Pedestrianise College Green for 2016

Cathaoirleach · 12-07-2011 11:27pm

So you consider The Square Tallaght but not College Green. LOL

Wild Bill · 12-07-2011 11:32pm

Another modern square I like is the modern Grand Canal Dock; where the water plays the essential role of the trees in creating beauty.

It has always amazed me how visually illiterate most Irish people are; it may be a colonial hang-over. Back in the 1700s when the physical and cultural genocide was ongoing all the beautiful spaces and places were owned by the oppressors, this bred resentment to everything about them.

And after they had wiped out the great forests and established the plantations they started planting trees and forests, surrounded often by vast estate walls.

This bred a deep atavistic strain in the native psyche which we can see manifested here today.

We need to move on and hug some trees. :cool:

Wild Bill · 12-07-2011 11:34pm

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

So you consider The Square Tallaght but not College Green. LOL

No, College green is fine (with the trees) - I can't name every bloody square I like - the list would grow to hundreds.

gjim · 13-07-2011 12:57am

Wild Bill wrote: »

No, College green is fine (with the trees) - I can't name every bloody square I like - the list would grow to hundreds.

The trees on College Green are vile. They're bent out of shape and are bunched in a meaningless muddle. The place looks noticeably better in winter when there are no leaves; it would look even better with the trees completely gone - especially in Summer. And it would allow tourists to take photos of some of the most iconic buildings of Dublin. Trees can have their place in public squares but never to completely dominate them like this. These ones can't be chopped soon enough.

Blisterman · 13-07-2011 10:21am

Agreed. Plus the positioning of the trees is such that it draws your eyes only in an East-West direction along Dame Street, reinforcing the "street" as opposed to "public square" feel.

If they kept the trees around foster place and removed the ones from the centre, it'd work well to give the square a sense of enclosure.

Aard · 13-07-2011 2:12pm

Wild Bill wrote: »

The People's Square in Shanghai is a foreign favourite - there are so many though.

Azadi Square in Tehran is amazing; though not really square.

Merdeka Square in Jakarta is pleasant and Zion Square in Jerusalem is interesting even if more of the Irish scale.

In Europe, Place du Luxembourg in Brussels is cool.

Dam Square in Amsterdam was, like College Green a treeless prison until after WW2 but the trees have brought out it's beauty; created it even.

Red Square, Moscow of course - maybe the best of the lot.

OK, St Marks in Venice is obviously top class but it could do with some trees; but they can't survive the sea-water flooding and salty water table.

In London many of the Squares are pretty soulless (even ugly) but Leicester Square is a beautiful exception; though I also like that wee square behind Big Ben were the anti-war folk gather.

Save the Irish ones you noted which are better classed as parks, none of these squares have very tall trees. Indeed, many if not most of them have landmark buildings whose presence would be rendered irrelevant had obscuring trees been installed.

Zion Square above (I've never been, so I'm only going by photos) looks comparable, as you say, to the size of College Green. The latter is only about 3,000 m² -- a small square by international standards. As such, it is unlikely to ever achieve the status of a vast grey expanse (characteristic, incidentally, of your Red Square, the best of the lot), especially given that it's a major pedestrian thoroughfare and is busy at all times of day. The current trees are out of scale with the relatively compact nature of the area. Even moving them to the southern side would open the place up for views of Trinity and the Old Parliament. It's not an all-or-nothing case of green or no green, but it is an urban environment after all; if one wants "natural" beauty, Stephen's Green is about five minutes away.

At any rate, by the sounds of it you've made up your mind on this already and won't be swayed. I'm clearly an extremist -- but I'll gladly take the moniker of sophisticate over sophist.

Wild Bill · 13-07-2011 9:49pm

Aard wrote: »

I'll gladly take the moniker of sophisticate over sophist.

Why not, like me, be both? Add a pinch of visual literacy and, heck, we couild almost have sound judgement :eek:

Love the chap who complained that the trees are "crooked"!

So is the street. :cool:

Aard · 13-07-2011 10:46pm

Why not address the main point of my post?

