PROTECT KILMAINHAM JAIL

Do you really want Dublin look like cities of USA or make the same mistakes who were done in France about the new building surrended historical monuments ? Do you want Dublin more ugly ? Why not a supermarket in the GPO ? Dominique Foulon France

Username:: Sarah Sénéor
UserEmail:: sarah.seneor@free.fr
UserTel:: 01 40 34 60 63
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 212.27.46.220
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 09:32

Comments

keep these national monuments seems to me very important for the future and memory of Ireland Don't touch them for new and very often ugly modern buildings(we have seen that in Paris). Sarah Sénéor, Paris, France

Username:: Sarah Sénéor
UserEmail:: sarah.seneor@free.fr
UserTel:: 01 40 34 60 63
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 212.27.46.220
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 09:33

Comments

Username:: Gary Hoctor
UserEmail:: ghoctor@eircom.net
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 213.190.132.187
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 10:04

Comments

Sir, I hereby object to the proposed contruction of office buildings opposite Kilmainham Jail. Its present architechtural value will be decreased if such a construction is allowed to proceed. Yours

Username:: Shay Gibbons
UserEmail:: gibs@eircom.ie
UserTel:: 453 6758
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 149.157.1.55
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 12:01

Comments

People born and reared in Inchicore can no longer afford to buy homes there anymore. The influx of country people, lower and uppper middle class Dubliners and an motley array of yuppies have now ruined what was once Dublin's best kept secret. When will someone shout stop? Kilmainham will surrvive all wars and conflicts that comes its way, please concern yourselves with the distruction of a community before your very eyes. In ten years time what was Inchivcore will be but a memory.

Username:: Edward Brannigan
UserEmail:: edbran@indigo.ie
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 149.157.1.55
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 15:49

Comments

Well done on your magnificant site. I would just like to point out that no IRISH SOLDIERS fought and died in the two world wars. Those who did, and were of Irish birth etc, fought and died as BRITISH SOLDIERS. It is misleading to suggest otherwise.

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.145.134.220
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 17:18

Comments

Please find below a copy of Sinn Féin's objection to the proposed development accross from Kilmainham Jail.

To: Mr. Christopher Geoghegan Principal Officer, Planning Department, Dublin Corporation, Civic Offices, Wood Quay, Dublin 8, Friday 19 January 2001

Re: Revised planning application no. 2467-00 from Charmside Ltd. Re: Proposed Development at nos 34-38 Inchicore Road, Kilmainham, Dublin 8 (formerly Rowantrees)

A chara, I wish to again lodge an objection to the planned development by Charmside Ltd. on the former Rowantrees site, planning application no. 2467-00. The revised plans, which were submitted on 22 December 2000 following a request from Dublin Corporation for further information, are in my view still contrary to the aesthetic, architectural, archaeological and ethos of the area. I also believe that the project is still in breach of the guidelines for buildings on this site as outlined in the Inchicore Urban Design Plan issued by Dublin Corporation in May 2000 . Obviously the developers did not understand the nature of the objections to their first plan, that the size, density, obtrusiveness and bulk of the three blocks should be reduced and that a building of excellence as per Inchicore Urban Design Plan should have been submitted. The revised plans in fact increase in size the development by 3,351 sq. mts to 56,786 sq. mts of accomadation. This is in fact achieved by the reduction of open space within the site, the removal of an atrium as per original plan. There is no serious attempt to address the concerns regarding car-parking space and traffic to and from the site.

Traffic/Car Park The revised plan retains the proposed two-storey underground carpark with a capacity for 587 vehicles. This capacity will in no way be capable of handling the volume of vehicular traffic which a development of this size would entail. Conservative estimates by the developer that there will be less than 1,900 people working in the offices, while other planners suggest that the office space available if the building is completed would suggest a working population in excess of 3,000 and possibly as much as 4,000. That would suggest that the car park proposed would not have the capacity to deal with the level of worker vehicles and that the surrounding area would suffer the consequences. The revised plan has more than doubled the space for retail and creche facilities, suggesting more people visiting the complex, also suggesting that more than the proposed 11 visitors car parking spaces are required. The consequences would be that all local on-street parking spaces would be taken up to facilitate the overflow of workers cars from that development and that the proposed public square “civic space” in the middle of Inchicore Road opposite the entrance to Kilmainham Jail would be compromised or disfunctional due to traffic chaos and grid lock. The number of car travelling into and out of the area because of the development would make it difficult for local residents to enter or exit their houses and would obstruct the tourism industry as per Kilmainham Jail and the Royal Hospital. The workings of the courthouse might also be affected. I still contend that as I said in my initial objection that: “Even taking the conservative estimate of 1,800 people working in the development, the level of traffic, into an already traffic-congested area would be unacceptable. The road network in the area cannot cope at present with the level of traffic and this development would add greatly to the problem, specifically at the times when the traffic problems in the area are at their worst. As it is the planned the introduction of the LUAS is predicted to worsen the traffic problems of the area.” I would also submit that relying , as the developers do in their new plans, on a reduction of car use of 20% , and a hope that 10% would be using the LUAS, with 4% and 6% increases over 3 years of cyclists and walkers to work respectively is a bit far-fetched, and is a reflection of the current trends in modes of transport for office based workers.

Size and scale Despite the minor alterations to the original plans I believe that the new plans are no less intrusive on the homes of existing residents on Inchicore Road and South Circular Road, specifically St John’s Terrace amd also to the houses adjoinging the site on Inchicore Road. The building will still be rising three storeys above the houses on Inchicore Road and St John’s Terrace. (An opening onto South Coircular Road from the Gym is included in the revised plans.) The submitted photomontages View D2 shows how much the buildings will be looming over the houses on St John’s Terrace. Photmontage View E3 shows how imposing the buildings will look and their bulk. View F2 show0s that the buildings will dwarf the exisiting houses. Several of the other views I contend are decieving. It is welcome that the developers took on board some of the concerns of the residents and other objectors, but it still seems that they are intend in squeezing in as much office space and can fit on the site, with the resultant bulk, the second class architectural appearance and an imposing nature. Words such as “soften façade” and “ restrained façade” do not hide obstrusive nature of the proposal. The building, despite the new proposal to have precast Limestone and Granite panels the building, will not blend with the existing building and will therefore be intrusive. The development is also contrary to the development parameters outlined in Dublin Corporation’s Urban Design Framework prepared as part of Inchicore’s Integrated Area Plan (May 2000), i.e. “the development of the heritage potential and associated tourism and employment, regeneration of derelict areas whilst respecting existing urban fabric” and that any building on this site would “ take its building line from the adjacent development on either frontage, perhaps responding to the strong form of the complex of buildings opposite”. The proposal is far from being a building of excellence and does not take its line from existing building nor does it reflect the strong form Kilmainham Jail or Kilmaiham Courthouse or for that matter Richmond Tower. edifice The frontage, skyline, the size and density of the buildings will not blend with the existing architectural construction of the local buildings, some of which are very important to Ireland both in terms of their architectural and their historical heritage. Imposing a modern edifice along the lines of what Charmside are proposing will detract, rather than enhance Kilmainham Jail, the District Court, the Royal Hospital and Richmond Tower and thus would discourage tourism to the area. This would be contrary to the first key objective listed under the Economic Renewal heading in the Kilmainham-Inchicore Integrated Area Plan 1997 was: “The development of tourism as a means of addressing unemployment”. That plan, the Integrated Area Plan, sees the promotion of the full occupation of under-used sites and buildings, in accordance with sustainable development objectives. These buildings and their impact on the local community and local traffic network would not be in line with the sustainable development objectives because it would have a negative impact on the area economicaly and underwise because it will cause gridlock and thus discourage tourists and others from visiting or locating the area.

