Nothing To See Here


The vote on Dublin City Council to reverse a May 2019 decision blocking the sale of land close to The Bernard Shaw and Eatyard (top)

Unfit for social housing, apparently.



Councillors Overturn Earlier Vote Not to Sell Off Patch of Land (Lois Kapila, Dublin Inquirer)

Earlier: Meanwhile, Opposite The Bernard Shaw

Yesterday: Heartbreak House

Sponsored Link

35 thoughts on “Nothing To See Here

  1. Kevin Higgins

    Would like to see any professional assessment of the potential of the site provided to Councillors.

        1. V

          and four independents, one of which is a former PBP and another a former United Left (although they hardly lasted a fortnight)

          Christy Burke abstained
          Which I feckin hate btw

        1. Rob_G

          Why would people be getting annoyed about the sale of some vacant wasteland that will be turned into something useful…

          1. Emily

            Because we’ve a housing crisis that’s been exacerbated by the private market. We need social housing, not more bloody bar, restaurants or private dwellings that few can afford to rent or buy.

          2. Cian

            because (some) people are idiots and can’t see a big picture.

            because it is easier to be in opposition – you can just shout “no” and never have to make a decision.

          3. V

            Cian’s right there

            Look at PBP in DCC alone
            Lost 3 of their councillors

            because all did was talk, and disrupt

            No results
            Voters want results

            The main parties make sure there’s less rabble rousing and performing for the gallery, and more getting on budget committees, housing committees, planning committees etc

          4. Rob_G

            @Emily – did you read the linked Inquirer article?

            No need – here’s an excerpt:

            “Many of the councillors who switched their votes between May and September said at Monday’ meeting that they did so after assurances from the council manager that the site wasn’t suitable for social housing.”

  2. Plumbob

    That plot doesn’t house either the Bernard shaw or Eatyard neither is it adjacent to it as the tweet says. It’s a few doors down.

    1. b


      i’m not sure what people expect of the council here? Seems some would prefer them to forgo 1.4mln and engage in some Up! type of protest to the development of the block to keep a private pub in business and surrounding buildings vacant?

      the outgoing councillors rejected it, the incoming freshly elected ones approved it – that’s democracy in action

  3. Spaghetti Hoop

    Cultural and creative hub issues aside…have any ‘Shaw fans seriously looked at the state of the building and its surroundings? And not just via the image above. Crumbling. I feel this has been overlooked.

    1. V

      And the fact that Pat Dunne himself has organised meetings to get residents to Object to Housing Developments here in Dublin 12

    2. class wario

      Given I pass through the area several times a week, I’d like to point out that a lot of the area has only relatively recently (the past year to 18 months I would think but not certain) gone into serious disrepair because they’ve been left to sit and rot in advance of development. there used to be a number of grocers, a gym, a handful of restaurants/cafes and at one point a little enclave of land used to house outdoor art in the area prior to the block being bought and left to sit. I am not sure why this has been done but history would point to it likely being cynical, either to allow for a council funded demolition, quicker planning or simply to await the inevitable purchase of more land in the area. As a result, the place is totally desolate. It’s a bit unfair to lay that on the Bernard Shaw or its patrons.

      To not even say anything about the inherent charm in the Bernard Shaw as is, tearing down all and sundry to replace them with identikit glass monstrosities isn’t inherently progressive either. And even then, I would be cynical as to the social benefit of what will inevitably be erected there. The large building across from the BS is a large office block which, I believe but happy to be corrected, is to house one of those co-working places and already houses a Press Up group restaurant. Chatter the past few days has pointed to a hotel being built where the BS is/was to go alongside the Wetherspoons Hotel down the road.

      As thing stand, this is a social net loss.

    3. Rosette of Sirius

      I’ve had many the night there and was amazed that it was still going. The quasi-derelict look they go for doesn’t hide the fact that it’s actually bordering a derelict state.

  4. A Person

    What do we want – houses, particularly in central area. Oh no wait, we can’t have it on this site, the site of an almost derelict building cos some hipsters go there. Clearly not enough hipsters however, as it there more customers it would not be closing. The pub and the whole block down to Harcourt Road has been an eyesore for year. It badly needs a mixed use redevelopment which will include at least 5% social houses.

    1. Mr.Fart

      wow, you know very little if anything about this, yet come blustering in with a big statement anyway. its not closing because of business loss, its closing because the council wouldnt re-issue their license, which you have to renew annually. the site its on isnt being used for houses, its guna be another hotel. of which there are many. so to re-iterate, they were forced closed, and no housing is being built.

  5. Mr.Fart

    i knew there was somethin iffy about hazel chu, that people were plugging for her solely because she’s a minority background. when it comes down to it, once in power, they’ll all do what theyre told.

  6. Chlorinated RTE Canteen Chicken

    Very surprised at Hazel Chu. Extremely disappointed she turns out to be like the rest.

    1. Termagant

      Why did you think she would be any different? Because she’s young? That just means she’s even better at the game than the common politico stock. A prodigy when it comes to self-interested cynicism and chicanery, let’s say.

  7. Panty Christ

    I look forward to the big black snappily branded hoarding around the site decorated with a serif golden coloured font that reads “Shaw Bank Development”

  8. Chlorinated RTE Canteen Chicken

    The history and destruction of Dublin has a history longer than 13 years. Bambrick’s anyone?

  9. sparkilicious

    I live in the area and I welcome the fact that the site in question can now be developed. Yes, it’ll be sad to see the BS go but people need to get a grip: for all its ‘am I in shoreditch?’ atmosphere, the BS is an absolute kip structurally speaking and acts as a kind of cock block on a site that is far bigger than the area of the pub itself. Same goes for the derelict-for-years Manhattan cafe. The very people getting misty-eyed about the BS and Manhattan cafe are the first to bitch about land hoarding/vacant sites. This is prime land close to the city centre and should be developed pronto.

    1. Mobi


      Also, the site that DCC sold is a tiny piece of grass at present with a fence around it. They did well to get that price for it. Would have no value if surrounded by a vast development.

      Also, whilst I would rather that Wetherspoons not move in they haev done a serious job on a row of buildings that have been in rag order for years.

      People are developing areas that were neglected/abandoned. That is a good thing. Developing around the BS is using a vast area that was underutilised. It is crazy that this hasnt happened before.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link