Liberty Hall redevelopment

[missarchi]

2207/10

no drawings on there...

I wonder if the "curtail-age of a protected structure" (bridge) will come out...
I doubt it and we will be seeing double again

[gunter]

2207/10
no drawings on there...

Model in lobby of the Corpo though.





I don't know, I just don't see any advantage in this, . . . . . apart from helping SIPTU out.
No, I think I was right the first time, I just don't see any advantage in this.

It's taken us forty five years to even start to love the existing Liberty Hall, why would we want to start at square one again?

Even if it could be argued that this is the right place for a high-rise development [and I've never heard anyone say it is], there's nothing particularly striking or elegant about the new version, compared with either the existing Liberty Hall or even the stalled Keogh tower at Heuston.



I'm not getting misty-eyed about Liberty Hall, I'd knock it down tomorrow if I could be sure we'd get a five/six storey replacement on the site, but assuming this isn't on offer [without the imaginative land swap that this city is incapable of brokering] then we're better off with the existing Liberty Hall, imo.

[Peter Fitz]

Its just all over the place, no matter what way I look at it ... I just find my eyes straining to focus on its obscure profile - like what the hell is it trying to be? apart from an incoherent mess.

[Bago]

another barrel in a cube! It's the ectomorph to the endomorph conference centre... with posture problems.

[missarchi]

It's a very difficult site...

The only reasonable precedent I can think of is the herald building.
The box like facade that breaks it into 4 parts slims the building.
It has old on the bottom new on top...
1 part might work very well here if the lift core/stairs could be pushed out...

Either way I always thought the profile should be square or a trapezoid...

they should CPO the site next door...

what is the plot ratio?



http://www.flickr.com/photos/hrdrck/3437194550/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36009735@N08/3606170210/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/53898331@N00/2502961423/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26407687@N05/3413530579/sizes/o/

[colmmac]

Any updates on this? Last I heard in the Tribune last month was:
Dublin City Council has told Siptu it will have to submit further justification for the demolition of Liberty Hall, even though it is not a protected structure.

The council has said the union will have to submit a more detailed analysis of the contribution the building has made, as well as a "more detailed exploration, including financial and economic appraisal of proposed alternative uses of the existing Liberty Hall tower, to include detailed appraisal of possible refurbishment".

I was leafing through an obscure book I picked up in the library on the work of Dutch firm Architektengemeenschap van den Broek en Bakema when a building designed in 1956 for Het Parool newspaper made me do a double take:







Spot the difference?

[missarchi]

It does beg the question is Irish architecture Irish?
Have leading practitioners avoided an Irish vernacular and embraced a globalized medium.
Is Europe good for Irish architecture?

[PVC King]

Spot the difference?

Very interesting images; when Frank talks about Liberty Hall in DoD he makes the point on the reflective bomb film on the windows added in the 1970's which destroyed much of the attraction of the see-through nature of the building. To use a clothing anology it changed a see through top for a shell suit; if the form of the tower wasn't so elegent it would be a complete horror story which thankfully it isn't; but reversing an intervention made on security grounds when the security situation is now normalised could add to both the attractiveness and the marketability of the space.


What these images do display is that it is clear that the union changed the original design quite a bit no doubt in an effort to cut budget. I would be fully supportive of DCC's stance on quantifying the cost benefit of a refurbishment option as any project that may go ahead may suffer from the same fate as the original proposal and not be what it now purports to be. This site is far too high profile to take that risk and given that there are stalled projects such as the proposed Anglo offices within walking distance you have to ask the question could the elevated construction costs of a tall building be matched by a premium rent?

Something tells me Siptu would be better off sticking to their core business of national wage agreements and by taking a pragmatic view on their core mandate they could help create the conditions that could lead to a significant uptick in employment levels and by implication the demand for grade A office space; such a recovery would enable their membership to buy unit trust investments in Commercial Property in larger numbers and capitalise on what is now quite a discounted asset vis a vis medium term averages.

[trace]

Wait till the boys on the Billy's thread see this!:D

[missarchi]

dutch on dutch von dutch...

I really don't mind if they knock liberty hall but it has to better for it to be worth it!
poly vinyl plastic money can be printed... grade a people cannot be printed or bought.
Grade a office space is an illusion... like flipping burgers or team building...
complex systems cannot be audited...

