johnny21 wrote:One of many mountbrook sweeteners to the residents of ballsbridge!!
*cough, silly sop alert, cough*
johnny21 wrote:One of many mountbrook sweeteners to the residents of ballsbridge!!
johnny21 wrote:One of many mountbrook sweeteners to the residents of ballsbridge!! Architectural competition for the ballbridge/dodder predestrian bridge won by irish architect based in london. Funny looking blue bridge but i think i like it!!!!!!:cool:
Paul Walsh, said the tower was "like a massive bent erection"
Rory W wrote:Given the Jury's site is at least 200m from the Dodder and has a lot of buildings in between I don't get how this bridge is of benefit to the mountbrook - where will this bridge be sited - is it part of 'The Oval'?
Former city planning officer Pat McDonnell . . . . said the site was suitable for redevelopment, but as a high-quality residential scheme with building heights of four to five storeys.
jdivision wrote:Yes it's not near the site but it's part of the community planning gain Dunne offered:
Dunne offers â‚¬31m for social initiatives in D4
Sunday, September 02, 2007 - By Neil Callanan
Property developer Sean Dunne has said that he proposes to spend â‚¬31 million on social initiatives in Dublin 4 as part of his planning application for the Jurys Ballsbridge and Berkeley Court hotel sites.
Dunneâ€™s company, Mountbrook Homes, will spend the money on new community centres, sheltered housing and other initiatives if planning permission is granted for the proposed development. The company lodged its plan for the site, including a 37-storey tower, last Friday.
Its proposed scheme is just under 190,000 square metres, and would include more than 500 apartments, offices, shops, bars, restaurants, a cultural quarter, a hotel and embassy space on the site.
The plan is on display to the public at the Berkeley Court today.
As well as providing social and affordable housing on another site in the area, Dunne is also willing to build a new community centre on the site of the existing Ringsend and Irishtown centre on Thorncastle Street.
It would have a sports hall, a creche, daycare centre, youth clubs, offices, changing rooms and computer training rooms. The facility would continue to be owned by the current trustees.
The creche in the hotel site will have 30 subsidised places, with a maximum charge of â‚¬1 per hour for low-income households if the scheme is approved.
Artists in the studios proposed for the site will be subsidised for up to two years. Lansdowne Road will be landscaped, and Dunne is willing to build a new pedestrian bridge over the river Dodder at the back of the Oval development on Shelbourne Road.
The developer said that he was also willing to help finance the cost of a Luas feasibility study for a line linking the city centre, Ballsbridge, AIB Bankcentre, St Vincentâ€™s Hospital and University College Dublin.
He is also offering to redevelop the sheltered housing at Margaretholme on the Claremount Road in Sandymount. There are currently 38 units there.
Dunne said he could bring that number up to 90 and build a community hall. This will not count towards Mountbrookâ€™s social and affordable housing obligations from the hotel redevelopment.
A further â‚¬5 million will be available towards local amenities, the beneficiaries of which will be chosen in consultation with councillors and planners.
johnglas wrote:; if the UB tried to get this EUR500m bad debt off the Dept of Finance I suspect they'd be told where to go.
Seamus O'G wrote:There is a rumour going around town that the bank involved in financing this is now UP one set of keys.
But DOWN around about 500 million euro.
And that they are attempting to re-flog the whole thing back to the Doyle family for a fraction of that figure.
Was the whole BP inquiry in vain?
JoePublic wrote:I don't see how Sean Dunne's finances are at all relevant. The scheme should be judged on its merits alone, and how it fits in with whether or not we want a high density future for Dublin.
wearnicehats wrote:of course there's money involved. no-one is stupid enough to ignore that. Neither is Sean Dunne stupid enough to know that he still makes money if the tower gets chopped in half. He had a competition, got a good and renowned architect and he's put it up to the planners. Let's see what happens
BTW anyone who wants to experience the positive and constructive nature of mickletterfeck's contributions to this site should visit this thread
thank the lord ODT didn't get get the job
jdivision wrote:And there was I thinking developers developed for nothing. Of course it's about money. Along the way it helps if it improves on what's there, ie, a bunch of drab horrible buildings that are past their sell by date. That's what this debate is about. The issue of Dunne making a profit is so obvious it doesn't need to be mentioned, it's what all developers do. The issue of high rise for Ballsbridge is not a hard one. There is no village centre, it's walking distance from the city centre and close to major public transport links. In short it's probably the best location in Dublin for high rise along with the docklands. This thing of oh it's unsuitable for Ballsbridge when there's relatively tall buildings in the area - dating from the 1970s in the main, when there was much lower densities than are presently allowed - is nonsensical.