Jayuu · 14-07-2011 1:36am

I think before you decide what needs to be moved you need to ask what is the purpose of pedestrianising the street and how big the pedestrian area is going to be.

If its to create a space for large crowds to gather then the trees are a problem. However if its just to create a more viable living public space then I don't think there's a strong case to be made for the trees to go.

Personally I like the fact that the trees aren't in any sort of pattern or defined shape. Nature isn't exact and the idea that we should prune things back to make it rigid and controlled doesn't appeal to me. I like the fact that the tree create areas of shade and light.

monument · 14-07-2011 2:18am

Blisterman wrote: »

Agreed. Plus the positioning of the trees is such that it draws your eyes only in an East-West direction along Dame Street, reinforcing the "street" as opposed to "public square" feel.

The road and the buildings reinforce the street line and trees interrupt this. If the trees were removed the building further reinforce the street line.

gjim wrote: »

The trees on College Green are vile. They're bent out of shape and are bunched in a meaningless muddle.

Somebody call the tree police! The trees are bent out of shape?! Who would such abuse to nature!?

Some people like the trees, some don't. I don't think anybody here is going to convince the others to change their minds.

In general, I would be against this kind of square as pictured in the OP and below -- if there's any point in pedestrianising College Green it's to make it a living place where people can sit down, eat at tables, hang around, ...

Wild Bill · 14-07-2011 8:16pm

Aard wrote: »

Why not address the main point of my post?

I thought describing yourself as a "sophisticate" was the main point.

If not, what is it?

Amtmann · 14-07-2011 9:37pm

As an avowed tree lover, I initially agreed with Wild Bill that some trees should be retained in College Green. Having read the points by other posters, though, I now agree that trees should be removed from that particular square.

I would say however that in general however Irish people have a bizarre and irrational hatred of trees. I think it's one of the reasons why so many Irish towns look dreary and depressed - nothing but cracked concrete pavements with no greenery at all. Cities like Erlangen and Cincinnati are lovely because they have so many trees.

I would call for far more trees to be planted along Dublin's streets, but not in College Green.

Aard · 14-07-2011 10:57pm

Wild Bill wrote: »

I thought describing yourself as a "sophisticate" was the main point.

If not, what is it?

This:

Aard wrote: »

Save the Irish ones you noted which are better classed as parks, none of these squares have very tall trees. Indeed, many if not most of them have landmark buildings whose presence would be rendered irrelevant had obscuring trees been installed.

Zion Square above (I've never been, so I'm only going by photos) looks comparable, as you say, to the size of College Green. The latter is only about 3,000 m² -- a small square by international standards. As such, it is unlikely to ever achieve the status of a vast grey expanse (characteristic, incidentally, of your Red Square, the best of the lot), especially given that it's a major pedestrian thoroughfare and is busy at all times of day. The current trees are out of scale with the relatively compact nature of the area. Even moving them to the southern side would open the place up for views of Trinity and the Old Parliament. It's not an all-or-nothing case of green or no green, but it is an urban environment after all; if one wants "natural" beauty, Stephen's Green is about five minutes away.

Wild Bill · 15-07-2011 7:05pm

Frankly folks, if you try to remove those trees, you'll find me chained to them.

Metaphorically speaking. :cool:

Aard · 15-07-2011 7:20pm

Why can't you reply in any way more in-depth than a short quip and a smiley? Several posts of back-and-forth and you're still obfuscating more than those trees.

Wild Bill · 15-07-2011 7:47pm

Aard wrote: »

Why can't you reply in any way more in-depth than a short quip and a smiley? Several posts of back-and-forth and you're still obfuscating more than those trees.

I have replied more than a short quip and a smiley. But repetition gets tedious. Yours and mine.

Clearly we have failed to convince each other; this is common in matters of taste.

Thus I cited (to quote but one example) the shade provided by the trees as a positive while another rather insightfully described it as "blocking the sun".

Another had problems with the trees being "crooked".

