Alto Vetro, grand canal docks, dublin

(Monte?) / Altro Vetro last week:

any up to date pictures of alto vetro?

The main shaft has moved about 10 feet off the ground – xmas break and all holding things up

@Pepsi wrote:

any up to date pictures of alto vetro?

Taken about two weeks ago:

So what’s the story with the monte/alto vetro how high is it going to be once they’ve finished it up?

And are the two of them definitely going ahead or have the powers that be rejected one of them?

This one is Alto, 16 floors, same height as Milly across the beach.

Monte – when that burnt out shed is gone, give it six years.

YOU CAN actually make out the size of the apartments in Alto. Compare the lift door to the rest.. 30ft containers all the way up.

thanks for the picture manifesta.

Has anyone seen the new design for Montevetro? Now an office development

Anyone got pics of tall- ish building under construction at Pearse street bridge just along grand canal quay?

It’s a really tight space they are working in and it’s been ineteresting watching the build. I work just beside it. You can’t miss the big yellow container as it goes up florr by floor. I think it’s alta vetro or alta vista?

Here’s a link:

http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=58

It looks a lot bulkier in the photo than one would think possible, for such a small site. Last time I looked at that tiny site I was amazed that they were planning a building of that height with such a small footprint.

some early images on this thread

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=3251&page=9

Here’s another pic of the new monte vetro plan from Treasury’s website.

So… is Montevetro definitely, definitely going ahead?

When is the start date for construction? is it in the next few weeks?

It looks alright from what I can see. I’m personally delighted that its an office development. I’ve read too much reports of soaring demand for Dublin office space to be less than a lttle worried about excessive inflation of office rents. Coupled with the office-led redevelopment of the Burlington and a large office compnent of the IGB revamp, that should cool any demand pressures in the commercial property market.

The only quibble I’d have is with the anttenna thing they have sticking out of it. it looks a bit dated, a restyle would fit better with the rest of the building.

@Pepsi wrote:

there is now a very tall concrete pile in the south dockland area of dublin. i saw it from pearce station yesterday. could this be alto vetro i wonder? it looks to be near the mill.

Pepsi, i think this is the ‘block’ you are referring to. According to other posters above this is indeed suppose to be the Alto Vetro building

The 16-storey Shay Cleary building currently under construction at the NW corner of the inner Grand Canal Basin will look good as you approach from town.
.

should do alright, renders are quite vague though …

Looks like the Alto Vetro stairwell has reacched its pinnacle height. Looks quite good next to Charlotte Quay.

Thanks for the pics Noodles
Nice to see something of a ‘vertical’ nature taking shape there

@Noodles wrote:

Looks like the Alto Vetro stairwell has reacched its pinnacle height. Looks quite good next to Charlotte Quay.

Noodles your pics are great. Worth noting, if you can picture it, but the Point Village tower and U2 tower will be well over twice the height of the lift shaft you have pictured there;)

[ATTACH]4590[/ATTACH]

Anyone notice the absence of curves in the docklands and adjacent developments? The new buildings are mostly great but all flat edges- as are all the planned developments. I’m not asking for a gherkin, but…

lots of Docklands photos taken today ;http://www.flickr.com/photos/58086761@N00/sets/72157600052222012/

The whole development stretches from Alto Vetro right down along the Bolands Mills to Barrow St, that whole side of the road is closed to pedestrians..so what else are the doing, are the silos finally coming down?

Eh..they’re rebuilding the bridge in case you missed that! :rolleyes:

Well I just saw it from distance, no need for fucking sarcasm, arsehole

Carroll’s Britain Quay site would have one curved tower if he succeeds in his court case.

Go to oms.ie, click on portfolio, then on View Projects by type, then on offices and then Sir John Rogersons Quay.Sorry for level of detail but I can’t copy and past the image.

See Vertigo? U2 tower thread for more details on the dispute.

Saw them starting test bores on the Montevetro site this morning – looks like things might finally get moving on this site.

It would appear that Alto Vetro is moving along with swift efficiency and painstaking attention to detail.

Does that say “Up Carlow”? haha

Is the Montevetro building still this heap o’ shite?

It has changed a bit. There was a different render around, but I can’t find it:
http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=73

Alto Vetro is really taking shape. It will be a great new landmark in the city. The inner dock is a really special place in Dublin.

I don’t think Alto Vetro is tall enough to be a landmark altough it looks sweet in that location! I also think it will look very well when finished.
The reason i say this as i was in college green looking down Pearse street and i could just make it out: bolands mill & charlotte quay are still way more prominent from most angles and the more i see boland’s mill the more i want it to stay!! Albeit renovated to modern standard but not the whole structure lost as it is an important part of our nation’s history. Dublin needs a landmark building, I think the U2 tower will achieve this.

@Criag wrote:

Alto Vetro is really taking shape. It will be a great new landmark in the city. The inner dock is a really special place in Dublin.

It certainly is taking shape. But if you’re passing by soon, have a look at the picture of the finished product on the hoarding around the building.

It shows all the apartments lit up beautifully, and a number of people standing or sitting out on their balconies enjoying Dublin’s fine weather. The interesting thing is that. despite all the glass which will be in the structure, the only furniture to be seen is out on the balconies! A few of them have a couple of chairs and a table out on the balcony, but that’s it for the entire building.:D

As so often happens, it may not look quite so impressive in real life as it does in the promo picture. Especially when the net curtains start going in.:p

Ah ah ah, not so fast Seamus O’G . . .

Net curtains not allowed in goldfish bowl tower

Archiseek / Ireland / News / 2005 / January 23
The Sunday Times

Calling all exhibitionists. A 16-storey tower earmarked for Dublin’s docklands will be completely transparent, providing a perfect home for individuals with a penchant for being on 24-hour show. Alto Vetro — meaning tall glass — will be Ireland’s first block of homes made entirely from glass. Each of the 26 apartments in the 16-storey tower will have floor-to-ceiling windows with only sliding wooden screens to preserve the modesty of residents. Net curtains will be a no-no, and messy rooms ill advised for buyers of the see-through luxury apartments. And, it seems there is no shortage of people willing to go on permanent display. Treasury Holdings, developer of the ambitious project, says it has already got a waiting list for the apartments, which will boast unbroken views of the cityscape.

Those poor, poor people living in glass houses. First you tell them they can’t throw stones. Now this.

While these no-net-curtain rules appear unreasonably stringent on first glance, I imagine that this announcement ushers in a new era for Treasury Holdings and for the future of pretty buildings in general. I have heard from a very reliable source that applicants for the tower apartments will be matched to certain balconies based on their resemblance to their promo-picture prototypes. Thus ensuring that only beautiful exhibitionists will be permitted to inhabit the premises.

I can only take heart in the knowledge that before long, the voyeurs of the city from all walks of life can stand and look up at Alto Vetro for their own unbroken view-boasting. Everyone wins.

renders

new view of montevetro on Treasury Site

Alto Vetro is well on now…the first 3 floors are almost fully clad, i have to say it looks pretty damn nice and will look much better when completed. 12 floors have floorplates and they have started on the 15th floor. It’s amazing how narrow it looks from Grand Canal Square or approaching from Mount Street/Grand Canal Street. And it doesn’t look out of place at all IMO. If they put another floor or two on top it would be more prominent in the area as it stands opposite Boland’s Mill and Millenium tower. Anyway it’s a step in the right direction for highrise in the area

Any pictures??

I think this building is shaping up to be one of the nicer designs built in Dublin over the last few years. The bottom few floors are starting to look relatively finished and I think overall the building will look a lot better than any of the photomontages prior to its construction

well the facade is installed up to the third floor on this now and I dont know what to think of it. The black (granite?) stone reminds me of the stuff used on headstones. Joints / Gaps all over the place.

Here it is: looking good, I quite enjoy it’s slenderness ratio. Cladding looks fairly decent too. I’ll be interested to see exactly how it meets the ground. According to the notice for PP at the site, They’ve extended the plot somewhat to add car parking and landscaping. They’ve also removed the gym from the upper floors in place of more apartments. Oh well, would have been quite an inspirational place to run on a treadmill!

etc..

those pictures look really good. i quite like the tower too. it’s coming along very quicky i must say. when did they start it again?

@CM00 wrote:

According to the notice for PP at the site, They’ve extended the plot somewhat to add car parking and landscaping. They’ve also removed the gym from the upper floors in place of more apartments. Oh well, would have been quite an inspirational place to run on a treadmill!

Has this revised PP been granted do you know, CM00? Or is it an application that’s currently before DCC?
Disappointing to see a non-residential use being replaced by yet more apts, though not necessarily all that surprising. 🙁

Just goes to show how much renders can differ from the finished building. I too did not take to kindly to the renders but the cladding looks ok. Have to say that I think its a little too slender.

By any chance did you get any pics from distance of the wide side of the building? Great pics though!

ctesiphon: It appeared to me like it was a newly lodged application, but I’m just basing that on the pristine appearance of the notice, I didn’t check the submission date I’m afraid. I agree with your point about the non residential loss: Just another example of developer self-interest I’m afraid. It is, to be fair, hard to begrudge when you consider it’s (potentially) a couple of million euro we’re talking about. If the developer in question intends to reinvest these monies in similarly interesting architecture then I feel it’s a rather minor infraction on said developers’ part. My inner urbanist should be able to stomach it! 😀

Darkman: This is all I’ve got in terms of a side view I’m afraid:

ctesiphon if you’ve ever been flung backwards off a treadmill into the nearest wall, you wouldn’t be too concerned with a gym being removed from the upper floors of a 12 storey glass fronted building 🙂

haven’t been down here in a while. great pics.

@CM00 wrote:

ctesiphon: It appeared to me like it was a newly lodged application, but I’m just basing that on the pristine appearance of the notice, I didn’t check the submission date I’m afraid. I agree with your point about the non residential loss: Just another example of developer self-interest I’m afraid. It is, to be fair, hard to begrudge when you consider it’s (potentially) a couple of million euro we’re talking about. If the developer in question intends to reinvest these monies in similarly interesting architecture then I feel it’s a rather minor infraction on said developers’ part. My inner urbanist should be able to stomach it! 😀

Thanks CM00. I wonder how big the ‘if’ at the start of your penultimate sentence might prove to be…
My own reservations stem from the possibility that the mix of uses was part of the reason it got PP in the first place. I should investigate. 🙂

@alonso wrote:

ctesiphon if you’ve ever been flung backwards off a treadmill into the nearest wall, you wouldn’t be too concerned with a gym being removed from the upper floors of a 12 storey glass fronted building

Simple answer: reinforced glass. It’ll be like Big Brother meets a Wrestlemania cage match, with ringside seats by the dock. Bring cans.

That case (1783/07) was decided on 17 April 2007:-

Regarding the gym element of the application, it was decided that:

“The currently authorised gymnasium at 15th floor level shall be retained on that level and its proposed replacement with parts of two triplex apartments togetter with a reduction the floor area at that level shall be omitted entirely from the development. Reason: It is considered that the authorised gymnasium forms an integrated and essential part of the development and as such should not be omitted. The proposed reduction in floor area at the 15th floor level would significantly reduce the area available for the gymnasium and is consequently unacceptable.

Thanks for that, adhoc. I was planning to go hunting as soon as I had some time to spare.