Railway Line While Iarnród Éireann stated that they had no objection to planned developments near the boundary of the railway line, they did make it conditional: that no work take place within 4 metres of the boundary wall. I would contend that the scale of the work proposed would undermine the boundary wall and could seriously affect the maniline rail schedules out of Heuston Station.

I am not opposed in principal to office accomadation on this site, but would think that in line with IAP and Urban Design Framework that any development on this site should aimed at enhancing the tourism potential of the area. I would also contend that the developers were a bit previous in suggesting that the inclusion of a hotel development on the site would be opposed by residents. (“The latter considerations include the likely response of adjoining residents to the development of an hotel”.) Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn’t. What residents in the area are seeking is that any development on the the site would enhance the the area rather than detract from it. This revised proposeal for all the reasons outlined above would detract from the area and should be rejected by the Planning Department. This is an ill-conceived plan in many ways and should be rejected on grounds of height, density, intrusion of residential properties, the level of traffic during and after construction, not being in line with Dublin Corporation’s development plans for the area and would detract from the historical and architectural importance of the area. Is mise,

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Sinn Féin) 12 Bóthar na Déise, Baile Fhormaid, Baile Átha Cliath 10.

P.S. If my objection and those of others are not upheld. I would ask that serious restrictions be put on the hours of building on this site, that the number of trucks removing soil from the site (which will be substantial) be limited to a set amount daily and that Iarnród Éireann be kept fully inform of any work close to the boundary wall. I would also seek to ensure that proper consideration be given to the impact pile-driving is going to have on the houses adjoining this site.

Username:: Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Sinn Féin)
UserEmail:: sinnfeindsc@iolfree.ie
UserTel:: 01-4541868
UserFAX:: 01-4541868
Remote Name:: 194.145.134.220
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 17:23

Comments

The following is a copy of Sinn Féin's recent objection to the proposed development. This was submitted to Dublin Corporation

To: Mr. Christopher Geoghegan Principal Officer, Planning Department, Dublin Corporation, Civic Offices, Wood Quay, Dublin 8, Friday 19 January 2001

Re: Revised planning application no. 2467-00 from Charmside Ltd. Re: Proposed Development at nos 34-38 Inchicore Road, Kilmainham, Dublin 8 (formerly Rowantrees)

Aengus Ó Snodaigh 12 Bóthar na Déise, Baile Fhormaid, Baile Átha Cliath 10.

Username:: Stephen King
UserEmail:: eoghan@wanadoo.fr
UserTel:: ++ 33 0297325848
UserFAX:: ++ 33 0297325848
Remote Name:: 193.250.26.239
Remote User:
Date:: 30 January 2001
Time:: 22:39

Comments

I am utterly sappalled by the proposal to build office blocks beside Kilmainham Jail. Is that all it's about, money, money, money (greed) and no heritage and culture.

Username:: D. de Coverley
UserEmail:: ddecoverley@hotmail.com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 65.64.202.34
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 03:02

Comments

Currently the architecture proposed does not blend with existing buildings or enhance by virtue of scale or scope what is needed to create a harmonised development within the neighborhood. Imposing buildings that block visual sight lines and sunlight, and whose design are directly opposed to the guidelines specified in Dublin Corporation’s Urban Design Framework are not what is needed to enhance the tourism and heritage potential of the existing urban fabric of the area. With 160,000 visitors to the Kilmainham Jail in 1999, it is clear that interest is very much alive in Ireland’s history and will continue to be so. Would it not be more in keeping with the needs of the visitors to Kilmainham Jail to develop some sites for rest and refreshment within the area where Charmside Ltd. wishes to build, reduce the scale of the proposed buildings and require Charmside to adhere to Inichore’s Integrated Area Plan (May of 2000) at the same time?

Surely a plan more beneficial to the neighborhood and in line with the IIA plan should be required if Dublin Corporation is to hold it’s civic honor and face intact. Honor your heritage and history by preserving the importance of the Kilmainham Jail and the surrounding historical sites by giving them the full precedence they deserve within the framework of the needed urban renewal.

D. de Coverley Dallas, Texas USA

Username:: Rosena Horan
UserEmail:: rh@paris.com
UserTel:: 0033320152857
UserFAX:: 0033320152857
Remote Name:: 212.27.35.139
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 09:49

Comments

As a native of Clondalkin, but now living in France, I was distressed to recently learn of the proposed development opposite Kilmainham jail. Would it not be in more keeping with the site's cultural importance to plan the surrounding area for amenities which would rather enhance its attraction for the numerous visitors to the jail each year? Or will I once again be confronted by another botched Dublin Corporation Planning development on my next visit to Dublin? Another eyesore to explain away to our foreign visitors.

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 195.7.34.65
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 10:29

Comments

Please leave Kilmainham Jail as it is !

Catherine (France)

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 195.7.34.65
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 12:01

Comments

Elisabeth Sabot, Country : France/Ireland

Username:: Shane O'Brien
UserEmail:: shaneobrien@ireland.com
UserTel:: 01 2181085
UserFAX:: 01 2943385
Remote Name:: 212.120.142.65
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 14:21

Comments

This is a historic building. Please do no ruin it.

