covering city issues???
@Phoenix Magazine wrote:
we might expect some coverage from the likes of Fintan O’Toole
Irish Times? Unlikely – Its only Dublin City and on the northside :rolleyes:
Developer makes play for Sheridan’s birthplace
From The Irish Independent Sat, Feb 10 07
A DEVELOPER plans to demolish the birthplace of 18th century playwright Richard Brinsley Sheridan and replace it with an apartment block.
Planning permission has been sought from Dublin City Council by Shane Murphy, with an address at Malahide in Dublin, to demolish the playwright and Whig MP’s former home at 12 Upper Dorset Street. Mr Murphy wants to build nine apartments, including a luxury penthouse suite.
A listed building, the house is currently in a dilapidated condition and two of the upper floors have been demolished. A conservation report attached to the planning application calls it an “eyesore”.
As well as the apartments, there would be a retail unit at ground floor level, and the adjoining disused Moy pub will be demolished.
Born in October 1751, Richard Brinsley Sheridan was the author of The School for Scandal (1777), considered to be among the greatest comedy of manners written in English.
The application has been opposed by Senator David Norris, who said last night that a blue plaque signifying that the house had cultural merit had been placed on the building in the 1980s, but had since been removed and the upper floors demolished.
“We have to draw a line somewhere,” he said. “We can’t go around putting plaques up and then demolishing the building. The facade could be retained and I think special consideration should be given to this house.”
Senator Norris’ objection states it is “regrettable” that the Georgian building had been allowed fall into such a neglected state that the top two floors are missing.
A decision from Dublin City Council is expected in the next two weeks.
Paul Melia
@GrahamH wrote:
The building on this site prior to 1916 was the founding place of Conradh na Gaeilge in 1893 – they moved up to near the Savoy in the late 1890s.
Thats right – I was just examining the plaque yesterday! 🙂 First time Id noticed it tbh – it doesnt appear as if its polished much.
I notice that the signage at ground level is for an internet cafe; surely DCC would not have given pp to such signage since the arrival of the internet?
Graham youre quite right about the ACA and yet wheres the enforcement? Remind me again as to what the meaning is of the phrase “Protected Structure” :rolleyes:
Nice shots.
@THE PHOENIX MAGAZINE wrote:
Saving Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s Home
A “school for scandal” has emerged over plans to demolish the birthplace of playwright, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, at 12 Dorset Street Lower, where Shane Murphy with an address in Malahide, has lodged a planning application.
Lodged on Friday December 22, Murphy’s scheme would level the Sheridan house and also the adjacent building, the disused Moy bar, to allow for the erection of a new complex of nine apartments on top of a commercial unit.
Formerly a fine Georgian house of four floors over basement, Sheridan’s home stood intact close to the corner of Dominick Street until the 1980’s – during when the house was boarded up, the top two floors removed, and the plaque mysteriously disappeared. Since then, the building has sat empty alongside the Moy bar, which has also become disused.
Unfortunately for Murphy, what remains of Sheridan’s house is listed in its entirety on the Record of Protected Structures, and this is likely to present difficulties for his scheme. Oddly he did not seek to have the building de-listed before applying for planing permission. Such applications are automatically referred to a number of prescribed bodies, including An Taisce.
In the past there have been attempts by conservationists to save the building but the exact ownership proved elusive, with the Dominican Fathers being among those denying possession – although they did apply to put in a car park in the rear, back in 1993.
Happily for all, the current application resolves such riddles, and so there has been an upsurge in activity. Helpful fellow that he is, Senator David Norris has lodged an objection noting all the expected reasons.
Now that word is out, we might expect some coverage from the likes of Fintan O’Toole, who has published a well received biography on Sheridan. Or perhaps O’Toole has had enough of conservationist malarkey – given his own recent planning controversy?
.
Nice snap there DJM 🙂
On foot of the city council’s report, is there any news on whether theres a budget or schedule? :confused:@ctesiphon wrote:
I look forward to seeing the ‘Bespoke site notices by Hutton, Esq.’