Looks like my initial position was pretty close- good to see DCC being firm on this one.

This is looking good, makes the Millennium Tower across the way look old-fashioned already. They both put paid to the idea that medium-to-high rise is always visually intrusive. Passing in the DART, the two towers come into view very briefly before disappearing back into their surroundings. How much better the docklands would have turned out with clusters of smart, slender towers like this…
I’m surprised at the transparency of the glazing, though. Will it not be like living in a goldfish bowl? Or will it just end up 15 floors of curtains and blinds?

Nearly fully glazed now – looking very nice. The slenderness proportions are just right.

… however, welcome to Dublin’s worst apartment! Triple aspect glazing sounds great on paper – but the first floor apartment is not one I’d wish on anyone.
Exhibitionists only please

I dont like it. Its too small for that posistion in the city. Its not on the right scale.

Looking at this shot by d_d_dallas it could probably have gone higher, but overall i think its a nice addition to the area.

Yeah it looks a like it could go up a bit more from that angle, but when viewed from Westland Row or thereabouts – it does look quite dominant

@d_d_dallas wrote:

Yeah it looks a like it could go up a bit more from that angle, but when viewed from Westland Row or thereabouts – it does look quite dominant

It is interesting you should mention this. When viewed from anywhere in Grand Canal Dock I think this building looks quite elegant, but when looked at from the junction of Pearse Street and Westland Row, I am not too sure. Maybe it is because from this angle all you can see is the west elevation? I will wait until it is finished before making a full judgment on it though. As I have said before, It think overall, it is going to be one of the better buildings built in this area in recent years. I personally think it is probably at the right scale too. Proof maybe that medium-rise can work quite well in Dublin at present!

was in Dublin at the weekend and to be honest I thought this looked like someone squashed an 80’s office block to make it look higher..Nothing really individual about it except its kind of tall. Can’t see it lasting the test of time well but thats just my opinion. Definitely nothing to write home about imo.

Have to admit that I was more impressed with this building close up. It is very slender in appearance and looks well proportioned. Compared to some of the late 90’s apartments in the area, I would imagine that this building will certainly stand out.

This building is NOT in proportion. It is a crime on Dublin tbh,

Here’s some more pics. I like this building. It has to be the most slender building in Dublin, if not Ireland. The lower two apartments are very exposed indeed. I just hope the glass is shoppingtrolleyproof.

Cool pics Morlan and d_d.

I’m surprised nobody has yet mentioned how similar it is to a chic Liberty Hall. The width, height and elevation treatment are strikingly similar – especially the racing stripe bands or aprons(?) between the floors. Even the layout and construction method are the same, just with an extra ‘column’ of floorplate added to the other side of the lift shaft.

Very much an indication of what could be done with Liberty Hall if the will was there. Only Liberty Hall would need a slightly less self-conscious look – the designer stubble would need to stay at home.

I like how Altro is so readable. It’s a domestically-scaled tower if it could be described as such – clearly just two apartments per floor each side of the lift shaft. The narrow width is also pleasantly modest.
Though how are you supposed to use those lower blaconies in any sort of comfort?! No clothes horses of underwear here anyway 😮

@vkid wrote:

Definitely nothing to write home about imo.

considering the kind of stuff going up on the quays,that’s the equivalent of high praise.

@GrahamH wrote:

I’m surprised nobody has yet mentioned how similar it is to a chic Liberty Hall. The width, height and elevation treatment are strikingly similar – especially the racing stripe bands or aprons(?) between the floors. Even the layout and construction method are the same, just with an extra ‘column’ of floorplate added to the other side of the lift shaft.

I don’t think I really agree with you there Graham. Fairly different shape in my opinion.

I don’t think I really agree with you there Graham. Fairly different shape in my opinion.

It is more similar to Liberty Hall than any other building in Dublin. It’s tall and slender and has clean lines with plain flat surfaces (no protruding balconies and such). It’s surface is dominated by glass giving a light airy feel. If Liberty Hall were cleaned up or restored it would look just as fresh, I believe.

I think this building looks good from most angles around the Grand Canal dock but not so good (as pointed out) from the city end of Pearse Street but I’m hoping that improving its context will fix this.

Trinity has plans for the horrible neighbouring enterprise centre which could do wonders for Pearse Street. Unfortunately the Macken St./Pearse St apartments overlooking Pearse Square is a disaster in this regard my opinion. The way it fronts onto the dock but backs onto Pearse Street is a terrible wasted opportunity. It’s sad that this recent development simply reinforced the sorry state of Pearse Street in a way that will probably never be possible to correct.

@jimg wrote:

It is more similar to Liberty Hall than any other building in Dublin. It’s tall and slender and has clean lines with plain flat surfaces (no protruding balconies and such). It’s surface is dominated by glass giving a light airy feel. If Liberty Hall were cleaned up or restored it would look just as fresh, I believe.

Hmmm, I really am not sure. Clean lines etc, I agree on, but whilst the square plan of Liberty hall allows gives the building a uniform appearance from various angles (apart from difference in window colours), the new tower, as already agreed, appears differently when viewed from different angles. The balconies being added on to the new building at present will also change its finished appearance.

Those balconies look bizarre! Nice building all the same. See what happens when you use glass and polished stone instead of cheap plaster and unvarnished planks.

@phil wrote:

Hmmm, I really am not sure. Clean lines etc, I agree on, but whilst the square plan of Liberty hall allows gives the building a uniform appearance from various angles (apart from difference in window colours), the new tower, as already agreed, appears differently when viewed from different angles. The balconies being added on to the new building at present will also change its finished appearance.

Sorry – that’s what I meant Phil. I didn’t think it needed mentioning that it’s a rectangular version of Liberty Hall 🙂

It’s the exposed floor plates infilled with glazing that makes it so similar to it, including the enlarged ground floor ‘plinth’. In fact, the more you think of it, there’s very few buildings in Dublin that adopt that format. Most have curtain walling sheathing over the plates. They’re very thin in this case – very much an indication of a residential tower.

yep Graham, thought just the same as i scrolled down through Morlan’s pics … though as you beat me to it, you’ll just have to take my word for it ! balconies are surprisingly discreet, sewn in to the floor plate. Overall, a good job.

Ahem, ahem…….my biggest bugbear, and a real Dublin one at that, who’s going to wash the windows?

Was walking down by the Barrow Street end and it performs a nice counterbalance to the (unoccupied I think) office block also developed by Treasury next to the Barrow Street Dart Station. You can just make out part of it in the background of PeterFitzPatrick’s pic. Obviously I was looking at it from the opposite direction.

I work right beside this building, infact i can see it right now from my work desk.

I like it. But jaysus you’re expoesed on the first few floors. and what if veryone gets differnt blinds/curtains. freaky.

Over allI think the docklands in this area are toostumpy and boring. That Belfast Titantic developemt is a million 7years ahead of Dublin Docklands in term of scope and imagination. Is this becasue Belfast is comfortable with highrise? Dublin is 3 times the size of Belfast but our buildings are 3 times smaller.

No it’s because it’s a private venture using an architect with vision. I was at the launch where Eric Kuhne gave his speech and it was really impressive I have to say. The DDDA is just a mess when it comes to property

No curtains allowed in that building AFAIK. Uniformity, you will have blinds, and as I saw in an ad on DAFT, ‘No Dirt Birds’. :p

went past today. Pretty much fully glazed, and they’ve helpfully numbered each floor, 14 in all so that you don’t have to count yourself as you’re going past. Bit of advice, if you drive and you’ve an interest in the development process, stay the hell away from this area. Between craning to get a view of the point, the works on macken St. Bridge, pondering over the impact of the Gormley piece, the crater for the theatre, alto vetro itself, and finally copping on to the building on Ringsend rd. featured elsewhere on this forum, I nearly crashed about 12 times between fecking Eden Quay and Ringsend village!!!

@alonso wrote:

I nearly crashed about 12 times between fecking Eden Quay and Ringsend village!!!

That’s why I travel everywhere by bus. You get to see a lot more from the top deck of a Number 3 (and they’re brand spanking new buses too!) 😎

16floors

Interesting new metal and glass arch on the bridge next to Alto Vetro.

[ATTACH]5630[/ATTACH]

Looks pretty sexy.

You can see the facade work started on the hotel too

[ATTACH]5631[/ATTACH]

Interesting. Certainly seems like it’s going to be a snazzy looking bridge. Thanks for the shots Joe.

Is that the Mateus going up behind the bridge, it seems to be progressing quite well, if it is. Bridge looks excellent.

@JoePublic wrote:

Interesting new metal and glass arch on the bridge next to Alto Vetro.

Looks pretty sexy.

You can see the facade work started on the hotel too

Great! I was hoping they would do something with that bridge. It was so ugly. I would have thought they have might’ve widened it a bit first though.

They have widened it quite a bit actually, looks like it will be four lanes. They’re still working on it.

Yep that’s the Mateus in the background

@Starch wrote:

renders

The original rendered images of this look terrible. The finished article does not look like them and thank god too.

That bridge looks cool. This whole area when finished will be an attractive little enclave of contemporary buildings.

However, it remains to be seen if the new Dublin Docklands will be saved from banality.

I am not convinced by that bridge. I’d need to know more.

I always detested TCD’s pedestrian bridge across Westland Row. Clealy it is a bridge which was supported by the piers at either side of the road, i.e. a beam bridge. But it also includes a curved section which gives the impression that it may be an arch bridge. What annoys me about that bridge is that Westland Row is narrow enough that it should be reasonably easy to build either a beam bridge across it or an arch bridge across it. However, it shouldn’t be necessary to require both forms in the same bridge to traverse the street.

Every time I see it, it simply cries out “crap engineering” to me.

I suspect that the same thing may be going on here. The old bridge at the dock was a drawbridge. I suspect, though I may be wrong, that the new one is a simple beam bridge. In which case, the arch actually has no function.

Until I know more, this bridge will be saying “unnecessary window dressing” to me.:D

@Seamus O’G wrote:

I suspect that the same thing may be going on here. The old bridge at the dock was a drawbridge. I suspect, though I may be wrong, that the new one is a simple beam bridge. In which case, the arch actually has no function.

Until I know more, this bridge will be saying “unnecessary window dressing” to me.:D

I want to wait to see this bridge finished, but I too am unconvinced by the arch. It doesn’t seem to make sense in terms of the overall aesthetic of the original dock, which is of a much more industrial form. I wonder is it trying to pay homage to the bridges further up the canal?

A quick update – almost finished now

This looks good, but the roof is a let-down. You can’t see from the pic, but the (presumably) service structures on the other side are a rather ugly black-and chrome thingy that kind of spoils the otherwise sleek finish.

doesn’t look half as good from the wide side – reminds of an elongated Hawkins House for some reason – must be the colour.

Any idea what is happening to the building now that construction is complete? No sign of any sales activity…

Looking at JoePublic’s photos above, that part of Town is going to look pretty swish once all the building work is finished up. Alto Vetro looks a lot better and brighter than I imagined from its renders all the way back in 2006.

More of this please!

does anyone know what’s happening with the montevetro? Is under construction? will it be visable from grand canal dock square?