Thanks, Shane

Username:: Dermot Keyes (The Liberty)
UserEmail:: dermotkeyes@ireland.com
UserTel:: Newsroom - 01 4023071, Mobile - 087 6413906
UserFAX:: Newsroom - 01 4023283
Remote Name:: 147.252.69.176
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 14:35

Comments

I agree with the motivations of this group and I must compliment everyone involved in this website on the tremendous efforts being made by the local residents and everything must be done to protect another monstrosity from dotting this city's skyline. It is bad enough that the Customs House is surrounded by high rise buildings, most of them ugly and that the GPO stands in the most desecrated main street of any capital city in Europe (and that's with no spike) without one of the most historic buildings in our country being subjected to the same fate. I am the news editor of a free sheet newspaper in the south inner city and though I will have to conduct an impartial approach in my story for thus month's edition of The Liberty, I cannot understate my vehement opposition to another office block construction which will leave a national monument in shadow for huge portions of the year. It is remarkable to think that Sile de Valera did not see the importance of purchasimng this site to retain the look of the area as it currently stands, considering that her own grandfather and many other brave men of that age, were housed in the very jail that we must protect. Let us hope that this technology park never leaves the planning sheets and that a sane and reasonable future for this precious national site can be agreed to.

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 205.188.197.51
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 16:03

Comments

This is the horribly familiar story of a developer trying to squeeze the maximum possible floorspace out of a site, and to hell with the surroundings. There comes a point when basically bad and inappropriate proposals such as this one cannot be "improved" any more. If it's overscaled (and it is, grossly) then no amount of fiddling about with the elevations is going to help much.

At which point, it is time to wave goodbye to whoever is proposing the bad scheme, and invite new approaches from less greedy people fielding better architects, capable of producing a suitable lower-density scheme. Preferably mixed-use. You know, homes, shops, cafes etc as well as offices. That way it doesn't all go dead at 5pm.

Hugh Pearman London

Username:: Liam and Marti Massey
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 216.100.38.139
Remote User:
Date:: 31 January 2001
Time:: 20:41

Comments

We support the campaign to stop the large office block development directly across from the historical landmark, the Kilmainham Jail.

Username:: Gerard Blaney
UserEmail:: www.thebestirishwebsite.come-mail
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.207.87
Remote User:
Date:: 01 February 2001
Time:: 08:54

Comments

Dear John,

We have added the campaign to a prominent place on our Homepage and I anticipate a good response.Would you mind keeping us appraised of developments and of course the outcome ?

Wishing you all the very best on the campaign.

Gerard Blaney The Best Irish Website.com

===== visit us @ http://www.thebestirishwebsite.come-mail webmaster@thebestirishwebsite.com

____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

Username:: Richard Ledwidge
UserEmail:: r.ledwidge@home .com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 24.112.158.238
Remote User:
Date:: 01 February 2001
Time:: 09:08

Comments

As a city that prides itself on its history, culture, people, and uses these strengths as a means to encourge visitors to enjoy these attributes, I would urge you to give due consideration to concerns regarding the proposed development across the road from Kilmainham Jail. Here is an oppurtunity not only to practice what you preach about Dublin, but, a way to enhance the surrounding area by limiting development. Do we have to surrender to the desires of developers in their relentless pursuit of profit or are we prepared to protect and promote a part of our history?

Username:: Paul Canavan
UserEmail:: paul_canavan1@excite.com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 195.7.34.65
Remote User:
Date:: 01 February 2001
Time:: 12:02

Comments

This is a travesty, these buildings are part of our heritage. I grew up in Drimnagh and these buildings were part of my upbringing. Our 1916 heroes were interned and died within these walls. This is another example of the Liam Lawlors of the world putting money before history. What's next? A Dart station in Christ Church?

Username:: Maria Delaney
UserEmail:: mia_delaney@hotmail.com
UserTel:: 0013459166133
UserFAX:: 0013459456401
Remote Name:: 205.161.241.188
Remote User:
Date:: 01 February 2001
Time:: 13:48

Comments

As a Dubliner living abroad I realise the extent of the historical sites in Ireland. We are blessed with our heritage and should do everything within our power to protect it. Development is important yet it must be controlled or it will take over and leave Ireland as one large commercial zone, taking away its history, charm, and everything we stand for.

Username:: Dr Ray Fuller
UserEmail:: rfuller@tcd.ie
UserTel:: 01-6082426
UserFAX:: 01-6712006
Remote Name:: 134.226.1.28
Remote User:
Date:: 02 February 2001
Time:: 10:45

Comments

This revised proposed development is a minimalist and purely cosmetic response to the considerations thoughtfully and responsibly detailed by the Corporation in its comments on the original proposal. There is still: No provision of green space; No serious consideration of the height of adjacent and proximal buildings; No responsible analysis of road infrastructure to service access and parking (capacity and safety); No comprehensive and sensitive consideration of the historic nature of the immediate area; No meaningful protection of the privacy of residents, especially those adjacent to the site on South Circular Road; No restoration of the loss of direct sunlight to residents adjacent to the site on South Circular Road; No reduction in the size and density of the development which is totally out of proportion to the existing historic and residential buildings. This new proposal appears to be a cynical response to the responsible position adopted by the Corporation, apparently driven solely by a desire to exploit the site to deliver the largest possible return on investment, with virtually no consideration for the quality of the visual, social and historical environment.

Username:: Mary Upton, TD
UserEmail:: mary_upton@oireachtas.irlgov.ie
UserTel:: 6183756
UserFAX:: 6184637
Remote Name:: 193.120.127.221
Remote User:
Date:: 02 February 2001
Time:: 10:56

Comments

This is the letter of objection submitted by local TD, Mary Upton. From my careful examination of the file, this proposal is a travesty and must be rejected.

Mr Christy Geoghegan, Principal Officer Planning Department Dublin Corporation Civic Offices Dublin 8

1 February 2001

Dear Mr Geoghegan

I refer to planning application 2467/00 for new offices at the former Nestle site, 34 to 35 Inchicore Road, Kilmainham. I wish to respond to the points made in the additional information submitted by the developers. I refer also to my previous correspondence of September 15 last concerning the original application.

I have studied the details of the additional information and I would ask that this application be rejected immediately.

1. Additional information submitted does not answer queries raised Dublin Corporation should find that the additional information submitted is completely insufficient. The proposed development is of monstrous proportions and it will do serious long-term damage to the future of Inchicore and Kilmainham.

Dublin Corporation should not feel under any obligation to agree to this proposal. It must ensure that proper planning guidelines are followed to the end. The Corporation should not be bamboozled by the boxful of glossy documents submitted by the developer.

2. Poor mix and too dense This is a huge development and the additional information makes matters worse. There are too many units and it is of too high a density.

The mix is appalling. The application admits that it has nothing to offer the local community. Despite all the glossy documents sent in from the developers, they did not bother to draft a proper viability study on what they could offer the local community.

Only 2% of the application is for uses other than office. This is laughable and unacceptable.