And so on. What do you want me to say to this?

Aard · 15-07-2011 8:23pm

You're right; we've failed to convince each other. Thanks for replying all the same.

gjim · 16-07-2011 10:59am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Another had problems with the trees being "crooked".

- there are two separate issues.

You can agree or disagree as to whether there should there be trees there at all. I'm actually somewhat open to argument on this front. Something more subtle like the new O'Connell St trees might be appropriate.

But you can independently criticize the current "scheme" which consists of randomly bunched, overbearing (in the context of the surrounding buildings, monuments and street scale) and ugly ("bent out of shape") trees of a variety chosen purely because it grows quickly.

The entire area is a muddle of trees, surface utility boxes, unless phone boxes, pointless bollards and street signage. There is no point adding more clutter in the name of improving it. So the first step would be to de-clutter the area and in my mind that should start with the most prominent element - the trees - which by the way are a relative novelty in the area historically. Then the rest of the clutter: bury the utility boxes, remove excessive and useless road signage and bollards, move the phone boxes, consider moving the taxi rank, reposition the cycle parking, etc. Only then should you think about pedestrianisation.

imme · 19-07-2011 6:24am

Yixian wrote: »

Would be so gorgeous with a large fountain+statues, lined with outdoor eating cafés in the summer. Also an ideal place for political rallies etc., as there currently is none.

There are french villages a 100th the size of Dublin with plazas, it really is a gaping hole in the city.

Once you imagine it there, you can't imagine Dublin without it.

"Pearse Street would have to become a two way system again and take over from Nassau Street as the area to get buses from. This would actually help to generate more activity on Pearse Street. It would obviously take a huge amount more than just this, but it is one of my first thoughts on it anyway."

don't we already have Smithfield.:(

Political rallies were held in College Green back in the 1930's, I don't think we want them held again, they were a feature of the times, pre modern communications and similarly a feature of the Great Dictators of Europe. There's no need for them any more.

I wish people would stop saying that College Green could the this or that of Bologna/ London/ Paris/ New York or where ever.

It's the College Green of Dublin and always will be. We're Dublin, we're not Milan, Paris, London or NYC.

I think something too shiny and steel would be totally out of place in College Green.

Pearse Street can't be regenerated, there's too much traffic on it and Trinity owns too much of it.

donvito99 · 19-07-2011 11:15am

imme wrote: »

Pearse Street can't be regenerated, there's too much traffic on it and Trinity owns too much of it.

Pearse Street is and has been regenerated to an extent, namely by Trinity.

seamus · 19-07-2011 11:22am

imme wrote: »

don't we already have Smithfield.:(

Smithfield is in the arse-end of nowhere, tourism-wise. There are a couple of attractions up that end of the city, but Smithfield itself is in the middle of a residential area and isn't a through-way to anywhere. And I wouldn't recommend having tourists walk from Phoenix Park to O'Connell street via Smithfield unless you're going to massively increase the Garda presence and clear out the scum.

College Green by contrast is part of a primary pedestrian thoroughfare for the city, which starts St. Stephen's Green shopping centre, all the way down to the Spire in one direction and up to the top of Dame Street in the other. College green is the pedestrian hub of the city, in effect. It's bizarre that traffic it still given such priority to go through it.

leshamry · 19-07-2011 12:47pm

Wild Bill wrote: »

Frankly folks, if you try to remove those trees, you'll find me chained to them.

Metaphorically speaking. :cool:

Ok we will do a deal what do you think?
I'll trade those few trees for 30 in Dame in distress st.
12 in West More Land st.
12 in Lier St.
6 in Grafton St.

I've got more trees than you?

FreudianSlippers · 19-07-2011 3:29pm

I have no problem with trees on College Green to be fair, but they should be implemented in accordance with a new pedestrian layout and they should be better suited for the area and much better maintained.

The current trees are the wrong types of trees for that area and are poorly looked after.
There is certainly not no room for trees in a pedestrianised College Green, on the contrary I think it'd look to sterile without some greenery.