@cgcsb wrote:

does anyone know what’s happening with the montevetro? Is under construction? will it be visable from grand canal dock square?

it was referred to elsewhere (perhaps the high rise thread) that some JCB movement was seen on site

@alonso wrote:

it was referred to elsewhere (perhaps the high rise thread) that some JCB movement was seen on site

So we could be seeing it in this stage of completion this time next year?

That’s great if it is going ahead, more building jobs will be saved and with the correction in property values, it’ll make city living an altogether more feasible option.

@cgcsb wrote:

does anyone know what’s happening with the montevetro? Is under construction? will it be visable from grand canal dock square?

This money-making clump of spew has been approved.

This was proposed:

@cgcsb wrote:

does anyone know what’s happening with the montevetro? Is under construction? will it be visable from grand canal dock square?

Yeah the construction engineers are down there now, its well underway. How tall is this Meontevetro going to be? The renders on skyscrapernews are outdated I think. I work over-looking onto it, I’ll keep the forums updated.

This project is well under way, the boring machine is there the last few days. This site comes with a photo of the finished article and date for completion..

http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=73

i like it.

Owes quite a debt to the Seagram Building

@Morlan wrote:

This money-making clump of spew has been approved.

This was proposed:

@The Denouncer wrote:

the boring machine

😉

Very elegant facade treatment, if the arrangement of footprints a bit weird in this view. A wider selection of imagery would probably reveal all.

Does this mean the curvy side bit will get the same facing treatment? I can’t seem to match the two.

the various pictures of this building from Barrow street always show beautiful cobbled street and lovely mature trees on the footpaths. Is this improvement works part of the development? I think not!

Why don’t they show Barrow street as it is, ugly random patches of concrete and tarmac on street and footpath alike, not a tree in sight.

PS. When it’s built, there goes the last of the little light shone on my poor apartment, high rise is great and all, but does it have to be in my back yard 😉

@AndrewP wrote:

This looks good, but the roof is a let-down. You can’t see from the pic, but the (presumably) service structures on the other side are a rather ugly black-and chrome thingy that kind of spoils the otherwise sleek finish.

The roof is a public decking type place. No service elements to be seen AFAIK.

@JoePublic wrote:

the various pictures of this building from Barrow street always show beautiful cobbled street and lovely mature trees on the footpaths. Is this improvement works part of the development?

The footpath probably will be (like the Gasworks opposite), but not the road. According to one of their planners, DCC will be improving the street (possibly with cobbles like Grand Canal Quay) and planting trees once the three remaining major developments are finished – this one, Boland’s and the extension of Gordon House they approved a few weeks ago. Apparently trees help reduce the effect of wind at ground level due to the fairly high buildings. Of course, I’d like them to fix the street now, but it would just end up torn up again.

@Graham H wrote:

Very elegant facade treatment, if the arrangement of footprints a bit weird in this view. A wider selection of imagery would probably reveal all.

Does this mean the curvy side bit will get the same facing treatment? I can’t seem to match the two.

Is this a completely new design ? like Graham, i can’t square it with the old curvy job (pardon pun), if not, what side are we looking at here ! ? Quite like it btw.

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

Is this a completely new design ? like Graham, i can’t square it with the old curvy job (pardon pun), if not, what side are we looking at here ! ? Quite like it btw.

Its facing Barrow St. by the looks of it. I’m based the other side of the DART station keeping an eye on it. Whats the story with the Bolands development anyway.

have they started to construct a concrete pile on the montevetro site yet? haven’t been in this area in a while.

Just excavations and piling.

“Development work has just begun” according to today’s Times.

Work starts on 63-metre tower beside the Dart in south docklands

DEVELOPMENT WORK has just begun on a 15-storey office tower next to Grand Canal Dock Dart station on Barrow Street in Dublin 4.

The landmark Montevetro block is being developed by Treasury Holdings on a half-acre sidings site originally used by CIÉ to refuel trains. Treasury has taken a 999-year lease on the property and entered a rent-sharing agreement with the State company.

The building will stand 63 metres above the dock and will have a floor area of over 18,580sq m (200,000sq ft).

Mark Pollard, Treasury’s director of development, says the fully flexible floor plates will average 1,579sq m (17,000sq ft) while three penthouse floors will each have 650sq m (7,000sq ft). One of the features is to be a huge south-facing terrace extending to one-fifth of an acre on the 11th floor – about 50 metres above ground level.

The block, which will be ready for fit-out early in 2010, is expected to be of interest to Google if it proceeds with plans to greatly expand its operation in Dublin.

Google is based on the opposite side of Barrow Street, a street that is due to be substantially upgraded by developers in the area.

The letting agents for Montevetro are HT Meagher O’Reilly and Jones Lang LaSalle.
© 2008 The Irish Times

63 metres will make it slightly higher than liberty hall. 🙂

Will that mean that it it’s the tallest building in the city by the time it’s finished?

Liberty Hall is 59m methinks.

I took a cycle down docklands way today, i haven’t been around there in some time, my oh my what an embarrassing waste of land.
In my non expert opinion nothing really more than finance-related warehouses, with some fancy glazing here and there

The watch tower in point village will be finished before it, I think, so it won’t be the tallest building in the city

how’s this project progressing? has the lift shaft gone up yet? It’ll be interesting to see this building completed in the line of site with altro vetro and the other high rise in the grend canal dock (think it’s called Charlott’s Quay something or other). One might even get the impression of density

@notjim wrote:

Google is based on the opposite side of Barrow Street, a street that is due to be substantially upgraded by developers in the area.

Is Barrow Street going to lose what’s left of it’s cobbles?

@Morlan wrote:

Is Barrow Street going to lose what’s left of it’s cobbles?

As a Barrow street native, I can say there’s not a cobble in sight, only random ugly stripes of tar, conrete and potholes.

@JoePublic wrote:

As a Barrow street native, I can say there’s not a cobble in sight, only random ugly stripes of tar, conrete and potholes.

I could have sworn Barrow Street had patches of cobbles, at lease in the past 5 years.

So work on this has started,some good news for once,will be much appreciative if someone can provide snaps of this construction.

@Morlan wrote:

I could have sworn Barrow Street had patches of cobbles, at lease in the past 5 years.

I thought so too, at least at the southern end. I seem to remember it being a very uncomfortable road to cycle down, though I haven’t used it recently.

Anyone know what the story is with the Alto Vetro tower. All the apartments seem to be fitted out with identical white sofas and white lampstands, but there’s a little work still being done on the ground floor?

Is anyone living there yet? Haven’t seen anyone on the balconies (apart from a few naked people posing at the weekend 🙂 )
Were the apartments all sold off the plans? If so, why is no-one moving in?
If not, it could be a hard sell in the current climate…

In answer to my own question:

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/hot-property-exclusive-glass-homes-only-available-to-let-1412414.html

hot property: exclusive glass homes only available ‘to let’

IRELAND’S first block of homes made entirely from glass has just been put on the market, but not to buy.

The Alto Vetro residential tower in Grand Canal Quay was billed as “the most beautiful building in Dublin” but hopes of owning an apartment there anytime soon are futile.

The owners of the 27-metre addition to Dublin’s skyline, Treasury Holdings, will only release the 26 apartments onto the letting market.

The “sumptuous landmark tower” rises over Dublin city’s skyline and overlooks the Grand Canal Basin with panoramic views of Dublin Bay extending from Howth Head to Killiney Bay.

But while it was originally thought that the “stylish and elegant” apartments, including two penthouses would go on the market for more than €500,000 each, Treasury Holdings now say that they will only be leased.

A spokesperson confirmed to the Herald that the long-term plan is to only rent the apartments and that they will stay under the ownership of the Treasury Holdings who built them.

A reason has not been given as to why the apartment will not be put up for sale, although the plummeting market means that they would be worth a lot less than expected when building began last year.

The apartments have monthly rents of between €2,500 and €3,500, depending on the floor level. The three-level penthouse will set you back €8,000 a month.

It’s a lot taller than 27 metres. 47, surely?

Must be a typing error,as stated above its 63m or quite similar to liberty hall.

@ctesiphon wrote:

I thought so too, at least at the southern end. I seem to remember it being a very uncomfortable road to cycle down, though I haven’t used it recently.

Just double checked, definitely zero cobbles.

I’m not surprised you had difficulty cycling down Barrow Street, it really is in an apalling state. And to think it is the entrance to the South Docklands by rail, not to mention the European headquarters by probably our most prestigious American company. It says alot about how the local government in Dublin cares for the city.

@cubix wrote:

Must be a typing error,as stated above its 63m or quite similar to liberty hall.

different building – Alto Vetro is the recently completed apartment tower, Monte Vetro is the just commenced 63m office block.

we all know the economy is in trouble so are they going to continue with construction of montevetro? it hasn’t been mentioned in a while. i kinda like what i have seen of montevetro’s images.

@Morlan wrote:

This money-making clump of spew has been approved.

This was proposed:

is this still the design?

http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=73

some more pictures of it, they’re a bit small and hard to see though

Heres a pic of monte vetro(small pic) ready for 2010 and aqua vetro 2012??? Treasury website saying aqua vetro ready for occupation 2012. In the small pic you can see tower behind montevetro, i dont think its bolands mill!!!

Never heard or seen ‘aqua vetro’ before:confused: Where did you get the image?

Found on bruce shaw website http://www.bruceshaw.ie/cost_management/projects/tall_buildings/barrow_street . But if you look in small photo you can see aqua vetro(found photo on treasurys website). On treasury holdings website it says it be available in 2012(in office availability). Im pretty sure its treasurys site. 24 storey building

wow some high rises for a change. Grand Canal Dock is coming up in the world no thanks to the DDDA

Few pics of grand canal square when finished-looks well!!:cool:Pity the area is mainly low rise!!!But hopefully barrow street + kilsaran site will see a few high rises in years to come along with U2 tower.

Another render of Monte Vetro and pics of Alto Vetro(looks great, trademark building :D). Monte vetro looks boring from this view.:p

:D:D:D:DHeres the plans have for grand canal dock area with monte vetro(2010) and aqua vetro(2012). Very ambitions plans by treasury aqua vetro is a massive development. With bolands mills alo beside aqua vetro the area will be transformed Cant wait to see all these developments complete.:D:D:D:D. The renders look great
!!!

Has Montevetro changed again? I’m not a great fan of this new design 🙁 For some reason it reminds me of a new Hawkins House. More glass and less concrete might do the job.

With bolands mills alo beside aqua vetro the area will be transformed Cant wait to see all these developments complete

Agreed. This is a good site for such building and will look good but this new Montevetro design is poor.

Is aqua vetro actually a redeveloped Bolans mill, or is that seperate? it’s hard to tell from the pics. They look great either way, nice to see a cluster of mid rises go ahead:) inspite of the DDDA “masterplan”:rolleyes:

I think the render is showing the partial site of bolands mills development, Aqua vetro is just the 24 storey tower.:D Heres another render!!!

**hyberbole** Its like Canary Wharf **hyberbole**

oh I see now. Thanks for clearing that up 🙂

Thanks for adding them Johnny21. I quite like the look of the architecture, given the current climate it looks like the proposals are materially and aesthetically quite advanced, nice tidy sharp lines, if you”re going to do a big block, for speculative commercial developments, the sharp, pared back aesthetic is fine by me, although like most Dubliners, I would be terribly sad to see Boland’s Mill finally torn down.

the proposals are materially and aesthetically quite advanced, nice tidy sharp lines, if you”re going to do a big block, for speculative commercial developments, the sharp, pared back aesthetic is fine by me

They look like many other steroid-driven commercial developments built at any time from the 70s; they have no sense of place and say nothing about Boland’s Mill and are hopelessly over-scaled in their immediate context. Architecture for weans.

you’re a wean

The standard of intellectual response I expected.