alonso wrote:mick thanks for the lesson. We had thought Mountbrook was an arm of Respond until you came along. Whatever about the social make up of this place, having wealthy people living in towers is better than having them in outer suburban sprawl. And if this scheme is successful we can finally throw off the shackles of high rise in Ireland whereby every ignorant buffoon, when confronted with anything over 6 storeys retorts "not another Ballymun".
massamann wrote:I have a confession to make.
Its something that has been eating up inside of me for years and now - due to MickLetterfracks nuanced debating - I have to admit it: I too go to work mainly for the money. Yeah, sure, I get a sense of achievement of out some of the things that I do, and I enjoy the company of my work colleagues, but I'm guessing Sean Dunne does too. In fact, given that Sean Dunne is far richer than I am, and as he could probably retire tomorrow if he wanted too, it's probably less about the money for him than it is for me. Damn.
Up to now, I hadn't realised that working to earn money was wrong. And it leaves me in a bit of a quandry: If I shouldn't work for money, and my hobbies are now to become my job, then how do I afford to put food on the table? Or should I just suffer for my art?
Then again, why does it matter if Sean Dunne makes a profit as long as the design succeeds? Is this not the main question? Personally, I'd prefer if a design conscious developer made money, so that they can afford to take their design conscious ass and develop another site.
Or am I missing something here?
Rory W wrote:Spot on Alonso - as someone who was 2 hours late for work this morning due to train failure on the (grim up) northern line I'd sooner see this sort of development act as a catylist for decent high rise in the CC so that it (a) civilises high rise living and the city centre as a place for families (b) develops sufficent density for a proper metro and (c) stops the constant sprawl of dross which is destroying this country
jdivision wrote:Eh land prices in Ballsbridge have pretty much doubled since he bought it. So actually he got a fairly good deal.
wearnicehats wrote:Donâ€™t forget that prior to the sale of Jurys Ballsbridge Sean Dunne was Jurysâ€™ largest single shareholder at nearly 19% of the company. Seeing as how the papers this weekend put the sale of the chain at between â‚¬750 and â‚¬950million, Mr. Dunne will have made a few quid back.
Also, he says in his letter that he only took control of the hotel in September this year. Many deals where a company needs â€œmoneyâ€ are structured in such a way that very little â€œmoneyâ€ changes hands. You might find that big interest payments only kicked in recently
And, as Matt cooper said in May 2006, â€œOne wonders what Ahern, Cowen and other ministers make of their friend's ambitious plans to reshape the landscape of Dublin 4. Will they support, object or affect neutrality, as if this is merely a commercial matter of no real interest to politicians? Will friendship with Dunne influence their thinking? Eventually, of course, it will come down to the planners, and what they think is in the best interests of the development of the city. And we can have every confidence that they'll make the right decisions, oblivious to all factors of wealth, influence and begrudgery. Can't we?â€
So his position might not be as shaky as people think.
But, as our mad friend who has just made the 10 minute trip from his desk to his padded cell alluded to, Dunneâ€™s just committed himself to a minimum of 1 year in the planning process and another 4 on site. Thatâ€™s still, financially, a bit tasty.
Just to put the cat amongst the pigeons - what if the â€œitâ€™ll never get builtâ€ crowd are right, but for none of the above.
What if Sean Dunne has no intention of building anything. What if heâ€™s got the high of the deal, the competition, the spotlight. What if heâ€™s using the site as collateral to finance other deals. What if, in 18 months time, he simply sells the site. Even if he gets â‚¬70million per acre (not unreasonable) heâ€™ll turn a tidy profit. And if his planning is refused he can leave head held high. If it is granted, heâ€™ll get even more cash for the site.
wearnicehats wrote:I was going to write something but then I realised that nothing would sum it up better.