The one that sticks in my mind as a cool open urban area in the middle of a city. It's about the same area as a pedestrianised College Green would be with water features and trees and seating areas:

fd22a802fd72a90e8a6f692eda9d5bf47f5857f2

fd22a802fd72a90e8a6f692eda9d5bf47f5857f2

Portland%20Area%20Condos%20-%20Relaxing%20in%20Jamison%20Park.jpg

imme · 24-07-2011 10:29am

seamus wrote: »

Smithfield is in the arse-end of nowhere, tourism-wise. There are a couple of attractions up that end of the city, but Smithfield itself is in the middle of a residential area and isn't a through-way to anywhere. And I wouldn't recommend having tourists walk from Phoenix Park to O'Connell street via Smithfield unless you're going to massively increase the Garda presence and clear out the scum.

College Green by contrast is part of a primary pedestrian thoroughfare for the city, which starts St. Stephen's Green shopping centre, all the way down to the Spire in one direction and up to the top of Dame Street in the other. College green is the pedestrian hub of the city, in effect. It's bizarre that traffic it still given such priority to go through it.

I was being facetious when I said about Smithfield already being our civic space.

It's a total failure imo, failed square, turned off gas braziers, hotel closed down, Chimney tower closed down, empty shop units, unused offices.

Of course the emptiness mirrors the emptiness up and down the country. But the concept itself hasn't worked.

The cobblestones are a nightmare to walk on.

It's a failure.

I hope the same people who 'redeveloped' Smithfield won't be a part of the College Green Plan.

Smithfield was a market place, that's why it's surrounded by a residential area as you say, this needn't be a block to a redevelopment.

College Green at present is a primary route across the city centre, how do you see that being altered, a tunnel?

imme · 24-07-2011 10:32am

donvito99 wrote: »

Pearse Street is and has been regenerated to an extent, namely by Trinity.

I don't see how Trinity regenerated Pearse St, they bought functioning businesses and now the street is a dead zone. There might as well be hoarding up in front of the buildings they occupy across from the Fire Station and further back towards The Science Gallery.

The Science Gallery has brought people to the area, but as there's no parking near there I guess most people get there by DART or a long 30 minute trek the other side of Trinity itself.

FreudianSlippers · 24-07-2011 10:45am

imme wrote: »

seamus wrote: »

Smithfield is in the arse-end of nowhere, tourism-wise. There are a couple of attractions up that end of the city, but Smithfield itself is in the middle of a residential area and isn't a through-way to anywhere. And I wouldn't recommend having tourists walk from Phoenix Park to O'Connell street via Smithfield unless you're going to massively increase the Garda presence and clear out the scum.

College Green by contrast is part of a primary pedestrian thoroughfare for the city, which starts St. Stephen's Green shopping centre, all the way down to the Spire in one direction and up to the top of Dame Street in the other. College green is the pedestrian hub of the city, in effect. It's bizarre that traffic it still given such priority to go through it.

I was being facetious when I said about Smithfield already being our civic space.

It's a total failure imo, failed square, turned off gas braziers, hotel closed down, Chimney tower closed down, empty shop units, unused offices.

Of course the emptiness mirrors the emptiness up and down the country. But the concept itself hasn't worked.

The cobblestones are a nightmare to walk on.

It's a failure.

I hope the same people who 'redeveloped' Smithfield won't be a part of the College Green Plan.

Smithfield was a market place, that's why it's surrounded by a residential area as you say, this needn't be a block to a redevelopment.

College Green at present is a primary route across the city centre, how do you see that being altered, a tunnel?

In fairness if you're desperate to keep traffic I suppose a cut and cover tunnel is viable. It was discussed either earlier in this thread or the thread on this topic on archiseek

dubhthach · 24-07-2011 11:05am

imme wrote: »

I don't see how Trinity regenerated Pearse St, they bought functioning businesses and now the street is a dead zone. There might as well be hoarding up in front of the buildings they occupy across from the Fire Station and further back towards The Science Gallery.

