New street and redevelopment for Dublin ?
- This topic has 172 replies, 49 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Something is deeply wrong in Dublin City Council planning department. Scheme after scheme after scheme – I could list dozens – that it puts through is being substantially changed or refused outright when it goes to An Bord Pleanala.
@Devin wrote:
Something is deeply wrong in Dublin City Council planning department. Scheme after scheme after scheme – I could list dozens – that it puts through is being substantially changed or refused outright when it goes to An Bord Pleanala.
Some thing is deeply wrong with ABP also – what is their problem with this development. Fair enough on the car spaces but the rest – o dear, dispair is all that comes to mind—16 stories inside an entire city block !!
No vision in ABP either – as said before poor planners in a shockingly poor system. Protection of the city centre skyline or lack of at 7 stories is ridiculous when the the sprawl is approaching 30 miles out. Most worrying is that the board want the project scaled back – Dublin is an international city not some country town. There is an entire generation growing up who think the shopping area of dublin begins and stops at Dundrum. There is a real risk that the city centre could end up dying a slow death like Dun Laoghaire town if current restrictive planning is not reconsidered.If the press is correct there are numerous large retailers waiting to locate in the city but cannot find large enough floor plates.A bit disappointing – was looking forward to seeing this area regenerated. Pity the board couldn’t have knocked a couple of floors off the tower, reduced the car spaces and went with the rest.
What did the board make of the plans to knock and rebuild half of the original Arnott’s facade?
I guess given the board’s obvious conservatism it’s clear what the decision will be on Dunne’s Ballsbridge 18 storey planning permission – probably the neighbouring vetinary college site too.
@CC105 wrote:
Protection of the city centre skyline or lack of at 7 stories is ridiculous when the the sprawl is approaching 30 miles out.
Oh CRINGE:o, I thought this was cleared up by now!! The reason we have sprawl is because of 2-storey semi-d houses with front and back gardens extending for 30 or 50 miles, not because of heights in the city centre. The city centre is dense and compact at 7 storeys, at 4 storeys or at 3 storeys.
@JoePublic wrote:
I guess given the board’s obvious conservatism it’s clear what the decision will be on Dunne’s Ballsbridge 18 storey planning permission – probably the neighbouring vetinary college site too.
This part of the city centre is not really suited to a 16 storey building (but the view looked quite good coming over the Ha’penny bridge) and im surprised that there wasnt the usual fuss made around these pages, but i dont think Ballsbridge can really compare
@CC105 wrote:
No vision in ABP either – as said before poor planners in a shockingly poor system.
Devin pulled you up on your other incorrect generalisation, but this one shouldn’t go unchallenged either. What cases are you referring to here? What planners? Why ‘shockingly’ poor?
You may be right, but groundless sweeping statements like this do your case no favours.
(I get touchy at slurs on my profession. What can I say? I’m human.)
Maybe I was a bit too general, the shocking system I am referring to is the fact that DCC and ABP can have such different views on the development of the city and the fact that every major planning decision has to go through 2 hurdles which not always but regularly have different outcomes. These bodies need to start talking to each other.
Poor planners -no names here – perhaps it is not their fault but somebody is responsible for the fact that Dublin stretches out for mile after mile. Maybe the brown envelope people.
Devin – What ever about building heights nobody could say Dublin City is dense.
Oh groan why do you come back on something that was already covered in the last post. YES Dublin city is dense. 3 or 4 or 5 storey buildings joined to form terraces forming streets as we have in Dublin is dense. Dublin city within the canals is dense.
The issue here in relation to this Arnotts scheme is that Dublin City Council is not upholding its own Development Plan – An Bord Pleanala is. The inner city is protected from high buildings; the Development Plan says so. But time after time DCC have granted permission for high buildings which are subsequently thrown out by ABP for not complying with the Development Plan. More on that here: http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/property/2007/1025/1193238272990.html
In regard to the scaling back of the scheme, CC105 or JoePublic have you seen what was originally proposed and what it has been scaled back to? The problem was that the site was being HKR-ifed; given a gargantuan Smithfield-Market-style scheme bearing no relation to the scale of the surrounding area. What ABP have stipulated it be scaled back to remains a very substantial scheme.
Thought this might interest people
http://www.tribune.ie/business/news/article/2008/jul/13/council-to-use-cpos-to-help-arnotts-with-750m-henr/
Council to use CPOs to help Arnotts with ¤750m Henry Street plan
Neil CallananDublin City Council (DCC) is planning to use compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) to forcibly acquire properties to facilitate the development of the Northern Quarter retail scheme planned by Arnotts for Henry Street in Dublin city centre.
