Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Yes
66
29%
No
163
71%
 
Total votes : 229

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby EIA340600 » Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:02 pm

I think the images for the hotel look spectacular,The Saucer is quite impressive as are the images of the temple bar side of things.The only part I find particularly awful is the plain curtain wall that brings the height of the buildings to the left of the main building up to the matching height.True it looks "Different" to the rest of the quays but that particular run of buildings aren't looking to well anyway.I might go so far as saying that the hotel is a diamond in the roof...but I won't go that far for fear of getting shunned
EIA340600
Member
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby lostexpectation » Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:29 pm

Roche rejected advice on Clarence Hotel proposals from department
i know politicians are supposed to make judgements but surely he should know he doens't have the right judment for this osrt of thing and excuse himself and trust his advisors
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1104/1225523343322.html
lostexpectation
Senior Member
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby wearnicehats » Thu May 07, 2009 12:06 pm

according to the IT property News today, Foster has closed his Dublin office

ARCHITECTURAL FIRM Foster+Partners has closed its Dublin office as part of a redundancy process worldwide.

The first sign that the Dublin office’s days were numbered came in a fax sent to management at the firm, calling for redundancies that very day, leaving staff in shock.

The Berlin and Istanbul branches of the starchitect’s firm, which had 17 offices worldwide, have also closed.

Just 12 per cent of Fosters work was in his home country, with the rest of the portfolio being spread around the world where the Foster brand was revered by starchitect-struck clients.

Projects in Ireland include a revamp of the Clarence Hotel, complete with flying-saucer roof, and the U2 Tower in Dublin’s docklands as well as a €280 million mixed-use, residential and commercial scheme on a 10-acre site beside Howth’s Dart station and a masterplan for a mixed-use development in Greystones, Co Wicklow, with residential, civic, educational, commercial and leisure facilities.

Staff in the London office of the practice, which is seeking around 400 redundancies from a workforce of 1,300, also got a shock the day after the practice announced strong profits, in February, when they too were told of job losses, in a letter explaining: “A number of our international clients have fallen victim to the current economic climate and as a result some of their projects have been delayed or cancelled.”

Does that include the Clarence and U2 Tower?
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby layo » Thu May 07, 2009 1:03 pm

wearnicehats wrote:
Projects in Ireland include a revamp of the Clarence Hotel, complete with flying-saucer roof, and the U2 Tower in Dublin’s docklands as well as a €280 million mixed-use, residential and commercial scheme on a 10-acre site beside Howth’s Dart station and a masterplan for a mixed-use development in Greystones, Co Wicklow, with residential, civic, educational, commercial and leisure facilities.

[/I]


Always thought the Greystones South Quarter development was an interesting one. Didn't ever think that was going to get permission/built anyway! http://www.greystonesnewquarter.ie/gallery.asp

what does ayone think of it?
layo
Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:34 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby missarchi » Fri May 08, 2009 6:14 am

layo wrote:Always thought the Greystones South Quarter development was an interesting one. Didn't ever think that was going to get permission/built anyway! http://www.greystonesnewquarter.ie/gallery.asp

what does ayone think of it?


I think its quite ok in the scheme of things...
The tower had potential and the Clarence had potential where do you draw the line...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby GregF » Fri May 08, 2009 1:40 pm

"Does that include the Clarence and U2 Tower?"


Aye, and according to the latest Time's Britain and Ireland's wealthiest list, Bono and Co are feeling the pinch.
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby PVC King » Sat May 16, 2009 8:27 am

LVMH to take stake in Bono-backed ethical fashion brand
The French luxury goods group is to take a stake in Edun, the ethical fashion brand founded by Bono and his wifeTimes Online
LVMH, the French luxury goods group, is to take a stake in Edun, the ecological and ethical fashion brand founded by Irish singer Bono and his wife, Ali Hewson.

Speaking at LVMH’s annual shareholders’ meeting in Paris, the group’s chief executive, Bernard Arnault, said Edun will sit alongside the company’s other fashion brands such as Celine, Kenzo, Marc Jacobs and Louis Vuitton. He did not specify the size of the stake or give any financial details.

Launched in 2005 by Bono and Mrs Hewson, Edun sells T-shirts and dresses in organic cotton made in countries such a India, Peru, Uganda, Kenya and Lesotho.
The company says on its website it aims to encourage sustainable employment in developing regions, particularly Africa. Bono, whose real name is Paul Hewson, is famous for fronting the band U2 and for his extensive campaigning for African humanitarian causes, which has led to three Nobel Peace Prize nominations.

