Poolbeg chimneys to be knocked down?

corner of hells

Build three more , knock two down first and then shortly afterwards the remaining three.

ScumLord

Potatoeman wrote: »

Bring a compass. :-)
The reason we have no new skyline features is that people object to most new tall buildings.
Isn't there a group that fight buildings over a certain height as they will disturb the 'iconic view'.

A view that's iconic to a few Dubs, and they think Dublin should be remembered for two unused chimney stacks?

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

Right, and the Empire State building is just a really big tower, and Elizabeth Tower's just an enormous clock when you think about it.

Those were built to be attractive city buildings/landmarks. The chimneys are little more than an eyesore to the people who haven't become accustomed to the sight of them.

It doesn't go any way towards explaining their significance or the value they have to people.

What is the significance of the chimneys? A reminder that we have electricity?

I like the way that the chimneys were built for industrial reasons, but have since transcended that purpose to become something else, even when they're obsolete in an a practical sense. Gives them a bit of character.

To the Dubs that have become accustomed to them. Most other people in the world wouldn't see any value in them and would see chimney stacks, the symbols of pollution as something that people wouldn't want to have as the most visible landmark of the city.

endacl

If the chimneys are demolished we'llhave to add an extra verse to 'The Rare Auld Times'.

I hope DCC are considering all the implications of this decision.

:mad:

SEPT 23 1989

I have never really gone on any sort of protest but i would block any attempt to knock them down

culchies really should have no say in this Dublin matter:D

brooke 2

Hootanany wrote: »

They are only Chimneys no loss.

Cannot understand all the fuss. Now being discussed on Moncrieff, ffs!
Am off to RTE!!

miss no stars

Best bit of the discussion on moncrief:

Panit them into 2 fingers to Garth Brooks :P

Rough Sleeper

ScumLord wrote: »

A view that's iconic to a few Dubs, and they think Dublin should be remembered for two unused chimney stacks?

Based purely on personal experience, I'd say it's more like a lot than a few. The thread poll seems to suggest so as well, and people on boards.ie tend not to be the most sentimental. I know I'm not. That's not taking into account that a lot of the Yes votes were probably cast by the people who start shouting at the computer screen at the mention of the word "Dublin."

Those were built to be attractive city buildings/landmarks. The chimneys are little more than an eyesore to the people who haven't become accustomed to the sight of them.

My point was that saying that they're "just chimneys" is a bit like telling your Ma that her lost wedding ring was "just some stones and metal." It ignores the fact that they have value to some people.

And I think they should be kept for the people who are accustomed to them. Which is actually a pretty significant portion of the country's population.

What is the significance of the chimneys? A reminder that we have electricity?

Lots of people in Dublin like them and think they add to the city, thus giving them significance or importance. If that makes us Philistines then so be it.

To the Dubs that have become accustomed to them. Most other people in the world wouldn't see any value in them and would see chimney stacks, the symbols of pollution as something that people wouldn't want to have as the most visible landmark of the city.

Well, I don't see the issue here as the towers are in Dublin and most other people in the world don't have to put up with them. Nor do I imagine they act as a deterrent to people visiting the capital. If there were plans to somehow uproot them and plant them in the middle of Mullingar I could see it being problematic.

And I can deal with "symbolic" pollution. It's actual, tangible pollution to which I'd be more inclined to divert my attention.

Dave!

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I have never really gone on any sort of protest but i would block any attempt to knock them down

Me too – strange the stuff that people get exercised about!

#garthbrooks #gaza

Sierra Oscar

They are a protected structure now anyway so demolition looks unlikely.

Councillors vote to preserve Pigeon House chimneys

Dublin city councillors have voted to preserve the ESB’s Pigeon House chimneys at Poolbeg more than eight years after the same proposal was rejected by the council’s conservation department.

petronius

This is a great opportunity - develop them as a viewing point, install some night time light works (like eiffel tower) and have a maritime museum at the base..

stevedublin

Spray them with sewage from the nearby treatment works and turn them into a delightful organic modern art sculpture

Adamantium

petronius wrote: »

This is a great opportunity - develop them as a viewing point, install some night time light works (like eiffel tower) and have a maritime museum at the base..

