Forum Replies Created
Well! I must say lol whatever about your opinions on “Pomme de Terre’s” work, you certainly win this month’s award for exhuming the oldest deceased thread.
De Blacam and Meagher are responsible for the new (and good) restaurant on the ground floor – “Franks”.
does anyone know did the great campaigner Boyd Barrett get elected to the Council?
Sounds like they are getting a little nervous about the long term plan – which would be a shame.
If phase 2 is left till next summer does that imply another 12 months of bicycle shattering pot holes for cyclists passing the Fitzwilliam hotel etc or will there be some light remedial work on the potholes?
No word there about what Dublin bus are going to do with the buses currently going down Harcourt St – will it be Hatch and Green East or Harcourt/Cuffe/Aungier/Georges St for them?
But my comment arose from your previous post. The 2 residents’ objections would have been enough to put it on ABP’s agenda and they would probably have come to the decision they did even if An Taisce had been silent..
That is not exactly how it works Kefu.
Once a file goes before ABP they are expected to look at the totality of the application – not just the points raised by the appellants. Obviously when preparing his or her report the ABP inspector focusses on the issues raised in the appeal but other issues can come up that the Board will have to decide on.
That’s why, for example first party appeals against local authority grant conditions (such as developers objecting to the amount in planning contributions being levied by a Council) sometimes lead to projects being rejected in their totality by ABP.
what notjim said
An Taisce did not take this decision. An Bord Pleanala did. It sounds like it was a tough one for them.
Castlethorn are pretty good developers though and I’m sure they will come back with a good revised plan. Given the note on the decision it sounds like they ought to stick with Wejcherts too.
Edit: BTW the Irish Times can’t be right in its claim “that DCC will review its strategy of promoting retail use on South King St following the surprise decision of the Board”. Where did the journo get this stuff from?
To quote from the ABP direction again: the Board considered the proposed building to be of high design quality and considered the proposed uses, particularly at street level to be most desirable
One of the architects on the Board – Angela Tunney, signed the decision – which was a 4 to 1 vote.
Interesting note attached to the Direction
In arriving at its decision the Board considered the proposed building to be of high design quality and considered the proposed uses, particularly at street level to be most desirable. However, the scale of development proposed on this restricted site was considered inappropriate for the reasons given.
I don’t suppose you know the file number?
ABP now publish all decisions and inspectors reports on-line pretty promptly but they are hard to find without the file number
Can you find the decision here: http://www.pleanala.ie/ ?
How do you mean?
This turned into quite a good article in the Tribune last Sunday.
Bottom line is that there was no planning at all for the project and, worse, the city Council does not even seem embarassed about that.
Pity the Tribune does not publish its content on-line.
I agree that the Earlsfort Terrace contraflow seems an attractive option for buses. You could even have a bus-stop outside the NCH.
Well done in spotting the consultation notice, blue.
I see it announces a deadline for comments of Friday week. Spread the word to interested parties!
Edited to add:
I think its pretty amusing and illustrative of the non-strategic approach that the consultation is entitled and promoted on the Director of Traffic page as Reconstruction of St. Stephen’s Green West
rather than “New Transport Strategy for the SG area” or something similar.
Originally posted by FIN
plot ratios determine height don’t they????
They used to be absolutely important but now they are more indicative – providing more flexibility to go higher.
Aesthetic and contextual considerations are increasingly relevant in decisions these days.
Harcourt St is becoming left turn only into Cuffe St making it “anti bus” rather than “bus only”.
Dublin Bus have the choice of rerouting those routes currently coming into Green East from Harcourt St by sending them along Cuffe St and down Aungier St or doing one of two more imaginative things (a) Earlsfort Terrace (Contraflow) and Green West & North and down Dawson as normal or (b) down Camden, Aungier, Georges and right into Dame…
…and having had a look at the maps now a few points strike me as very important and under addressed:
- Traffic stress in neighbouring streets – especially Wexford/Camden and Pembroke/ Lower Leeson;
- Bus options – will those being evicted from Harcourt St be rerouted down Ealsfort Tce and Dawson or down Camden/Aungier/Georges St – significant implications for traders if the latter;
- Taxis on Green North – the rank at the top of Grafton St may or may not now become a pedestrian zone but taxis are likely to lobby for the Dawson to Grafton zone to become a Taxi rank and turnaround like on O’Connel St opposite the Gresham;
- The horse drawn carriages will also press to be allowed stay in the becalmed Dawson to Grafton zone. Can we improve the pedestrain environment here at the same time?
- The taxi rank/drop off zone between Kildare and Dawson is to be retained but will (a) be on the “driver’s side” of vehicles and (b) still be much more highly congested being the only likely drop off for tour buses, coaches, taxis and private cars unless some of this is moved to Dawson St.
- There is no clarity yet as to whether buses might seek to drop off on Green East or North in lieu of South and West. They might be better to press on around the Green and simply put new stops nearer the top of Dawson St…. or remove some parking on Green North between Kildare and Dawson to make a new bus stop…
All in all they would be smart to have a public consultation on what they are doing. Sue, have you any idea as to when or how this might happen?
Predictably the residents were objectors to the original scheme. They have obviously been bought out which should help the way the whole project addresses the road and sea, not to mention the speed of construction. I bet they were well compensated.
Maybe the developers have to get permission before actually flattening them. It is a bit odd alright..
It’s a remarkably good scheme BTW.
The document presented to the SPC says there will be a consultation process entered into. However, I can’t imagine genuine consultation between now and the “temporary” closure.
Somehow I have a feeling that the Council have had something like this in mind for ages. (Indeed if they did not have a “luas era” plan it would gross negligence.)
And yet, what bothers me is that it is being sprung now at a late stage, as a pseudo temporary, sort of experimental measure.
The bus routing aspects appear to be totally up in the air. The knock on impact on other routes from discouraging vehicles from the green are not discussed. The potential civic space, pedestrian and cyclist gains which might arise are assumed at best and certainly not being planned so that they can be maximised.
All in all it appears to be an exercise in traffic management rather than urban planning.
Em – not clear yet – the whole thing may only be temporary while they do the resurfacing.
Secondly its not decided what will happen buses (and I suppose taxis and horses) in the long term even if they do go ahead with phase 2.
I’ve read the full document now.
“The City Council is proposing to engage in consultation with various interest groups and with the relevant statutory agencies both in relation to the Traffic Management Plan which it is proposing to implement in order to facilitate the reconstruction of St. Stephenâ€™s Green West and also on the desirability of maintaining the Phase 2 traffic management changes on a permanent basis. “
I wonder when and with whom this consutation will occurr?
I fully agree about the footpath between Grafton and Dawson St. There is great potential to make life easier for both pedestrains and cyclists arising from this plan.
It is notable that the document is largely silent on this potential.