Archer’s Garage
- This topic has 191 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
no1horse.
- AuthorPosts
- February 21, 2003 at 8:56 am #715645
Rory W
ParticipantDellyberg properties (i.e. O’Callaghan Group) have applied to remove the circular column from the forecort area of (as described in the application – “the corner of Sandwith Street and Fenian Street”) i.e. Archer’s Garage and add door/glazing to the forecourt.
Now is this going to change the appearance of this building dramatically or what – the central pillar is what makes Archer’s in my opinion, with it’s almost cog like expression. Anyone who cares to object to this should contact Dublin City Council.
February 21, 2003 at 9:35 am #715646ew
ParticipantDo you know the application number? and date lodged?
Anyone that wants to object ….
http://www.dublincity.ie/planning/planobj.htmFebruary 21, 2003 at 10:59 am #715647kefu
ParticipantI don’t think this permission will be granted after all the effort involved in getting the building reinstated. I was never a great fan of Archer’s Garage but I think the central pillar is probably its only defining feature. The whole purpose of the exercise would be defeated is this were granted.
February 21, 2003 at 11:01 am #715648Paul Clerkin
KeymasterI’ll send that out in Monday’s newsletter
February 21, 2003 at 2:16 pm #715649emf
ParticipantJust a point when you include the link to DCC planning site.
Was there a ruling from Europe recently that the €20 fee for objections was in fact illegal? Do you thing this is a good or bad thing?February 21, 2003 at 2:24 pm #715650GrahamH
ParticipantIt is illegal. Mary O’ Rourke in the Seanad a couple of weeks ago said it will be reversed.
But when, well, don’t hold your breath…
A bad thing dosn’t come close to how appalingly undemocratic the measure is.
February 21, 2003 at 4:28 pm #715651ew
ParticipantThis was introduced to reduce the number of spurious objections. I never saw any statistics to indicate if it reduced the amount of rejected objections compared to objections upheld. I suspect that apart from being a ‘nice little earner’ it didn’t meet it’s own questionable aims and only limited participation in the planning process. I hope it gets done away with.
One practice that is encouraged by the charge is that groups of residents get together and one of them files an objection on the street or areas behalf.
Unfortunately it has happened that then just before the review, the person who’s name is on the objection is offered a sum to personally drop the objection. If they do, it is too late for any of those who felt also represented by the objection to file a further objection as its past the five weeks…
The charge stinks and I hope it gets dropped.February 6, 2004 at 10:30 am #715652Anonymous
InactiveIt looks like Archers Garage is nearly reconstructed, complete with its PVC windows!
I am presuming it will be the entrance to the offices!?February 6, 2004 at 11:17 am #715653GregF
ParticipantJust to add that Art Deco former garage building in Phibsboro has been given a make over.
I heard it was opening up as a night club place.
See too that the booths are being installed on Capel Street Bridge.
First impressions ….they make the bridge rather cluttered.February 6, 2004 at 12:52 pm #715654Paul Clerkin
KeymasterI think it is a new Porterhouse…..
February 14, 2004 at 5:58 pm #715655Paul Clerkin
KeymasterBefore

Today
February 14, 2004 at 6:01 pm #715656Anonymous
InactiveThe concrete detailing on that does not even resemble the original. Nor does the window casings. 🙁
Me thinks we haven’t heard the last of this one yet. 😡
What part of replace exactly does he not understand?
February 14, 2004 at 6:18 pm #715657Paul Clerkin
KeymasterWell he has replaced it – just replaced an original with a bad facsimile……
June 9, 2004 at 10:28 am #715658kefu
ParticipantArcher’s Garage is finished now. Looks great – obviously a lot cleaner and smarter looking than pre-demolition.
Also it appears as if the area under the arch will be a glazed office, perhaps a car showroom or something like that.
The surrounding development around it doesn’t detract from it either as I had expected. Not a bad job over all. And an expensive lesson for Mr Noel O’Callaghan, no doubt.August 9, 2004 at 3:49 pm #715659Paul Clerkin
KeymasterArcher’s garage rebuilt after razing
Marie O’HalloranFive years after it was illegally demolished on a bank holiday weekend, Archer’s garage on Fenian Street in Dublin has finally been rebuilt.
The razing of the distinctive late 1940s art deco building, demolished over the June bank holiday in 1999, provoked huge controversy and its reconstruction became a long, torturous and disputed process.The new version is a gleaming white building with significant glass frontage, attached to an office block development and adjacent apartment block at the site near Merrion Square.
Before the former garage was razed it was the only surviving building on a largely derelict site.
IIB Bank is scheduled to move in at the end of October, and two final planning permission applications are outstanding – for signs, flagpoles, a clock and a 1.8 metre-high glass screen at roof level on the former garage and adjoining offices.
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2004/0809/1722913933HM4ARCHERS.html
August 9, 2004 at 8:58 pm #715660JL
ParticipantSorry I ahven’t seen it – does they mean that the bit underneath where the cars used to go has been glazed in?
August 12, 2004 at 2:03 am #715661Devin
ParticipantArcher’s looks well but the steel windows haven’t been put back on the 1st floor. It’s the same glazing pattern but the material is some kind of coated metal (could it really be PVC coating??).
Incidentally, it was Ian Lumley of An Taisce who got Archer’s listed, as part of a submission to the 1998 draft Dublin City Development Plan, recommending hundreds of buildings for listing (as it was then). The submission was made under the Dublin Civic Trust, a company set up by An Taisce.
December 8, 2006 at 10:03 pm #715662GrahamH
Participant8/12/2006
Developer faces fine of €13m
Probe underway after early morning convent demolition
A developer has illegally demolished a 19th century convent which was in the process of becoming a listed building.
Homebuilders Kimpton Vale Ltd razed the building on November 5, just two weeks after Dublin City Council began the process of adding the Presentation convent in Terenure to the Record of Protected Structures (RPS).
December 8, 2006 at 10:21 pm #715663Paul Clerkin
KeymasterIt should be a massive fine, as that €13m will probably remove the profit
December 8, 2006 at 10:36 pm #715664GrahamH
ParticipantUnfortunately maximum fines are rarely issued by the courts, hence it’s questionable if a €5 or €6 million fine would make any real impact on the benefit derived from building, for example, new-build apartments in the reconstructed shell…
Any fine certainly should take account of this.Incidentally, a proposed protected structure is defined as:
“a structure in respect of which a notice is issued under section 12(3) [composing a Development Plan] or under section 55 [altering a Development Plan] proposing to add the structure, or a specified part of it, to a record of protected structures, and, where that notice so indicates, includes any specified feature which is within the attendant grounds of the structure and which would not otherwise be included in this definition”.
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