This is actually fantastic, If you're coming in by-plane at night , you'd see the chimneys lit up, that'd be pretty iconic.

FullblownRose

Drop the Ball wrote: »

Recognisable Landmark…Yes.
Aesthetic value…None

Blow them up or known them down IMO. Do in a dramatic fashion and turn it into a big even/day-out for the city.

Now that times have moved on and architectural styles have, well, improved, there's a sort of nostaligia to this style of structure and i think in the future they will provide a nice contrast to the newer or modernised buildings and streetscapes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brutalist_architecture

Fratton Fred

FullblownRose wrote: »

Now that times have moved on and architectural styles have, well, improved, there's a sort of nostaligia to this style of structure and i think in the future they will provide a nice contrast to the newer or modernised buildings and streetscapes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brutalist_architecture

If you love Brutalist, you'd love Dun Laoghaire library.

FullblownRose

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you love Brutalist, you'd love Dun Laoghaire library.

I actually dont in general and im glad things look a lot different nowadays but the chimneys might be an exception,,,

Rough Sleeper

FullblownRose wrote: »

Now that times have moved on and architectural styles have, well, improved, there's a sort of nostaligia to this style of structure and i think in the future they will provide a nice contrast to the newer or modernised buildings and streetscapes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brutalist_architecture

I think the vast majority of brutalist architecture is straight-up ugly. UCD's old buildings are gak, the Ballymun flats were depressing and any time I pass by that monstrosity of a shopping centre in Phibsborough I feel like topping myself.

However, on occasion, when the structure is really ****ing big, I think it can take on a sort of bleak, imposing beauty. Red Road flats in Glasgow spring immediately to mind.

4Sticks

For those who care that they should not be removed there is a petition here

http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/dublin-city-chief-executive-protect-the-poolbeg-chimneys-by-listing-them-on-the-record-of-protected-structures?share_id=TqCARptfDA&utm_campaign=friend_inviter_chat&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&utm_term=permissions_dialog_false

HeidiHeidi

4Sticks wrote: »

For those who care that they should not be removed there is a petition here

http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/dublin-city-chief-executive-protect-the-poolbeg-chimneys-by-listing-them-on-the-record-of-protected-structures?share_id=TqCARptfDA&utm_campaign=friend_inviter_chat&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&utm_term=permissions_dialog_false

That's a petition to place them on the Protected Structures list.

Has this not happened already today? I'm sure I saw a post about that somewhere......

ETA - I was half right http://www.herald.ie/news/council-moves-for-official-protection-of-poolbeg-chimneys-30430946.html

4Sticks

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

That's a petition to place them on the Protected Structures list.l[/url]

Yes - and therby saving them from demolition.

HeidiHeidi

4Sticks wrote: »

Yes - and therby saving them from demolition.

Yeah, I get that

Just thought that it had already happened, but I was wrong - the process to get them put on the list has been started.

Peregrine

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you love Brutalist, you'd love Dun Laoghaire library.

That's not brutalism

I remember that one of the proposals were but what they've built is not brutalistic.

ScumLord

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

My point was that saying that they're "just chimneys" is a bit like telling your Ma that her lost wedding ring was "just some stones and metal." It ignores the fact that they have value to some people.

Your mas ring was designed to be pretty to look at, the chimneys were designed to burn things. They are just chimneys, it's not the same as saying the empire state building is just a building, it was again designed to look good, be an example of American ingenuity and power, have a useful function for the people of New York. It's not just a building in the same way your local supermarket is just another supermarket more or less the same as the one in the next town.

The chimneys mean nothing, they're not attractive, they don't say anything positive about Dublin or Ireland other than we're too sentimental to get rid of stuff that's redundant. They're not anything to be proud of.

And I think they should be kept for the people who are accustomed to them. Which is actually a pretty significant portion of the country's population.

Well if the people of Dublin want to pay for them then so be it, but as with all things Dublin they'll probably use national money to protect a pair of chimneys while they rot.

Maybe they can turn it into a museum of sorts, but it's going to cost millions and it may not even attract enough visitors to support it meaning the state will be throwing more money down the hole due to sentimentality and pandering to sentimentality.

