Point Village

http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2004/000277.html

There are other stories in the archives

Here’s the section 25 relating to the area

What about point village?

I really wish a cluster of high rises could spring up here – like a lot of people.

What I can’t get over – and I’m sure this is a well worn and age old rant – is that its obviously meant to be a ‘landmark’ building – but its only 100metres tall.

I can just see it: headline news on CNN ‘100 metre, yes that’s right 100 metre, building planned for Dublin’. Who do they think will go ‘wow’ outside a few initial irish reactions ?

US tourists will see it as something of the suburbs and Europeans will go ‘how provincial’ – it could be something in bloody Croydon to our friends to the east.

Why is an Irish landmark a scaled down landmark?
I don’t believe in ‘context’ because we need to stand out globally.

I know tall does not equal good – but in the ‘popular imagination’ I believe it does.

Why cant it be the best city quarter in the world? Not just ‘ok’. If you start by aiming high you’re on the right track.

The best stuff is the best stuff. Mediocrity is mediocrity

As regards height restrictions:

Why is very tall inappropriate for Dublin? What makes sky more appealling? What does inappropriate for an area mean when its every area? Why must people live in meath when high rise might just solve some of the endless suburban sprawl?

The scaling down of the scotch hall building by one floor just shows how ridiculous it gets.

Rant ends.

ps this is a great site.

and by ‘why must people live in Meath’ I am of course referring to people who commute to Dublin – nothing wrong with Meath for Meath’s sake! – but Meath towns as Dublin suburbs is scary.

wow, couldnt agree more, there is no good reason for resisting high rise yet there are countless reasons for embracing it. dublin is extremely backward when it comes to building tall, the mentality is crap! ideas like everywhere is the wrong area and one more floor is the destruction of our skyline are really hindering progress, this is a laughable example of a “21st century city”

I am curious if this ‘lust’ for highrise is blinding many persons to the quality of design being imposed by these projects. So far, few high-rises proposed in the recent flurry across Ireland, have satisfied what I (personally) would constitute as a genuinely landmark character (I don’t mean auctioneer landmark, I mean real landmark). Perhaps it draws back to the age old debate of what constitutes ‘landmark’. I have a strong affinity for Dublin, but I don’t think it’s approach to high-rise has been entirely productive. In my opinion, one of the best ‘landmark’ projects proposed for Dublin has actually been low-rise – the Sandyford scheme proposed by Landmark Developments and designed by the Traynor O’Toole Partnership. Of the highrise, I actually like the Alburn proposal for Sandyford, but I’m not so confident of its location. Dublin is riddled with unique and interesting structures – modern and old. In embracing high-rise, I think the city stands to benefit from high-rise development in a centralised context in areas which can adequately accommodate them – my preference? The docklands. However I do not oppose genuine positive projects in other areas, including suburban. After all, a strong case should be made for quality of design over height – where a design produces greater positivity. So far, Treasury Holdings’ high-rise proposals have been far from landmark, I am especially referring to the 32-storeu Barrow Street proposal which screams Benidorm’s worst. The Point Village proposal is nothing special and my opinion is known on Heuston Gate. The U2 Tower remains the best high-rise proposal for the docklands – it is a distinctive building with a character all of it’s own, that happens to be both aesthetically pleasing and architectural innovative. It’s a building I believe Dublin will grow proud of in years to come. But why can’t the city’s other projects strive to achieve the same quality? I agree a city blanketed with landmark high-rises detracts from the uniqueness of inidvidual efforts – but that doesn’t mean the city should suffer at the hands of poor design.

