Carlisle Pier

Originally posted by pragmatist
Richard Boy Band

is that he’s real name?????

Originally posted by pragmatist
Socialist/Trotsky-ist workers party

i will venture a guess that ur not a fan of that particular political viewpoint.

while not in agreement with his viewpoint at all, and not sure what he is actually trying to achieve, if he would agrue that it’s public property and therefore shouldn’t have private dwellings ( another thing i’m not too sure on is wether it’ll be sold to the developer or a construction company build it for the co.co) on it then he may have a valid arguement. not enough of one for him to actually win but still enough for people to take note and listen. voice of a minority and all that.
As an Architect and a believer that we should develop our little nation so it looks as if we are in the 21st century and not stuck back in the 18th, he needs a good kick in the arse and a short curt f**k off and take ur nonsense somewhere else but unfortunately that won’t happen. bloody democracy!:D

Fin, I am also a little confused about the whole public/private property issue in this example. The pier is controlled by the Dun Laoghaire Harbour Company. It is a statuatory company set up on 1997 to run the harbour. As far as I know the Harbour Company will still control the space after it is constructed upon. Do you think that makes it any clearer?

With regards to the whole idea of it being open to the public, I don’t accept the ‘its not open to the public at the moment, so therefore a mainly capital driven development is what is needed’ argument. If the space is as important as it is being promoted to be – in terms of the ‘icon’ or ‘landmark’ building of international merit status – then when it is developed it should be primarily a public facility/amenity, that people will really have a reason to come to Dun Laoghaire for.

Thanks

Phil

that’s where he has the argument alright. although there is a point even if it was private, the fact that it is a icon building would enhance the space around and therefore benefit the public. but we could debate this all day.
primarily a public space- a museum on ground floor would be termed public…

and the ownership question is still out there. harbour company…is this a public body run by the l.a. or is it semi-private???

Fin, here is how they define the status of the company on their webpage: http://www.dlharbour.ie/content/company/overview.php

from the Dun Laoghaire harbour company web page
“Capital:
IR£11million Company status: Semi-State (03 March 1997)

State-sponsored bodies are defined as autonomous public bodies, other than universities; they are neither temporary in character nor purely advisory in function; most of their staff come from outside the civil service. However, the government or ministers in the government appoint directors or council members to their boards or councils.

Some state-sponsored bodies are statutory corporations. A corporation set up by a statute derives its authority directly from the statute and does not, therefore, require to be incorporated as a company under the Companies Act.

CORPORATE OBJECTIVES
To enhance Dun Laoghaire’s attractiveness as a gateway for tourists to Ireland by offering state of the art berthing and terminal facilities to ferry operators at Dun Laoghaire Harbour.

To maintain and enhance the recreational and amenity value of the Harbour in the interest of all of its stakeholders.

To promote investment in the Harbour.

To generate sufficient cash flow from commercial operations to provide for the long term maintenance of the Harbour and meet the dividend targets of the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources.

In order to carry out these objectives, the Company aims at all times, to be fair and equitable in its dealings with employees, suppliers and the local community. In addition it aims to provide and efficient and cost effective service to its customers.”

fair enough. private in everything but name… still makes no odds really. he’s argument is really against this company taking control of public lands and building on them when they belong to the state who in turn gave them to the management company.

i do feel however that some of the profit could be used on the other public spaces in the town as it really is profit from the sale of these lands. wouldn’t agree with it going to the coffers of the government as it affects the town citizens and should be all be used in the town and not spread around the country as it most doubtably would be. .

Not too sure what any profits will be used for. They are mainly to be used for the upkeep of the harbour as far as I know.

yeah! probably but would be nice to see them pump some money into a public square or new playground or something like that. then the public will see some resource out of what ultimately is development on public lands

There was an article in one of the papers just before the competition details were released detailing the repairs which were needed to be done to the Piers and how much it would cost (13 Million as far as I remember).

The civic plaza beside the ferry terminal is not a bad spot. There is a fruit and veg market there once a week at the moment, and it is the venue for bands during the summer festival.

http://www.archeire.com/buildings_ireland/dublin/dunlaoghaire/dunlaoghaire_ferry_terminal.html

i would hope their profits would be more than 13 mil. but civic plaza would do the trick and stop all arguments about the development. but they need to announce it.

Not too sure where your chain of thought is going here Fin? The civic plaza is well known about.

can it be improved ? maybe a pavillion for a band that sort of thing

I suppose it could be. There was a sort of canopy which was in the seaward corner of it, but it got blown apart by the wind.