Dublin Corporation has recently prepared a detailed Integrated Area Plan for Kilmainham and Inchicore. This lays down what should happen to make Kilmainham and Inchicore a better place. These proposals fail to meet the guidelines of the IAP. On these grounds alone, the application must be rejected.

3. Amenity and heritage value of site Many of the representations made to Dublin Corporation mention the historic value of Kilmainham Gaol. This needs to be at the forefront of the Corporation's consideration of this application. As it now stands, the proposal will dwarf the Gaol. It will severely undermine the tourist value of the Gaol. Some 200,000 tourists visit Kilmainham every year. Some part of this site could be used to develop and exploit the tourism potential of Kilmainham.

Kilmainham and Inchicore are parts of Dublin with great potential. They have been neglected in the past, but there is hope in the air that things will improve. The local community need a broad mix of services to improve everyone's quality of life. This is not contained in this proposal.

4. Transport study is a joke The report submitted by the transport consultants is shoddy and not worthy of consideration. The additional information does not contain credible information on how many people work in the offices.

There could be some 4000 people working in the offices. There is insufficient provision for parking contained in the application. It is not realistic to expect that everyone will take public transport to work. The neighbouring area will be saturated with daytime on-street parking.

5. Conclusion One person described this application as an ocean liner forever docked in Kilmainham. This accurately describes the macro and inappropriate scale of the development. If approved, these offices would devastate Kilmainham and Inchicore and this damage would last for many years.

This application must be rejected. Any office development cannot be more imposing than the buildings now in place.

I look forward to the careful consideration of Dublin Corporation of this proposal. I hope that the points I have raised will be fully taken into account.

With best wishes.

Yours sincerely

____________ Mary Upton, TD

Username:: John Callery
UserEmail:: johncallery@eircom.net
UserTel:: 087 6820278
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.220.153
Remote User:
Date:: 02 February 2001
Time:: 12:01

Comments

To everyone who has supported our campaign up until now-THANK YOU ONE ALL from Texas to Tallaght and Paris to Inchicore.

Could you also e mail the following public servants who must act in their professional roles as protectors of our historical and architectural heritage. If they cannot act to protect Kilmainham Gaol what excuses can they offer ?? Ask them. Sile de Velera announced with a fanfare only some weeks ago that she is to spend £1 million on the roof of the Gaol, she should concern herself with the monstrosity that is planned to loom over the roof of the Gaol.

Sile de Velera (Minister for Heritage & Culture) aire@ealga.irlgov.ie

James Barret (City Architect) james.barret@dublincorp.ie

Bertie Ahern ( Irish Prime-minister and FF TD for Kilmainham ) bahern@iol.ie

Username:: Eithne Massey
UserEmail:: eithnemassey@hotmail.com
UserTel:: 4539381
UserFAX:: 4539381
Remote Name:: 194.168.166.180
Remote User:
Date:: 02 February 2001
Time:: 15:53

Comments

As member of the local community in Inchicore, I would like to lodge my strong objection to Charmside's (a most unsuitable name, if ever there was one!) plans for the Nestle-Rowntree site. The revised application is in no real sense an improvement on the original one, which put forward a high-rise, high-density plan for the site. The frontage of the site gives particular cause for concern, removing the green area which currently exists and creating a series of massive, monolithic structures, coming to the very edge of Inchicore Road and the South Circular Road. Residents in the area are opposed to the development primarily for the following reasons;

The location: This corner is unique; it forms an axis of great historical and cultural importance. Originally the site of a twelfth century priory (and an earlier Celtic foundation), it now holds the entrance to the Royal Hospital and the façade of Kilmainham Jail. As it stands at present, the corner holds an intact vista of seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century buildings. The historical and touristic importance of the jail in particular must be obvious to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Irish history but the fact that it is more than likely that the site is the location of the Knight's Hospitaller's Great Hall - a building which was a centre of administrative life in Dublin, on the scale of Dublin Castle - from the 12th. to the 16th. century-may not be generally known. The late twentieth century Nestle Rowntree factory currently on the site is of neither historical nor aesthetic importance, but it least it has the virtue of being set well back from the road and with green space and planting around it, and a clear view down towards the Phoenix Park. The planned development would destroy this vista completely. The planned buildings are completely out of character with the area in both scale and design. The plan is not a bad design in itself, simply the wrong buildings in the wrong place. Modern architecture can blend in well with existing structures, and no-one is advocating a pastiche-style building for the area, but a much smaller, lower-scale design, with green space around it and with some recognition of the particular character of the site would go a long way towards making the plan acceptable.

The nature of the development: When it rejected the original proposal, Dublin Corporation requested a more mixed development from Charmside. The response could be considered laughable, if it were not so insulting. Now with a few more retail units, a restaurant (not specified for public use), a creche (not specified for public use) and a public gym (of great benefit to the community, considering the general age profile in the immediate area) it has rejected the idea of a public square because of the road junction. This despite the fact that anyone passing the area on the mornings the court sits will find the paths full of the waiting public. The rejection of any consideration being given to a hotel as part of the site is also spurious. Many members of the community would prefer have such a public facility, which would at least bring life to the area, to a concrete ghost-town left sitting on their doorsteps after the last commuter has sped (or rather crawled) down towards the M50.

Traffic congestion: The scale of the planned proposal will bring hundreds more cars to an already seriously congested area. As it stands, there are constant rush-hour bottlenecks at all roads around the site - South Circular Road, St. John's Road, Kilmainham Lane, Old Kilmainham and Emmet Road. The huge emphasis on car-parking in the scheme demonstrates that the developers see this facility as a major selling-point in the development. At a period when the Corporation is supposedly discouraging use of cars in urban areas, how can they approve of such a scheme?

Finally, I would like to stress that the community realises that what is a prime site cannot remain without development of some kind. Office space is relatively non-pollutant and has the potential to be designed in such a way as to retain the integral character of an area. The Kilmainham/Inchicore area is overdue for such development and an influx of workers would certainly be welcomed by local businesses and no doubt stimulate new growth. But this is not the plan that will develop this potential. If it is approved, what it will leave us with is a monstrosity towering over the cultural treasures of other days. Do we really want that to be the legacy of the 21st. century?

If you are interested in further information about the site, or interested in lodging an on-line objection, should access the kilmainham-gaol website. I await your reply with interest,

7 Emmet Road, Dublin 8.

Tel: 4539381

Dear

Are you aware of the planned development at the Nestle-Rowntree site at the corner of Inchicore Road and the South Circular Road?

If you are, what action do you plan to take?