As he announced the Edun deal, Mr Arnault said trading in April at LVMH was broadly in line with the level seen during the first quarter, with a slight improvement in wines and spirits
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/retailing/article6288788.ece

Few have escaped in the last 18 months even some of the most risk averse funds have seen performances of -30% p.a.

Will this project happen in the current climate?

Not unless the syndicate empty their matresses
PVC King
 

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby SunnyDub » Sun May 17, 2009 6:25 pm

Hopefully it won't happen, I find it shocking that there has been no legal challenge as the permission is blatantly unlawful. Maybe the IGS have other priorities and maybe An Taisce are short on funds.
SunnyDub
Member
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 4:44 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby Smithfield Resi » Sun May 17, 2009 6:36 pm

blatantly unlawful


Care to expound - do you think An Taisce had grounds to JR'd the Appeal?
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby SunnyDub » Tue May 19, 2009 5:00 pm

This was my quote from last year, they can't legally grant a permission to demolish protected structures except in exceptional circumstances.

SunnyDub wrote:I've just had a look at the decision & it all hinges on "exceptional circumstances", I can see this going to a legal challenge i.e. what is the legal definition of "exceptional circumstances". I fail to see anything exceptional about it except that the design is "exceptional" (in a good or bad way depending on your point of view).

I don't think the economic or hotel use justification could be realistically seen as "exceptional" in the city. There must be numerous places where the same considerations apply. Decision extracts:

"Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed development constitutes exceptional circumstances for
the purposes of section 57(10)(b) of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 which
make it appropriate to permit the part demolition of the protected structures. The
proposed development, therefore, would not be contrary to the provisions of the
development plan when taken as a whole and would be in accordance with the proper
planning and sustainable development of the area
".

"In deciding not to accept the Inspector’s recommendation to refuse permission, the
Board considered that the development proposed, which involves the part demolition
of protected structures, is permissible because the exceptional quality of the design of
the proposed development, allied to the continuation of the historic hotel use on the
site constitute exceptional circumstances
for the purposes of section 57(10)(b) of the
Planning and Development Act, 2000 and that the Board was not, therefore, precluded
from granting permission
".

They follow on with this definition of unique/exceptional, would a judge agree?

"The Board also considered that the unique circumstances of this case, that is, the
exceptional design quality, the conservation proposals and the architectural quality
and cultural significance of the remaining intact historic fabric of buildings on the site
would not constitute an undesirable precedent for the partial demolition of any other
protected structures, either in Dublin or nationally".

Planning Register Reference Number: 1394/07
An Bord Pleanála Reference Number: PL 29S.226834

I'd like to see what happens if this is challenged in the courts as it would have wide ranging significance for other cases also. Let the games begin!
SunnyDub
Member
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 4:44 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby dave123 » Tue May 19, 2009 6:19 pm

Cant they not make a compromise? I dont think the new proprosal is that bad anyway. If it is what is not good about it. Is there anything you like about it.

Its all about proportion and balance here. The CLarion building is fine, But the back and some adjacent buildings could do with alot of renovation and restructuring. Dublin needs more density of 5-9 storeys. The Clarioun is 6 storys from ground to roof level.

I like the proprosal, Im tired of nothing exciting going ahead. Open the doors to some love for christ sake, and LET THE FEAR GO.
dave123
Senior Member
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Co. Dublin

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby Smithfield Resi » Wed May 20, 2009 10:57 pm

Im tired of nothing exciting going ahead. Open the doors to some love for christ sake, and LET THE FEAR GO


Fine quality protected structures in current usage are hardly the place to start are they?

But the back and some adjacent buildings could do with alot of renovation and restructuring.


Image

Inside

Image

Looks great to me as it is...perhaps you mean the Clarion not the Clarence - they can knock the effing Clarion as far as I'm concerned.
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby SunnyDub » Thu May 21, 2009 3:29 pm

I'm not saying I dislike it (or like it), I'm just pointing out that, in law, they must have exceptional circumstances to grant permission to demolish protected structures. What are the exceptional circumstances? I can't see any.

Exceptional circumstances should be defined specifically in the Act but is not.
SunnyDub
Member
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 4:44 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby Smithfield Resi » Mon May 25, 2009 8:51 pm

Exceptional circumstances should be defined specifically in the Act but is not.


