Liberty Hall redevelopment

[missarchi]

DOCOMOMO?

Is Liberty hall a fine piece of architecture? Yes
Will it stand the test of time? I don't think so in it's current form.
Liberty hall should be demolished and replaced with something that matches the adjoining parapet or something Irish... Some parts could be recycled somewhere else...

Ireland doesn't even promote Irish Architecture it's lost a battle of quasi global modernism that has no sense of place vs 18/19th century "heritage"... Kells...

[wearnicehats]

The wording of the refusal effectively sterilises this site. Demolition will never be permitted. Forget it. Move on and get used to having to look at it.

[missarchi]

Demolition by old age or low maintenance...
It's sad enough that the central bank is moving to the carcass of Docklands it created...

[StephenC]

I just came across this on www.dublincity.ie - the Council's reaction to the decision of the Board

http://www.dublincity.ie/Press/PressRel ... yHall.aspx

Dublin City Council deliberated on the proposals by SIPTU to redevelop Liberty Hall for a considerable period of time. The first application was withdrawn. Following the withdrawal of that application, Dublin City Council had a series of pre-application consultations with SIPTU and their Architects to ensure that a building of the highest architectural and design quality was proposed for this primary location. The high quality of the design was acknowledged by An Bórd Pleanála in their decision today.

The City Council as authors of the Development Plan is satisfied that their planning approval was in accordance with Development Plan Policy and therefore is disappointed with the nature and extent of the decision of An Bórd Pleanála. Indeed the re-development of the Liberty Hall site was specifically promoted by a decision of the elected members during their consideration of the Development Plan by the insertion of the following wording:

In recognition of the national, social and cultural importance of the Liberty Hall site, the height limitations set out in the Development plan may be set aside or relaxed in considering a proposal for the redevelopment of the site which will provide for the continuation of its national historic, social and cultural status. Any such proposal will considered against the relevant standards set out at Section 17.6.3 “Assessment Criteria High Buildings”.

The relevant assessment is fully set out in the Planners Report to the City Council decision.

The City Council will make no further comment until it has had the opportunity to fully consider the decision of An Bórd Pleanála including the report of the Inspector.

[millennium]

An Taisce called for an independent regulator to be appointed to investigate the planning function of Dublin City Council.
“It is a waste of time and scarce resources for major applications to be processed through the planning system, if they are then overturned because they are found to be in breach of local and national policy.”

I think the real issue that needs to be investigated here is why two different sets of expert Public Sector Planners have come to entirely opposite conclusions and, in the process, have succeeded in wasting so much of everybody's time.

In 1984 the reverse happened on the Irish Life George's Quay site. Dublin City Council would only give planning permission for a development with a limit of 12 stories. This was appealed to An Bord Pleanala who gave a decision to build 34 stories!!!
So called expert Planners!!

Applicants should not be asked to jump through all these hoops like circus dogs.

Anyone for residential in the obsolete stump that is Liberty Hall?

[lostexpectation]

the height limitations set out in the Development plan may be set aside or relaxed in considering a proposal for the redevelopment of the site which will provide for the continuation of its national historic, social and cultural status.

hear people talking about how meaningful the site is to siptu what a load of crap, they want to build as high as they can for financial purposes

[wearnicehats]

I was on Eden Quay yesterday and took the opportunity of standing and actually looking at this building. It's an absolute kip of a thing. It's only a matter of time before stuff starts falling off onto the quay. How anyone could describe it as being of national historic and social significance is completely beyond me

[lostexpectation]

I was on Eden Quay yesterday and took the opportunity of standing and actually looking at this building. It's an absolute kip of a thing. It's only a matter of time before stuff starts falling off onto the quay. How anyone could describe it as being of national historic and social significance is completely beyond me

im sure siptu are delighted with that report, job well done

[Paul Clerkin]

I think the city should tell siptu that they can demolish it and build a perfect replica of the Northumberland Hotel version of Liberty Hall with no planning process / appeals, and see what they think....

[arachne]

I second that

[thebig C]

I think the city should tell siptu that they can demolish it and build a perfect replica of the Northumberland Hotel version of Liberty Hall with no planning process / appeals, and see what they think....

Couldn't agree more Paul, and I would go further and add the same proviso for Hawkins House and the ESB redevelopment on Fitzwilliam Street. However, as a quid-pro-quo, I would allow tall buildings to be constructed in the Docklands....but of course that would never happen because An Taisce want to have their cake and eat it.

I hate to labour the point but I am somebody who has been moved from being fairly anti-development into a supporter almost purely due to the sheer bloody minded theocratic objections of An Taisce. Furthermore, ABP are not much better, they seem to have taken the role upon themselves of not only ensuring that development plans are adhered to but also deciding which parts of the development plants they want to disgard!

C

[thebig C]

An Taisce called for an independent regulator to be appointed to investigate the planning function of Dublin City Council.
“It is a waste of time and scarce resources for major applications to be processed through the planning system, if they are then overturned because they are found to be in breach of local and national policy.”

I think the real issue that needs to be investigated here is why two different sets of expert Public Sector Planners have come to entirely opposite conclusions and, in the process, have succeeded in wasting so much of everybody's time.

In 1984 the reverse happened on the Irish Life George's Quay site. Dublin City Council would only give planning permission for a development with a limit of 12 stories. This was appealed to An Bord Pleanala who gave a decision to build 34 stories!!!
So called expert Planners!!

Applicants should not be asked to jump through all these hoops like circus dogs.

Anyone for residential in the obsolete stump that is Liberty Hall?

I remember hearing about that aspect of the Georges Quay saga. Aparently, the it was the designation of the plot ratio for that particular site which opened the door to such a tall structure. I think Irish Life even went as far as studying a few Skyscrapers in the US but eventually decided that at the time (1984) it wouldn't be economically viable. I had no idea though that ABP allowed a 34 storey building......odd when you consider that in the late 1990s they refused a stylish 80 metre 19 storey building....and forced the resurrection of an older plan....thankfully for them the 34 storey permission must have run out!!!!

BTW, do you have any renders of the 1984 proposal??

C