As part of the winning Henegan.Peng submission it is proposed to put a band stand floating off the end of the peir, I assume there will be a shift of these sort of activities from this plaza to the end of the pier.

hmmmm. shame about it being moved but at least they were thinking of something. well done h-p.

Does anyone know if Henegan.Peng discussed their Carlisle Pier project at the RIAS Convention?

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?threadid=3039

All true Pragmatist, but the last PPP in Dun Laoghaire was the Pavillion, which, as I think I have said on this same site before, has been an economic success, and has rejuvenated that area of the seafront, but is not exactly the most public of facilities.

I don’t understand the argument.

Carlilie Pier was never public property – when the terminal was open you couldn’t just wander into it unless you had a ticket for the boat. Since the terminal closed you cannot wander into a decaying shed.

Just what sort of a public amenity is/was it?

Originally posted by pragmatist
Phil,

A few days ago I spent a very pleasant hour and a half having Sunday lunch at the pavilion. I would say there were about 200 other members of the “public” enjoying the fine weather at the cafes, restaurants and bar along its lenght. There were no barriers to access and the ‘public’ who werent eating or drinking were strolling happily by with prams or pets… I didnt sense any undercurrent of resentment or anti-privatisation angst and nor would I expect to.

Are you saying that the Pavilion development is some sort of capitalist trojan horse which has failed the “public amenity” test because commerce takes place on it to the exclusion of the masses? If so then you might as well argue that South Anne Street has failed the public because you have to buy a sandwich in Cafe Java before they let you sit down !!!!

If every site is to be turned into a gallery/museum/library/public open space etc then we will all become very bored indeed visiting one dimensional attractions. There is only so much culture that the “public” can handle – we all need a little retail and leisure from time to time…. !

What the current proposal for the Carlisle Pier offers is a diversity of experience, a balance of uses, and an invite to the public to explore the space. What the Carlisle Pier anti-privatisation lobby fail to understand is that a fixation on purely ‘public’ utilisation of available space does not make for very good Public Space’s……..

Pragmatist,
I do not object to any of what you are saying I do object to. What I do object to is the fact that the Pavillion was built on a public park. At least 60% of it is now occupied by private use functions. There is not one public bench within the whole complex. The Metals on to which it fronts is gradually being dominated by the restaurant furniture, and is becoming increasingly difficult to walk past. You simply cannot compare South Anne Street to the Pavillion Complex. South Anne Street is a commercial shopping street. The pavillion was meant to give something back to the public. The problem is that we have become so used to this that we now accept it as the norm. I fully agree that a certain amount of commercial activity is needed to make a place lively. I recently walked down the main shopping street in Plymouth during the evening and only passed about 3 people. There were no restaurants etc. open and therefore no activity. What makes a good public space is a mixture of uses, as you also agree. That is something which to my mind the Pavillion does not offer.

I remember the Pavilion gardens before the new complex was built, it was solely used by junkies, dealers, winos and pot smokers. There is now a theatre and restaurants, are these not for the public ?

Shaun, As I have stated before, I am not against its development. I am against its complete over commercialisation. Parks such as that one can simply be opened up by removing barriers and allowing people to move more freely into them. That park was surrounded by walls and railings on all sides. It could have been improved by adding public facilities alone (such as the Theatre and the restaurants you mentioned). There was no neccessity to take up most of its mass with Apartments.

Can’t agree with you there Phil, the appartments are top-notch, among the best in Dublin. There are enough parks in DL, and Morans park is right beside the Pavilion, and a nice park it is too.
Plus you have the piers which are also public places and all the seafront.

Shaun, I am not arguing about the quality of the apartments in the Pavillion. Yes, they are quite nice indeed. I still do not think it was right for a public park to be given to developers in exchange for public facilities which are 100% commercial in their nature. I am not arguing that everything should be like the piers, and only for use by a non-paying public. I am arguing for a balance within developments like these. Incidently, I really like Moran Park. I would walk through it quite alot. However, it is has turned into the exact sort of place associated with the activities that you felt warented the Pavillion Gardens to be converted into what they are today. Tou might be interested to know that it is planned within the 2004-2010 development plan to build a public library within Moran Park. It is an interesting plan. I personally am in two minds about it at the moment, but it could really open up the use of Moran Park in comparison to what it is at present.

Thanks

Phil

does anyone know did the great campaigner Boyd Barrett get elected to the Council?

not elected but a suprisingly strong 1420 fp votes.

Phil, yes I know that the drunks and junkies now habitate in Morans park, damn shame that, but they have been there for the last 25 years also, fine park, not your typical Irish park at all, even the statue of JC is magnificent, there’s nothing like it in Ireland.

