Re: Re: One Berkley court -132m Tower
@Rory W wrote:
The Corner where this development is situated is well in need of redevelopment and the sort of site permeabilty and footfall that having a decent retail presence on site offers means that the development won’t be just another souless office canyon ala IFSC1.
I don’t disagree with that, but why can’t we have all of that and a responsible relationship to Lansdowne Road, and a defined boundary (even if only aspirational at present) within the city block dividing the part that is new ‘urban quarter’ from the bit towards the the bridge that looks like it will never be urban quarter scale, and a clear statement from DCC that they are persuaded, despite the absense of any specific zoning objective or adopted visionary master plan, that this site is suitably blessed with attributes to host the new Ballsbridge urban quarter, and if you happen to own a half acre site on an adjascent corner, you’re out of luck, no precedent can be taken beyond these boundaries.
If we had that, I be a bit more comfortable with this.