A company called Charmside Developments has applied to Dublin Corporation for planning permission to build an Office Park on this site. Their first application was rejected and a second application has been lodged, with the decision due to be given on February 16th. The revised application is in no real sense an improvement on the original one, which put forward a high-rise, high-density plan for the site. The frontage of the site gives particular cause for concern, removing the green area which currently exists and creating a series of massive, monolithic structures, coming to the very edge of Inchicore Road and the South Circular Road. Residents in the area are opposed to the development primarily for the following reasons;

The location: This corner is unique; it forms an axis of great historical and cultural importance. Originally the site of a twelfth century priory (and an earlier Celtic foundation), it now holds the entrance to the Royal Hospital and the façade of Kilmainham Jail. As it stands at present, the corner holds an intact vista of seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century buildings. The historical and touristic importance of the jail in particular must be obvious to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Irish history. The late twentieth century Nestle Rowntree factory currently on the site is of neither historical nor aesthetic importance, but it least it has the virtue of being set well back from the road and with green space and planting around it, and a clear view down towards the Phoenix Park. The planned development would destroy this vista completely. The planned buildings are completely out of character with the area in both scale and design. The plan is not a bad design in itself, simply the wrong buildings in the wrong place. Modern architecture can blend in well with existing structures, and no-one is advocating a pastiche-style building for the area, but a much smaller, lower-scale design, with green space around it and with some recognition of the particular character of the site would go a long way towards making the plan acceptable.

If you are interested in further information about the site, or interested in lodging an on-line objection, should access the kilmainham-gaol website. I await your reply with interest,

7 Emmet Road, Dublin 8.

Tel: 4539381

Dear

Are you aware of the planned development at the Nestle-Rowntree site at the corner of Inchicore Road and the South Circular Road?

If you are, what action do you plan to take?

The location: This corner is unique; it forms an axis of great historical and cultural importance. Originally the site of a twelfth century priory (and an earlier Celtic foundation), it now holds the entrance to the Royal Hospital and the façade of Kilmainham Jail. As it stands at present, the corner holds an intact vista of seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century buildings. The historical and touristic importance of the jail in particular must be obvious to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Irish history. The late twentieth century Nestle Rowntree factory currently on the site is of neither historical nor aesthetic importance, but it least it has the virtue of being set well back from the road and with green space and planting around it, and a clear view down towards the Phoenix Park. The planned development would destroy this vista completely. The planned buildings are completely out of character with the area in both scale and design. The plan is not a bad design in itself, simply the wrong buildings in the wrong place. Modern architecture can blend in well with existing structures, and no-one is advocating a pastiche-style building for the area, but a much smaller, lower-scale design, with green space around it and with some recognition of the particular character of the site would go a long way towards making the plan acceptable.

If you are interested in further information about the site, or interested in lodging an on-line objection, should access the kilmainham-gaol website. I await your reply with interest,

7 Emmet Road, Dublin 8.

Tel: 4539381

Dear

Are you aware of the planned development at the Nestle-Rowntree site at the corner of Inchicore Road and the South Circular Road?

If you are, what action do you plan to take?

The location: This corner is unique; it forms an axis of great historical and cultural importance. Originally the site of a twelfth century priory (and an earlier Celtic foundation), it now holds the entrance to the Royal Hospital and the façade of Kilmainham Jail. As it stands at present, the corner holds an intact vista of seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century buildings. The historical and touristic importance of the jail in particular must be obvious to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Irish history. The late twentieth century Nestle Rowntree factory currently on the site is of neither historical nor aesthetic importance, but it least it has the virtue of being set well back from the road and with green space and planting around it, and a clear view down towards the Phoenix Park. The planned development would destroy this vista completely. The planned buildings are completely out of character with the area in both scale and design. The plan is not a bad design in itself, simply the wrong buildings in the wrong place. Modern architecture can blend in well with existing structures, and no-one is advocating a pastiche-style building for the area, but a much smaller, lower-scale design, with green space around it and with some recognition of the particular character of the site would go a long way towards making the plan acceptable.

If you are interested in further information about the site, or interested in lodging an on-line objection, should access the kilmainham-gaol website. I await your reply with interest,

Username:: Nick
UserEmail:: budskull@madmail.com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.175.61
Remote User:
Date:: 02 February 2001
Time:: 17:40

Comments

It is very disappointing to see that Dublin Corporation has no consideration for historical landmarks such as kilmainham I am from the kilmainham area and it would be a total disregard for the people in the area such as myself to see a project such as this to go forward

Username:: Denise Merriman,116 Kickham Road, Inchicore, Dublin 8
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.168.166.180
Remote User:
Date:: 03 February 2001
Time:: 12:14

Comments

This site must be developed as one would see in any other European country. This most unique site cries out for what we as residents and our thousands of tourists require.

1) A classicaly,tastefully designed first class hotel.

2) A heritage village to to reflect the great and ancient history of the area and site-from St. Maighneann of the 7th C, up to the 1916 rising.

3) An OPEN PLAZA for all to sit and reflect on the great history of the site and enjoy its unique views.

Sile de Velera and James Barret( Dublin City Architect) it's your duty and responsibility to SAVE AND PRESERVE OUR BLUE SKIES IN KILMAINHAM. Save us and the Old Gaol from these 3 proposed OCEAN LINERS PLANNED TO BE bearthed in our face forever- even one floor of offices will destroy this site for ever-and who will be welcome on board these ocean liners - BUSINESS CLASS ONLY!!!!

Username:: Patrick V. Garland
UserEmail:: pgarland6@juno.com
UserTel:: USA (931) 764-2883
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 63.30.22.7
Remote User:
Date:: 04 February 2001
Time:: 02:40

Comments

Dear Sirs: I am a first generation Irish-American, my father emigrating to the US during the 1920s. My father was proud of his heritage and I follow along. My wife and I have visited Kilmainham Gaol and hope to do so again later this year. In my mind, Kilmainham is a shrine and should be treated as such. Rather than surrounding it with office buildings, I would rather see it developed into a tourist site where visitors would be able to learn more about Ireland's History, with facilities for stopping to contemplate what took place at the Gaol, a shrine to pray, public restaurants, and maybe a place to get a bite to eat. A gift shop-book store would also be a nice addition.

Username:: Niall Rooney
UserEmail:: n_rooney@yahoo.com
UserTel:: 086 8873450
UserFAX:: n/a
Remote Name:: 136.201.1.46
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 04:12

Comments

I disagree with the proposed building of an office block opposite to Kilmainham Jail as it would take away from a great irish monument.For the record i am living in limerick city

Username:: John Callery,2 the Paddocks, Hy Breasal, SCR, Dublin 8.
UserEmail:: johncallery@eircom.net
UserTel:: 087 6820278
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.207.178
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 13:20

Comments

KILMAINHAM AND INCHICORE COMBINED RESIDENTS ASSOCIATIONS AND FRIENDS OF KILMAINHAM GAOL.