@johnglas wrote:

They look like many other steroid-driven commercial developments built at any time from the 70s; they have no sense of place and say nothing about Boland’s Mill and are hopelessly over-scaled in their immediate context. Architecture for weans.

Someone had to restore the universal balance after such a post…

Dont be insulted, I dont know what the word means;)

I feel most people would be quite content with this type of development,it barely qualifies as a mid rise and shouldnt be overbearing,its position along the river will lessen any imapct,It seizes to amaze me why every new project has to conform and fit in perfectly with the surrounding landscape,this is not what a city is about,.Its simply an inherent part of the Irish psyche to think small so generally speaking people like johnglas just don’t know any better.

Have to disagree with you there, Johnglas.

Firstly this street has totally lost any sense of place it may have had, virtually every building in and around Grand Canal dock is post 1995, and none of them refer either aesthetically or materially to what the built environment of the south docks meant. Most of the new builds on Barrow street are quite frankly appalling. This proposal is an improvement on what we have seen for this site.

I certainly don’t think they’re overbearing. What are they overwhelming? Other bland corporate office blocks? The woeful apartment block to Upper Grand Canal street? The equally boring gasworks blocks? They don’t look like any “steroid driven office development” currently existing in Dublin and at least they don’t have naff decorative motifs such as silly pyramids on top (see Ulster Bank).

To be honest with you, after the diabolical Scott Tallon Walker proposal for Boland’s Mill, this proposal seems far more palatable. Bearing in mind this is based on two jazzed up renders, I wouldn’t mind seeing how the height corresponds a)To the original Boland’s Mill silhouette and b)to the terraced houses on South Dock Street / Gordon Street.

All due respect to Johnglas but your views just seem to be the typical anti highrise/ anti capitalist (commie:D)mindset, nothing really wrong with it each to their own and all that.

S’ok, let him be a wean if he wants to be.

Nice pic johnny, is that the watchtower there beside the point? looks to close to be the center… if so looks like it never stopped at ground level at all if it was at that stage when the ncc was as pictured

@ihateawake wrote:

S’ok, let him be a wean if he wants to be.

Nice pic johnny, is that the watchtower there beside the point? looks to close to be the center… if so looks like it never stopped at ground level at all if it was at that stage when the ncc was as pictured

We all hope it is but unfortunately its not,looks like the photo was taken 2/3 months ago when comparing the ncc and liam carrolls development. The site is the 8 storey office development,(i think!!!)

@johnglas wrote:

say nothing about Boland’s Mill

What is there to say about Boland’s Mill? Its a decaying 1950s concrete silo beside a decaying, somewhat attractive, 19th century factory. Is this based on the common misconception that the site has something to do with 1916? The Boland’s site that was occupied by rebels was on Grand Canal Steet and it is currently occupied by an early 1990s pastiche of an earlier, possibly 1940s, factory building.

I like these plans. The Alto Vetro building looks great by the way

This looks really good, finally we are sort of getting a cluster of semi highrise buildings.

CM00: at least you attempted some kind of rationale – I don’t agree, but at least I see where you’re coming from.

‘Wean’ means child, as in ‘infantile’; and, Luxor, I really do know better. As for paul h – ‘commie’!! – even your vocabulary is infantile.

Try and develop an appropriate waterside vocabulary; these blocks could be built anywhere and they are simply an attempt – a capitalist/developer quick-fix if you like paul h – to extract as much revenue from the site as possible.

PS Didn’t reply earlier because I was on my first-ever visit to Cork – now, there’s a waterscape for you. If Leeside ever gets round to smartening up its act it will realise it’s – whisper it – actually architecturally more interesting than Dublin. And, yes, I do like the new high-rise there, like.

View from barrow street and roof garden view of the city from montevetro.

love the roof garden idea except that the weather will never be like that and there won’t be a sinner out there.

Montevetro website. http://www.montevetro.ie 😉

In what way do you see architectural development between Telecom House (Marlborough Street 1967-9)and ‘Monte Vetro’ (2008) ?

. . . and I’m not accepting the answer that ‘Monte Vetro’ is twice the height!

sexy italian name?

Wow

I have to say I’m really excited about those mid rise buildings proposed.

It would be a setting the stone to finally have one part of the city that is high rise/high density living. It’s prefect IMO.

Pretty much how the Canary wharf started judging by the pics above.

Kudoos to the architectural designers on these towers! 🙂

gunter: design-wise perhaps not a lot, but it integrates with its site and general area to an extent that 60s/70s buildings rarely did. Given that it’s a commercial spec-office building, this integration and its relation to both the small-scale houses on the other side of the railway and to the opening vista on the canal basin give it a definite pass from this grumpy old planner. This level of integration (if the blurb is to be believed) harks back to the 50s and the ‘brave new world’ of modernism: a pointer for the future? (And a wake-up call to planners to get a bit more proactive and insist on gain for the public realm?)

@johnglas wrote:

. . . . a definite pass from this grumpy old planner.

I feel hostility towards this, it offends me, I don’t like it . . . and now because of you, I’ve got to go off and figure out why I don’t like it.

Thanks johnglas . . .
If there’s ever anything I can do for you . . .

gunter: I gave it a pass – for what it is. I’m not over-enthusiastic and I think the detailing of the building per se is pedestrian, but… At the ground level, given its relationship to the station, the canal-side and even the nicely-scaled domestics sheltered from it by the railway bridge, it does make a real effort to relate, even giving a passage through. To the mere pedestrian, anything over 2 storeys doesn’t exist, so i’ve judged it on that basis. It’s also got a few nice quirky angles and the facade is disciplined. And it lights up at night!

how is monte these days? it hasn’t been mentioned in a while. i can’t see anything happening from pearse station. i thought by now you would see a tall concrete pile appearing. alto could be seen from pearse when it was going up.:rolleyes:

i think all preparations for the lift shaft to start construction are completed, they’ve just recently erected a crane so they’re making fast progress anyway! Expect to see the lift shaft finished within a few months.

What is that building behind montvetro???

It doesn’t say anywhere!

The massing of the Monte Vetro breaks the building into two blocks, the narrow, high one and the other being lower deeper & angled along the railway line. In some of the images they read almost as 2 separate buildings. Beyond that again in one of the images you can see the first block of the Gasworks development, the one occupied by Google. Bot sure if either of these are what you’re referring to though!

Monte vetro homepage has added a video of the development and future developments of barrow street. http://www.montevetro.ie 😎

“A merging of land, water, galss and light, Montevetro combines these natural elements, resulting in a breathtaking structure designed for success!”

does anyone know when the other building will start. Think It’s called Aqua Vetro or something. It’ll probably be the tallest building in Dublin if the watchtower doesn’t work out

Montevetro is under construction, they’re piling now, should be on foundations around now.

View from penthouse of Alto Vetro, only had the camera phone which was a pity. Views are amazing.

@cgcsb wrote:

does anyone know when the other building will start. Think It’s called Aqua Vetro or something. It’ll probably be the tallest building in Dublin if the watchtower doesn’t work out

Construction due to start 2010 and finished 2012 but unlikely now due to the downturn!!!!!!:mad:

Updated design for monte vetro, taken from o mahony pike new website http://www.omp.ie/img/big/commercial/montevetro/montevetro.html ;):cool:

hmmm, not sure if that’s an improvement or not…! Looks a bit… gimmicky?

they can never leave anything alone, can they. always playing with everything.:rolleyes:

The Grand Canal Docks are an urban space, I’m going to make a prediction that this one will be in the text books in years to come, in the section on ‘How not to address an urban space’, with or without net curtains on the top four floors.

Ah, but how else can you ‘twitch’?

Any update on this development?

Is it actually gonna go ahead?

@rob mc wrote:

Any update on this development?

Is it actually gonna go ahead?

Big hole in the ground.

It is certainly going ahead.

Unfortunately.

@JoePublic wrote:

Big hole in the ground.

It is certainly going ahead.

Unfortunately.

Haha,i think its quite nice.

But it seems there are always gonna be people for it and against no matter what the proposal, so we had to take a chance on something at some stage as it seems all other developments have been either cancelled or delayed.

@JoePublic wrote:

Big hole in the ground.

It is certainly going ahead.

Unfortunately.

It is a spacious building that takes advantage of land in a prime location.

I wouldn’t mind having a look at the planning files but can’t seem to find it on the city council website. Is there a way of looking at them without visting the city hall?
-I live in cork

What sort of a name is Alto Vetro?

think it means glass tower or something in Itallian

It’s tall glass in Italian

@ForzaIrlanda wrote:

It’s tall glass in Italian

whats monte vetro mean?

Any pics so far?

Or is it still just a hole in the ground?:)

It must be nearly out of the above ground level,lift shafts will be next!!

Pic taken from flickr.com

Cool cant wait,i’m actually really excited about it 🙂

Its probably one of only a few high profile early stage developments still going ahead this year!!!!:D

whats monte vetro mean?

It means mountain of glass or glass mountain, something along those lines anyway.
Anyone know why they decided to call these 3 blocks alto, aqua and monte vetro?
Is it just cause it sounds fancy?

@ForzaIrlanda wrote:

Is it just cause it sounds fancy?

Yes.

Or ‘high, water, mountain’ + ‘glass’; showing some descriptive toponymy for once.

When is Aqua Vetro going ahead?

I presume after monte vetro is completed,Aqua looks the best of the lot imo.

@rob mc wrote:

When is Aqua Vetro going ahead?

I presume after monte vetro is completed,Aqua looks the best of the lot imo.

apparently construction is supposed to start in 2010, with completion in 2012, if the recession doesn’t stop it. But treasury holdings seem to be very brave by still going ahead with monte so I would say they’ll go ahead with aqua

does aqua have permission??

i believe so as I seen a story on it on RTE news last year and they seemed to be talking about it as if it was certainly going ahead. What I’d like to know is what is to be done with Bowlans mills?

What design are they using????? Three different designs on three websites http://www.omp.ie http://www.degw.ie http://www.montvetro.ie New pic Taken from degw!!!:confused::confused:

they’ll build until the money runs out so whichever one is cheapest…

they’ll build until the money runs out so whichever one is cheapest…

Or subsidise it with BMW advertising….(anyone got a pic of this Ad on Alto Moto?)

Proposed public square at the proposed Aqua Vetro. http://www.treasuryholdings.com

@johnny21 wrote:

Proposed public square at the proposed Aqua Vetro. http://www.treasuryholdings.com

I presume that’s good news for aqua then, there showing no signs of stopping the development,well, yet anyway(knocks on wood) 😀

There probably the only developer steaming ahead with plans for both north and south docks, and also still building monte vetro in the RECESSION!!!!:D

fair play to them. Does aqua have permission yet? can’t wait to see them coming out of the ground.

how far has monte come? i haven’t been in this area for a while. is there a lift shaft going up yet?