The Science Gallery has brought people to the area, but as there's no parking near there I guess most people get there by DART or a long 30 minute trek the other side of Trinity itself.

well trinity wanted to demolish those buildings in the late 90's but they were refused permission -- part of the plan had included retaining the elaborate shopfronts that were on them.

dubhthach · 24-07-2011 11:08am

Some great colour shots of Dublin in 1961 here:
http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/2010/02/dublin-1961-in-colour/

Relevant ones to College green are:

mgmt · 28-07-2011 11:29pm

I was watching the final stage of the Tour de France in Paris. They have a short transit tunnel running under a park beside the Champs Élysées:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Champs-%C3%89lys%C3%A9es,+Parys,+Frankryk&hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=48.861141,2.330174&spn=0.002012,0.005284&sll=53.120405,-3.306885&sspn=0.931292,2.705383&dirflg=ht&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=48.861141,2.330174&panoid=jD_iLkN3UQsKj6etzBYn5Q&cbp=12,26.95,,0,1.01

There is tons of examples of these tunnels in cities across the world. Surely this option should be considered for College Green or better still a short tunnel under the cricket grounds of Trinity.

monument · 28-07-2011 11:55pm

mgmt wrote: »

I was watching the final stage of the Tour de France in Paris. They have a short transit tunnel running under a park beside the Champs Élysées:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Champs-%C3%89lys%C3%A9es,+Parys,+Frankryk&hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=48.861141,2.330174&spn=0.002012,0.005284&sll=53.120405,-3.306885&sspn=0.931292,2.705383&dirflg=ht&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=48.861141,2.330174&panoid=jD_iLkN3UQsKj6etzBYn5Q&cbp=12,26.95,,0,1.01

There is tons of examples of these tunnels in cities across the world. Surely this option should be considered for College Green or better still a short tunnel under the cricket grounds of Trinity.

Unless for buses, why would such be needed in Dublin?

mgmt · 29-07-2011 12:07am

monument wrote: »

Unless for buses, why would such be needed in Dublin?

To pedestrianise College Green!

It would be a mixed transit tunnel, the luas bxd could run through it as well as cross city bus services. I predict that the backlash against tram lines on College Green mean that they will never get built as is currently planned. The Luas is capable of gradients up to 6%.

Wild Bill · 29-07-2011 1:29am

mgmt wrote: »

I was watching the final stage of the Tour de France in Paris. They have a short transit tunnel running under a park beside the Champs Élysées:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Champs-%C3%89lys%C3%A9es,+Parys,+Frankryk&hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=48.861141,2.330174&spn=0.002012,0.005284&sll=53.120405,-3.306885&sspn=0.931292,2.705383&dirflg=ht&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=48.861141,2.330174&panoid=jD_iLkN3UQsKj6etzBYn5Q&cbp=12,26.95,,0,1.01

There is tons of examples of these tunnels in cities across the world. Surely this option should be considered for College Green or better still a short tunnel under the cricket grounds of Trinity.

Indeed.

But can you imagine the "controversy" that would be generated by the Irish Times; the objections from all manner of nuts worried about Viking remains (or whoever might be down there) - the vast tracts of debate on boards.ie and a dozen other places.

We'd never get it done in 100 years and by the time we'd finished waffling the cost would be 10 times a similar project in Paris or London.

At least there aren't any trees down under Trinity to be destroyed by philistines. :cool:

donvito99 · 29-07-2011 1:14pm

Wild Bill wrote: »

At least there aren't any trees down under Trinity to be destroyed by philistines.

lol, but the ROOTS of the trees would be destroyed...

BrianD · 30-07-2011 3:58pm

donvito99 wrote: »

Pearse Street is and has been regenerated to an extent, namely by Trinity.

Trinity destroyed Pearse St. The Science Museum is a well overdue "pay back" to the city. Pearse St. is beside a large university and a major rail station. Why is Pearse St. dead - only because of how Trinity uses the buildings on Pearse St.

They should be required to make available the ground floor for mixed retail use. Would go along way towards regenerating the street. Obviously not the best timing to be doing this.

