Boland’s Mill

I was wondering that too as the mill next door is getting the Treasury Holdings makeover at the mo. Would make super apartments. But being a DART station could just aswell be offices.

They are protected structures so very little can happen to them. Even more interesting is the Odlums Mill on Alexandra Road in the Dublin Port and Docks, it is still operational and merits viewing

Down docklands way…. has anyone seen the fab paving and street lighting the DDDA have installled on Grand Canal Basin…. check it out.

that reminds me of an art museum coversion that herzog de meuron did to a huge old factoryn somewhere in germany (cant remember the city) where they sharply cut some windows into the face of this huge unforgiving structure. very nice project. anyway.

There was a great abstract painting of the mills in Grogans on Sth William St at one stage. Is it still there?

Doesn anyone know what the plans are for Bolands Flour Mills? I presume the tall grey building attached to it is not being kept?

I don’t know what’s happening here. I’d definately like to see the smaller building converted to offices/apartments.

(c) fjp

As for the taller structure, perhaps this could be converted to apartments too. You could stick a few windows onto it.

AFAIK Scott,Tallon & Walker are woking on this, so…(bites lip)..we have a fair idea of whats coming.

I work across the water from this building. Now and again you can see squatters moving around on the roof! I’ve heard there are raves there on occasion. A generator is brought in. Also, wouldn’t the larger building make a great screen for outdoor cinema. Miller projected an ad onto the wall a few years ago. 😎

if they wanted to, they could do something very interesting with that site.

Agreed about the tall blank wall- I’d hate to see that building go, and I think it would be a pity to puncture windows in it. There’s something about its starkness rising above the water that I find more sculptural than bleak.
Can’t think what it’d be used for internally though, without light getting in from the west (west, right?). Still, that’s the job for the architect! 🙂

This bldng was sold for 42Million big ones acouple of months back. If you have access to ireland.com I would say there is a good bit in their archive on it. AFAI remember any apartments built on site will have the highest unit cost in the country.

Construction work has started & all the lights are one these days. . .

yeah,
that’s been up for a few weeks now. There’s an image in STW’s book sneakily tucked away in the index of this proposal. It’s um… large.

@d_d_dallas wrote:

yeah,
that’s been up for a few weeks now. There’s an image in STW’s book sneakily tucked away in the index of this proposal. It’s um… large.

the agent is RPS, anyone know who the developer is?

Can’t help with that, though I think their name is up about the site at the moment on various signs, probably including the big planning applications that are everywhere too.

Is is an office development that’s planned then d d dallas?
I wonder what the future is for this lovely Regency house on the site – it generates a fantastic, if bizarre, juxtaposition:

It doesn’t look good however 😡

The mill holds such a dominance over the area. I love how it towers over the little streets below:

@burge_eye wrote:

the agent is RPS, anyone know who the developer is?

Sean Kelly’s Benton Property Holdings, he’s formerly of Ballymore and developer of Adelaide Square apartments in city centre and the Capel Building on capel st where gary rhodes is opening

@phil wrote:

In that case who are Versus? On the sign which I read it said ‘Versus Limited, Adelaide Chambers, Peter Street, Dublin 8 intend to apply for permission for development at the site known as Bolands Mills…” and so on as in the above excerpt from the online information. Are they just agents acting on behalf of the developer? I got the impression that this was the developer from the various signs around the buildings (up until this point I had thought it was owned by Treasury Holdings)

Versus is still Benton Property. Basically, a lot of developers use subsidiary companies/special purpose vehicles to apply for each individual development it undertakes. It means that if anything goes wrong and the project went south, their other assets would not be affected. So Treasury Holdings for example never applies for anything in its own name, Castlethorn rarely does, the Kellys use several different companies, Liam Carroll owns a number of companies etc. However, if you saw promotional material for each of the developments it would state that it was being developed by Treasury, Castlethorn etc. Benton is just doing the same thing.

Nothing’s changed since the ’60s so 😉

A list of Protected Structures in the complex:

Grand Canal Dock, Dublin 4:

a) Boland’s warehouse/mill at lifting bridge, Ringsend Road: six-storey stone warehouse
b) Boland’s warehouse/mill to south and east of concrete silos fronting quay: six-storey, stone warehouse
c) Two-storey brick gables of warehouses fronting at (b) above, i.e. Boland’s Ltd: warehouse
d) Four-storey brick warehouses/mill parallel to quayside to rere of 38-40 Barrow Street 3307
e) Five-storey warehouse/mill gable end to quay, north of (d) above
f) Three-storey warehouse with oriel window adjoining north side of (d) above

It seems the two houses are also protected:

Barrow Street, Dublin 4:

No 33 House/offices including railings and steps
No 34 House/offices including railings and steps

I have no idea what the composition of the plan is – just saw the image in the book. Although from its size offices and apartments surely. The protected structures are untouched with a large “gherkin-esque” blob of glass inserted between.
Suppose it’s not that bad (well better than heuston gate or point village)

I live near here, and several taxi drivers and pub bores have complained to me that a 1916 rising site will be destoyed to build apartments. Telling them that DeValera’s crew occupied a building in Boland’s flour mills on Grand Canal Street, and that the concrete towers overloking the docks are obviously no more than fifty years old, doesn’t tend to register.

