Poolbeg chimneys to be knocked down?

4Sticks

Yeah - the chimneys are STILL staying SL

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/councillors-vote-to-preserve-pigeon-house-chimneys-1.1866275

Just add it to your Grates-my-Gears list

darkpagandeath

4Sticks wrote: »

Yeah - the chimneys are STILL staying SL

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/councillors-vote-to-preserve-pigeon-house-chimneys-1.1866275

Just add it to your Grates-my-Gears list

Who wants to come and see chimneys.... Surely building some kind of purpose built structure would work out cheaper if they want some kind of London eye thing.. And how is something from the 60s heritage Jesus.

4Sticks

Academic now

darkpagandeath

4Sticks wrote: »

Academic now

Not really they have to apply to demolish them.

old hippy

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who wants to come and see chimneys.... Surely building some kind of purpose built structure would work out cheaper if they want some kind of London eye thing.. And how is something from the 60s heritage Jesus.

Over here we've got brutalism architecture from the 70s which might be considered such. We've got Television Centre (1960) which is a grade 2 listed building, although I'm not sure what style of architecture it is.

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

Just add it to your Grates-my-Gears list

I don't have such a list. My expectations of Ireland are pretty low at this stage.

darkpagandeath

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't have such a list. My expectations of Ireland are pretty low at this stage.

Would not be to surprised if they award the maintenance contract to 1 of the golden circle. That then only maintains them poorly so it has to be re done every 5 years. As you know something purpose built would never even be considered a sensible option by them in charge when looking at this stuff.

wandatowell

My old man spent years living in a bedsit in Dublin doing his apprenticeship for the ESB then finally when he was qualified.

He loves those towers and tbh for no reason I can think of so do I.

It would be a shame to see them gone.

4Sticks

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Not really they have to apply to demolish them.

They (ESB) always had to do that. Now the chimneys have the status of Protected Structures. It has the practical effect of saying - don't bother applying to demolish them.

darkpagandeath

I have an idea lets make the whole country a protected site as apparently every rock or whatever has some significance. :rolleyes:

ScumLord

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I have an idea lets make the whole country a protected site as apparently every rock or whatever has some significance. :rolleyes:

Next thing you know they'll start putting heritage orders on pot holes so they don't have to fix them. Better not leave your bins out for long either or your neighbours might get used to looking at them.

4Sticks

Now lads ye're just over reacting a little - yes?

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

Now lads ye're just over reacting a little - yes?

Maybe a little.

If the chimneys are developed into something beneficial to the country or even Dublin, I'll change my tune. If they're just left to rot under the state's care I'll be dishing out "told you so's".

Maximus Alexander

Yes, the only two sensible options are either not to protect the Poolbeg towers or to protect everything.

4Sticks

Or maybe a case by case basis would be best - no ?

Maximus Alexander

That's crazy talk.

Zulu

ScumLord wrote: »

A proper motorway network (which we could have easily built during the boom) ...

When exactly do you think our motorways were built?

4Sticks

Here is a building less than 10 years old that imo should be protected. Reason - it is Ireland largest timber framed building and as such is a most unique building.

( For those who care about such things - no it is not in Dublin )

Enjoy reading here if interested

darkpagandeath

Think peoples sarcasm detectors are broken. And yes case by case, but I'm betting these will go to rack and ruin I mean we could not in the good times keep our water network maintained. What do you think the odd's of this being kept maintained.

4Sticks

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What do you think the odd's of this being kept maintained.

The status of protected structures compels this of the owners. The LA have swinging enforcement powers for this.

darkpagandeath

4Sticks wrote: »

The status of protected structures compels this of the owners. The LA have swinging enforcement powers for this.

So the tax payers.

Tarzana

ScumLord wrote: »

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.

For our size and population, our motorway network is pretty darn good, there's just a few bits that need to be completed.

For the UK's size and population, the motorway isn't actually that extensive. Their sub-motorway roads are much better than ours though, obviously.

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

Or maybe a case by case basis would be best - no ?

How about outlining what constitutes a heritage building set some guidelines so that we don't have to go on a case by case basis for everything that a few people might become attached too.

If you had such a guideline I don't think a building like Poolbeg would make the list. It has little actual significance. It's not like people would look at it and say that's a fine example of such a building, or it's architecture stands out (like the battersea station in the UK), it's just a run of the mill station. It could be replaced with something that's actually iconic, that would actually be a good symbol of modern Ireland and be a real tourist attraction. I don't know why people want to turn that area into a derelict site?

