32-floor building planned for Dublin
- This topic has 257 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
The application to raise the height of Smithfield Market was refused a good while ago. The building under construction is 13 stories and 43m AMD.
I haven’t seen the application for Liffey Valley yet, and I’d agree that at the moment the extra traffic could be a problem.Diaspora, I think it’s foot-in-mouth time – the 32 storey building will have 197 apartments, which is about the same as the 5 storey building across the river. This will not overwhelm the transport in the area any more than the already approved office component of the development. Find another reason to complain.
Fitzwilliam St was pre planning acts.
Wood Quay was pushed through despite overwhealming opposition to the project. In fact the membership of An Taisce grew 200% in three years during the Wood Quay phase.
As for ‘Stunting growth’ it is architects without the cop on not to design substandard buildings or put either sub std or otherwise in the wrong places that causes objection.
What is uterly futile are individuals that cannot seperate the Irish Georgian Society
The Green Party
The National Trust For Ireland
If you seperated your approaches to planning applications a little more carefully you might even win an An Taisce award for good symnmetry or any of the other 17 categories of examination.
Until I have seen the drawings for Heuston it is not foot in mouth time.
197 apts could be accompanied by 350 car spaces or should I say 197 car spaces and 394 tractors and a few Trailors thrown in
Read the entire thread it is well covered unless the finer points are beyond you
There are a type of people in this country that will object to almost everything. Anything with height seems to be the most popular. Narrow minded twats with no imagination, and the worst thing is that they always seem to get their way.
Dublin, a city with over one million people, ends up with no exciting architecture as a result, just block after block of boring, monotonous crap. Box after box after box.
There are a type of people in this country that will object to almost everything. Anything with height seems to be the most popular. Narrow minded twats with no imagination, and the worst thing is that they always seem to get their way.
Dublin, a city with over one million people, ends up with no exciting architecture as a result, just block after block of boring, monotonous crap. Box after box after box.
Sorry guys,
Posted my entry twice. Will get the hang of this sooner or later !!!! Glad i got my point across twice though!
not only dublin but everywhere in ireland. and it’s not just at as seemingly there are a few in galway..1 is a taxi-driver who justs objects to everything….cos he is bored or something..i don’t know but
Designed by who?
Cynics like yourself
Regarding exiting archittecture the National Gallery is an exiting building, Temple Bar is littered with them.
To some people it occurs to me architecture only looks good in a magazine.
The two tallest proposals to be located in Dublin
Spencer Dock
The alternative proposal for Georges Quay.
Both in the Dock lands
One ‘An Auwful lookin thing’ ‘A monstrosity’ according to the General of ‘The Soldiers of Destiny’
Stop whinging and design something exiting that could be called a mould breaking building
Who Objected to the National Gallery extension?
It was not An Taisce.
They weighed it up and considered that the extension was of sufficient architectural merit to warrant the loss of a Historic building.
It was also a sufficient National need to have a world class modern gallery.
Or a world class coffee shop, restaurant and shop with a small gallery, depending on your perspective.:)
The investment in the Gallery has been entirely vindicated lokking at the collections they can now attract.
Money very well spent. It is also a pity it wasn’t completed as originally designed as was An Taisce’s wish.
But then again An Taisce don’t always get what they want like everyone else.
the new wing wasnt supposed to be large amounts of gallery space. it was built both to facillitate and take pressure off the older gallery (by giving it a shop coffe shop etc.) and to create a new and modern face for the gallery on nassau street. it has been extremely successful in attracting people to the venue. i dont think this can be denied
Yes I fully agree with both of you. I was only really joking about in my last comment. It is always very busy and I am sure it is making alot more money then it used to. This is obviously a very important aspect of the running of the gallery.
Diaspora: There were three objectors to the National gallery Extension – An Taisce, the Dublin Civic Group and the Irish Georgian Society – no?
in the “A Platform For Change” document it can be seen after research that few people would actually want to use of the phoenix park route. The underground interconnector is essential for the city in my view. I am a regular user of the kildare line. I would rather get off at heuston and take the luas than be dragged up to phibsboro and the back of croke park before crawling at a snails pace to get anywhere near connolly. Now if the interconnector was built and St. Stephens green would be an attractive destination for a lot of people. This could be a very good hub for metro luas etc…
Platform 11 have some good ideas but I dont agree with them on certain things. They tell you what you want but in most peoples case this is not what they want. They are obsessed with end destinations such as getting people from kildare into spencer dock or getting peole from the airport to spencer dock via the existing DART. They forget about all the suburbs and communities that are to be served by new DART/metro lines. A public transport system should allow people to navigate a city easily and quickly and should not focus on end points of lines so much…
An Taisce withdrew their objection after further consultations and very minor revisions were agreed after the first instance application.
It was the IGS who pushed it with ABP. I attended a lecture in Edinburgh by the architect who was most angry that the government wouldn’t delay the construction to get it right. It was ‘a matter of time and a matter of money’ to the governmentI totally agree on the Transport situation
In one word
Intergation,
Ease of mode change
One ticket many destinations
The metro needs to be built to unify the Four existing rail sytems,
1 Dart
2 Luas
3 Western Suburban (Heuston Routes)
4 Eastern Suburban (Connolly Routes)
How it is done or the specific route to the airport is secondary.
Time is the over-riding criterion
Ten Years was ok in 1991 the country was broke
Ten years is not OK now it is now 6 1/2 years since O’Rourke came into office What do we have other than two linear building sites to show for her time and our taxes
Build the whole system as outlined in the A Platform For Change document. The benefits to the city would be incredible. INVESTMENT in the future is the key. Dublin losses approx 8billion in its economy each year as a result of congestion. Reduce congestion to 50% of what it is now and this drops to about 5billion. Thats 3billion saved EVERY YEAR to the city’s economy. So If 10 billion is invested think of the rewards for generations to come…….
AaaaaaaGH…..FRUSTRATION
sexual?
I totally agree again,
You really wonder why they have the DTO to write these reports when they are completely ignored or taken A La Carte.
And I think it is a question of which sections of the platform to implement first
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