The council said its is proposing to initiate a CPO to allow Arnotts acquire “some properties not yet acquired by the developer, the perfection of title where required and the extinguishment of rights of way over certain laneways/ roadway. The CPO will have regard to the final decision on the planning application. All costs incurred by DCC will be underwritten by the developer.”
The €750m Northern Quarter plan is currently before An Bord Pleanála, which has told Arnotts to lower the heights of many of the buildings proposed and halve the number of proposed car spaces.
Arnotts had originally proposed developing a new department store, 47 shops, 14 cafes, restaurants and bars, around 175 apartments and a 149-bedroom four-star hotel on the 5.5-acre site it has assembled by buying surrounding properties. It has also bought properties on nearby Liffey Street, including the K2 bar, for about €10m.
Arnotts had planned to relocate to the former Debenhams unit in Jervis Street shopping centre during the redevelopment but it is now looking at moving to another location.
The decision to use a CPO for Northern Quarter will revive memories of the council’s decision to CPO the nearby Carlton cinema and adjoining sites which held up development of the area for seven years.
Developer Joe O’Reilly has since bought the site and a large number of surrounding properties and is planning a major rival development to Northern Quarter on the site.
Last week he secured planning permission for the part of that €1.25bn redevelopment when he was granted plan*ning permission to demolish the Royal Dublin Hotel, which he bought for €30m.
He will now be able to develop more than 1,100sq m of shops, a gallery and more than 2,500sq m of office space. His scheme, currently dubbed Dublin Central, will be anchored by Dublin department store John Lewis
When does construction start on the site? I read somewhere that September was the start date but that’s probably different now because of incompitant staff at pleanala
Ha ha ha: “incompitant” [sic].
Do you have a clue what you’re talking about? What incompEtEnce are you referring to? Care to back up the accusation? I hear CC105 is looking for a new best friend…
I’ll put this as simply as possible: the case has not yet been decided. ‘Kay? Do your bloody homework. The case reference is 224640. Put it into the ‘Search’ box on http://www.pleanala.ie if you want the latest news.
I am of course refering to the fact that a decision was due a long time ago but the board said they needed more time because of all the paper work and as a result, the decision was delayed.
‘of course’? It wasn’t apparent to me. Say what you mean. ‘Incompetence’ is a very serious accusation.
a decision was due a long time ago but the board said they needed more time because of all the paper work and as a result, the decision was delayed.
Seems like the essence of competence to me. What do you want? A rushed judgement?
The problem with the Board is not incompetence, its capacity. There simply arent enough members to deal with the number of appeals within the specified period so the decsions get deferred.
I understood the Board had sought a redesign of significant elements of this scheme,
Took a stroll around the new library area out in tallaght yesterday afternoon. Very impressive indeed.
ABP has given the green light: http://www.rte.ie/business/2008/0728/arnotts.html
From Breaking News section of The Irish Times:
Last Updated: Monday, July 28, 2008, 15:16
Arnotts gets go-ahead for ‘Northern Quarter’
JASON MICHAELAn Bord Pleanála has today given the go-ahead for a major redevelopment by Arnotts in Dublin city centre.
The company is planning a €750 million redevelopment of a 5.5-acre block bordered by Henry Street, Middle Abbey Street, Liffey Street and O’Connell Street into a new shopping, entertainment and residential zone, called “Northern Quarter”.
An Bord Pleanála gave the green light subject to 26 conditions, including the preservation of several protected buildings in the area.
An Post, An Taisce and the Rail Procurement Agency were among the parties that had appealed planning permission for the scheme, which was granted by Dublin City Council last summer.
Among the conditions laid down, an Bord Pleanála has ruled that the developer has to provide for 24-hour public access to all of the proposed new public streets and spaces, including Abbey Square.
The board also said there must also be a year-round festival ticket office at ground-floor level, appropriate childcare facilities, and an archaeological appraisal of the site.
An independent road safety audit must be done, and a parking-management plan prepared and agreed with the planning authority, the board stipulated.
Details of shopfront design – including any associated signage, lettering, lighting or security screens – is subject to a further application for planning permission.
An Arnotts spokesman said: “We are delighted with the news. It gives certainty to the very ambitious Northern Quarter project. We will work with the city council to deal with the various conditions An Bord Pleanála has made.”
The retailer refused to comment on a previous announcement that 580 of its 950 staff will be let go when the store moves temporarily to Jervis Street Shopping Centre, which is one-third the size of Henry Street site.
Boyers on North Earl Street will also be converted to an Arnotts furniture and home store.
“The news has come a bit faster than expected, so Arnotts will now sit down to assess the detail of what will happen next,” the spokesman added. “Over the next few weeks, management will also work to bring clarity to the workers.”