4Sticks

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the tax payers.

Well ESB in the first instance.
you dizzy yet going in circles?

BrensBenz

Yes, the chimneys "say" Dublin but, unfortunately, they're not paying their way any more and, up close, they're in poor repair and pig-ugly.
Can you imagine the whingeing from the chattering masses if any company offered to spend money maintaining two massive ornaments?

No! I'd say their fate is sealed but we'll get over it.

4Sticks

ScumLord wrote: »

How about outlining what constitutes a heritage building set some guidelines so that we don't have to go on a case by case basis for everything that a few people might become attached too.

If you had such a guideline I don't think a building like Poolbeg would make the list. It has little actual significance. It's not like people would look at it and say that's a fine example of such a building, or it's architecture stands out (like the battersea station in the UK), it's just a run of the mill station. It could be replaced with something that's actually iconic, that would actually be a good symbol of modern Ireland and be a real tourist attraction. I don't know why people want to turn that area into a derelict site?

They are massive yet slender structures set in a context that make them extremely visible. A lot more than "a few" people value them and that does make them significant. They perfectly embody our City's industrial heritage.

4Sticks

BrensBenz wrote: »

No! I'd say their fate is sealed but we'll get over it.

you should track back a few post

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

The status of protected structures compels this of the owners. The LA have swinging enforcement powers for this.

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So the tax payers.

No ESB customers from the looks of it. It doesn't seem right to force the ESB to maintain a building that's useless to them either. It would be only fair for the state to buy it off them if they want to maintain it as a persistent eyesore landmark.

Tarzana wrote: »

For our size and population, our motorway network is pretty darn good, there's just a few bits that need to be completed.

By what standard is our road network good? We've had motorways on the books for over a decade that keep going back into planning because the road plan they come up with is sometimes bizarre.

If you look at Galway/Mayo/Roscommon the motorway that would serve the area has been set back and set back and instead we've got a motorway to Dublin. That's great if you're exporting or planning on leaving the country in a hurry but in my experience it's come at an expensive of worse traffic for anyone that's just trying to get home from work because all the new traffic lights favour the motorway over the N17. That will come into it's own if the M17 ever get's built but until then every worker in the west has to endure worsening traffic problems. I won't even consider going to Galway unless it's absolutely necessary because of the traffic.

BrensBenz

4Sticks wrote: »

you should track back a few post

Sorry. Although extraordinarily wise on all matters, I'm a lazy b@$t@rd.

4Sticks

ScumLord wrote: »

If you look at Galway/Mayo/Roscommon the motorway that would serve the area has been set back and set back and instead we've got a motorway to Dublin. That's great if you're exporting or planning on leaving the country in a hurry but in my experience it's come at an expensive of worse traffic for anyone that's just trying to get home from work because all the new traffic lights favour the motorway over the N17. That will come into it's own if the M17 ever get's built but until then every worker in the west has to endure worsening traffic problems. I won't even consider going to Galway unless it's absolutely necessary because of the traffic.

I do sympathize and I know what it's like. I spent may hours of the Tiger years stuck on the M50 whilst they were widening it. It got a whole worse before it got better.

darkpagandeath

4Sticks wrote: »

They are massive yet slender structures set in a context that make them extremely visible. A lot more than "a few" people value them and that does make them significant. They perfectly embody our City's industrial heritage.

Since when does Dublin have a heritage of power stations. They are not a superb example of chimneys no architectural thought just tall to avoid pollution. And just because some people are used to them does not make them Iconic.

4Sticks

This make them more rare. And more culturally valuable.

Maximus Alexander

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Since when does Dublin have a heritage of power stations. They are not a superb example of chimneys no architectural thought just tall to avoid pollution. And just because some people are used to them does not make them Iconic.

You should take a look at the list of protected buildings in Dublin as of 2010. You'll struggle to find anything iconic on there.

ScumLord

4Sticks wrote: »

I do sympathize and I know what it's like. I spent may hours of the Tiger years stuck on the M50 whilst they were widening it. It got a whole worse before it got better.

What makes it worse is when you see them spending money on works that nobody asked for just to use up budgets. Sometimes it's like their purposely pulling the piss on smaller country roads by resurfacing the bit that got resurfaced last year and stopping when it get's to the bad bit that needed to be done. It's like they're avoiding the work that needs to be done so they can guarantee more work next year.