As for College Green it's a laudable idea but probably only because Kenny is still on a high from his speech. I don't think it's a workable idea. The "square" is a "green" for a reason. It has no history as a great square nor do the buildings lend to it ever becoming a great square. It as we found out from Obama's visit, pretty useless as a public space as well.

Anyway, they would want to start getting rid of those trees first - they ruin the sight lines.

donvito99 · 30-07-2011 5:24pm

BrianD wrote: »

Trinity destroyed Pearse St. The Science Museum is a well overdue "pay back" to the city. Pearse St. is beside a large university and a major rail station. Why is Pearse St. dead - only because of how Trinity uses the buildings on Pearse St.

They should be required to make available the ground floor for mixed retail use. Would go along way towards regenerating the street. Obviously not the best timing to be doing this.

As for College Green it's a laudable idea but probably only because Kenny is still on a high from his speech. I don't think it's a workable idea. The "square" is a "green" for a reason. It has no history as a great square nor do the buildings lend to it ever becoming a great square. It as we found out from Obama's visit, pretty useless as a public space as well.

Anyway, they would want to start getting rid of those trees first - they ruin the sight lines.

Depends on what your definition of regeneration is. Pearse St was in tatters with abandoned industrial units that have either been knocked or completely transformed (Chartered accountants/architect's studio building, northside of pearse st).

How would you suggest a university that already has massive site constraints use its own budget? It already has effectively taken the initiative by building student accomodation and a brand new health and leisure centre (avec swimming pool, climbing wall and gym) that is partially open to the public, for security reasons (garda intervention shortly after building opened).

Did the governement have any plans for Pearse St? No. Would you trust a developer to do anything but run of the mill shabby apartment blocks and useless retail space? No. Would anyone let CIE touch tose sites? Of course not.

BrianD · 31-07-2011 1:33pm

donvito99 wrote: »

Depends on what your definition of regeneration is. Pearse St was in tatters with abandoned industrial units that have either been knocked or completely transformed (Chartered accountants/architect's studio building, northside of pearse st).

How would you suggest a university that already has massive site constraints use its own budget? It already has effectively taken the initiative by building student accomodation and a brand new health and leisure centre (avec swimming pool, climbing wall and gym) that is partially open to the public, for security reasons (garda intervention shortly after building opened).

Did the governement have any plans for Pearse St? No. Would you trust a developer to do anything but run of the mill shabby apartment blocks and useless retail space? No. Would anyone let CIE touch tose sites? Of course not.

There's no need for the Government to have a plan from Pearse St. other than to instruct or suggest Trinity to do something about it.

If you look at the buildings that Trinity occupies, these all effectively have their backs to the street. May of these were retail in the past. Trinity simply cannot be allowed to strangle a street which what they have done. There is a "vicious circle" that somebody has to break. In any other city, universities tend to be surrounded by cafes, retail.

A good plan would be to allow ground floor for retail/commercial (income for the college) and regenerate the street. Upstairs can be used for university use. Look at the properties that the University controls - the Gas building on Westmoreland (you'd be hard pressed to know if it's derelict) and the building on Foster Place that they want to turn into a super pub. Plus the bizarre decision to build a bridge across Westland Row in the past.

There seems to be a pattern here - Trinity aren't really bothered about the city they are in and don't want to integrate into it. They have an opportunity to show leadership and have failed to do so.

Aard · 31-07-2011 4:13pm

+1

Ground floor use is the most important factor in giving life to any urban area. A long tract of entrance-less buildings is probably the worst thing you can do to a street. The area in front of that just becomes a transit route. Some of Pearse St looks OK, the rest just needs to catch up.

EDIT: While we're having a dig at Trinity, could the please do something with that wall on Nassau St?

Cathaoirleach · 03-10-2011 3:54pm

Absolutely shocking what DCC have just done in College Green. They've erected 4 lamp poles right in front of the BOI portico and butchered the old granite pavement, patching it up with tarmac. :eek:

Is there anyone in DCC that gives a sh!t about this city?