It is an exciting time – but it will be more exciting to see what positive accomplishments and lasting design contributions can be forged from these efforts. I believe and support high-rise steps in Ireland – God knows some of our urban areas could do with some skyline distinction – but in carefully assessed moves. Some urban areas seem suited to taller structures like the Dublin and Cork docklands and Limerick’s waterfront, in my own opinion – I think Galway’s character would be lost with some high-rise (but that’s just a personal thing and not a knock by any stretch of the imagination – design pending). It’s good to see a little adventure in Irish skylines – but some attitudes remind me of the little kid who was given the key to the sweet shop, overjoyed at the prospect of all those sweets, he stuffed his face with every possible kind and swallowed them without even stopping to taste them. That evening he lay sick in his bed – while his little brother sat down by the fire with a bag of his own sweets and took the time to enjoy each one individually.

Rjajc and ihateawake, I totally agree with you both. People complain about the least little thing these days. There are far more important things in life to worry about than bricks and mortar! All you have to do is watch the news to see that.

@ihateawake wrote:

. dublin is extremely backward when it comes to building tall, the mentality is crap! ideas like everywhere is the wrong area

That is very good description of planned locations for tall buildings over the past 30 years in Dublin. The number of inappropriately sited or poorly designed tall buildings. I very much doubt that there would be too much opposition to a well designed building of real design quality at scale on this site. Having read the article in the news section and viewed the image on http://www.archeire.com I do not think that STW have the aptitude for this type of project; both their proposal for Dun Laoghaire and their building at St Vincents Hospital are/were extremely uninspiring. Business park architecture on a budget seems more their thing these days.

Something with a little more imagination could start a trend in the distant North Docklands which if Bremore happens will be a very large landbank indeed

So many posts over the past 48 hours have screamed little but ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’.
To pick up one one point, the very reason Irish people ‘gasp’ when they go abroad to New York or wherever is because we are different, refreshingly so. Our lack of an audio meter-like skyline is because we are NOT the very places that have them! This is partially down to planning alright, but largely as has been pointed out there is little need for glittering skyscrapers in a country of four million people. Our nation is the UK equivalent of Birmingham. Our capital is a suburb in Birmingham.

Dublin’s uniqueness stems from being the very thing that it is, a low-rise intimate capital of a small, peripheral European country. It will never have a large conglomeration of international-equivalent ‘skyscrapers’, nor is this desirable.
A medium-rise Docklands of 8-10 storeys punctuated by the odd ‘feature’ building of 30-40 storeys in the Docklands is much more suited to the scale of Dublin city. Unfortunately it seems we’re not going to get even this in light of what has happened thus far.

As for what Americans think about the scale of our buildings, with all due respect blah blah blah, who gives a toss about what Americans think, or anyone else for that matter, about the scale of our buildings. This is not contest.

No one can beat Hong Kong, Singapore or the new simcity of Shanghai

@Rjajc wrote:

Rant ends.

What rant?

@Graham Hickey wrote:

So many posts over the past 48 hours have screamed little but ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’.
To pick up one one point, the very reason Irish people ‘gasp’ when they go abroad to New York or wherever is because we are different, refreshingly so. Our lack of an audio meter-like skyline is because we are NOT the very places that have them! This is partially down to planning alright, but largely as has been pointed out there is little need for glittering skyscrapers in a country of four million people. Our nation is the UK equivalent of Birmingham. Our capital is a suburb in Birmingham.

Dublin’s uniqueness stems from being the very thing that it is, a low-rise intimate capital of a small, peripheral European country. It will never have a large conglomeration of international-equivalent ‘skyscrapers’, nor is this desirable.
A medium-rise Docklands of 8-10 storeys punctuated by the odd ‘feature’ building of 30-40 storeys in the Docklands is much more suited to the scale of Dublin city. Unfortunately it seems we’re not going to get even this in light of what has happened thus far.

As for what Americans think about the scale of our buildings, with all due respect blah blah blah, who gives a toss about what Americans think, or anyone else for that matter, about the scale of our buildings. This is not contest.

Agreed.