A new public library sounds like a great idea, an opportunity to build something interesting and a also to get more people down into that general area.

Shaun, it is a great park. It is hard to know how to alter it so that it becomes more accessable without in some way altering its unique character. Even those concrete shelters beside the bowling green are quite cool.

The Libeskind design for the Carlisle proposed a version of the proposed library with a walkway between the park and their development.

The below document is quite interesting for anyone still interested in this development.

http://www.dlharbour.ie/files/downloads/project_carlisle_pier_redevelopment.pdf

That is a very interesting survey result and totally at odds with the selection decision, it would appear that the project selected reflected ‘The line of least resistance entry’ as if it were a damage limitation exercise as opposed to an architectural competition seeking excellence. The rating of importance given to ‘integration with Dun Laoghaire’ is not really surprising and that is unfortunate, one wonders how many people will reconsider the project if it goes ahead.

It was my favourite of the four from the renderings shown in your link but some of the other renderings around didn’t flatter it quite as much. Is there any news on the status of the project?

TP: I reckon that the Harbour Company are biding their time until the issues relating to the Baths subside for a while. I have also heard that it might not go ahead at all, but that was pure speculation and rumour, so don’t take it as my opinion. Just passing on what I had heard. The other parcel of land that was owned by the Harbour Company is being primed for development at the moment. This is the area to the west of the Town Hall where the Harbour Cottages were (until a few days ago that is). There is to be a mixed use scheme of offices and apartments along with a few retail outlets and a new public plaza. Incidently, the site to the south (which is presently occupied by the ‘Old School House’) has recently gone in for planning. Not sure on the details, but will have a look soon and fill you in. Originally a new public walkway was meant to link this site and the site of the Harbour Cottages together to give a new route up to the town (It is in the lates development plan). However, I am not sure if it has remained like that.

The town hall scheme looks like it is called ‘Crofton Court’ and the scheme is being marketed through Lisney, there are images in the office section accessed through the Dublin Office section of their site. (The web pages only identify the front page) 😮

The baths could be the death of the harbour project; there is some justification for the Hennigan Peng scheme in that the architecture is of a high standard, well at least to my eye, but the baths project has no where near the same level of design quality. I’d actually say that STW could design a more imaginative scheme. 🙁

“The Finger”?

“The Finger”?

Now that you say it, that building could actually be read as giving ‘the finger’ to the rest of the town (in that sort of Charles Jencks metaphor way :p )! Similar to the way the ‘Gateway’ sculpture is said to be giving the two fingers to the County Council offices.

Bad news:

“The Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company is to re-examine proposals for the redevelopment of the Carlisle Pier after it decided this afternoon to withdraw preferred bidder status for the pier’s redevelopment from the Urban Capital consortium.”

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0920/dunlaoghaire.html

More interesting news than bad news, I’d have said. Does this mean that the whole entry will be reevaluated? i.e. afaik the Urban Capital group included the heneghan.peng scheme rather than being simply an independent developer. Never liked the heneghan.peng scheme in the first place, so anything that might lead to a reconsideration is welcome.

Phil – Crofton Court was I think built in 1979 and Marine Court built about 1978.
I’m not an architect, just an ordinary bogman. Even though I am in favour of high rise buildings and lived/worked in them for years, I hate theCarlisle proposal but not as much as the DL Baths design. Both planned buildings are totally out of harmony with the local built and natural environment. The Regency & Victorian facades along the seafront are preserved, I’ve heard owners are not allowed off-street car parking… an overpowering high rise that is against their wishes certainly would be giving the finger to them! My bet is that Carlisle will be delayed indefinitely and the Baths will not go ahead as the CoCo is rapidly getting cold feet. Too many powerful people live in the area and/or are members of the yacht clubs that will be dwarfed. It’s a pity the shinners are getting in on the act, it will put off too many people who would support the protests.
Anyone remember the Depot? and Man-of-War steps?

Why is it that we have to play around with everything in this country? Look at the U2 Tower for example. Why not build the winning entry instead of making things difficult? It really gets to me that. As a result we will end up with another bland and boring project. They are acting like babies.

Paul-
In this case, it seems that it is the fault of Urban Capital rather than the client. If anything, this decision is designed to expedite a result rather than further postpone one. From the little I have gleaned from media reports, it would seem that DLHC might be happy to proceed with the ‘victorious’ scheme using different project managers. But as I say, it’s from the media that I have got my info, so there could be ulterior motives that are bubbling below the surface- who knows.

something striking in that area would look well. i love the sydney opera house. i hope they build something like that in the end.