I think the foundation works should be about done now. 3 weeks ago, I seen the form work going up around the RC Columns

I dont know whether aqua has planning but is planned to start 2010!!!!:D

Image is “pending” on Treasury’s website – won’t be long now.

got a quick pic from my phone while passing by on the DART

From yesterdays Irish Times

THE CORE of one of Dublin’s tallest office blocks has started to go up at a rate of three storeys a week in the Grand Canal Dock area of the city. The 15-storey building, Montevetro, will eventually stand 57 metres above the dock, offering uninterrupted views over much of the docklands area.

Treasury Holdings is spending €148 million on the office scheme which will be integrated into the Dart station at Grand Canal Dock. It will have a floor area of 19,509sq m (210,000sq ft) with the average floor offering 1,579sq m (17,000sq ft). Three penthouse floors will each have 650sq m (7,000sq ft) of space.

Apart from direct access to the Dart, the building will have up to 80 car-parking spaces over three basement levels. There will also be parking for bicycles and motorcycles.

Derek Nolan of Treasury Holdings said the radical design of the office building will provide column-free floor space and a flow of natural light. The 11th floor, 50 metres above ground, will also have a south-facing garden terrace, on a fifth of an acre, from which there will be views of Howth Head and across Dublin Bay to the Dublin mountains.

Nolan said they were noticing the popularity of the Grand Canal Dock area among the new media companies, evidenced by Google’s decision to locate there. “We believe that this is down to its central location, its accessibility and transport links and its array of trendy bars and restaurants.”

HT Meagher O’Reilly and Jones Lang LaSalle will be the joint letting agents.

Will nothing kill this thing?

I thought we were supposed to be in the deepest recession in a hundred years!
All the good stuff all over the city is getting cut, but they’re still beavering away on RetroVetro!!

The empire state building was built during the depression or maybe that was the rockefeller centre?

Looks like this will be our depression highlight building wise.

What this building will provide is 20,000 sq m of grade A office space in a well connected location in a building that could be described as clean, modern but uninspiring in architectural terms. It will be snapped up when things improve as will so many of their other locations because as experienced developers they understand what financial services companies and global corporates want in terms of space. Location, transport connections and glass!

How green is this building? Being practically in a DART station is definitely a plus but what about ventalation, natural light, insulation, triple glazing, U values etc.?

is this the montevetro thread too? Cool. Here’s some pics – i thought it was time i did something useful for this site 😉

a few of Alto as well. Pity it was such a grey day, it makes all the various renders of this area over the years from all the various proposals look, well let’s say, misleading.

Very atmospheric, alonso; who says that the Docklands are dull (apart from meteorologically!)?
And, for the record, far from being opposed to all highrise, I think these punctuation marks look pretty well in this location and that the ‘vetri’ site is really not half bad (any further thoughts, gunter?).
PS: why don’t they jazz-up the Waterways site a bit? It’s an interesting wee bldg but it’s so self-effacing that you’d hardly know it was there.
And what about that rebuilt wall? Somebody actually paying attenetion to detail! Whatever next?

Hey Alonso

Am I correct in thinking that the core going up in your pictures is not the main “tower element”?

C

BTW nice pics Alonso:)

C

@thebig C wrote:

Hey Alonso
Am I correct in thinking that the core going up in your pictures is not the main “tower element”?

I’ll field this one, if you don’t mind 🙂

Yes you would be correct big C, the lift cores are not ‘the main tower element’ and nor, in fact, will there be a ‘main tower element’, because, with RetroVetro, we’re talking ‘slabs’.

One 16 storey slab goes this way and a second 11 storey slab goes that way, it’s going to be tremendous!

. . . . but what really distinguishes the design of RetroVetro from other office blocks is the cryogenics used to straddle the forty year time gap since medium-rise, slab, office blocks last bounded off the architectural drawing boards to blot urban landscapes across the globe.

jeez, it looks like shit in that render… (but at least the sky is blue)

Thanks Gunter!

That pic makes it look fairly bland in a 60’s/70’s way! I seem to remember one render that showed several distinctive setbacks tapering towards the street frontage. Hence, I thought there might be more then 1 core.

C

in that render the tall slab at its Barrow street end to the right, the grey bit, could be lifted straight from Apollo house or its famous cousin Hawkins House or even, and I hate to say this I really do – it’s such a backward cliche – Ballymun…

Depends on what cladding they use if it is Apollo-esque concrete on the top right of a very grainy newspaper pic; then it will look foul after a few years pollution leaches in; however a matt limestone could look really good.

I’m not so negative on slab blocks if done right; the view of Bank of Ireland Block A accross the City always looked good but looking at your typical totalitarian state 1960’s slab hospital block gives a totally different impression of just how dull a rectangular concrete box can be.

If the materials used are of good quality this building has the potential to turn a very constrained site into a very clever use of space.

OMG! – an actual lift shaft going up! It’s so beautiful *tear*

Is that as high as the lift shaft is gonna go?

From the pics it doesn’t look like 16 floors :-

when montevetro is finsihed where will it come in terms of dublins tallest buildings? just short of liberty hall but will it be taller than canary dwarf?

also was racking my brains last night to think of what order dublins 10 tallest built/under construction would come in.anyone any ideas.

i had liberty hall,montevetro,canary dwarf,altovetro,millenium tower,santry cross but then i wasnt sure.the vantage apartments at central park seem high and also 2 high lift shafts can be seen from the M50 in sandyford.would o connell bridge house,central bank,quinn building in blanch make it? theres also a few apartment blocks round 10-12 stories e.g. cork st, tallaght beside the square, hsq, old chocolate factory kilmainham and at the charlestown centre off the m50.anyone able to hazard a guess/provide a list by height??

Alonso, are you giving GrahamH a run for his exhaustive Dublin photography money? 😉
Thanks for the pics. I DARTed past the docks for four years when going to UCD so the updates are much appreciated.

@cgcsb wrote:

fair play to them. Does aqua have permission yet? can’t wait to see them coming out of the ground.

I’m curious about this too. Does anyone know of the planning status of aqua vetro?

@df1711 wrote:

.the vantage apartments at central park seem high and also 2 high lift shafts can be seen from the M50 in sandyford.

a few crap pics from inside the car as I was goin past a few weeks ago

@fergalr wrote:

Alonso, are you giving GrahamH a run for his exhaustive Dublin photography money? 😉
Thanks for the pics. I DARTed past the docks for four years when going to UCD so the updates are much appreciated.

🙂
nah I wouldn’t dare even try challenging Graham’s unimpeachable standing on archiseek…. Only developments within 15 minutes of my couch interest my camera on a day off!!!!!

Oh you guys!

*flaps hand gayly*

Hey, any picture that informs works in my book alonso.

What tends to be most disappointing about slab blocks such as these is their arbitrary character; their repetitive, modular make-up is such as to make their final height, and thus the overall design, somewhat meaningless. Conversely however, the final arrived-at height does insidiously set in bricks and mortar (or should that be steel and glass) the contemporary economics of the building’s construction and/or the planning ethos of the age – injecting some modicum of interest.

I agree that the stark limestone cladding and glazing will give this neo-International Style (?) a more palatable twist.

Cheers for the pics.

I think you knocked the no parking sign over 😉

We need more pics,its been about two weeks already:D:D

I saw the core as i was passing the Customs house today, it’s making an impression in the skyline, already well above Alto Vetro and but i am guessing that the core has reached its highest level now

I was under the impression that this was 63m high? Where did I read that, or am I making things up :confused: And is there a specified height for aqua, if not what are the guesses from the pros eh?

from Baggot St. Bridge.

If they stopped now, I wouldn’t have a problem with it!

@ihateawake wrote:

I was under the impression that this was 63m high? Where did I read that, or am I making things up :confused: And is there a specified height for aqua, if not what are the guesses from the pros eh?

There aren’t many good pictures,but it looks about 22 or 24 storys tall, which is about 80 to 85 metres

@ihateawake wrote:

I was under the impression that this was 63m high? Where did I read that, or am I making things up :confused: And is there a specified height for aqua, if not what are the guesses from the pros eh?

Yes! I read the exact same figure. I even posted it here a few weeks ago. I also tried working out the floor to ceiling heights….at 16 floors, office space usually has a clearance of about 4 metres. That would make it 64m. Even, at 15 floors (because I have seen different floor counts quoted) it would be 60m with probably another couple of metres for double height lobby/entrance.

This was always touted as the new tallest in Dublin, eclipsing Liberty Hall at 60m. I have a strange suspicion that ABP randonly lopped one or two floors off (somewhere in the middle, as they frequently and bizarrely do). 60m seems to be a psychological barrier!

C

@rob mc wrote:

There aren’t many good pictures,but it looks about 22 or 24 storys tall, which is about 80 to 85 metres

Those lift shafts can be very deceiving. I remember, watching a construction along the Luas line at Black Horse, it looked 12/13 floors….turns out it was 8!

@thebig C wrote:

Those lift shafts can be very deceiving. I remember, watching a construction along the Luas line at Black Horse, it looked 12/13 floors….turns out it was 8!

Yea i know what you mean,but i think this is the best picture of it:

It shows it alongside monte making it easier to see the size difference,and to be honest it looks a damn size bigger. Should make a big impression on the skyline and finaly put that 60m barrier to rest 😀

Liberty Hall is 59m tall. So yes I would definitely agree that there is a barrier. What height is the Milenium Tower in The grand canal dock? surely it’s about the same?

Aqua will be 24 floors with a double height ground floor so possibly 90m

Is this the ‘Get a Life’ thread?

@rob mc wrote:

Yea i know what you mean,but i think this is the best picture of it:

It shows it alongside monte making it easier to see the size difference,and to be honest it looks a damn size bigger. Should make a big impression on the skyline and finaly put that 60m barrier to rest 😀

Yeah, it looks good in that picture……as long as the glazing/cladding doesn’t change during construction. Which it has a habit of doing….just look at the Hotel the other side of the dock:)

C

@johnglas wrote:

Is this the ‘Get a Life’ thread?

Afaik tbh :rolleyes:

Will be interesting all right to see if aqua survives the collapse.

@cgcsb wrote:

Liberty Hall is 59m tall. So yes I would definitely agree that there is a barrier. What height is the Milenium Tower in The grand canal dock? surely it’s about the same?

Aqua will be 24 floors with a double height ground floor so possibly 90m

Millenium tower has 16 floors, but its residential, so with lower floor to ceiling heights its probably more in the 48-50 region.

@johnglas wrote:

Is this the ‘Get a Life’ thread?

Oh I forgot…this is Dublin so we can’t discuss high-rise. I am surprised you didn’t trot out the old chesnut about us being lacking in the manhood department because towers are a phalic symbol:)!!!

C

Superfluous; it’s OK to discuss HR, but the obsession with measured height is, well, phallist at the very least. (Except of course that dicks stick out and not up!)

…..and why are we talking about cocks?

I mean there’s off point and then there’s ridiculous:D:D

Yeh but when you are so hard up for any large erections, like we poor Dubs are, one must never prematurely pull out of any mass debates on the issue at hand.

Com on lads, this is all getting a bit hard to swallow….lets get back on top…ic:))

C

thebigC: and the C is for…?

@johnglas wrote:

thebigC: and the C is for…?

Hahaha…..oh jesus…….