Ref: Macro Blocks at Kilmainham Gaol.

James Barret City Architect Dublin Corporation Wood Quay February 5th 2001.

We wish to state our following observations in relation to the “revised”!! submission by Treasury Holdings pertaining to the above.

1. Overall build of this “revised” development is now 56,786sq.m (611,245 ft. sq. ) Previous scheme = 53,388 sq. m.(574,668 sq.ft) So proposed new build of these blocks has increased by 3398 sq m.(36,576 sq.ft ). This is some RESPONCE to him being asked to consider the density of his proposal.

2. Let’s now examine each block: Block A = 25,311 sq m of which 24,788 sq m for office use Block A to contain a “restaurant” (workers canteen)!! = 236 sq m. Also to contain “a tourist information unit”!! = 361 sq m. Total retail = 597 sq m

So block A will provide “amenities” of 2.4% of “mixed use”. Further more this miniscule space that he calls a restaurant is nothing more than a tea room where the 4000 occupants of the blocks will cram in shifts for a smoke and cup of tea. It is a token tea shop that would not even serve the needs of the security staff of the Macro Blocks.

Block B = 9,019 sq m of which 7,616 sq m for office use. Block B to contain 625 sq m of a “public gym”, 5 retail units = 417 sq m and “a private creche” of 361sq m.

So block B will provide the much needed “local and tourist amenities” that this site cries out for, namely a gym and private creche !! All he is providing is some miniscule facilities for his tenants. Ratio here of offices to “mixed use”!! is 98% offices to 2% office worker facilities – we ask where is the local and tourist amenities that this site cries out for??

Block C = 2560 sq m, this remains at 100% office space.

OVERALL RATIO FOR SCHEME IS 98% OFFICES TO 2% “MIXED USE”- which is for the benefit of the tenants.

The second so called proposal is exactly the same animal as the first. This same proposal for this ancient and historic place is preposterous , architecturally of no merit for such a magnificent location just sub-urban Lego. The comments I have heard after viewing the photomontage vary from that these blocks look like a space station from opposite the Gaol, add a couple of flues and we see a power station from the Pheonix Park and hospital blocks from Con Colbert Road the Western Gateway into Dublin City. This just cannot be passed in any shape or form and be imposed on this ancient place. It’s like the O’ Flaherty case it will never be right. It was wrong last year, its wrong this year and it will never be right. A totally appropriate and well thought out design is required here- a classic hotel, heritage park and public plaza.

3. Public space / atrium : This charade is nothing more than an entrance foyer that “leads into the more private space of the office atrium” to use the planning agents exacts words.

4. “A hotel was considered but not progressed” : We wish to remind Dublin Corporation to read the 2000 very specific points as submitted by the residents stating what this site requires (copy enclosed).

PROPOSED OFFICE BLOCKS OPPOSITE KILMAINHAM GAOL.

Development by Charmside Developments at 34-38 Inchicore Road, Kilmainham Dublin 8. Planning Ref: 2467 /00

I :……………… Address : ……………… …………………………. ………………………… ………………………… August 29th 2000.

I wish to object to the above on the following grounds:

1. The building of the above and its function (SPECULATIVE OFFICE BLOCKS) will diminish the integrity and national importance of Kilmainham Jail.

2. I wish for this site opposite the Kilmainham Gaol to be designated / zoned by Dublin Corporation as a HERITAGE / CULTURAL site.

3. I wish for appropriate amenities for locals and the many tourists who visit here. We require a classically designed hotel (and its associated amenities) restaurant and heritage village for our children and all the children of the nation which reflects the great history of the district.

4. This is Dublin’s Bastille District – let any new development reflect this as one will see surrounding Place de la Bastille in Paris. This site must have public access and be developed as “Plaza Kilmainham”

Yours sincerely,

……………………

5. This proposed development DWARFS all the protected structures that surrounds this most unique site and it can only be described as ARCHITECTURAL FACISM IF IMPOSED ON THE RESIDENTS of St.John’s Terrace, Spencer Terrace and Charlton Terrace. This most imposing scheme will be a negative externality of major density and bulkness in the face of the Gaol and the district. It cannot be considered be Dublin Corporation in any shape or form as it’s apparent all the developer insists on developing is speculative office blocks. Dublin Corporation you’re here to serve the public not big business – you must respond to the total con of “additional information” as submitted by the developer in an appropriate manner. This most inappropriate (in every sense of the word) proposal deserves total rejection, no amount of requests to the developer will improve this scheme. It’s architecturally, historically and morally wrong to say nothing of its function and location. Dublin Corporation you know yourselves this totally fails the objectives of your own IAP for the area, the leading statement of which reads as follows-

“ On the 2nd of November 1999 Dublin Corporation launched (in the East Wing of Kilmainham Gaol !!!) an exciting new Urban Renewal Plan for the Kilmainham / Inchicore area. The AIM is to bring about regeneration whilst enhancing both the built environment and the green space”

This reads like a sick joke to us now. This proposed development has the potential to destroy the only site in the district where the aim of Dublin Corporation’s IAP can be realised – opposite Kilmainham Gaol. Just view the photomontages as submitted by the developer they do nothing to enhance his case quite the contrary they destroy his pathetic arguments to justify his most greedy speculative proposal for our most ancient and historical place.

James Barret Dublin City Architect, Dublin Corporation Wood Quay Dublin 8. Sept 8th 2000.

Re: Macro Blocks planned for Kilmainham Gaol and our IAP.

Dear Sir,

I just wish to reiterate the vision statement of the Integrated Area Plan for Kilmainham.

. “To enhance the environment / heritage adjacent to buildings of national importance”.

Can you imagine my feelings when only last month as I was out pushing my young son in his buggy towards (our favourite place among many in the district the Great War Memorial Park) when on reading the planning application on the Nestle site railings I turned and proceeded home shocked at what I had read. Six Hundred and Fifty Thousand 650,000 sq ft of OFFICES, with a minimum office population of 3,500!! to be spread over 3 blocks rising to 6 stories on the most perfect and elevated site in the district (if not the City of Dublin) that should so rightly enhance the great heritage and listed buildings that surround this site i.e.

Kilmainham Gaol, Bully’s Acre, ancient walls, walks and gardens of the Royal Hospital, The Royal Hospital itself and the War Memorial Park . From this elevated site one is in level with the Arsenal in the Pheonix Park and the panorama of the Park expanse itself.

We have the tourists in their thousands coming to view and soak in the great heritage and history of Kilmainham. What is missing is facilities and amenities for our tourists and locals alike. This site has the potential of becoming the greatest venue in Dublin for heritage and cultural events and all to revolve around Kilmainham Gaol and what our district so badly lacks an tastefully designed first class hotel to cater for tourists, the endless film crews who come to the Jail and for ourselves as residents in the most historic district in the city but not one single amenity to reflect of our Jail and the other local national sites.