---

Also, media quotes earmarked the Point Village development with a price-tage of €700m – seeing the plans, I’m confused as to how Mr. Crosbie is spending so much on relatively so little (with respect to the plans). For €500m, O’Flynn Construction have effectively built a new town in Ballincollig, Cork – with a new 170,000sq ft shopping centre, multi-storey car-park for over 1,000 cars, a new multi-purpose town centre, over 800 new houses/apartments, over 100,000sq ft of offices, new recreational facilities etc. For almost the same price in the Cork docklands, Manor Park Homes are redeveloping 17 acres at Horgan’s Quay with approx. 1,000 new homes (apartments etc), new waterfront, new road network, landmark buildings (some of which are ‘high-rise’), a new recreational facility/green space, plaza, office facilities, retail outlets, cultural facilities etc etc – and the possibility of a new 6,000 seater event centre. Point Village seems a little expensive should those quotes be proven accurate. :confused:

@Graham Hickey wrote:

Our lack of an audio meter-like skyline is because we are NOT the very places that have them! This is partially down to planning alright, but largely as has been pointed out there is little need for glittering skyscrapers in a country of four million people. Our nation is the UK equivalent of Birmingham. Our capital is a suburb in Birmingham.

Dublin’s uniqueness stems from being the very thing that it is, a low-rise intimate capital of a small, peripheral European country. It will never have a large conglomeration of international-equivalent ‘skyscrapers’, nor is this desirable.
A medium-rise Docklands of 8-10 storeys punctuated by the odd ‘feature’ building of 30-40 storeys in the Docklands is much more suited to the scale of Dublin city. Unfortunately it seems we’re not going to get even this in light of what has happened thus far.

This thread seems to have mutated out of the Dublin Skyline one. Agree fully with G.H’s comments on the size of Dublin. What I don’t understand is that it many conservationists have an all or nothing mentality. You can have both quite easily. Like most other european cities, you can have a low-lying historic core (e.g, Paris and Vienna) and then have one or two clusters of high rise buildings. Dublin is lucky to have the docklands in this respect – it was made for such a purpose. One complements the other – both have different characters, not better, not worse, just different. We cannot compete with the US or China so why bother. We could, however, try to find a balance. A number of landmark high-rise buildings in Dublin’s docklands would create a more interesting skyline. Why should Georgian Dublin be the ‘true’ and ‘only’ Dublin, unless you want to live in a musuem of colonial architecure. A city evolves and Ireland is evolving so lets go with the flow. It is time to build a 60 storey landmark building in the form of a green illuminated shamrock near the Point Depot. It would reflect beautifully in the Liffey and would stir no end of international interest in our humble capital city. Let not the limits of space nor gravity weaken our resolve to incarnate the Celtic Tiger in reinforced concrete and steel.

“wow, couldnt agree more, there is no good reason for resisting high rise yet there are countless reasons for embracing it. dublin is extremely backward when it comes to building tall, the mentality is crap! ideas like everywhere is the wrong area and one more floor is the destruction of our skyline are really hindering progress, this is a laughable example of a “21st century city”

I take this to be the extreem point in this argument. For all its faults Dublin is an increasingly progressive city and has come a long way – with further to go – from the city nearly destroyed by planner, politicians and developers from the 60s onwards. All well intentioned I’m sure (well a large number certianly intended to line their own pockets) but their mistakes are largely a result of not understanding the urban context of the city. The new rage for skyscrappers threatens the same in the absence of a sensible policy covering the whole city.

Dublin doesn’t need tall buildings. I undersatnd that there is an increasing need for office space but this will be best cattered for by increased densities. Here the docklands have missed a trick. While I don’t agree with skyscrappers for Dublin I do think the massing and density are far to low – especially in relation to the weight of the Liffey down there. Also the carchitecture is corporate bland and of dubious worth on the long term – 50 years plus. A much better model to my mind would have been Soho NYC turn of the century. Long life – loose fit tough yet elegant buildings that will last a couple of hundred years if taken care of – as per Georgian Dublin thus explaining its importance as partly defining Dublin’s urban character.