My, this topic has aroused a sudden burst of new interest on the thread, even if the innuendo is of the rather limp variety (and not always structurally accurate). Someone put a shuddering end to it please.

Done! Who can resist the digit of reason?

I’m already excited about the oother propasal at the boland site cant thy put another 10 floors on it. It seems we are afraid to go over 30 floors why?

We need to grow up,, and yes that even means the buildings.:)

@johnglas wrote:

Superfluous; it’s OK to discuss HR, but the obsession with measured height is, well, phallist at the very least. (Except of course that dicks stick out and not up!)

Ah now, what’s wrong with throwing in structural facts as well as opinions? TBH it is very solemn to be discussing ‘will it or won’t it be over 60 metres tall’ especially after my recent trip to New York, but the fact of the matter is that Liberty Hall has been the tallest building in Dublin for over 40 years. 63 metres breaks the monotony of high-rise (pff) structures that have randomly gone up in Dublin (Santry Cross, Alto Vetro, Canary Dwarf) A new tallest is a new tallest.
In other cities a building like this would not make the news. Maybe if a building of 60 floors in an otherwise medium rise city would create a stir, but this is Dublin and we have to play the card we are dealt.

OK, I may be missing something, but I just don’t see what is so magical about ‘breaking’ some imaginary barrier. Never mind how tall it is, is it any good?

@johnglas wrote:

thebigC: and the C is for…?

Well….if its the C word I think you are thinking of…….my ex gf would definately agreee in terms of scale!!!:))

You meant Cunt right:))

@dave123 wrote:

I’m already excited about the oother propasal at the boland site cant thy put another 10 floors on it. It seems we are afraid to go over 30 floors why?

We need to grow up,, and yes that even means the buildings.:)

Exactly…..when they chop floors off buildings it can make them look very sqat!

@Keen wrote:

Ah now, what’s wrong with throwing in structural facts as well as opinions? TBH it is very solemn to be discussing ‘will it or won’t it be over 60 metres tall’ especially after my recent trip to New York, but the fact of the matter is that Liberty Hall has been the tallest building in Dublin for over 40 years. 63 metres breaks the monotony of high-rise (pff) structures that have randomly gone up in Dublin (Santry Cross, Alto Vetro, Canary Dwarf) A new tallest is a new tallest.
In other cities a building like this would not make the news. Maybe if a building of 60 floors in an otherwise medium rise city would create a stir, but this is Dublin and we have to play the card we are dealt.

Too right its a big deal. Particularly, when you consider the ammount of money that was sloshing around for a few years, its frankly remarkable that not even one or two buildings crept through planning that exceeded Liberty Hall in height.

I think its because there is such a stigma in Dublin around this issue that subsumes everything else once a proposal is in any sense taller then average. For example, I think if The Elysian had been proposed for Dublin…it wouldn’t have got further then ABP!

Surely in the case of the Boland’s Mill bldg that sets the precedent for the height in its immediate vicinity; any new development (assuming the mill is kept and not swept away in some neo-modernist (i.e. old-fashioned) frenzy) should complement it rather than swamp it. There are plenty of riverside locations for signal high-rises; this is not one of them.

Boland’s Mill is an extremely ugly, derelict piece of 1950s industrial equipment that would have been demolished this year if it were not for the inevitable property market collapse. New buildings should certainly be well designed and appropriate to their setting, but should not be required to complement a structure that is both condemned and undeserving.

@dave123 wrote:

I’m already excited about the oother propasal at the boland site cant thy put another 10 floors on it. It seems we are afraid to go over 30 floors why?

We need to grow up,, and yes that even means the buildings.:)

Haha,slow down there mate,we have to get past 16 floors first!

Lets just take it one baby step at a time 😀

I think the main B’sM bldg is a lot older than the 1950s and does deserve retention (and respect); there may well be additional elements that need not be retained and clearly these could be replaced if necessary. One just wonders whether any replacements would be respected in 10 years, never mind 60+.

Boland’s mill consists of two late Victorian stone workshops facing Ringsend Road and the inner dock which are protected; two semi-detached Victorian houses on Barrow Street which are also protected and are in scandalously poor condition; various smaller portected warehouse on the interior of the compound; and finally two interlinked concrete silos of 1940s, ’50s or ’60s vintage. The silos are of absolutely no architectural merit whatsoever, unlike some other silos in Dublin and Cork’s docks with subtle Art Deco features. One is also very evidently constructed of thin shuttered concrete, which leads me to doubt that it could support internal floors even it it were possible to make it look attractive as part of a conversion. There is a great photo in the first post of this thread that shows all four large buildings, and one further down of the houses on Barrow Street: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=2506

While the rejected proposal for the site deserved to be rejected due to being bland and repetitive, I wish a better one had made it over the line before the commercial proprty market made it unviable. Now there will be a huge derelict complex on my street for yet another decade.

Very fair points, but in an overheated market there is always a tendency to over-egg the floorspace (and go too high?) and ignore any inconvenient ‘heritage’ in the way. Recessions (so we are told) don’t last forever and there is now a breathing-space to develop the site in a more sensitive (but still comercially-viable) way.

I hope so. In the meantime, when the sky is overcast and the mood dark there is an intriguing juxtaposition between the rotting concrete of Bolands and the hulking services shaft of the building just down the road. That one could go either way – Some of the renders give it a Miesian appearance while others make it look like sixteen floors of just-above-the-minimum-required-to-get-permission blandness.

@Andrew Duffy wrote:

Boland’s mill consists of two late Victorian stone workshops facing Ringsend Road and the inner dock which are protected; two semi-detached Victorian houses on Barrow Street which are also protected and are in scandalously poor condition; various smaller portected warehouse on the interior of the compound; and finally two interlinked concrete silos of 1940s, ’50s or ’60s vintage. The silos are of absolutely no architectural merit whatsoever, unlike some other silos in Dublin and Cork’s docks with subtle Art Deco features. One is also very evidently constructed of thin shuttered concrete, which leads me to doubt that it could support internal floors even it it were possible to make it look attractive as part of a conversion. There is a great photo in the first post of this thread that shows all four large buildings, and one further down of the houses on Barrow Street: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=2506

While the rejected proposal for the site deserved to be rejected due to being bland and repetitive, I wish a better one had made it over the line before the commercial proprty market made it unviable. Now there will be a huge derelict complex on my street for yet another decade.

Looking at the rejected proposal……..it looks suspiciously similar to what is now being constructed on the Monte Vetro site. Anybody notice this??

C

Obviously, the Victorian Mill/Grain stores should be kept. Not only are they very attractive, but those types of buildings can make great quirky office areas or loft apartments.

As for the 50’s 60’s grain silos, I think they could be swept away. They are very overbearing and of little merit. Being built in a time of austerity they are also probably of dubious construction quality are other posters have mentioned. If they were to be retained, there is an example in Copenhagen of a former Carlsberg silo being used as the core of a cylindrical apartment building. I think its about 80m. I will try posting pics here later.

Also, I came across another example on Skyscrapercities from the Czech Republic, likewise the building couldn’t support many internal floors, so a modernist residence was built on the uppermost floors of the mill building. I think somebody has already posted this somewhere on archiseek.

C

The new controll tower in Dublin Airport is set to become the tallest structure in Ireland (that’s not one of those bare steel frame antenna things (I’m having a blonde day)) it’ll be over 80 meters high

@cgcsb wrote:

The new controll tower in Dublin Airport is set to become the tallest structure in Ireland (that’s not one of those bare steel frame antenna things (I’m having a blonde day)) it’ll be over 80 meters high

well tallest ‘habitable’ structure anyway

interesting. any images of this tower?

I’m not sure if construction has started or not. I believe the reason for it is that the runway is being obscured from the current control tower because of T2 so the new one must be 80 metres high. That’s one building that the council can’t insist has a few metres lopped off it.

The airport isn’t in the Dublin SE ward… so the objections would be less shrill and accompanied by fewer SC barristers in any case.

@fergalr wrote:

The airport isn’t in the Dublin SE ward… so the objections would be less shrill and accompanied by fewer SC barristers in any case.

Yes….and ABP are very zealous about having no High-Rise in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown:)

@cgcsb wrote:

I’m not sure if construction has started or not. I believe the reason for it is that the runway is being obscured from the current control tower because of T2 so the new one must be 80 metres high. That’s one building that the council can’t insist has a few metres lopped off it.

There are some amazing Control Towers around the world. Alot of Airports use them as Signature buildings. A great examples would be Newcastle Airport and Edinburgh Airport.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Airport

And a quirky older example….Budapest:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Ferihegy_International_Airport

Maybe, ATC towers are the makings of a separate thread??

It’s been a little over two weeks since the last photos of Monte Vetro were uploaded, it must look a little more filled out at this stage.

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

It’s been a little over two weeks since the last photos of Monte Vetro were uploaded, it must look a little more filled out at this stage.

Yeah, I was thinking the same. I used to work near there until last Sept……I would have been able to watch this rising from my office window:)

C

was there on wednesday, it was much the same

@cgcsb wrote:

was there on wednesday, it was much the same

I can see why, the website for the building has a webcam up at the top showing daily and hourly progress on site. Link. The liftshaft, which is the only visible part of the building from street-level, hasn’t been built upon in the last few weeks. From the looks of it they are building below street level and it’ll only be when this building work rises above street level that changes will become apparent.

Hey Gang

I came accross this website:

http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://kgi.ie/files/Projects/monte_vetro_06.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.kgi.ie/index.php%3Fp%3Dprojects%26id%3D1072&usg=__DmDwqg4d11dIFVFq__YlWxSGDeM=&h=689&w=516&sz=120&hl=en&start=15&um=1&tbnid=Ma01LC7vND4fUM:&tbnh=139&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmontevetro%2Bdublin%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

It mentions that the lift shaft is 76 metres in height! I know there will be a plant room above the top floor proper. But that still would not account for the extra height. Could they be counting below ground floors in the overall height?

C

@thebig C wrote:

Hey Gang

I came accross this website:

http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://kgi.ie/files/Projects/monte_vetro_06.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.kgi.ie/index.php%3Fp%3Dprojects%26id%3D1072&usg=__DmDwqg4d11dIFVFq__YlWxSGDeM=&h=689&w=516&sz=120&hl=en&start=15&um=1&tbnid=Ma01LC7vND4fUM:&tbnh=139&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmontevetro%2Bdublin%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1

It mentions that the lift shaft is 76 metres in height! I know there will be a plant room above the top floor proper. But that still would not account for the extra height. Could they be counting below ground floors in the overall height?

C

I’m not sure,sounds a bit odd,could just be a typo cos i’m pretty sure its only 63 metres tall.

So is this officially the tallest building in Dublin or what?there is so much bloody mystery surrounding its height 😀

@rob mc wrote:

I’m not sure,sounds a bit odd,could just be a typo cos i’m pretty sure its only 63 metres tall.

So is this officially the tallest building in Dublin or what?there is so much bloody mystery surrounding its height 😀

Yeah, even at 63m it would be Dublins tallest! So, its taken over 40 years to climb just 4m!!!

C

The 76m high lift shafts are in place (put up in just 18 days) – it looks like this will be a big structure.