😀
Great minds think alike I tell you CTEsiphon!
ctesiphon wrote:the basic cost seems to be €]Darn, initially I thought it might be 410 per week – and now its down to 135 in total. 🙁
Not to worry, its got me thinking – and sure why think small; bigger signage seems to generate bigger profits and bigger leverage so I’m now thinking of “Hutton Hoardings” 🙂
Helpful information has been sent my way in this regard by a pal. It relates to the economics of type of adverts that are being proposed for the city;
” the prevailing rates in comparable places like Leeds or Glasgow are gauranteed payments of £500-1,500 for non-illuminated to £3000 – £7500 for LED stg per fitting per year. Revenue is then split at 50% of net profit once servicing and sales costs are deducted. Revenues are generally double the gaurantees so a well positioned LED Fitting would probably generate €22,500 p.a….All similar proposals for the more attractive cities in the UK such as York, London, Bath, Edinburgh have been shot down.”
Fortunately Dublin now has a more enlightened policy that will facilitate such enterprises. However I am still trying to work out the exact economics – for example when first published in the I Times last April, the JCdecaux deal was worth €90 million to the city – yet this seems to have since halved to €50 million as quoted by Cllr Daithi Doolan on liveline. He should know – he is the chair of the councils Environment SPC, but then so too should the newspaper. :confused:
All quite intriguing and requiring further research before the new venture is launched… Onward “Hutton Hoardings”!
The last couple of posts have been fairly informative and helpful – good work there PVC and Phil for further informing the debate.
A couple of anomilies seem too be appearing – Councillor Daithi Doolan yesterday said the city would benefit to the tune of €50 million – yet the Times article from last April gives €90 million as the figure. Very odd indeed :confused:
@PVC King wrote:
the latest ones are also bullet proof.
Oh good, I’ll get an opportunity to try out my new RPG so 😀
@StephenC wrote:
The whole point was to reduce all those nasty hoardings
I am afraid Im not convinced that this neccessarily is the case – existing billboards would go first and DCC would make sure to let us know of this…Instead of which it appears that the Lord Mayor was not aware of current scheme until this week. 😮
Separately I am getting the impression that the business community is not neccessaarily unanimous in backing this either.
“the 48-sheets will disappear; they’re not a suitable type of advertising for the city and they’re not even very effective,”
DCC’s Ciaran McNamara comments on how existing ineffective sites will be superceded by better provision for the advertising industry.
From RTE Clip “Complete with a view to an underground sculptoral exhibition”
Oh well in that case the building is okay :rolleyes:
lostexpectation – because – imo -Irish print media is of an appalling standard, and is declining every day. Look at the current row about the Dublin adverts plan – and how pisss poor print coverage is. The IT in particular has gone to pot re such issues – Ive given up buyiing it tbh – is FmcD still writing there?
*gets back vaguely on topic* Anyhow re this building, I still stick by my suggestion that the best use for the gantry is to hang bad architects :p
@alonso wrote:
5 million cyber euros*
😀
Further developments on this – it got a reasonably good airing on liveline yesterday]http://www.rte.ie/radio1/liveline/[/url]
Aside from that the Evening Herald also had a piece the day before yesterday, by a Kevin Doyle on top of page 11. Suffice to say, unless I am mistaken, basic information was wrong such as “If city planners do approve the boards, it will cost an individual €1400 to object to an individual sign or €98000 to object to all 70” :confused: :rolleyes: .
Cllr Andrew Montague stated “This council has very little ways of raising money other than raising rates, which we dont want to do” adding “this is a good way to raise money”.
No Cllr Montague this is not a good way to rasie money, as DCC will have a lot less cash if there is a rate strike arising from this.
City Manager John Tierney said: “Irrespective of where we put these signs there is going to be a level of concern or dispute as to why its that location.” – which pretty much to me dodges the question and says “lump yez”.
Show us the criteria used for site location Mr Tierney. 😡
Where’s the Irish Times in covering this???
Signed off by OC of the Popular Front of Judea