What sort of scale is the proposal, does anyone know? Given the height of the silos, the nearby Millennium Tower and Treasury’s approved 16 and 18 storey buildings nearby, it is presumably big? Treasury withdrew its application for a 32 storey building next door a few months ago.

@d_d_dallas wrote:

I have no idea what the composition of the plan is – just saw the image in the book. Although from its size offices and apartments surely. The protected structures are untouched with a large “gherkin-esque” blob of glass inserted between.
Suppose it’s not that bad (well better than heuston gate or point village)

is there any link to this image? very interested in this sire. thanks

^ site 🙂

Very interested in this as I work right beside it, and those concrete slabs are an eyesore! Can’t wait for them to be either demolished or regenerated into a mean, clean, glass gherkinesque structure..

I’m sure that if someone came up with a scheme as attractive as the Gherkin that no-one would object; In relation to the concrete silos you could be looking at an updated version of this which in environmental terms would represent a very sustainable project and set a very good environmental precedent for the rest of the scheme.

Yeah I always liked the view from the Grand Canal onto the Treasury Building and Grand Canal Plaza, though a walk down Barrow St. and the top of Pearse St. disappoints as it always seem so far from completion.

So did I – most surprised not to find any reference to them on the Record. Even under the guise of a surrounding street name, still nothing.

Given the steel windows it probably dates from 1920 to 1950, but sure we knew that anyway 🙂
Indeed they could be iron, completely throwing things off.
The late 40s seems about right,

It must have been the tallest building ever built in Ireland when constructed surely?
(spires and chimneys aside).
When did it close does anyone know, and who owned it since?

It was operational at least as late as Q4 1999 operated as Bolands Mills sold as a property development opportunity by parent group IAWS was reported in the IT at the time can’t remember who bought it at the time roughly 2000 / 2001

There’s a similar building on the north docks in Waterford City that was built around 1920, or slightly before- concrete frame, infill panels. A few years ago the city Conservation Officer was trying to get it included on the city RPS as it was/is one of the oldest structures in the whole country to use concrete in its construction, but I believe he had an uphill battle (Sisyphian?) with the Councillors. If you thought it was a battle to get Councillors to appreciate 19th century architecture, imagine how difficult it is to convince them of the heritage merit (Scientific and Technical, to name just two categories of interest) of a concrete silo. Don’t know what the outcome was…

And then there’s the R&H Hall building in the docks in Cork City. Not sure if that one’s a PS either, though. Something tells me it might be, but I haven’t time to check just now.

Anyone know the height of this Dublin one? Even a ballpark figure?

It seems to be 12 storeys, however each is relatively low at around 2.5 metres/9 feet, bringing the building up to a height of 30m or around 105 feet. Plus a bit more probably.

@ctesiphon wrote:

the R&H Hall building

Is it still planned to redevelop this as an apartment tower?

@phil wrote:

It seems to be about the same height as the Millenium Tower across the road.

I agree. The Millennium Tower is a shade over 49m, but I think it is a little higher than the silo. in any case, I imagine the replacement will be taller.

Boland Mill Development Company, a subsidiary of Benton Properties (whose principal is Sean Kelly) is seek planning 3 new office buildings on the site which total approximately 34,268 sq.m. You can tell instantly it was designed by STW. The existing warehouse building is to be converted toa hotel, multi-storey warehouse fronting the Grand Canal Dock and No’s 33 & 34 Barrow Street are being converted to office use, culminating in a gross development of approximately 40,647 sq.m.

The new office buildings, which range in height from 12 to 16 storeys, are set in a public plaza that extends from Barrow Street to the Grand Canal Dock. The nearby Millennium Tower in Charlotte Quay on the same side of Grand Canal Dock is also 16 storeys. Gary Rhodes is to operate the restaurant in the hotel overlooking Grand Canal Dock.

More from today’s times commercial property – image in the paper which I’ll scan later

Boland’s Mill to be developed as office, hotel complex

Three 12 to 16-storey office buildings, a boutique hotel and a restaurant to be run by celebrity chef Gary Rhodes are planned for a key site in Dublin’s south docklands. Jack Fagan reports

One of the key sites in Dublin’s south docklands, the former Boland’s Mill at Grand Canal Dock, Dublin 4, is to be redeveloped as a major office and hotel complex at a cost of over €150 million. When completed, it is likely to be one of the most distinctive and important new developments in the fast changing south docklands.

A development company headed by Sean Kelly of Benton Properties is finalising a planning application for three new office buildings ranging in height from 12 to 16 storeys – the tallest matching the height of the Millennium Tower apartment block at Charlotte Quay, on the opposite side of Ringsend Road.

Boland’s Mill, a cut-stone grain store dating from the 1830s, was sold by the food group IAWS to Mr Kelly 18 months ago for €42 million.