And their lies the rub: once they are defined, de facto, they cease to be exceptional.

However, that said we could use some guidance in the Act and a consulted and agreed set of guidelines would help.
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby GrahamH » Mon May 25, 2009 9:13 pm

Such as some form of architectural heritage protection guidelines for planning authorities, issued perhaps by the Department of Environment.

Oh wait...
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby gunter » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:15 am

Some positive developments on the Wellington Quay front.

Image

Image

Image

The vacant shops that form part of the stalled Clarence Hotel redevelopment site, ironically still 'protected structures' despite the planning permission to demolish them, might be coming back into use as at least an as interim measure, which when you think about it is a bit of a repeat of how the whole Temple Bar area itself survived and evolved while the mega-CIE-bus-station plan stalled before eventually dying in the 1980s.
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1922
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby Paul Clerkin » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:01 am

Has anyone ever been in the former Working Mens Club? Just wondering what kind of interior it had - probably 70s bar lounge
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
 
Posts: 5427
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby StephenC » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:10 am

The brickwork of the facade you see in the middle photo was recently cleaned of its paint. It involved applying some sort of transfers to lift the paint off the brickwork. Interesting to see although the effect isn't complete.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2497
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby SeamusOG » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:40 pm

SunnyDub wrote:Hopefully it won't happen, I find it shocking that there has been no legal challenge as the permission is blatantly unlawful. Maybe the IGS have other priorities and maybe An Taisce are short on funds.


The IGS may also be slightly hamstrung because of their effusive praise of the design.
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby SeamusOG » Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:36 pm

I was in Dublin recently, and there didn't seem to have been any progress on this project. What's the problem?

I understood that the hotel would be unviable unless it was allowed to be redeveloped. Yet, after all the ABP palaver, nothing.

Did Michael Smith's snobbery finally reach The Edge?
SeamusOG
Member
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:59 pm

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby StephenC » Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:17 am

The scheme was shelved ages ago. There isnt the finance to develop and probably not the market for the high cost hotel envisaged. The age of the starchitect is passed.

It is interesting to see how all those 'redundant' and 'derelict' spaces and units surrounding the hotel have been put to quite 'viable' and 'attractive' re-use.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2497
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Postby GrahamH » Fri Oct 12, 2012 12:01 am

Not a snowball's chance in hell this will go ahead any time soon. However, should an extension to the planning permission be applied for, one would wonder what the implications of the revised building height objectives in the new Development Plan would be on the project. Any assessment of a permission extension must take cognisance of changes in planning policy since the permission was granted.

A further interesting procedural point is some of the alterations that have recently been carried out in these Protected Structures - buildings that may still have a demolition ball over them, but until the permission is enacted are still Protected Structures. This can be observed in the main entrance to the Workman's Club, where all of the delicate early nineteenth-century balusters have quite literally been chopped out of the staircase in the past few weeks because they were 'suffering from wear and tear' according to a cagey member of staff, and all replaced with preposterous swirly poles from B&Q. There are a number of other interventions in these buildings that would make for a fascinating enforcement case.

Nonetheless, as mentioned above, it is the mind-numbingly outrageous professional endorsement of the Clarence project across a number of disciplines, with their writing off of these buildings as 'unviable' and beyond economic repair, that is so galling, when one observes how they have since been transformed into one of the most vibrant, culturally distinctive and uniquely Dublin venues in the capital. Not only have these period buildings - one of the very best groupings on the entire three miles of the historic quays - been put to a viable and sustainable use that is of social and economic benefit to the city, their new lease of life as a fantastic array of public venues is showcasing to Dublin's citizenry - particularly, and crucially, its younger people - the interior delights of stoical Dublin merchant building stock of the late Georgian and Victorian periods.

Image

The intimate two-room plans, the variety of delicate and robustly detailed staircases, the tradition of our reticent interior joinery - our moulded shutter boxes, pilasters and doors - the simplicity of plasterwork, the handsome selection of chimneypieces, and the baffling array of sash window types intuitively responding to site context - all make for the most stimulating urban experience. And that's before you even drink in the majesty of the Liffey views framed by the delicate tracery of 200 year-old glazing bars.

Image

To all those built environment 'professionals' who endorsed this demolition ego trip, grow your own brain, get out of your car, and learn about your city before destroying it for the rest of us.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Previous

Return to Ireland