The next day I spent it in the planning office reading the drawings and EIS as prepared by Treasury Holdings servants Frank Benson ( Planning Agent) and Tony Reddy (architect ).

What is proposed to be shoehorned / built in our face and the face of Kilmainham Gaol is THE MOST SPECULATIVE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT PLANNED IN THIS CITY SINCE THE SIXTIES. It shames the very word architect and personifies the profession at its most greedy and vulgar extremes. This architecture and its function is totally alien to our district and must not stand beside the architecture of Sir William Robinson (Royal Hospital), Francis Johnston,(Richmond Tower) and Sir Edwin Lutyens (War Memorial Park) to name only a few great architects whose work stands in the district today. THIS CANNOT BE BUILT OPPOSITE KILMAINHAM GAOL AND THE ROYAL HOSPITAL and over and around us as residents.

The integrity of the much vaunted IAP for this district, that was launched (with a fanfare over fine wine and mature cheese) in ( Mc Caudrey’s ) East Wing of Kilmainham Gaol only some months ago already lies shattered and irrevocably damaged. It’s also void of any trust if this was planned as the developer says

“after detailed discussions with the senior planners and architects of Dublin Corporation.”

The IAP has being exposed as a joke and words written on paper. The anger in this district has steadily mounted and is about to reach a cresendo people are shocked and stunned and so worried of what could loom over us and the Jail forever!! The muck that was built in the sixties still stands Hawkins House, Liffey House to mention other 6 storey blocks although everyone agrees they should never have being built. This is the year 2000 and the implementation of IAPs, there are no excuses this.

This development belongs out off the M50 not on the actual ancient lands where Brian Boru camped the evening before the battle of Clontarf in 1014 also the ancient place of St. John’s Well. This is reason enough why no speculative office blocks should ever be built here. This site cries out and deserves development in the form of heritage, tourism an international hotel etc.- not speculative office blocks.

I write on behalf of the lads in Donoughue’s who when I told them (with their mouths open) of what our IAP has planned for the Nestle site, said to a man “Office blocks, never, your messing, in front of Kilmainham Jail, the government would never allow it.” As is the norm (after a little thought on the matter) in this district they then put their heads back in their pints to console themselves and their genuine feelings of “why bother John, it’s a done deal as usual”

I also write on behalf of Rosie whom I conversed with in the snug of Mc Dowell’s when on hearing the proposal up at the Jail simply said “it’s a disgrace, office blocks, sure Dublin is full of them. I’ll tell you what’s badly needed around here, a chemist shop son, a chemist shop, tell them that!!!. Boy did she make me realise we’re all on the one road, in that this site must provide amenities and facilities for us and all our tourists alike. Maybe Rosie’s ideas of ideal facilities might differ from mine but are just as valid and desire a listener’s ear.

Many of us in Dublin are aware of the vision you manifested in your tenure as Limerick City Architect and its great equivalent historical site St. John’s Castle. We rest our trust in you that when people gather again in great crowds outside of Kilmainham in 2016 that you will have played your part in ensuring that an appropriate legacy is rightly located opposite Dublin’s and the nation’s most historic site.

Please Jim, this is your watch over us and Dublin’s Kilmainham Gaol. If you can spare us and the Jail from what is proposed to loom over us forever, please do.

Yours sincerely,

JOHN CALLERY & SON.

an be realised – opposite Kilmainham Gaol. All one has to do is to look at the photomontages as submitted by the developer.

Username:: Niamh Checkley
UserEmail:: niamhnc@yahoo.com
UserTel:: 087.9984990
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.106.141.66
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 13:36

Comments

I was appalled to hear about the office block planned for Kilmainham. As a native of Dublin I feel this building would ruin such a historic part of Dublin.

Username:: Noreen Dennehy
UserEmail:: noreen_dennehy@hotmail.com
UserTel:: 01 4544172
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 139.92.140.140
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 14:55

Comments

I feel that the proposed office block is highly inappropriate to it's surroundings. I live in the area (Kilmainham, D 8) and feel that the historical and cultural atmosphere of the area would not be best preserved by the building of an office block. This is not in the area's best long term interests - posterity will not thank us for going ahead with this development.

Username:: Alice Da Silva
UserEmail:: dasilvamcp@msn.com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 63.23.123.109
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 18:51

Comments

I am objecting to your proposed office development. These historic buildings are a direct link to our history and should not be adversely affected in any way. Alice in New York.

Username:: Captain Simon Reece
UserEmail:: sksisko@hotmail.com
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 193.203.145.92
Remote User:
Date:: 05 February 2001
Time:: 21:54

Comments

Kilmainham jail is one of the most impressive historical buildings in europe. it captures hundreds of years of are history. So many people died in this place so people like us can look back and be proud of being irish and now people are going to be let overshadow this fantastic building that symbolis's irish freedom. People cop on

Captain Simon Reece United states airforce

Username:: Patrick R. E. Kelley
UserEmail:: lugh@ou.edu
UserTel:: 011-(405)447-9215
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 129.15.111.218
Remote User:
Date:: 06 February 2001
Time:: 03:41

Comments

I believe that to dwarf Kilmainham Gaol with modern office buildings would greatly affect the impact that the building has on visitors to Ireland's most important historical monument. The visual impact that its size conveys expresses the oppressive force that the crown held over Ireland. When I visited it in 1994 I was deeply moved by the power of the building to silence and depress I think had it been surrounded by larger buildings its impact would not have been as great. I am from Edmond, Oklahoma, USA and consider this building one of the most meaningful places in Ireland.

Username:: James Waugh,15 The Paddocks, South Circular Road, Kilmainham ,Dublin 8
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.220.67
Remote User:
Date:: 07 February 2001
Time:: 16:27

Comments

Dublin City Planners - May we add our concerns to the matter addressed by Liam O’Meara in today's Irish Times, the insane proposal (being considered by Dublin Corporation) i.e. the planning of massive speculative office blocks opposite Kilmainham Gaol in this the most ancient and historic district of Dublin City. How can this be considered by Dublin Corporation as part of their much lauded Integrated Area Plan (IAP) for Kilmainham/Inchicore that was launched with such a fanfare in the East Wing of Kilmainham Gaol on the 2nd November 1999 ??

This preposterous proposal could land, surround and loom over (on all sides) some of the greatest protected stone icons that stand in the city of Dublin today. Namely, Kilmainham Gaol (a national monument), The Royal Hospital, Kilmainham Courthouse, the Richmond Tower, the ancient walls of Bully’s Acre, the Great War Memorial Park and the residents of the Victorian dwellings of St. John’s Terrace and Inchicore Road.