He recently completed a large own-door office and retail scheme at the junction of Mary’s Abbey and Capel Street and previously handled the redevelopment of the former Adelaide Hospital, now one of the highest value apartment schemes in the inner city.

Enda Moore of agent Hooke & MacDonald Commercial, who is letting agent for Boland’s Mill Wharf, says he believes it will set a new benchmark for offices in the city in terms of design, quality and location. It is just a few minutes’ walk from Grand Canal Dock Dart station.

The redevelopment is likely to prove even more challenging than the Adelaide because of its primary position in the Grand Canal Harbour area. Eoin O’Morain of architects Scott Tallon Walker says that one of their objectives will be to enhance the three existing protected structures and to achieve maximum accessibility to both the retained buildings and the waterfront.

Top conservation architect David Slattery has been retained to advise on the listed buildings which were used up to recent years as grain stores. The promoters estimate that the cost of restoring and refurbishing the cut-stone buildings – one of them has around 250 wooden windows – is likely to run to about €3,000 per sq m (€279 per sq ft) as against a cost of €2,000 per sq m (€186 per sq m) for new build.

The existing six-storey building on Ringsend Road is to accommodate a four-star, 53-bedroom boutique hotel along with a health spa and brasserie. The building will also have a 150-seater restaurant at ground floor level to cater for visitors, as well as about 2,000 people who are likely to be working on the site. The restaurant, to be known as D4, will be run by celebrity chef Gary Rhodes, who has also opened a restaurant in Mr Kelly’s newly-completed development off Capel Street.

Several Irish, UK and international hotel chains have already expressed interest in operating the hotel, which stands to benefit from the large number of companies moving into the Grand Canal docks area. The hotel opening will coincide with the closure of at least two of the Jurys Doyle hotels in nearby Ballsbridge.

Two other listed buildings on the Boland’s site, a multi-storey warehouse fronting on to Grand Canal Dock, and numbers 33 and 34 Barrow Street, are also to be redeveloped as offices, bringing the gross development to 40,647sq m (437,524sq ft). The tall concrete silo pits that dominate much of the site were built in the 1950s and will be demolished. The two listed buildings being turned into offices will be for sale or to let.

The two main new buildings will stand 12 and 16-storeys high and will face on to an impressive public plaza that will extend from Barrow Street onto Grand Canal Dock. The taller block will have a net floor area of 15,488sq m (166,711sq ft) while the other will have 7,442sq m (80,104sq ft). They are likely to be used as corporate headquarters and will be interlinked by a glazed central core featuring 10 lifts, each capable of carrying 21 people as well as a stairwell.

The two blocks will be capable of being operated as a single headquarters or as two separate entities. Floor sizes generally will range from 887 to 1,206sq m (9,548-12,981sq ft).

The third new office block planned for the site will be 14 storeys high and will bring the new floor areas up to 34,268sq m (368,857sq ft). While the three new buildings will have air conditioning, windows will be capable of being opened to allow natural ventilation. A further 1,608sq m (17,308sq ft) office building on the north-east corner of the site will cater for small to medium-sized occupiers.

Seen the photomontage in the paper. More of STW depressingly mediocre blandness

@ConK wrote:

[Gary Rhodes is to operate the restaurant in the hotel overlooking Grand Canal Dock./QUOTE]
Isn’t Gary Rodes operating a restaurant on Capel Street? I guess he’ll operate both. he must be moving to Dublin?

🙂 Yeah right, one night a month in one of the restaurants i suspect. Rhodes D7 has an okay chance of survival because of the solicitor/barrister element, the one on Grand Canal Dock should do well simply because there’s nothing else really around there. After a couple of years though people will get bored of both.
The menu’s not very original
http://www.rhodesd7.com/menu.pdf

next person who uses the word boutique, gets it .

[attach]2488[/attach]

Wow! The Hawkins House of the Noughties. That is spectacularly awful. Despite the apparent criticism of everyone from the City Council to NIMBY residents, to the DDDA the fact of the matter is that developers (and Grand Canal Dock is all developer-led) just havent come up with the goods regarding quality buildings in this quarter. I cant think of one decent highrise so far proposed on this site with the exception of Alto Vetro.

As for D4…its a sad day when a restuarant is used to sell a development. At least they were sticking in fullblown Museums in the schemes gone before.

Was just about to post a scan of that image – really is fucking awful isn’t it. You’d think that on an important site like this they’d come up with something better.

STW hang your heads in shame – this would look bland in a retail park and a six year old would do better than this crap

STW really are the bland face of the Celtic Tiger; lazy architecture and yet they are so prolific. They’re responsible for more highrise dross at Point Village. Another landmark beacon blah blah….

I also find it interesting that a company like Gary Rhodes Restuarants could commit to a project that hasnt even been granted permission yet!. Surely it would make a lot more sense for him to locate closer to the Leibskind Theatre.

That is a million miles from the render in their book. Were architects involved or is this the structural engineers design?