Lots of people in Dublin like them and think they add to the city, thus giving them significance or importance. If that makes us Philistines then so be it.

What is the significance though? Why are they important? The chimneys are neither, it's just people have gotten accustomed to the sight of them, there is no intrinsic value or heritage to protect.

Well it seems it's done now, another expense caused by a minority that the majority have to pay for.

Tail Docker

If they painted the damn things, that would be a good start. The red and white is so dirty and faded it is brutal. Repaint them, stand back, have a goo. If they look nice painted, keep em, if not, knock em. I reckon they'd clean up a treat. I'd love to get my hands on them, fresh paint, some cool lighting, be a stunner.

4Sticks

ScumLord wrote: »

Well it seems it's done now, another expense caused by a minority that the majority have to pay for.

Nothing to stop you packing the hang sangwiches and coming up to admire them ScumLoard

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

Nothing to stop you packing the hang sangwiches and coming up to admire them ScumLoard

I don't think so, it's not like they're a good example, they're just off the shelf chimneys. But ye'll need to start convincing someone to come look at them to cover the cost of upkeep.

miss no stars

ScumLord wrote: »

Well it seems it's done now, another expense caused by a minority that the majority have to pay for.

Dublin generates the majority of the money in the country. So the minority who are paying for everything anyway want to keep it and will pay for it, same way as the people in Dublin pay for everything in the rest of the country.

ScumLord

miss no stars wrote: »

Dublin generates the majority of the money in the country. So the minority who are paying for everything anyway want to keep it and will pay for it, same way as the people in Dublin pay for everything in the rest of the country.

That's because Dublin soaks up every opportunity at the expense of the rest of the country. It's easy to be the best when you're keeping everyone else under your boot.

Potatoeman

Remember this being refused planning permission:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/u2-to-appeal-hotel-planning-refusal-239323.html

Yet we keep some crappy old chimneys.

miss no stars

ScumLord wrote: »

That's because Dublin soaks up every opportunity at the expense of the rest of the country. It's easy to be the best when you're keeping everyone else under your boot.

So it's Dublin's fault that large companies locate here rather than in Galway or Mullingar? What people don't get is that Ireland is tiny. It's the size of Florida basically. Why locate yourself outside of Dublin when locating in Dublin means you have access to all the transport hubs, financial centres, larger pool of people to employ from? There's simply very little reason for most large multinational firms to be way outside of Dublin. And the multinational firms create revenue and demand for more services and other businesses grow up around them. So no, Dublin is not keeping everyone else under our boot. It's just a simple reality that the country is small and underpopulated.

So heaven fcuking forbid Dublin might actually be allowed to keep something that most Dubs associate very strongly with their city. The rest of you are happy enough to take all you want from Dublin.

Potatoeman

ScumLord wrote: »

That's because Dublin soaks up every opportunity at the expense of the rest of the country. It's easy to be the best when you're keeping everyone else under your boot.

Half of the Dublin population are from the country but there is common sense placing certain things in the capital.

ScumLord

miss no stars wrote: »

So it's Dublin's fault that large companies locate here rather than in Galway or Mullingar?

I wouldn't blame Dublin itself but the people in charge who ignore everything outside Dublin. Dublin was just as underdeveloped for a capital city as the rest of the country was for being rural before the boom. Other cities had the opportunity to attract business but like you said, Dublin got all the development, all the transport hubs, all the financial centres, it attracted all the people out of other towns and cities killing the opportunities around the country.

The only way people outside of Dublin can expect any work to be done is if people get poisoned, devastated or dead. We have to wait for half the population of Galway to get poisoned by cryptosporidium before our water treatment gets updated, we have to wait for **** to come out the taps before they even consider updating our sewage systems, and people have to die before they'll consider updating the roads.

The reason Dublin excelled is because the rest of the country got left behind and ignored. So I don't really care that Dublin wants to hang onto a liability out of sentimentality.

miss no stars

ScumLord wrote: »

I wouldn't blame Dublin itself but the people in charge who ignore everything outside Dublin. Dublin was just as underdeveloped for a capital city as the rest of the country was for being rural before the boom. Other cities had the opportunity to attract business but like you said, Dublin got all the development, all the transport hubs, all the financial centres, it attracted all the people out of other towns and cities killing the opportunities around the country.