This is Dublin’s "Bastille district",it must be developed and enhanced by an appropriate and well thought design as one would see in any other European city. This magnificent elevated site was chosen by Brian Boru as his campsite the evening before the Battle of Clontarf in 1014. It is also the ancient place of St. John’s Well. This the Western Gateway into Dublin City deserves the planning of a landmark building (of the utmost architectural excellence) to stand in the middle of its illustrious neighbours. This site must have full public access to allow our thousands of tourists / ourselves to ponder and reflect on all the great history that surrounds this site and to enjoy its most splendid and unique views.

Sile de Velera (Minister for heritage and culture) listen to the voices of the people in the churches, shops / pubs of Inchicore and Kilmainham and above all listen to the voices reverberating of the walls and cells of Kilmainham Gaol, please no speculative office blocks here in any shape or form !!

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 195.7.34.195
Remote User:
Date:: 08 February 2001
Time:: 10:51

Comments

Username:: Paul Salmon, 29 The Coppice, Palmerstown, Dublin 20.
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 212.17.49.205
Remote User:
Date:: 08 February 2001
Time:: 14:04

Comments

Dublin Corporation this proposal in front of you (and the Jail) fails the objectives and aims of your own Integrated Area Plan for Kilmainham. It also fails the criteria set out in your own commissioned Urban Design Plan of May 2000. This stated that on this site must arise a building of architectural excellence / a landmark building. The proposal before you totally fails your own criteria totally - you cannot pass this proposal before you and have posterity ask why??

Username:: BETRAYAL BY DUBLIN CORPORATION.
UserEmail:: TREASON BY DUBLIN CORPORATION
UserTel:: OUTRAGE : "AFTER CONSULTATION EITH THE SENIOR PLANNERS AND ARCHITECTS"
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.176.169
Remote User:
Date:: 08 February 2001
Time:: 15:00

Comments

Dear Mr Callery

We act as Planning Consultants for the proposed development. I note from the Planning Files at Dublin Corporation and from the letters page of the Irish Voice your correspondence on this issue.

I am concerned that some of the statements you make are at odds with the facts of the scheme. For example, the Gaol is located south of the scheme. Therefore the proposal has shadow cast upon it by the Gaol, not the other way around. Similarly, your correspondence does not take into account the current and long-standing industrial use of the site as a Chocolate Factory.

We held two meetings with local residents in June at the Ashling Hotel to outline the scheme prior to lodgement to Dublin Corporation.

We have also met with senior officials of Duchas - the Heritage Service who are vested with the care of Kilmainham Gaol.

The scheme as submitted stems from detailed discussions with senior planners and architects at Dublin Corporation, and the developer is fully commited to the realisation of the planning gain elements.

We will be holding another public meeting shortly (early September)for local residents to which we will extend you an invitation. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss the scheme with you.

I would like to correct the record in terms of your correspondence with the Irish Voice so that any letters of representation stem from correct information.

I look forward to meeting with you at the public meeting.

With regards

Tom R. Phillips

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.133.245
Remote User:
Date:: 08 February 2001
Time:: 23:30

Comments

Username:
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.165.165.197
Remote User:
Date:: 10 February 2001
Time:: 14:03

Comments

It is time people realized that the government is supposed to work for us "The people of Ireland" We hired them we can fire them,so hands off our heritage,leave Kilmainham alone and let the "fat cats" find some other way to get richer and not at our expense. Jim Wall

Username:: FRIENDS OF KILMAINHAM GAOL.
UserEmail:
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.168.166.180
Remote User:
Date:: 10 February 2001
Time:: 16:53

Comments

Q95) COUNCILLOR JOHN GALLAGHER.

To ask the City Manager(John Fitzgerald)if he will establish an independent group of experts to examine the feasibility of a variation of the Development Plan for the Nestle site, Inchicore Road , Dublin 8, so that this site is re-zoned to take account of its historic importance and vital role in the future of Inchicore.

CITY MANAGER'S REPLY.

THE SITE IS ZONED Z6 " to provide for the protection of enterprise and facilitate employment creation" The site has a longstanding use for industrial purposes.

According to the Integrated Area Plan " The underlying strategy of the IAP is to " bring about economic regeneration of Kilmainham-Inchicore, whilst protecting and enhancing both the built environment and greenspace, all to be based on an appreciation of the historic importance of the area."

The change of use zoning on this site and the loss of employment potential would not be desirable and could not be recommended.

There is a good mix of use zones in the area. There is a clear synergy between the provision of significant employment uses on the Nestle site and the existing residential developments nearby.

THE CURRENT APPLICATION (2467/00) AS REVISED AT THE REQUEST OF THE PLANNING DEPT. PROVIDES FOR A MIX OF USES ON SITE INCLUDING A RESTAURANT,CRECHE, INFORMATION AND LEISURE USES.

At a meeting with the local Councillors it seems that they are more concerned with design issues and not so much as the Z6 zoning per se. In practice in dealing with the current application it is been treated as if it were a de facto CONSERVATION AREA.

**********************************************

So there you have it from the horse's mouth or rather the developers mouths. Who does Fitzgerald represent the people of Dublin or the developers. Obviously from his script as written above his agenda overlaps the developers agenda to a tee. His feeble efforts to justify the destruction of this site is pathetic and its morally and profesionally wrong of him to present the developers argument. In any other City Authority there would be immediate calls for his dismissal and resignation. Note not once did he refer to the existance of Kilmainham Gaol. So the site in front of the Gaol was an industrial site 50 years ago and must remain so for the next 1000 years, what a sorry justification this is for to build high rise speculative office blocks in front of Kilmainham Gaol. The top official in Dublin Corporation has spoken ( 5th February 2001)-my God what hands we and the Old Gaol are in. Dublin Corporation are letting us know (and Treasury Holdings) well in advance of their decision. The City Manager's reply to John Gallagher's question is a disgrace. Fitzgerald ( along with both the de Veleras) is quite happy to oversee the destruction of the obvious potential of this site i.e. tourism and cultural facilities.

Username:: Petra Schurenhofer
UserEmail:: petrasch@iol.ie
UserTel:
UserFAX:
Remote Name:: 194.125.2.129
Remote User:
Date:: 10 February 2001
Time:: 17:20

Comments

Dear Sir/Madam,

Kilmainham Jail is an important historical site. Please don't ruin it. There are some things in life which are more important than short-term profit.

Petra Schurenhofer (Dublin)

Username:: Richard Davies
UserEmail:: rjdavies@indigo.ie