Case against millennium spire allowed

An artist and retired school inspector, Mr Micheal O Nuallain, has been given leave by the High Court to seek orders preventing the construction of the 400-foot millennium monument on O'Connell Street.

In an affidavit, the architect Mr Sam Stephenson said the proposed monument would affect buildings of artistic, architectural or historic interest on O'Connell Street, particularly the GPO, "the most significant building on the street and probably that with the most important historical resonance for the public".

The new monument, being slim, metallic and skyscraping, would dramatically alter the immediate environment about the GPO and contrast with the historic rectangular stone and brick-clad buildings on the street, he said.

He believed Dublin Corporation's competition for design of the millennium monument was "fundamentally flawed".

Mr al O Nuallain (71), a father of four of Belgrave Square, Monkstown, and a brother of the late Brian O'Nolan (Myles Na gCopaleen), through his Creative Arts International Ltd company, was among more than 200 unsuccessful entrants in the competition sponsored by Dublin Corporation to design a millennium monument for O'Connell Street.

In an affidavit yesterday, he complained that the parameters of the competition had not been adhered to. While he liked the winning entry and thought it superior to his own design in many ways, he believed it was designed in "complete disregard" of the design parameters. After reading affidavits from Mr O Nuallain and Mr Stephenson yesterday, and following submissions for the applicant by Mr Colm Mac Eochaidh, Mr Justice Smyth granted leave to seek a number of orders including an order quashing Dublin Corporation's decision of March 1st last to proceed with construction of the monument.

Leave was also granted to seek declarations that the Corporation or its agents unlawfully conducted the architectural competition to select the design of the new monument and unlawfully used Part X of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Regulations 1994 to permit the proposed development to proceed.

Among the grounds on which leave was granted are claims that, given that the proposed monument would affect objects or buildings of historic interest, Dublin Corporation was obliged but failed to send notice of its erection to prescribed bodies, including An Taisce. It was also claimed the Corporation failed to consider whether the development required an Environmental Impact Statement.

Other grounds relate to the conduct of the architectural competition and to claims that the winning entry - and particularly its height - does not relate to the scale of O'Connell Street as represented by the late 18th century and early 20th century architecture and civic design. Granting leave on all grounds, the judge said the matter was urgent and he returned it to Monday. He said the matter had a public interest dimension and should be ventilated at a public hearing.

In an affidavit, Mr O Nuallain said the Integrated Area Plan for O'Connell Street was published in February 1998 by Dublin Corporation.

One of its core elements was the reinstatement of a monument on the site of Nelson's Pillar. In July 1998 the corporation announced an architectural competition for the monument and the Royal Institute of Architects in Ireland was appointed to organise it on behalf of the Corporation.

The competition was governed by design parameters and by regulations including provisions that the competition would be anonymous. He believed the parameters indicated it would be desirable for the new monument to have a viewing platform. It was also stipulated that it "shall have a vertical emphasis, an elegant structure of 21st century design which shall relate to the quality and scale of O'Connell Street as represented by the late 18th and early 20th century architecture and civil design".

He was told in October 1998 his design was not selected for stage two of the competition. He was surprised to learn only three designs had passed to stage two as the regulations stated a minimum of five designs would proceed to that stage. He was also outraged to learn that some 205 entries in the competition had been examined by the assessors in just two days.