[missarchi]

Georgian irish rose fusion?
bricks, rubber mould precast, metal and glass? with timber floors to the office?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jagerjanssen/2774975397/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gherm/4018872246/

I want siptu to stay on the site...
Some sketchy ideas... in good faith
If you assume around 1000 m sq per floor...
The current proposal tower is around 69% percent efficient per floor.
Floor plate around 594 m sq.
184 m sq. of stairs lifts ect per floor
what is the size of the existing tower floor plate and how efficient is it?

option 1 no tower:

5000 metres of floor plate ground to 4th ( no set back)
1000 metres 5th/6th 50% of site
3000 metres in basement
1000 metre roof deck (500 x 2) if you want

only have a double height space for 10-20% of the site not 50%
relocate the main stair core to the west north corner of the site the secondary one to the north east corner

= 9500 m sq. with much less circulation space... 66% of what is proposed and it does not go above 6 stories + roof deck

I really want to see quality in this project...
The onerous fire requirements are going to pretty much make any towers form questionable in Ireland on a tight site like this unless they refurbish but even then its unlikely they can escape them.

it's cringe worthy...

why don't they want large floor plates around 800-900 m sq? they could get 4 of them almost with make less of a core and plant...
All these levels in a small floor plate tower make circulation wasteful and time consuming...
DCC could also give them some of the roads to the east

Upload of file failed.

[missarchi]

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2010/0807/1224276363274.html
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0809/1224276416696.html

[shanahap]

From www.irishtimes.com website.
-----------------------------------------------
ELAINE EDWARDS

Trade union Siptu has withdrawn its planning application for the redevelopment of the iconic Liberty Hall building in Dublin due to what it described as “design issues”.

The union said today, however, it would reapply for planning permission within three months.

Siptu general secretary Joe O’Flynn said in a statement: “We have decided to withdraw the current planning application due to detailed design issues.

“While the union, its professional advisors and Dublin City Council officials have worked hard to resolve these outstanding issues, time simply ran out on us.”

He said that after “detailed consideration” it had withdrawn the application to allow it more time to resolve the matters.

Mr O’Flynn said that the union remained fully committed to proceeding with “this major project for the union and the city of Dublin as the current building is no longer fit for purpose”.

He said that out of respect for the planning process, the union would not make any further comment at this time.

Siptu lodged its planning application with Dublin City Council last February, seeking to replace Liberty Hall with a significantly taller building, topped by a “sky pod” that would give visitors panoramic views over the city and Dublin Bay.

The existing building dates from 1965.

Under the plan, the 17-storey, 60m (197ft) tall block on Eden Quay/Beresford Place would be replaced by a 20-storey tower rising to 84m (277ft).

Siptu unveiled the details of its proposed development at its centenary annual conference in October 2009, pledging that the new Liberty Hall would have a “wow factor” second to none in the capital – surpassing the Guinness Storehouse.

Designed by Gilroy McMahon Architects, who were also responsible for Croke Park, the facilities were also to include a 300-seat theatre at lower ground level, a heritage centre illustrating Siptu’s history and 15 floors of office space.

Architect Des McMahon said last February it was likely to attract 250,000 visitors annually, generating significant revenue for Siptu.

[wearnicehats]

they obviously got the nod that a refusal was coming

[trace]

TIM O'BRIEN: Siptu withdraws plan for Liberty Hall, The Irish Times - Saturday, February 19, 2011
Liberty Hall, designed by architect Des Rea O’Kelly, who died on Thursday and was buried today, Monday 21, was formerly the tallest office building in Ireland, rising to 59.4 metres (195 feet).

[GrahamH]

Yes, there has been surprisingly little notice of Des's untimely passing.

The death has occurred of Desmond Rea O'Kelly of Howth, Dublin

Peacefully in the loving care of the staff of The Brymore Nursing Home. Beloved husband of the late Brenda and brother of the late Maurice and his late sister Pat. Sadly missed by his relatives and his many friends.

Date of death: Thursday, February 17, 2011

Rest In Peace

[Paul Clerkin]

Yeah surprised at that myself Graham.

[missarchi]

This untimely event could not be more surreal...

[Paul Clerkin]

I wonder why the union pulled the application - are the council about to list it? were they asked to shorten it? or have they decided with the downturn to build the whole site to a uniform level ?

[GrahamH]

I suspect retention is on the cards. This application must be viewed in the broader context of Ireland's abysmal recent record on the recognition and protection of 20th century architecture, as recently highlighted to and acknowledged by the Department of Environment by the newly formed Irish branch of DOCOMOMO. The Further Information request also centered on establishing and expanding on the building's architectural heritage value. For the most high profile example to be lost at this stage in the game would be an embarrassment, frankly.

[Paul Clerkin]

Yeah I suspect as much myself.

The Irish Times FINALLY printed an obituary of O'Kelly this weekend - however, it doesn't seem to be on their website at this point in time tonight - even though it shows up in Google News, it's presenting a 404

[shanahap]

Approved with conditions by Dublin City Council.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fro ... 78193.html

[Peter Fitz]

So what is different about the application this time round?

[lostexpectation]

can anyone link to details of the problems with the building?

[lostexpectation]

http://www.dublincity.ie/AnitePublicDocs/00361330.pdf this link might die