Linda Tanham, an official with trade union Mandate, which represents most Arnotts’ workers, said staff are still unsure as to what will happen next. “We are expecting to meet with management this week to get an update on a timescale for trading and intended job losses,” she added.
When completed, the Northern Quarter – bordered by the Middle Abbey Street, Henry Street, and Liffey Street – is expected to employ over 5,000 people, with one-fifth of those working in the new Arnotts store.
It is envisaged one of the main features will be the re-creation of Prince’s Street as an urban street and pedestrian thoroughfare with a new public square at its centre.
Gina Quin, chief executive of Dublin Chamber of Commerce, said the massive redevelopment will reinvigorate the heart of Dublin city centre.
“Not only will it have a significant impact on the city’s retail variety and range of offerings, but this development will also help to transform the Henry Street area into a vibrant residential, leisure and entertainment hub,” she said.
“The Northern Quarter will offer residents, shoppers and tourists a wide range of activities in the evenings and will play an important part in the transformation of Dublin’s city centre into that of a world class city with a quality of life that is second to none.”
The Construction Industry Federation said the scheme will make a huge contribution to the sector.
“There are a number of large scale projects in the pipeline or which have already begun and the Arnotts redevelopment is a huge construction opportunity, particularly for those in commercial construction,” a said spokesman.
In April, an Bord Pleanála had rejected several aspects of the development, which is planned for the site of the department store in Dublin – including a proposed 16-storey tower.
The board told Arnotts to cut the height of the tower by nine storeys and ensure that no other building in the development was higher than seven.
In its letter to Arnotts, the board said then the development would be “unduly obtrusive on the skyline” and would “seriously detract from the balance and architectural coherence of these streets”.
Additional reporting PA
Where did you hear that in the first place cgcsb?
This was a well considered case by the Board. They turned what was in essence a good urban-minded scheme but very much over scaled, into a palatable form that would sit comfortably with the wider environment of the north inner city.
Chief amongst the alterations was a reduction in height across the board, most noticeable on Liffey Street and Middle Abbey Street – the former of which was nothing short of a towering cliff face as originally proposed. The facade treatment along here, which is so dependent on the limestone cladding used, appears very elegant in renderings, as do the shop units at ground level. The uppermost floors of the building occupying the 1960s curtain wall site on Henry Street are to be lopped off and the remainder pulled back to protect the view from O’Connell Street.
The 16 storey tower at the Liffey Street-Middle Abbey Street junction has been completely removed, reduced down to the seven storey height of adjacent buildings. To be honest I think this came as something of a surprise to everyone – not even a nine or ten storey punctuation was permitted here. However this is a highly constrained corner – not a location that heralds or warrants a signature building. The corner building is to be clad in copper.
Penneys has mercifully been ditched outright, with the Board refusing it at an early stage. Their response to the proposal, and by association DCC’s decision was:
“The Board considers that the proposed modifications to the existing retail premises are unsatisfactory. The proposed addition of two floor levels of accommodation (stock room and administration offices) and the introduction of the large, glazed, projecting screens onto the existing streetfront facades would seriously detract from the civic design character of the eastern end of Middle Abbey Street and O’Connell Street generally, but with particular reference to the GPO building. Accordingly, and having regard to the overriding need to protect the architectural heritage value of this nationally important streetscape, the Board concluded that this part of the overall redevelopment (Block D) would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.”
So a pretty emphatic rejection. Penneys did not resubmit revised proposals other than a minor single storey addition towards the centre of the site. Clearly their involvement was driven by garnering maximum street impact and nothing in the way civic improvement. Croydon on O’Connell Street has thankfully been avoided.
The 1890s Arnotts building itself is going to be altered as proposed, with the western wing dismantled and re-erected as a facade on the new Prince’s Street. The balustrade as removed in the 1940s is to be reinstated as a condition, as is the concealed limestone entrance arch to be conserved and exposed.
The central Abbey Square is to be substantially increased in size, with the building line on the Abbey Street side pulled back by a considerable ten metres to enlarge the square. Also Arnotts which moves entirely to a new purpose-built department store building at the western Liffey Street-Middle Abbey Street corner of the site is to have its entrance forecourt substantially enlarged.
The apartments of the uppermost floors across the board are of an extremely high standard and will without question set a new benchmark for urban living in this city. Beautifully arranged roof gardens and terraces create nothing short of a garden suburb floating above this development.
Some minor modifications to glazing patterns and solid-to-void ratios were also made in respect of the Arnotts facade within Abbey Square. The mini-tower within this square has also been lopped in height.
From what I have seen of the two proposals, I find the Arnotts scheme head and shoulders above the Carlton development.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
