Alto Vetro, grand canal docks, dublin
- This topic has 358 replies, 87 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
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 pleaseI 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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