I envisaged a 32 storey tower for that site, bought for €42 million or something. That’s not exactly awe inspiring to put it mildly..in such a great site! What the hell are they restricted or something?

@The Denouncer wrote:

What the hell are they restricted or something?

In their imaginations perhaps…or mabe AutoCad was acting up the day it was designed.

@StephenC wrote:

or mabe AutoCad was acting up the day it was designed.

Or maybe they badly sellotaped together the rubbish from Richard Meier’s shreddit bins?

(A rehashed gag, I know, but perhaps appropriate for a stylistically rehashed building?)

In that rendering they look extraordinarily like 1960s social housing, especially with that distinctive capping band around the top – truly hideous buildings, the squat 12 storey in particular.

It would also appear that the silos are being used an excuse to get away with this heavy massing that is so inappropriate for the location; the buildings look like they’ve been shovelled onto the site for maximum floor gain with no concession to the environment. The silos are an inherent part of this industrial landscape – these yokes are not.

This is not elegant, striking juxtaposing – it’s simply brashness, using bloated structures of a botched design by the most boring practice of blah brokers in the country.

I agree STW are truly APPALLING! What always puzzles me is why they are used so much??

that proposal is truly awful.

Slightly off topic…. but does anyone have a picture of what Bolands Bakery on Grand Canal Street used to look like i.e. prior to it becoming the Treasury Building?

i think i shall have to object.

Is one allowed to object on the basis of poor architecture ?

I cannot understand this proposal. This spot has potential to please everybody: the planners the public the developer the architect (and us losers !). What i mean is trade quality for height. I would have no problem with a very tall slender structure , like the one pictured earlier on this thread.

Just don’t get it . looks like a duplo building.

Agreed – such a prominent location and in an area that generally has a good mix/quality in recent years – such an underwhelming design can only have a negative contribution to the basin. Objections all round!

What a disappointment – I live around the corner and had been looking forward to something interesting being built on that site. There’s been a lot of good buildings going up in the area in recent years – Millenium Tower, Gasworks, Hannover Quay. This looks like a 60s office block in Stoke-on-Trent. I’ll be objecting.

Did STW design Hawkins House as well? Maybe they just submitted the wrong drawings?

STW have been in decline for the last 30 years – nothing they have done has even come close to their 1960’s masterworks and their book, whilst beautifully realized, makes depressing reading…

This proposal truly marks a nadir in their design standards. It’s appalling and shameful that anyone thinks that this lump could be a positive addition to the area.

Also worrying is the involvement of the developer behind the project. Surely after the disgrace that is the Capel Building this guy shouldn’t be allowed near an important, high profile development site…

@NeilA wrote:

Slightly off topic…. but does anyone have a picture of what Bolands Bakery on Grand Canal Street used to look like i.e. prior to it becoming the Treasury Building?

I’m not sure which is the bakery as oposed to the mill but here’s an example of some of the bolands buildings

taken from the appropriate section on the wonderful fantasyjackpalance.com/, you could look there. If you still don’t find it let me know the exact site, as I took a few pictures down that area myself a few years back, when digital cameras were a novelty…

@phil wrote:

Lotts, I think this is the building that was being referred to:

http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/dublin/southcity/grand_canal_street/treasury_building.html

You are right about the Fantasyjack webpage. It is great.

Yeah thats the one I was looking for alright…. just curious as to what it looked like before it was renovated – anyone remember?…. I assume it didn’t have any of the merit of the Bolands Mill building or they wouldn’t have been allowed to make changes?…… Or am I being naive :rolleyes:

I don’t think it was an old building that was reclad; the building that was occupied in 1916 was further back on the site. There’s an article about it here: http://www.nli.ie/1916/pdf/7.10.pdf

It does look from the map that the building was where the car park of the Treasury Building is now….. Even more confused than I was before as I’m sure I have read that the Treasury Building was a reclad of the Bolands Bakery.

BTW, I think the original architect of Bolands Bakery was John Stevenson who was also responsible for the recently knocked Wiggins Teape Building on East Wall Rd….

@phil wrote:

It seems to be about the same height as the Millenium Tower across the road. Sean Rothery refers to the waterford granery in Ireland and The New Architecture as being from 1905. It would appear to still be there, but surrounded by some later silos:

http://www.opw.ie/waterfordquays/images/site_mag/img0051_mag.jpg

Just saw this now, phil- sorry for the delay in replying. Thanks for the info- I was remembering (badly) the date from memory.
Off topic, but related to this Waterford building- just read that the north quays of Waterford have finally been sold, against the wishes of the fishermen, so it seems the OPW’s plans for comprehensive redevelopment, first mooted in the late 1990s I think, might now go ahead. Though I don’t know if the OPW is the developer or if it’s been sold to a private interest. The fate of the 1905 building was anything but certain at the time, and I’m not sure how it stands now. Anyone know?

@NeilA wrote:

Slightly off topic…. but does anyone have a picture of what Bolands Bakery on Grand Canal Street used to look like i.e. prior to it becoming the Treasury Building?