Lets get away from this fetish for glass and steel and look to something weighier and more urban! Shane

@sjpclarke wrote:

Dublin doesn’t need tall buildings.

Since Dublin now streches from Drogheda to Gorey and as far inland as Laois – yes it does need tall buildings in the centre if only to slow the sprawl

@PDLL wrote:

It is time to build a 60 storey landmark building in the form of a green illuminated shamrock near the Point Depot.

Is this a joke, or would you actually like to see that?

🙂 I would give my right ball to see it 🙂

@Rory W wrote:

Since Dublin now streches from Drogheda to Gorey and as far inland as Laois – yes it does need tall buildings in the centre if only to slow the sprawl

i totally agree. this sprawl has got to stop. Building up is the only logical step isn’t it?

@alpha wrote:

@Rory W wrote:

Since Dublin now streches from Drogheda to Gorey and as far inland as Laois – yes it does need tall buildings in the centre if only to slow the sprawl

i totally agree. this sprawl has got to stop. Building up is the only logical step isn’t it?

No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.

Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.

One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.

Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.

One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.

i thought paris had way taller buildings than that now. then again maybe you are refering to a certain area.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.

Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.

One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.

with densities like that in buildings that small, we are beginning to talk in terms of slums. Dublin once had densities like that – ah, the good old days.

A slum in venice

If only Dublin had been one of the major capitals of world trade during the Renaissance period, we too could be slumming it like this. Oddly enough, if memory serves me correct, the population of Venice is decreasing dramatically because, quite simply, every day life there is hell. Indeed, the number of native Venetians living in Venice can now be counted in one gondola. The reality is that most ‘Venetians’ now live in Mestre across the bridge from the historic city. I couldn’t find any photos of Mestre to place a link here, but from personal experience it is not exactly pretty – plenty of non-descript apartment buildings with metal shutters and graffitti.

Dublin Densities Estimate

This is largey a gestimate but you’ll get my point.
% Land People Per Hectare
High Rise: .0001 600
Prime Dublin Retail 1 & 2: 2 250
Prime Dublin Hosuing 1 & 2: 2 400
Rest Dublin 1 & 2: 2 300
Victorian Suburbs: 8 300
Council Suburbs: 15 100
Private Suburbs: 30 150
New Ex-Urban Suburbs: 40 50

Move forward ten years and allow for 30 towners at 40 floors high half of which are used for housing. This would still have negligible impact on the above figures and a huge and very dubious impact on our sense of dublin. Tackling suburban Dublin (excepting Victorian suburbs and some private and council estates) in terms of increasing densities – including for example slowly takig down council / private area such as in Crumlin and building to X4 the densities would make an enoromus difference to the above and sustainable and urban to boot. If anybody has correct figures they would good to see. Shane

The above formatted rather differently than I hoped. Read as:
High Rise – currently occuping .0001% of land in wider Dublin at a density of 600 people per hectare.
Prime Dublin Retail (postcodes 1 & 2): currently occupting 2% of land at 250 per hectare.
etc. etc. Hope that makes the point clearer!!!!!!!

The densities are all in the last census data.

London tried to build its way into higher density with high rise council blocks and failed but did make a big impact on the visual environment. They can’t densify their suburbs now because so many of them are listed. If we don’t move fast the same will happen here with McInerney becoming a sacred name.

From my Desk in Sandyford I get a nice view of Dublin, particularly the sight of the two chimneys rising, er, chimney like, into the sky. The way they stand out and the distance from here that they are has just made be realise how much sky there is to build into, compared to the available land.

High Rise, as has been debated at length IS desirable, but in what scenario, debatable. The fact is though that they’re not the answer to our urban sprawl issues. Ireland is full of traditional, semi dwelling families who would never come round to the idea of apartment living. Even without High Rise, the choice exists currently for Dublin families to live in apartments but they don’t. They’d rather endure living in the Meath/Kildare estates. This may change if the High Rise developments mooted do actually include the promised services and amenities, but it probably won’t..