A post over on Archiseek by GrahamH somes it up

(c) GrahamH

donvito99 · 03-10-2011 7:47pm

Shocking indeed but they do appear to be refurbished classic ones awaiting the ornate top yoke.

I wouldn't mind TBH if they were only temporary (ie. pedestrianisation eventually gets underway) so long as they get rid of those tatty galvinised signage poles and that tatty bin

Cathaoirleach · 03-10-2011 8:49pm

donvito99 wrote: »

I wouldn't mind TBH if they were only temporary (ie. pedestrianisation eventually gets underway)

That's the problem - it's not temporary.

DCC have an abysmal record of preserving Dublin's architectural heritage and public realm for the simple fact that the people in charge couldn't care less and know that they can get away with it.

Look at the state of the rest of the city. Look at the amount of municipal tat and illegal, hideous shop signage that's been up for years. The DCC aren't enforcing there own regulations, and when they do, the damage has already been done. What's the point?

We can forget about pedestrianising College Green or having any serious city-wide beautification plan when we're up against the incompetent jobsworths in DCC.

Aard · 03-10-2011 9:28pm

Who decides these things? An individual I'm sure?

dRNk SAnTA · 04-10-2011 1:06am

That is absolutely outrageous.

That is Dublin city centre - have we no pride? The place looks like a bomb has gone off, and our city council is the main offender!

I wish they'd set up a body - even of volunteers - who could go in and clear the city centre of all that clutter, it would make a world of difference.

BrianD · 04-10-2011 1:19pm

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

Absolutely shocking what DCC have just done in College Green. They've erected 4 lamp poles right in front of the BOI portico and butchered the old granite pavement, patching it up with tarmac. :eek:

Is there anyone in DCC that gives a sh!t about this city?

A post over on Archiseek by GrahamH somes it up

(c) GrahamH

Are there actually lights on these or are they awaiting to be fitted?

Cathaoirleach · 05-10-2011 9:53pm

BrianD wrote: »

Are there actually lights on these or are they awaiting to be fitted?

Rest assured, DCC will install four different types of bulb (any old bulb will do) so we can have a mis-mash of different colour temperatures clashing together.

To add insult to injury, several election posters are now springing up on these lamp posts, further destroying the view of Dublin's finest architecture.

Well done, Dublin City Council, you've really outdone yourselves this time.

darragh16 · 07-10-2011 8:02pm

I was always under the impression that this is the route the new Luas connector will be taking. This seems likely in the coming years because the BXD line is going to be the last of the major infrastructural projects in the city to be given the go ahead in the budget & new development plan next year

crushproof · 08-10-2011 2:41pm

I saw the new lampposts yesterday, complete with the lovely tarmac and election posters. Outraged but the same time no surprised at all so my devious mind was thinking....
What "IF" a few tree surgeons dressed as DCC contractors turned up on a Sunday afternoon and carried out some essential works on the trees and cut them down completely. Of course there would be the usual nig nags calls to Joe but I'd imagine once people see how great the view is then there would be sufficient public support against reinstating any trees.

Don't worry, just a thought :P

Wild Bill · 12-10-2011 8:14pm

Well, those posts are not as nice as trees but they are a start I guess. :cool:

Cathaoirleach · 12-10-2011 8:54pm

Wild Bill wrote: »

they are a start I guess. :cool:

Sure, we might as well stick in a few bus stops, phone booths and ESB cabinets while we're at it.

You'd fit right in at Dublin City Council.

Wild Bill · 14-10-2011 10:46pm

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

Sure, we might as well stick in a few bus stops, phone booths and ESB cabinets while we're at it.

You'd fit right in at Dublin City Council.

Nah. I'd be a massive improvement - DCC pay way too much attention to "trendy" fetishists. :cool:

Bigfellalixnaw · 15-10-2012 10:43pm

Any positive progress on the pedestrianizing of College Green yet?

Pedestrianise College Green for 2016

Comments