Here you are: what was a beautiful, elegant building. I especially love the lettering, and the drama of that curved wall, Corrupted by Treasury Holdings’ approach to “Architecture” i.e. bring in Henry J Lyons and some New york architecture to create some post modern muck, tacking on an “atrium” in an ungainly fashion.

This building should have been protected. 🙁 Oh, and has anyone seen that new treasury building just next to the Silos? It has a ridiculous Gabion wall, of the kind we can look forward too if that extruded cylinder “Convention Centre” ever gets built. 🙁

Plucked from Pat Liddy’s Dublin 🙂 (was going to post them too ;))

Agreed CM00, esp regarding the curved wall – an absolute shame it was removed, including the lettering – and the tinkering with the windows.

Yes the pomo stuff is dated, but it’s a decent quality build and still stands up well on that front at least.

Ha! I’ve been caught!

Ah yeah I mean it is decently built, well finished and still sits reasonably well in its’ surroundings.

I just feel it was a lost opportunity and while the redevelopment fulfills it’s brief, it interrupts the lines of the building forever stunting it, and eroding its’ visual quality. The fact that it is pastiche decoration added to a modern building just seems to make my skin crawl! 😉

😀 No disagreement on that front considering what the building once was – especially irritating in the context of just how few modernist buildings we have from the period. But to be honest, what we now have looks like it was pretty much designed from scratch as a pomo building, as alarming as it may be!

Just looking at those pictures, where is the tall left-hand tower/pavilion depicted in the first image in the second one? Or does the second photo show the building under construction, so it has yet to be built?
Even so, to leave such a major part out of the build to the final stages is rather strange…

there is a really large curved wall still there with a cafe on the corner. I don’t know if it is the same one.
aren’t the first and the last pictures taken from different ends of the building?

I’m surprised at how much of the previous building is left, actually. When was it built?

That second picture is great. You can see the council flats on Maken St. under construction behind the building, and a large pair Georgian houses propped up on the corner of Macken St. and Grand Canal St. which are long demolished (dangerous buildings act I presume; the road was subsequently widened).

The curved wall is still there – just not the lettering

Just In case Anyone’s interested, the Bakery today. Curve, as previously mentioned, still there. In fact I still like this perspective, It hasn’t lost as much as I thought it had. Also, the Irish Nationwide building which is obviously of the same Genetic Family.

Graham, I think it’s that the building is still being built, there appears to be scaffolding on the near side, and the curving wall is absent, You’re right, what an odd way to approach it!

Andrew, the Building dates from 1948.

Conor.

Looks like you had a lovely evening all in all Conor 🙂
Stunning light in your pictures – in Docklands too.

Glad to see the wall is still intact – suffice to say I know Grand Canal St very little!
But isn’t it a shadow of its former self – the lettering used to reinforce the curve of the wall, whilst the bone white capstones added emphasis to its shape, including the detail to the top left: this could all do with cleaning.

According to Liddy, the building was built in 1948 to the designs of S. Stephenson and Son of Belfast, which might help explain the similarity to many such buildings in the UK – the design is rather alien to here. It was constructed by who else other than Crampton.
That late tower is still very odd!

Both the commemorative plaque and street sign look decidedly daft in those positions, and flanked by a delightful array of clutter. What is that sign serving facing the wall?!
Interesting to see the modern lamppost has replaced the earlier one on precisely the same spot 🙂

@phil wrote:

Are you sure about the Macken Street flats in the second image?

On further inspection, no.

Thats old Bolands building is an impressive structure in the B/W photo. I guess we have gone backwards since then. The Scott Tallon Walker proposed scheme is another one of their unimpressive banal offerings. Anyone know anyone who works with this firm of architects. Looks as if it may be a bunch of chimps reusing some old failed proposals from the 1960’s.

Thanks for the pictures of the bakery – my curiousity has been well satisfied. And i agree – it was a shame that the need was felt to “modernize” it….

With regard to the Scott Tallon Walker site, from Sundays’ Tribune.

The South Docklands is due to get yet another boost, if a planning application for the former Boland Mills Site at Grand Canal Dock, Dublin 4, Is accepted. The old mill, which was one of the key garrison sites during the Easter Rising of 1916, Eh no.. that was the “Treasury” Mill building.. is set to be developed by the Boland Mills’ Development Company, a subsidiary of Benoth Propoerties, headed up by Sean Kelly.

The company is seeking permission for a major development designed by Scott Tallon Walker architects. It Will incorporate three new landmark office buidings, along with permission to convert an existing warehouse into a four-star boutique hotel. The architects brief was to create a self-sufficient business-orientated complex which would allow the users to have a “working lifestyle” . To this end, the architects incorporated the hotel, brasserie, cafe, and health spa. In addition, an existing multi-storey warehouse fronting onto grand canal dock, and Nos33 and 34 Barrow street are to be retained and converted into office use.

The new buildings, which range in height from 12 to 16 storeys, will be set in an impressive plaza extending from Barrow Street to the Grand Canal Dock, acting as a landmark 😮 centrepiece to the Grand Canal Harbour area. Designed with the latest technology, the buildings will be energy efficient, have good natural light and openable windows on al floors– Fair play, at least it has that going for it. I mean it’s not all about how “nice” it looks – , a rarity in large office develpments.