Frank – Exactly my point. I’m sure that there are plently of Dubliners, conservationists and architects that can point out manys the good feature of such areas as Crumlin but they’re not fit for purpose in the 21st century. This does not necessarily entail demolition. Plenty of options to increase densities and still retain the green space in such suburbs. Doesn’t even seem to be on the agenda at the present. In any case this would all be an expensive waste of time if it was allowed to be contradicted by continued virus that is ex-urban carchitecture. Shane

Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.

@sjpclarke wrote:

Dublin Densities Estimate

This is largey a gestimate but you’ll get my point.

                                                 % Land             People Per Hectare

High Rise:                                    .0001                              600

Prime Dublin Retail 1 & 2:         2                                       250

Prime Dublin Hosuing 1 & 2:     2                                       400

Rest Dublin 1 & 2:                     2                                        300

Victorian Suburbs:                    8                                         300

Council Suburbs:                      15                                       100

Private Suburbs:                       30                                        150

New Ex-Urban Suburbs:            40                                          50

Move forward ten years and allow for 30 towners at 40 floors high half of which are used for housing. This would still have negligible impact on the above figures and a huge and very dubious impact on our sense of dublin. Tackling suburban Dublin (excepting Victorian suburbs and some private and council estates) in terms of increasing densities – including for example slowly takig down council / private area such as in Crumlin and building to X4 the densities would make an enoromus difference to the above and sustainable and urban to boot. If anybody has correct figures they would good to see. Shane

Where are you getting these densities? They seem completely wrong to me. A quick look at the most recent census of Dublin shows a density of 41/hectare (16/acre) for the Dublin city area. (495,781 people in 11,761 hectares)

By comparison, Paris averages 245/hectare within the peripherique.

@Rjajc wrote:

ps this is a great site.

I know what you mean when one clicks the previous posts.

Muchos pisos muchas identidades

Frank – I’ve no doubt you’re right on the figures and I welcomed corrections. As I said in my post these were a back of the envelope GESTIMATES used to illustrate the point that towers don’t go that far to addressing the density issue while having very dubious urban consequences. The rations more important to this point. Again we categorically DO NO NEED towers of the type demanded (30 plus floors) by some on this thread. What is needed is a wholescale change in current suburban densities and entailing the need to retro fit existing suburbs. I’ve read a lot of your comments under a number of different themes and am for the most part in complete agreement to all you’ve said on density – scale – urban grain – livability etc. I have no objection to tall building per say but only in the right context. Dublin does not provide that context. (Maybe it will in 50 years). Shane

@d_d_dallas wrote:

Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.

You don’t need apartments to achieve high densities. Amsterdam’s model of high density terraced houses springs to mind.

Am I straying off the point? Village, what village? Walking around my native city it is quite apparent that the majority of, is it appropriate to say native population, are quite incapable of living in high density dwellings. Has anyone looked at the building next to Sunlight Chambers quays? Not a window washed since the first residents went in. I did notice though that a number of the ‘new’ Irish quite understood how to relate to cities. Washing window sills and the like. It’s probably a DNA thing, natives in flats (except local authority ones) usually don’t cosnsider it ‘home’,
Home has a garden, front and back. Look up. How many people keep attractive neat balconies? One per building if we’re lucky. The odd half-dead plant here and there. And yet Irish gardens, the envy of so many. And the windows, ugh!! Litter and debris accumulate between railing and ground floor windows. There might be an excuse though that the resident can’t see out!!
Maybe it’s time letting agencies held courses akin to pre-adoption or pre-marriage ones to get people used to the idea that a flat is actually a home.
Don’t get me wrong, I adore high-rise.

@d_d_dallas wrote:

Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.