The building is, apparently, six weeks ahead of schedule. They have a web cam on the website but I don’t think the image has changed for a few weeks. Any chance of some picture updates on a high rise that is actually going ahead?;)

Treasury Holdings still have no prospective tenants for the building but are going to finish this and then bring two more large high rise shemes to the market in 2010/2011. The can do attitude is refreshing.

Can a mod change the title of this thread to this development:confused:

I was under the impression google were gonna take the whole thing. Can’t remember where I read it. Their current offices are in 2 buildings across the street and are a bit squashed in apparently

Yeah I also heard that Google were planning to take over the entire building, but agh can’t remember where I heard it either!
Is the building getting any taller than the pictures shown above?

The steel is going up according to the webcam

http://www.montevetro.ie/webcam/Webcam.aspx

i noticed that today too, should be visible above ground from the DART stop now

@Keen wrote:

i noticed that today too, should be visible above ground from the DART stop now

the steel is very visible from the dart. its only to be a pretty impressive fram when its up!

@aj wrote:

the steel is very visible from the dart. its only to be a pretty impressive fram when its up!

The bulk of this thing will be massive, and not in a good way. Leaving dublin port on a ferry during the week, the lift shaft alone is already the most significant structure visible when looking back towards the city.

I wonder were people this excited when Hawkin’s House was being built?

@gunter wrote:

I wonder were people this excited when Hawkin’s House was being built?

Come on….it’s hardly Hawkins House:rolleyes:

I’m interested to know if you can see Monte from most parts of Dublin or do you actualy have to go out of your way to see it?

Id love if it was just visible from liberty hall, then you would have liberty hall, The ulster bank buildings, hopefully soon tara street tower, and then monte vetro, all of similar height streching across Dublin. Forgive me for getting aroused right now:D:D:D

Aroused? Is that literally or figuratively? (Big phallic structures and all that…)

@johnglas wrote:

Aroused? Is that literally or figuratively? (Big phallic structures and all that…)

Well seeing that Ireland is a highrise virgin i’m getting pretty damn aroused right now:D

It’s 4 metres taller than liberty hall man, a WHOLE 4 METRES!!!!

@rob mc wrote:

Well seeing that Ireland is a highrise virgin i’m getting pretty damn aroused right now:D

It’s 4 metres taller than liberty hall man, a WHOLE 4 METRES!!!!

That such interest is even possible for a relatively small structure shows you how FUCKING NUTS Dublin City Council is. The whole of the docklands area should have been this height, for both aesthetic and economic reasons.

@rumpelstiltskin wrote:

That such interest is even possible for a relatively small structure shows you how FUCKING NUTS Dublin City Council is. The whole of the docklands area should have been this height, for both aesthetic and economic reasons.

You are spot on as regards the economic reasons. As Walter Chrysler said “Skyscrapers are a way of making the land pay”…its that simple. However, I think there was huge arrogance which crept into pampered planning authorities during the boom years. They seemed to think that we Irish could do things our own way and were exempt from the normal and natural laws of economics. Put simply if land costs 50 million per acre only allowing 6 stories is going to limit the returns and push up rents, land values and demand!

C

@thebig C wrote:

You are spot on as regards the economic reasons. As Walter Chrysler said “Skyscrapers are a way of making the land pay”…its that simple. However, I think there was huge arrogance which crept into pampered planning authorities during the boom years. They seemed to think that we Irish could do things our own way and were exempt from the normal and natural laws of economics. Put simply if land costs 50 million per acre only allowing 6 stories is going to limit the returns and push up rents, land values and demand!

C

That’s not at all true. The evolution of the skyscraper lies in a distinct lack of space, ie being forced upwards due to the constrictions on Manhattan island or the loop in Chicago.

Demand here never outstripped supply. Land only cost 50 million per acre due to a flawed planning system which allowed a small number of individuals to horde land and drive up costs by rezoning on a wholesale rather than case by case basis. Rampant speculation was the only thing which underpinned Irish land prices, not demand.

Your logic suggests that just because Sean Dunne paid a ridiculous sum of money for land which any sane business person would have known was an incredible risk, he should be allowed plonk a 30 story skyscraper regardless of the effects. (incidentally I thought the skyscraper was beautiful – the rest of the scheme was trash and would have significantly harmed the city centre).

There is definitely a case to be made for some tall buildings which provide the large floor space demanded by the worlds largest companies. We need to provide the infrastructure necessary to attract these companies to Ireland.

Their location is crucial. The docklands in Dublin were intended to be a residential quarter and as they stand they are beginning to achieve a density which matches best practice models across Europe. Go any taller and you begin to alienate families, exacerbating and justifying the exodus to placeless suburbs.

We could definitely build a couple of beautiful tall buildings in the locations that have been identified – The U2 tower site, Heuston etc but they are not the be all and end all of a city’s ambition or a natural and inevitable result of ‘the market’.

Amen to all that, reddy, but we’ve had this particular debate before…

http://www.kgi.ie/index.php?p=projects&id=1072

It’s fairly prominent but definately not overbearing, yet. Have to wait till the steel core is erected to get a true sense of it’s bulk. I agree it’s bulkiness could be a slight issue.

@reddy wrote:

That’s not at all true. The evolution of the skyscraper lies in a distinct lack of space, ie being forced upwards due to the constrictions on Manhattan island or the loop in Chicago.

Demand here never outstripped supply. Land only cost 50 million per acre due to a flawed planning system which allowed a small number of individuals to horde land and drive up costs by rezoning on a wholesale rather than case by case basis. Rampant speculation was the only thing which underpinned Irish land prices, not demand.

Your logic suggests that just because Sean Dunne paid a ridiculous sum of money for land which any sane business person would have known was an incredible risk, he should be allowed plonk a 30 story skyscraper regardless of the effects. (incidentally I thought the skyscraper was beautiful – the rest of the scheme was trash and would have significantly harmed the city centre).

There is definitely a case to be made for some tall buildings which provide the large floor space demanded by the worlds largest companies. We need to provide the infrastructure necessary to attract these companies to Ireland.

Their location is crucial. The docklands in Dublin were intended to be a residential quarter and as they stand they are beginning to achieve a density which matches best practice models across Europe. Go any taller and you begin to alienate families, exacerbating and justifying the exodus to placeless suburbs.

We could definitely build a couple of beautiful tall buildings in the locations that have been identified – The U2 tower site, Heuston etc but they are not the be all and end all of a city’s ambition or a natural and inevitable result of ‘the market’.

Reddy….granted the confines of Manhatten and the Loop played a part, however, alot of cities worldwide have issues of space, not all have skyscrapers. Building heights would still not have soared if it wasn’t for the Economics of demand. You are in danger of kind of endorsing the “build out not up” arguement……..but don’t get me started:)

Pretty much agree with you on the Jurys hotel site though!:D

C

@thebig C wrote:

Reddy….granted the confines of Manhatten and the Loop played a part, however, alot of cities worldwide have issues of space, not all have skyscrapers. Building heights would still not have soared if it wasn’t for the Economics of demand. You are in danger of kind of endorsing the “build out not up” arguement……..but don’t get me started:)

Pretty much agree with you on the Jurys hotel site though!:D

C

Its the law of SUPPLY and demand – Its an intimate and inverse relationship between the two and only when low supply and high demand coincide are buildings forced upwards. But like I said – Rampant speculation was the only thing which underpinned Irish land prices, not demand so you can probably scratch ‘natural’ economics in this argument.

I’m not at all endorsing the build out argument – I’m completely against it. What I’m saying is that if we don’t achieve densities which are tolerable to family living we will continue to drive people back out of the city to find their little patch of suburban lawn.

However I think like Johnglas said we’ve had this debate before and it could run on and on.

I’ve been checking into the live coverage of the building of Montevetro and the steel frame is becoming extensive at this stage. We should get some idea of how bulky it’s going to be when this covers the central lift-shafts.

It certainly is piercing the canopy of existing buildings around the the docklands area.

Wait.. What’s this then?

Not Aqua Vetro?

@Yixian wrote:

Not Aqua Vetro?

No, that’s a Zaha Hadid proposal for the northside of the Docks for Treasury Holdings. It was a runner-up design in the U2 Tower competition. Aqua Vetro is the greeny-black glassy building behind Montevetro(which is in the right foreground) in the image below –

Aqua Vetro should be approximately 24 stories tall which, assuming that each floor is 3.5 metres would give a total height of 84 metres – 40% taller than Liberty Hall. It should be launched publicly next year and finished in 2012 when, we hope, a recovery in the Irish economy will mean it will have little trouble finding tenants.

Argh, I see.

I read an article saying that the Hadid is going to be built after all. True/false?

I’ll try find the link.

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

No, that’s a Zaha Hadid proposal for the northside of the Docks for Treasury Holdings. It was a runner-up design in the U2 Tower competition. Aqua Vetro is the greeny-black glassy building behind Montevetro(which is in the right foreground) in the image below –

Aqua Vetro should be approximately 24 stories tall which, assuming that each floor is 3.5 metres would give a total height of 84 metres – 40% taller than Liberty Hall. It should be launched publicly next year and finished in 2012 when, we hope, a recovery in the Irish economy will mean it will have little trouble finding tenants.

BTW, I think alot of modern 3rd/4th generation offices run with a floor-ceiling height of 4-4.5 meters which would put Aqua at least in 96m upwards bracket?

@thebig C wrote:

BTW, I think alot of modern 3rd/4th generation offices run with a floor-ceiling height of 4-4.5 meters which would put Aqua at least in 96m upwards bracket?

I suppose. I have no idea of what the height of each floor will be in Aqua Vetro – I was just assuming a notional height and multiplying it by 24. Your estimate seems to be more accurate than mine. Once it’s taller than the Elysian in Cork and the Obel Tower in Belfast, it will be tall enough!

Just wondering, is that picture above of aqua vetro the finished product, or just there to give us an idea of the size and scale of the project?

And does it even have planning permission yet?

@darkman wrote:

http://www.kgi.ie/index.php?p=projects&id=1072

It’s fairly prominent but definately not overbearing, yet. Have to wait till the steel core is erected to get a true sense of it’s bulk. I agree it’s bulkiness could be a slight issue.

BUMP

Any recent pics? The webcam has been down for weeks…

there’s lots of steel there now, if that’s any help

Steel must be up to about the 10th floor now, only have the pic off the website tho, can anybody get any pics of a side view?

pics of monte vetro taken from Grand Canal Dock. Sorry for the poor quality but they were taken with a phone and the light wasn’t great.

M

Nearly to the top floor…. On Flickr by turgidson
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=monte+vetro+dublin&s=rec

There’s a lot more mass to Montevetro now that the steel skeleton is emerging. I must head down there in the next few weeks to see how it looks in reality. Fair play again to Treasury Holdings for pressing on with this development, it looks a cut above other proposals in Dublin and is keeping lots of builders in much-needed jobs for the next few months.

Has anyone seen it in the last week? surely the frame must be finished? Also I hear the new theatre will open in a few months as will Lansdowne rd. stadium. Inner Dublin4 is really shaping up nice

Yeh it’s really taking shape now.

Theatre due early 2010, Lansdowne August 2010, but Macken St Bridge and the O2 Luas will be open in December

Still, D4 is still up in the air until they finally decide on what form the Ballsbridge development will take..