The largest of the existing buildings will be the six storey cut stone warehouse, set to be converted into a 150 seater restaurant overlooking the waterfront, to be headed by celebrity chef Gray Rhodes.

The developers expect the restaurant, to be known as ‘Rhodes D4’ to become one of the trendiest spots in which to eat in the south docklands area.

The overall scheme will be called Bolands Mill Wharf and between the ofices, hotel restaurant and spa, around 2,000 poeole will be employed here. Plans for the site have come about as a result of discussions and consultation with both the planners, and local residents over the last 18 months

WOW. 12 to 16 storeys.

That bridge will have to be done up at some stage aswell i’d say, it’s gonna look pretty grotty surrounded by all the new buildings.

@jdivision wrote:

[attach]2488[/attach]

Does anyone know what the address of this is ?

yes there are just too many different applications, none of which appear to come from this year .

is this land part of the docklands development area?

thanks i was meaning to put in an objection . often things look better after looking at them for a little while , but this looks worse.

@phil wrote:

Apologies for long link, but I don’t know how to make it appear as one word with all the other stuff hidden underneath (any suggestions on how to do this would be appreciated). Anyway, I think this is the main application from late July.

First, click on “go advanced
Then type in the word or phrase you want to become a html link – I used “link from phil” below.
Highlight the word or phrase
Click on the little globe looking icon (“Insert Link”) above the text editing box that you are typing in.
When prompted, paste in the URL you are linking to – ://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg etc etc etc.
That’s it

link from phil

.

@a boyle wrote:

i think i shall have to object.

Is one allowed to object on the basis of poor architecture ?

I hope so. I’m almost too blindsided by the ugliness, the sheer ostentatiousness of the design, to even formulate an intelligent objection. What a shame. This is one of my favorite sites in the city.

Out of curiosity, how long does it usually take before a decision is reached on these proposals? And are the concrete silos fated to go either way?

@phil wrote:

It would seem that the days of the curved wall might be numbered. This building is presently subject to a planning application for a fairly large extension. Further information was requested on the 23rd of May, but there doesn’t seem to be any details of that on the file as of yet (at least not on line anyway).

The Irish Georgian Society “aims to encourage an interest in and to promote the conservation of distinguished examples of architecture and the allied arts of all periods in Ireland. These aims are achieved by education and grants, planning participation, membership and fundraising”

I’d heard that John Ronan is a member of the Irish Georgian Society . I don’t know if it’s true but if it is wouldn’t that be ironic

I tell you one thing – I hate walking up Barrow St. these days. Its a horrible, mucky gritty mess of a street with never-ending developments and more to come. If you can get from one end to the other without getting eyes full of dirt then fair play.

BTW…anyone interested in getting invloved in this application. The original application was declare invalid by DCC (the site notice didnt possess enough info) so that means a new application will be lodged. Gove any potential objectors or observers some extra time…

Maybe the invalidation will give them time to cop on to how dire it is, and come back with something a bit more elegant!

The silos only look good because they are silos. It doesn’t follow that you can model apartments on them and it will look good. Form not following function in this case!

[align=center:1e2dwy38]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[/align:1e2dwy38]

BTW, only the structure of the Bolands Bakery was retained, as the Archiseek entry says. The exteriors, including the curved wall, were totally demolished and rebuilt. Some original stonework – plinth courses, door surrounds et. – was reused. Check out the naff brick used, with deliberate ye olde marks.

The curved wall a terrible loss. I vaguely remember it – it was wine coloured and deeply atmospheric. The huge lettering looked amazing. It made you go ‘Wow, look at that’, when passing.

Hope STW are sent back to the drawing board. Although on further thought the fact that the site cost 41M could indicate a tight budget for any practice working on a proposed development.

I imagine you’d pay a lot more for a speculatively assembled site though, so it really can’t be used as an excuse, especially in such a prime area. Were it not for the brownfield or ‘contaminated’ factor, no doubt it’d have cost a heck of a lot more!

That is most interesting about the Boland wall having been entirely rebuilt – it didn’t look anything like the original wall depicted in the pictures but I couldn’t for the life of me imagine why! The pointing and orangey brick used is completely different to the orginal; lacking in character and interest 🙁

for the past five years i’ve been dreaming of renovating bolands mill.

unfortunately i’m not a millionaire yet, so it’s still on ice, but tell me how i can assist the active people on this forum to prevent STW’s proposal!

it reeks of modern capitalist ireland, maximising profit for today with no consideration for tomorrow. maybe future generations would like to see different and unusual buildings instead of all the glass and steel boxes being shoved up around the city these days. bono will get on board.

lets keep the towers- who’s in!

Please for the love of god that this is not built! 😮

This is back in now. Shock – no changes following archiseek condemnation!!

New Ref is: 4616/06. Last day for 3rd party submissions is 20th of Sept.