If they'd just stop spending money on pointless or irelivant works we could probably afford our motorway no bother.

4Sticks

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

You should take a look at the list of protected buildings in Dublin as of 2010. You'll struggle to find anything iconic on there.

Our built heritage is what we borrow from the past and have a duty to pass onto the future. It lends definition to our places character and gives a town or city a sense of place. It is not recoverable if lost.

Maximus Alexander

4Sticks wrote: »

Our built heritage is what we borrow from the past and have a duty to pass onto the future. It lends definition to our places character and gives a town or city a sense of place. It is not recoverable if lost.

I'm on your side. My point was that something doesn't need to be 'iconic' to be worth preserving. If that was the case we'd have what, O'Connell Bridge and nothing else? And O'Connell Bridge is nothing special, it could only be considered iconic by virtue of the fact that it appears on every Dublin postcard.

visual

ScumLord wrote: »

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.


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.

Can't stick a telegraph pole up outside of dublin without 1/2 the locals objecting.

No to motorways, pylons, wind energy, mobile masts, gas, oil the list is endless but the outcome is the same higher costs longer to implement if at all. Very hard for any business to setup in that environment.

darkpagandeath

visual wrote: »

Can't stick a telegraph pole up outside of dublin without 1/2 the locals objecting.

No to motorways, pylons, wind energy, mobile masts, gas, oil the list is endless but the outcome is the same higher costs longer to implement if at all. Very hard for any business to setup in that environment.

Yup People complain about no job in the area, but then do everything they can to stop the infrastructure or businesses that would provide jobs. Always same excuse unspoiled landscape, Hate to break it to them it’s 100% man made landscape Ireland used to be a massive forest. All trees and that cut down to accommodate farming. happened a long time ago yes but still man made.

And I'm not saying destroy the country... but areas that need infrastructure should get it.

Tarzana

BrensBenz wrote: »

Yes, the chimneys "say" Dublin but, unfortunately, they're not paying their way any more and, up close, they're in poor repair and pig-ugly.
Can you imagine the whingeing from the chattering masses if any company offered to spend money maintaining two massive ornaments?

No! I'd say their fate is sealed but we'll get over it.

I like the chimneys and have defended them on this thread, but I have to ultimately agree. There's not really any justification for keeping them and yeah, we will get used to them being gone.

Maximus Alexander

Tarzana wrote: »

I like the chimneys and have defended them on this thread, but I have to ultimately agree. There's not really any justification for keeping them and yeah, we will get used to them being gone.

We won't, they're being kept.

Tarzana

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

We won't, they're being kept.

For definite?

Maximus Alexander

Tarzana wrote: »

For definite?

Yep.

muddypaws

Tarzana wrote: »

For definite?

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Yep.

I don't think that means they are definitely staying, but rather that they can't be demolished without planning permission.

Owen Keegan's name just keeps cropping up.

Maximus Alexander

muddypaws wrote: »

I don't think that means they are definitely staying, but rather that they can't be demolished without planning permission.

Owen Keegan's name just keeps cropping up.

I think it means they're so close to definitely staying as makes no difference. From the Planning and Development Act, Section 57:

(b) A planning authority, or the Board on appeal, shall not grant permission for the demolition of a protected structure or proposed protected structure, save in exceptional circumstances.

ectoraige

rockbeast wrote: »

The short stumpy one has a nicer personality:D

That's because it has to try harder.

Fat Christy

I wouldn't like to see them go.

ectoraige

ScumLord wrote: »

Your mas ring was designed to be pretty to look at

I thought this kind of thing was against the charter these days?

Drayton Close

Here's an alternative proposal for the re-development of the #Poolbeg chimneys, turning them into a major tourist attraction on you tube: youtube.com/watch?v=0E1CewbnE_c

stevedublin

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

Zen65

Drayton Close wrote: »

Here's an alternative proposal for the re-development of the #Poolbeg chimneys, turning them into a major tourist attraction on you tube: youtube.com/watch?v=0E1CewbnE_c

Hmmm, where did the Ringsend sewage works go?

It's a great video, though the current chimneys would be totally unsuitable to be connected together. I imagine that they would sway quite a lot and any connecting bridge would end up at the bottom fairly quickly.

You could certainly build this from scratch, but once the current chimneys were removed to enable this, there would be a plethora of objectors demanding that new chimneys not be built as it would blight the new skyline