PLANNING PERMISSION FOR a new digital billboard in Dublin’s Kevin Street Lower, next to council housing what architects have described as “poor quality architecture” has been refused.
The request was made by JCDecaux, with a conservation method statement compiled by Anello Architects on behalf of the advertising company.
A similar digital display is located nearby on the corner of Wexford Street.
Sinn Féin Senator Lynn Boylan filed a planning observation defending the Bishop Street apartments, which were first built in the 1960s and are adjacent to the proposed billboard site.
A Dublin Inquirer article on the design states that Dublin City Council’s Heritage Office has no information as to who actually created the mosaics.
No regular exchange of posters would eliminate the “stress” of changing and sticking the displays, according to the cited report.
In her contribution, Boylan said Anello Architects argued that replacing the current billboard with a digital one will have a positive impact on “urban presence”. [of the protected structure at number 40 Kevin St] because it “distances further from the adjacent gabled rhythm of the inferior architecture of social housing from the last century”.
In her observation, also supported by Sinn Féin’s Eoin Ó Broin and Chris Andrews, she argues: “The apartments are wonderful architecture, well located and comprehensively designed in relation to the protected structure. They do not have to be “distant” from the protected structure.
“As the development plan states, “high-quality architecture from all eras is combined with a strong urban form of streets, squares and squares to form a dynamic metropolis with a very special sense of space”. This is especially true for Kevin St. Replacing the billboard with a digital panel would negatively impact the city’s presence.
“It is unfortunate that the pediment of the listed building is covered by the billboard. The billboard should be “removed” from the listed building and not replaced by a digital one, especially not from the social housing,” said the senator in her submission.
No news is bad news
Support the journal
Your posts will help us continue to deliver the stories you care about
Support us now
Dublin City Council rejected the motion on the grounds that the backlit digital sign proposal “would have a significant adverse impact on adjacent residential facilities, create visual clutter and have a negative visual impact on the character of the street”.
In its decision, the council considered that the increased luminosity of the signage and the frequency of advertising rotation would represent an intensification of use of the site and would have a significant adverse impact on the adjacent housing developments.
It added that the proposed LED advertising structure, due to its excessive size and proportions, appearance and location on the facade of this protected structure, would have an adverse visual effect on and seriously detract from and detract from the distinctive architectural character and legibility of the building both the protected structure to which it would be mounted.