Another view. It’s very monolithic looking:

Looks terrible.
Half the footprint, twice the height and lose that shit concrete look.

It’s like they’re working from 1950’s blueprints..that’ll be directly opposite Alto Vetro aswell.

Oh sweet jesus thats shite looking. I say we start a petition that it dosent get planning

I heard a report the other day that this planning application has been rejected.

Hurrah! Good news – it was….

Here are the conditions

REFUSE PERMISSION

1. The proposed development would, by virtue of its excessive height, bulk and scale constitute overdevelopment of the site, would be out of scale with the established pattern of development in the area, would constitute a visually obtrusive element in the skyline in this location and would compromise the setting of adjacent protected structures. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the provisions of Paragraph 15.6.0 of the Dublin City Development Plan, would seriously injure the amenities and depreciate the value of property in the vicinity and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
2. The proposed demolition of the stone buildings at the corner of Ringsend Road and Barrow Street and which are located within the curtilage of protected structures would result in a reduction in visual quality of the area and a loss of transitional structures between the large scale stone buildings to the smaller scale structures on Ringsend Road. The proposed demolition would be contrary to Policies H2 and H27 of the Dublin City Development Plan which seek the retention and reuse of building of architectural or aesthetic merit, would seriously injure the amenities and depreciate the value of property in the vicinity and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
3. The proposed works to Blocks B and C both of which are included on the Record of Protected Structures would constitute an excessive level of intervention such as would have a significant negative impact on the character of the protected structure. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy H2 of the Dublin City Development Plan which seeks the protection of the curtilage of protected structures, would seriously injure the amenity of the area and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
4. By virtue of the lack of permeability proposed through the application site, the poor quality and limited civic space and a relationship with both Barrow Street and the Grand canal Dock the proposed development would be detrimental to amenity and the urban design objectives set out in paragraph 3.3.1 of the Dublin City Development Plan. The proposed development would therefore seriously injure the amenity of the area and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
5. The proposed preponderance of office use together with the lack of a significant residential component and a lack of variety in ground floor uses would contravene materially the zoning objective for the site as identified in the Dublin City Development Plan (Objective Z14), ”to seek the social economic and physical development or rejuvenation of an area with mixed use of which residential and Z6 would be the predominant uses’.

Pretty comprehensive I think.

This is the planning file <a href="http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=4616/06&theTabNo=2&backURL=Search%20Criteria%20>%20Bolands Mill Development

Most of those bland high rise blocks of flats from the 60’s that one invariably sees being dynamited on evening news bulletins have more class than that heap to go up on the Boland’s site! 🙁

But no overall comment on “poor quality of design”

It was a terrible proposal on many levels and deserved refusal.

As well as the criticisms made earlier about the poor quality of the main buildings, I’d like to add that, on the strength of this proposal, STW architects don’t know how to treat historic buildings either. The proposals for the protected stone mill buildings were insensitive, to say the least.

For the double-gabled mill building at the corner of the canal-basin and Ringsend Road (‘Block B’), they wanted to demolish its pitched roof and add our old friend, the glass penthouse setback storey – the double gables facing the canal were to be left standing like a Hollywood set with nothing behind them.

For the mill building to the south of that, running along the canal basin (‘Block C’), they wanted to demolish one entire facade (the north facade) and replace it with a glass screen!! This is something you would normally only consider in a protected structure if the fa

Does anybody know what if anything is happening with Bolands Mills?

i think they should keep it, it’s got a kind of gotham city like splendour to it. maybe they should turn it into a modern art installation. but i don’t suppose the plutocrats who run the country would assent to that.

@CC105 wrote:

Does anybody know what if anything is happening with Bolands Mills?

There was this in the paper last May informing that a new plan was ready, but afaik nothing has been lodged yet:

RADICAL NEW DESIGN FOR €125M DOCKLAND SCHEME INCLUDES TALL BUILDINGS

© 2007, 23 May – The Irish Times

The developer is probably awaiting the new Building Heights Strategy for Dublin City due to be published very soon. It will no doubt give clearer guideance as to what can happen on the site

some photos of inside bolands mills http://www.flickr.com/photos/sebastiandooris/sets/72157604413634370/with/2392825289/

czech grain silo http://www.materialicio.us/2007/09/20/converted-grain-silo-tomas-pejpek-and-szymon-rozwalka/#more-63

Any news on boland mills site?? Heard they got ride of s.t.w. boring and dull architecture and are working with new architects. Any pics yet???

if anyone’s interested, here are some pictures taken from inside Bolands Flour Mills:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1soanes/sets/72157604250729415/

good photos – though (as mentioned earlier in this thread) Dev didn’t occupy this mill – it was the other Bolands Mill.

how did you get access btw? Or am I better off not asking – the place looks fairly dangerous…

@shweeney wrote:

good photos – though (as mentioned earlier in this thread) Dev didn’t occupy this mill – it was the other Bolands Mill.

how did you get access btw? Or am I better off not asking – the place looks fairly dangerous…

Thanks…yeah i didn’t realise that De Valera didn’t occupy this mill, the mill seem to be most famous for the fact that most people think he did occupy it, its hard to find out the correct information about the mills on the internet…

Getting into the place was easy, just had to climb over a low wall. It was quite dangerous however, on many of the floors a lot of the floorboards are unsafe to walk on…. well worth a visit though, and the view from the roof is simply amazing!