Jeez, I wish they had just let the first high rise plan go ahead, One Berkley Court would have been spectacular.

@Yixian wrote:

Jeez, I wish they had just let the first high rise plan go ahead, One Berkley Court would have been spectacular.

I agree. I can’t stand Seán Dunne as a person, but his plans for the area were very dramatic, confident and would have added a lot to Ballsbridge. It’s so unfortunate that his plans were shot down.

The Landmark 37 storey building was truely excellant. The rest of the surrounding 6-15 storey brink slab sided buildings were absolute dross.

However, rather predictably it was the tower which drew all the ire from the ususl suspects and the good citizens of D4. In fact before ABP shot the whole thing down, Dublin City Council were prepared to let the development go ahead minus the tower!……proof if it were needed that they are purely concerned with height not quality!

C

It seems like the only high rise proposals with enough funds and support to be built are proposed in areas where they are obviously going to be rejected, whereas every tower planned for the Docklands seems to be financially doomed from the outset..

And the result, Dublin is still flat as a pancake.

There are minor cities in Australia with more scrapers than have ever even been proposed for the Docklands. You don’t even need to be in a boom to have a high rise business district. This is a real mess and needs to change, say what you will of towers but the psychological effect of high rise districts does attract certain kinds of people and investment and if Dublin wants to shake any remaining “provincial” stereotypes then it should really get this mini-Manhatten project going already..

Some pics from Flickr….with thanks to turgidson:))

http://www.flickr.com/photos/turgidson/4125740351/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/turgidson/4170037593/

Really starting to take on its shape. Perhaps a little looming and bulky in some shots. However, the glazing is pretty good, and we really won’t know the impact until its finished. Also, all the shots are on very gloomy (Irishy) days when things tend to look at their most drab and worst and I reckon its still not half bad.

C

This is run-of-the-mill office crap. What a shame that we have to look at this as some sort of landmark, because the real landmarks all get refused.

At least it’s presentable and looks a bit more solid and impressive than some of the 90’s office blocks along the Liffey, that look they’ve been bought and self-assembled from Ikea.

But I guess we’re going to have to wait until the money returns in 2013+ before, under the new high rise policy, the decent projects proposed in the last 5 or 6 years can actually go ahead/be completed.

@rumpelstiltskin wrote:

This is run-of-the-mill office crap. What a shame that we have to look at this as some sort of landmark, because the real landmarks all get refused.

So true!! The bland proposals sail through planning because, by their very nature imaginative, daring and ambitious projects attract all the attention. Attention=objections!

@thebig C wrote:

So true!! The bland proposals sail through planning because, by their very nature imaginative, daring and ambitious projects attract all the attention. Attention=objections!

What else do you expect in such a location? The Gherkin it is not and it never pretended to be. It’s a bulky corporate office block. It’s situated beside a DART station in a cluster of knowledge-based company headquarters. To me, that’s a step in the right direction. If i was a large Multinational looking to locate in Dublin i’d have my eyes on it.

Breaking news: I have it on very good authority that the workers have been locked out of the Montevetro as it’s been claimed by NAMA. Yes all work has CEASED on this building.

Are you 100% sure about this? The building is nearly finished. They should at least complete the facade to stop us ending up with another shell foreign journalists can gawk at to show what a state our property market is in.

Yes take a look yourself, building is empty no work taking place. They let 1 guy in to collect their tools. What a crying shame, it was starting to look the business.

@The Denouncer wrote:

Yes take a look yourself, building is empty no work taking place. They let 1 guy in to collect their tools. What a crying shame, it was starting to look the business.

strange that the architects weren’t aware of it – unless they’ve been told to deny everything that is. one guy to collect tools for the whole building??????? must have been a wiry young buck

Yeah its all very strange..lets see what happens today.

There were people working on it when i passed on the DART this morning

In related news I saw a crane moving over new Anglo headquarters yesterday and a few workers on it today

it hasn’t received abp approval yet has it

Yes there is about 10 of the workers in there today I have been told

The seemed to be making progress lately. One side is even substantially glazed.

There is the same amount of work going on on Montevetro today as there has been for the past few months, working slowly but steadily on glazing and fit out.

NAMA, like any other lender, would need a court order to repossess the security for a loan. It also strikes me as unlikely that a lender would seek to repossess and stop work on a substantially complete office building beside a DART station – something that stands a passable chance of earning enough to repay the loan in the near future if it is completed.

The builders weren’t allowed onto the site yesterday that is a fact they were all gather outside at the Spar in the morning talking about it, it was completely empty yesterday if you were around.

@The Denouncer wrote:

they were all gather outside at the Spar in the morning

Sounds like business as usual to me 🙂

@darkman wrote:

………They should at least complete the facade to stop us ending up with another shell foreign journalists can gawk at to show what a state our property market is in.

Good point.
Newsnight (BBC2) and Channel 4 News seem to have endless footage of the doomed Anglo HQ which they reel out whenever they get the opportunity. Its getting annoying.

@Global Citizen wrote:

Good point.
Newsnight (BBC2) and Channel 4 News seem to have endless footage of the doomed Anglo HQ which they reel out whenever the get the opportunity. Its getting annoying.

Lol I’d use it.If you want to sum up the financial collapse and the building bust in one image…

@Global Citizen wrote:

Good point.
Newsnight (BBC2) and Channel 4 News seem to have endless footage of the doomed Anglo HQ which they reel out whenever the get the opportunity. Its getting annoying.

There’s been a fair bit of schadenfreude surrounding our plight across the water actually. We definitely don’t want to give them another photo op!

I totally agree; certain media elements in the UK seem to highlight the problems of corporate Ireland in a disproportionate manner to the sums involved. Leaving a half finished office building right next to a DART station would send out exactly the wrong message on planning grounds if nothing else. You would imagine that the warrantees go both ways on this so the lender will have to pay the contractor unless there is a clear defect in the construction; a scenario I very much doubt exists . If that funder is Anglo there would be no benefit to the taxpayer in paying out for an incomplete building. Looking at Google’s recent results there may be some very localised demand.

They might want to add the letters U and K to their sneering P I I G S acronym, though that would spoil their fun now wouldn’t it, and perhaps a little too close to the truth for our British friends.

British guy was on Newstalk this morning and says we aren’t one of the PIGS anymore! Man that’s a relief. Presume Italy is the sole ‘I’.

Italy never made the group; they declared a tax amnesty on foreign deposits and got €100bn into their collective over the table balance sheet and netted €5bn in taxes. Berlesconi may have his personal life episodes but he a very prudent economic manager.

Ireland it seems has left the group following some really hard budgets; one notes the very positive stance taken by the FT; it seems after being the model case according to many economists in the inflating the bubble phase; the country is now regarded as the model case in how to deal with the fallout.

Superb news!

@reddy wrote:

There’s been a fair bit of schadenfreude surrounding our plight across the water actually. We definitely don’t want to give them another photo op!

maybe we should just implode it

or turn it into an arts project of some kind

@Peter Fitz wrote:

They might want to add the letters U and K to their sneering P I I G S acronym, though that would spoil their fun now wouldn’t it, and perhaps a little too close to the truth for our British friends.

How about an acronym for France, United Kingdom, Estonia, Romania and Spain.;)
There’s bound to be some negative connotation linking them all.
If only to make us feel a little bit smug again !

Is work still progressing? it’ll be nice to have the tallest building in Ireland title taken back for dublin, Cork and Belfast had ideas above their stations.

oh wait, I’m confusing this with the, yet to begin, aqua vetro. Never mind.

Yes, I had exams over in the RDS over the past few weeks and you get a good luck at Montevetro on the route over to it and every day I saw activity on-site. Cranes were moving and you could see workers on the top floors. NAMA or no NAMA, it should be completed and put on the market. It’d be great to see a company of the calibre of Google take it as their EMEA headquarters so that it doesn’t become our very own version of the “Empty State Building”.

@cgcsb wrote:

Is work still progressing? it’ll be nice to have the tallest building in Ireland title taken back for dublin, Cork and Belfast had ideas above their stations.

Im afraid Belfast is way above its station with the Oble Tower at 28 stories 85 meters.Its just about finished too i hear.Alto Vetro is a poor ould stump at 60 meters sadly!:mad:

@mud hut!, I meant to say aqua vetro, is that still going ahead? As far as I know it was planned to be 80 something. I think Cork’s Elysian is 81m also.

@mud hut! wrote:

Im afraid Belfast is way above its station with the Oble Tower at 28 stories 85 meters.Its just about finished too i hear.Alto Vetro is a poor ould stump at 60 meters sadly!:mad:

Yeah but you see we can’t have tall buildings in Dublin because they’re vulgar or… something to do with Georgian architecture.

The yellow panels on Alto Vetro look very odd. Is IKEA moving in or something?

@cgcsb wrote:

@mud hut!, I meant to say aqua vetro, is that still going ahead? As far as I know it was planned to be 80 something. I think Cork’s Elysian is 81m also.

I think its on hold like everything else.Im not sure but i think it was only 24 stories so it would have still come up short compared with the Obel tower in Belfast.

@mud hut! wrote:

I think its on hold like everything else.Im not sure but i think it was only 24 stories so it would have still come up short compared with the Obel tower in Belfast.

according to wikipedia, the Obel is only 85m

@mud hut! wrote:

I think its on hold like everything else.Im not sure but i think it was only 24 stories so it would have still come up short compared with the Obel tower in Belfast.

Not true. Obel Tower is to be 85 metres tall with 28 stories. At 4 metres per storey, Aqua Vetro can beat it at 96 metres. Given that Montevetro will be 60 metres at 16 storeys that is a reasonable estimate of the possible height of Aqua Vetro.

Hopefully Aqua Vetro will be built so that finally, Dublin will be the home of the tallest building on the island. Given that it is the island’s primate city it is only right that that is the case.

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

Dublin will be the home of the tallest building on the island. Given that it is the island’s primate city it is only right that that is the case.

But surely primates thrive even better in the sub-tropical climate of Cork the real Capital:D?

@publicrealm wrote:

But surely primates thrive even better in the sub-tropical climate of Cork the real Capital:D?

g’wan away ya buck eejit-surely Armagh’s frost loving Red-Cap monkey lives in the e primeval city for building tall spires????

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0217/breaking27.html

I have to say that this is great news. I’m glad that Google are sticking with us during these shitty times.

€99m for such a large building in a prominent location is an absolute bargain. Fair play to them.

Google is buying the ‘skyscraper’ from developer Real Estate Opportunities, which is trying to raise cash to redevelop the Battersea Power Station.

The bulk of the Google proceeds will go to Ireland’s ‘bad bank’ for toxic debt, which owns the loans that REO took out to develop the Montevetro site.

€99m for such a large building in a prominent location is an absolute bargain.

or not…

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30850817/ns/business-real_estate/

A month before that, the John Hancock Tower — Boston’s tallest skyscraper — sold at auction for just over $20 million. The 33-story Equitable Building in downtown Atlanta is set to go up for auction next month; its owners owe more than $50 million to the bank and have only half of the building leased.

I don’t think Google are stupid – I suspect there is a lot more to this deal than meets the eye, but a useful piece of NAMA flim-flam to try and buoy up prices on vanity projects like this… the challenge for NAMA is that there are no more cash rich multi-national camped on the doorstep of other projects.