Rory W wrote:I was going to respond to him but words literally failed me
jdivision wrote:Dunne paid â‚¬379 million for the two sites in 2005, but the fact that he had not actually taken ownership escaped most people, until he pointed it out in a letter to this paper last month.
"Dunne was silent about the precise point at which he took on the responsibility for the very large loans that finance his deal, but presumably the meter is now well and truly running."
It was included in sale documents and publicly stated that Jurys Doyle would not hand over the properties for two years after the sale.
"it is at the same time very hard at this stage to see how he will make any money out of the project without driving a coach and four though the planning laws."
He needs an average of 8 storeys on the site to make a sizable profit from what other developers have told me.
"McNamara estimates that his construction, site clearance and finance costs will work out at around â‚¬1 billion, or just over â‚¬3,300 per square metre for his 300,000sq m mixed use development."
Not comparing like with like, Irish Glass Bottlers site is a former dump so much more expensive site clearance. He has no idea what interest rate Dunne is paying or how loan is structured, McNamara offered a 17 per cent per annum guaranteed return to investors for some of the finance. Dunne's finance costs will be much lower. Somebody here suggested a 5.25 per cent bond.
"More specifically, McNamara expects to get â‚¬625,000 for a two-bed apartment when his development comes on stream over the next five years. It is a reasonable assumption given current prices, even allowing for the current weakness in the property market. If anything , these prices look a little cheap for Ballsbridge in five years' time, but using them compensates for the conservative approach to Dunne's costs."
The approach to costs wasn't conservative as previously explained. In addition Dunne is on record is saying that the cheapest apartment will be more than e1 million. Why start using a e625,000 figure. Comparing Ringsend to Ballsbridge in terms of selling price per square metre is ludicrous.
"And if he doesn't get his towers, then the finances of his project look far less robust. It also calls into question the viability of whatever projects the developers who paid even more than Dunne for the adjoining sites in Ballsbridge have in mind. The â‚¬54 million an acre paid by Dunne is dwarfed by the â‚¬83 million an acre paid by Ray Grehan for an adjoining site and the â‚¬133 million an acre paid by Gerry O'Reilly for his site."
Ray Grehan paid e171.5 million for his site and expects it to have a completion value of e600 million. Based on standard developer profits of 30 per cent he stands to earn nearly e200 million if ressie values are steady in a few years time.
"Whatever problems Dunne must face, their difficulties will be significantly greater. It is hard to see any of them, Dunne included, making money unless the planning laws are rewritten massively in their favour."
There is already high rise in the immediate area, most of it dating back more than 30 years when densities and plot ratios were lower. Hardly planning laws being rewritten for him when Lansdowne got planning less than a kilometre away.
It's armchair economics from McManus TBH.
jdivision wrote:SD hasn't been to Galway races in three yearas alonso
BostonorBerlin wrote:Oi Wearnicehats Im guessing you read the papers - still reckon SD will get 70 million an acre ?
Yep Kefu .. Id say their beating down Sean Dunnes door to spend a million on an apartment .
Its "architectural merits" are sure to bring home the bacon, seems to be working for all the other box extensions/contemporary/clean line/minimalist pads whose prices are dropping thru their marble floors.. too funny ...
kefu wrote:Before people start talkin' about those commuting from two hours away, this proposal will have absolutely zero impact on this. It's not unrealistic that starting prices here will be beginning (and this is conservative) at around E800,000. More likely in fact is that every single apartment in this complex will cost more than E1 million. It seems likely that many of these will be bought up by investors or for the very wealthy as a second home. None of the people commuting from Portlaoise, Virginia, Gorey or whereever are going to be moving into this scheme.
One Berkeley Court is a development for the very rich, as befits its locations in Dublin 4.
So for anybody making this argument, give me a break.
Let the project stand on its architectural merits and that alone.
wearnicehats wrote: What if Sean Dunne has no intention of building anything. What if heâ€™s got the high of the deal, the competition, the spotlight. What if heâ€™s using the site as collateral to finance other deals. What if, in 18 months time, he simply sells the site. Even if he gets â‚¬70million per acre (not unreasonable) heâ€™ll turn a tidy profit. And if his planning is refused he can leave head held high. If it is granted, heâ€™ll get even more cash for the site.