Stunning photographs, 1soanes. Beautiful light expertly taken advantage of and extraordinary subjects. Thanks for sharing them.

Good day to you all … I’m presently putting together a short history of the Docklands … I’m uploading new information all the time but always interested in feedback … there’s a good chunk on Bolands here too … the relevant page is http://www.turtlebunbury.com/publish…nds_index.html … oh yes, anyone with any suitable photos, I’m game on …
Best for now, Turtle

The link doesn’t seem to be working, and I couldn’t find one on your homepage either. Any chance you could re-post it?

I found it:

http://www.turtlebunbury.com/published/published_books/docklands/pub_books_docklands_index.html

So the DDDA has realised all of a sudden that there’s something called ‘heritage’ down Docklands way? How convenient that it has promoted or permitted the relatively comprehensive erasure of most of that history before the belated effort to acknowledge it. So much easier to commission a book on the stuff once it’s gone than to try to keep it while it’s still around, eh?

It’s not as if the heritage value of the area hadn’t been documented- the School of Architecture in UCD carried out a full survey of the area, published in 1996, on behalf of the CHDDA, called Inventory of the Architectural and Industrial Archaeological Heritage.

That survey now reads like a new chapter of Lost Dublin, but one that was written whilst the buildings were still standing. What an odd sensation- to have your funeral before you’ve died.

This isn’t a dig at your project, Turtle, it’s a dig at the DDDA for its utterly shameful approach to the assessment, evaluation and protection of the cultural heritage of the area of the city for which it has been responsible (in one form or another) for over 15 years.

I understand your point. And I hope I can help rectify things with the book. Your comments on any specific stories would be welcome. Cheerio for now, Turtle

You could just put my previous post in as your preface. 😉

For balance, like.

Sorry to resurrect this thread in a Lazarus fashion, but does anyone know what’s going on at the moment? There appears to be some small-scale construction work happening on the site.

If aqua vetro went ahead at this stage, I’d be very impressed. That is what’s replacing most of the Bowland’s mill site, right?

Yes, if Aqua Vetro was to go ahead it would be great. It would complement its siblings Monte and Alto very well. Treasury Holdings appear to be going ahead with the Spring Cross scheme over in Ballymun given that they’ve signed up Vue to open a cinema there. If they’re developing Spring Cross, why wouldn’t they develop Aqua Vetro at the same time?

hat’s off to treasury holdings. Brave, and all their projects are very good quality.

@pdosullivan wrote:

Sorry to resurrect this thread in a Lazarus fashion, but does anyone know what’s going on at the moment? There appears to be some small-scale construction work happening on the site.

maybe it’s John Ronan personally taking the top of a few pile caps to prove the loss of his dolce vita

The big crane that was working on the Montevetro site was taken down over the weekend too, they’re fairly advanced with that project. Obviously the fitting out has yet to start in earnest (and they’re going to do it on a rolling basis as it’s rented out I understand) but to echo one of the above comments, fair dues to Treasury for having such confidence.

@pdosullivan wrote:

The big crane that was working on the Montevetro site was taken down over the weekend too, they’re fairly advanced with that project. Obviously the fitting out has yet to start in earnest (and they’re going to do it on a rolling basis as it’s rented out I understand) but to echo one of the above comments, fair dues to Treasury for having such confidence.

Yes, it’ll be a great, high-quality, landmark office building with excellent transport links. I hope Google moves into it from over the road and Facebook, LinkedIn etc. move into Google’s old place.

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

Yes, it’ll be a great, high-quality, landmark office building with excellent transport links. I hope Google moves into it from over the road and Facebook, LinkedIn etc. move into Google’s old place.

Facebook have more than enough space where they are at the moment, and not sure about LinkedIn.
I have heard other people suggest a Google move to Montevetro though, something about wanting to bring everything under one roof while simultaneously getting away from some crappy contract terms where they are?

They are only onerous terms if you are the tenant, Nama (I presume their existing building was part of the Liam Carroll tranche transferred) would I doubt let them off the hook, I wouldn’t into this market. Albeit that the lack of supply for new grade A space coming on line will bring the market back into equilibrium within a few years.

That said their existing lease was signed for occupation in 2005 and you would anticipate a 15 year lease with a break on 10 years and with Montevetro likely to complete some time in 2011 it would make sense for them to take certain space in Montevetro with an option to acquire more at a future date; which is what they did at the gasworks in 2005.

They’ve been fairly emphatic they’re not interested. Google has E100m to spend on a HQ, it would prefer to get one built to spec because they think the Carroll building thye’re in is shit. If I was them I’d take the Liam Carroll one on the south docks where the basement’s already in but planning expired. That way they could start going up as quickly as they want