Smithfield Resi

Pic would be good – I’ve been considering google mapping them…anyone give a hand?

In fairness I think the finish is temporary…in the real sense, not the DCC roadworks dept sense

Would that be temporary in the same way that historic granite has been ‘islanded’ by a 50m strech of asphalt ‘footpath’ on Thomas Street for the last six months? (keep meaning to post pics)

In other news…

The City Council just passed a emergency motion (unanimously and agreed as without debate) that;

All work be halted on the JC Decaux scheme until a complete health and safety report has been issued (words to that effect)

eyes peeled people (date stamps on photos are welcome together with photos of people in hi-vis continuing to put them up)

This must be a piss take, exact same situation as you cross luas lines beside fourcourts beside old motor tax office, completely obscuring sight of pedestrians from traffic and vice versa. unbelievable!

Pictures please!! I’ll take a look but if someone could document this – also I will be picketing the Council Meeting tomorrow evening at City Hall (the old one!) from 6pm – anyone care to join me please! This madness HAS to be stopped.

my mobile number is temporarily in my profile under ‘about me’ – sent me a text or call

Moreover, I understand there has not yet been a safety report back to councillors, as was required by March; can anybody shed any further light on this?

It was requested in March. The original Emergency Motion was phrased as no work to be done until a full H&S study was done on the siting. It was toned down to a request for a H&S report.

I’m finding it hard to believe that some of these sitings have passed a road safety audit. The madness is the PP requires one AFTER they are erected; ‘let’s put them up to see if it is dangerous’.

d) The proposed structure shall be subject to a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit at the applicants expense. This will be done by an approved auditor through a public procurement procedure, which shall audit the entire permitted signage. Any failure shall be removed.

What was wrong with a Stage 2: “Completion of detailed design, prior to tender of construction contract. In the case of Design and Build contracts, a Stage 2 audit shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the contract.”

Instead of:

Stage 3: Completion of construction (prior to opening of the scheme to traffic wherever possible).

I’ll bet these Stage 3 Audits have not been done, any more than the requirement to remove 100 48-sheet billboards has been done.

I also got a look at the footing for the one on Parnell Street. Appalling standard of work “Ah sure, just lash a bit’o the ole asssh-felt in there” Looks dreadful. It’s also at about a 35deg angle (let’s catch the motorists eye just at the ped crossing….) Cleverly this is one of the applications where the orientation of the sign was NOT shown on the site plan. The linear lines of the footpath road etc are just f*cked by plonking this down at an random angle.

How the hell did that pass a road safety audit??

Some clearer images:

Sharp edges to split foreheads of careless pedestrians (ever walked into a pole) the blind and young children

Closer look – this really is 90deg – no bevel whatsoever…

Guidelines for Accessibility of the Built Environment
http://www.ncbi.ie/information-for/architects-engineers/guidelines-for-accessibility-of-the-built-environment
3. Routes must be kept clear of obstacles to avoid unnecessary hazards
5. Street furniture should have rounded edges.
5. Street furniture should have rounded edges.

Decaux apparantly consulted with NCBI and promised ‘a high stabdard of design’ – they clearly never said what the criteria for the design was.

😡

The next six months are going to give them some headaches I imagine;

Getting this ‘spaceship’ into any kind of ‘classical form’ means a totally redesign. (not at all unwelcome in my book)

The recession could give them pause as to the scale of it; re OPW tower, Manor Park at Crane street. The lack of potential tenants in a retail downturn could leave them with a white elephant.

The Maximising document DCC put out on height got an absolute drubbing at public consultation, this, plus the fact that a 16 storey got refused around the corner should (by reasonable expectations) mean the ski-slope HAS to be removed to get through planning/ABP

The traffic management as proposed is crap, and they are going to have big problems sorting out getting cars in and out of this scheme.

The heritage aspect is also suspect, with the retention of just four houses of the Moore St terrace, this isolated out of context treatment massively diminishes the Monument, which is in this plan, further weakened by a treatment that poses it opposite a cinema entrance. It deserves a more sympathetic and restorative approach.

I was exposed to this proposal a while ago, Stephen, hence perhaps the reticence. I’m still somewhat reflective on it insofar as the extended height cannot be seen from nearly all of O’Connell Street, ought not to impact to any great degree on other major vistas, and is barely visible at all from the head-on view of the hotel from across the street, nor is the penthouse storey in front. I just wonder if the asset such a room may give to the city (difficult to determine) just may outweigh the negatives as seen above.

I’d point out that the vistas selected for the montages were precisely ‘selected’ and the impact of the ski-slope is mammoth when viewed from the classical standpoints of cross streets. The aspect to Parnell Square is also awful.

I have also appealled planning permission for the sign on the Western Side of Smithfield Market. Odd that this has not appeared on the website – I’ll follow up with them.