The only way people outside of Dublin can expect any work to be done is if people get poisoned, devastated or dead. We have to wait for half the population of Galway to get poisoned by cryptosporidium before our water treatment gets updated, we have to wait for **** to come out the taps before they even consider updating our sewage systems, and people have to die before they'll consider updating the roads.

The reason Dublin excelled is because the rest of the country got left behind and ignored. So I don't really care that Dublin wants to hang onto a liability out of sentimentality.

Careful now, that chip on your shoulder might wear you out altogether. Dublin didn't GET all the development, it didn't GET the transport hubs, the development HAPPENED in Dublin and the transport hubs DEVELOPED in Dublin because, shock horror, Dublin needed it. A quarter of the population live in Dublin, most of the economic activity in the country happens because of Dublin. If you want to bring more prosperity to your area go out and create it.
The cryptosporidium is a disgrace, nobody would doubt that. But that doesn't mean that a transport system in the capital city and centre of economic activity that's groaning under the pressure shouldn't be upgraded, especially when the economy of the country relies on that transport system being in place. Both should be done. Both are important. But the country goes under if Dublin can't function so no money for either if you don't keep Dublin running. Understand?

So while the property tax from Dublin is going to subsidise rural living, yeah, Dublin has a right to keep one of the most instantly recognizable structures in it.

Zulu

ScumLord wrote: »

<ignorant and blind anti-Dubiln rant>.

Ah right, now I get it.

Fratton Fred

Nimr wrote: »

That's not brutalism

I remember that one of the proposals were but what they've built is not brutalistic.

It looks pretty ****ing brutal to me.

4Sticks

They have to stay you know

Gannicus

bnt wrote: »

This isn't London, and that's not the Battersea Power Station. I say remove them and build something better in their place, like a 300m tall statue of my middle finger.

I would miss them but yeah. What about moving the Spire out there and put Ann Olivia back where she belongs. Maybe give it a clean

4Sticks

We will need them in place come September

Pauric89

Says a lot. Two dirty old chimneys are classified as a landmark in Dublin.

Potatoeman

ScumLord wrote: »

I wouldn't blame Dublin itself but the people in charge who ignore everything outside Dublin. Dublin was just as underdeveloped for a capital city as the rest of the country was for being rural before the boom. Other cities had the opportunity to attract business but like you said, Dublin got all the development, all the transport hubs, all the financial centres, it attracted all the people out of other towns and cities killing the opportunities around the country.

The only way people outside of Dublin can expect any work to be done is if people get poisoned, devastated or dead. We have to wait for half the population of Galway to get poisoned by cryptosporidium before our water treatment gets updated, we have to wait for **** to come out the taps before they even consider updating our sewage systems, and people have to die before they'll consider updating the roads.

The reason Dublin excelled is because the rest of the country got left behind and ignored. So I don't really care that Dublin wants to hang onto a liability out of sentimentality.

The simple answer is that it costs more to deliver services to people that are spread out. People have a chip on their shoulder about certain things located in Dublin but where else would be suitable?

Maximus Alexander

Pauric89 wrote: »

Says a lot. Two dirty old chimneys are classified as a landmark in Dublin.

They're the second and third tallest structures in the country (excluding masts). In what part of the world would that not be a landmark?

Zulu

Potatoeman wrote: »

The simple answer is that it costs more to deliver services to people that are spread out. People have a chip on their shoulder about certain things located in Dublin but where else would be suitable?

Not to mention the bollixup that was "decentralisation" - a perfect example of wanton waste just to put jobs outside Dublin to appease those with such chips-on-shoulders. (when we should have been rationalising and centralising)

darkpagandeath

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

They're the second and third tallest structures in the country (excluding masts). In what part of the world would that not be a landmark?

That says a lot about the country, Lets build some decent tall building in Dublin.... NO!!! you can't the skyline...

brightspark

They are just chimneys, if the ESB wanted to build a similar structure now there would be lots of objections just as there are objections to the planned pylons.

If it's not economic to leave them there, they should be demolished.

darkpagandeath

brightspark wrote: »

They are just chimneys, if the ESB wanted to build a similar structure now there would be lots of objections just as there are objections to the planned pylons.

If it's not economic to leave them there, they should be demolished.

Imagine the health concerns to chimneys, they would be spewing clouds of death. Like the pylons spew death rays. And would be upto the ESB to prove they don’t cause problems not the other way around.

Maximus Alexander

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Imagine the health concerns to chimneys, they would be spewing clouds of death. Like the pylons spew death rays. And would be upto the ESB to prove they don’t cause problems not the other way around.

The funny part is they could probably quietly build some really short chimneys and nobody would say a word, but if they wanted to build 200m ones there'd be objections, probably on health grounds.

But what's the entire reason that chimneys are tall in the first place?

darkpagandeath

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

The funny part is they could probably quietly build some really short chimneys and nobody would say a word, but if they wanted to build 200m ones there'd be objections, probably on health grounds.

But what's the entire reason that chimneys are tall in the first place?

To make sure any emissions and particulate matter therein is released as far up as possible to either diffuse or be blown high enough to pass over the city.

Fratton Fred

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

The funny part is they could probably quietly build some really short chimneys and nobody would say a word, but if they wanted to build 200m ones there'd be objections, probably on health grounds.

But what's the entire reason that chimneys are tall in the first place?

The taller the cleaner, more or less.

Maximus Alexander

darkpagandeath wrote: »

To make sure any emissions and particulate matter therein is released as far up as possible to either diffuse or be blown high enough to pass over the city.

Izacly

miss no stars

Apparently they used to spew awful ****e out over the bay, but all I remember is steam.

ScumLord

miss no stars wrote: »

Careful now, that chip on your shoulder might wear you out altogether. Dublin didn't GET all the development, it didn't GET the transport hubs, the development HAPPENED in Dublin and the transport hubs DEVELOPED in Dublin because, shock horror, Dublin needed it. A quarter of the population live in Dublin,

The development didn't just happen, International companies came to Ireland for tax breaks, our ministers and the IDA actively encouraged these companies to come to Ireland and put the sites we had available in front of them. They had the opportunity to spread that development around the urban centres but our other cities were hobbled from the start as development around the country dried up and moved to Dublin. If you're working in IT you don't need to be in a city but I appreciate that type of person probably wants to live in a city.

The argument that Dublin has the biggest population so it's the most attractive to businesses is false too. If a company needs to sell to lots of people then it wants to be in a dense population centre so it has more people to work with. Although if you look at discount stores in the UK they are mostly outside of cities on the motorways. If your manufacturing you don't want to be stuck in the middle of a city, if you're doing any transporting you don't want to be in a city.

most of the economic activity in the country happens because of Dublin. If you want to bring more prosperity to your area go out and create it.

That's pretty dismissive but expected, you assume because we don't have a booming business trade outside of dublin that nobody even tried. People all over the country set up enterprise centres, invested their savings in businesses because they kept being told "we're upgrading the road to reduce the traffic", "broadband will level the playing field". But the development never came or came too little too late.

It's not like this is a urban/rural divide either, its a Dublin vs the rest of the country divide. It's not surprising the capital city is the biggest city, or that it's the financial centre or that companies like google want to set up there. It does make sense. I don't begrudge Dublin it's development but the people in charge are being lazy with development and everyone is suffering for it, even Dublin. Dublin is watching it's population sore because people have to move there, sometimes whether they like it or not, this means it needs to suck up more resources, and because populations are going down in other places they get investment taken away from them and more people have to move to Dublin, it's a downward spiral. This puts huge pressure on Dublins services and means Dublin is always playing catch up.


A proper motorway network (which we could have easily built during the boom) would have taken the pressure off Dublin and made it easier to spread development around the country. One of Britain's major resources that makes it so attractive and beneficial to companies is it's road network. They treat it like an important national resource too making sure it's running as efficiently as possible. We don't have that resource so companies have to stay near the ports.