I agree – and the latest schemes don’t seem to mirror the ‘family based’ ideology either, prime example being the very recent Mark II Partnership’s plans for the Microsoft Campus in Sandyford, of the 847 or so residential units planned, over 600 are 2-bedroom. Now historically this may have made sense but times and markets are changing – space for families is lacking, I note this especially in Dublin. There is a potentially buoyant market for accommodating families with quality, decent sized apartment living space – with enough space for a young or growing family, plenty of living room space, individual bedrooms for a mid-sized family, 2 bathrooms, dining room, recreation space etc. Not trying to sound odd here, but in fairness to Cork City Council, their push for ‘family-sized high-density’ accommodation in the city centre is starting to bare some fruit – point in case, O’Flynn Construction’s Eglinton Street development offering 3-bedroom, 1,900sq ft apartments – it’s a start and more of the same is on the way, with hopefully some improvements. Developers are slowly coming round to this new angle – well for Ireland.

@Graham Hickey wrote:

So many posts over the past 48 hours have screamed little but ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’….there is little need for glittering skyscrapers in a country of four million people. Our nation is the UK equivalent of Birmingham. Our capital is a suburb in Birmingham.
…This is not contest.

But isn’t there a case for saying good architecture arises from competetion? What about the implicit Kuala Lumpur vs Chicago…most of my lakeside friends say there was more than a little disquiet in the windy city when Asia pulled ahead. Now the new Chicago trade centre will be bigger.
What about Chrystler and Empire State?
Or Hong Kongs banks?
Competetion is good. Its what Ireland has lacked for years. ‘Lets be better’ not just ‘ara sure were different for being mediocre’.

Also, Birmingham has a population of 1 million as far as I know. Not 4 million.

Why not think of Ireland as Greater NY and Dublin as Downtown NY? lol 😀 (I know NY has a pop of around 11 million)

I do know what you mean though Graham. But its not ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’ its lets be the best at this thing. Its not just because Johnny has one. I dont think of low and high rise as seperate their just different forms of building. Its a false dichtomy to seperate them. In some ways

@Graham Hickey wrote:

A medium-rise Docklands of 8-10 storeys punctuated by the odd ‘feature’ building of 30-40 storeys in the Docklands is much more suited to the scale of Dublin city.

thats just ‘ara sure were grand’ in a nutshell.

thats just ‘ara sure were grand’ in a nutshell.

Could we move away from this sneering type of argumentation? Graham hickey is not making any argument of the type “ara sure we’re grand” as he is asking for fairly large changes to Dublin : buildings 8 -10 stories with punctuated towers and features.

This is hardly the status quo – and although I would prefer taller heights – that particular sneer in uncalled for, and overplayed.

I don’t like the idea of punctuating an area with a high building for the sake of it. Why risk defining a city quarter by a single building? Even if the particular building is good (and most of the proposed “landmark” buildings are not, in my opinion), it is likely to be hated by a significant number of people.

I’d prefer a more organic approach by encouraging mixed height 12-20 story modern buildings for a distinct city quarter – the docklands would have been perfect but unfortunalely the potential has been destroyed by the DDDA with their communist-style planning model where entire blocks are devoted to boring monolithic developments. Why not allow a variety of buildings in each block, built by a variety of developers/architects? Provide basic stipulations regarding preserving the street scape and the provision of public access via retail facilities/restaurants/amenities/etc. at ground floors and encourage a mix of commercial/residential. You’ve a far better chance that some good stuff will be built than if your entire effort is invested in building a “landmark” trophy building which will probably be uneconomic in itself and will require a developer’s subsidy in the form of allowing cheap 6-story shit to be built around it. In this way no one building dominates so the flaws of a single building will not blight an entire area.

Well you do have to take certain ‘risks’ in building tall – but to blankly refuse to build a ‘landmark’ building because of the ‘risk’ is very unambitious don’t you think? Though saying that, given the record thus far I certainly see what you mean Jimg.

Hi Rjajc, sorry but again it seems you’re advocating height for height’s sake – that height is ‘better’ whilst low-rise is mediocre.
I can deduce little else from what you’re saying.

I can vaguely see where you’re coming from though, from the perspective that most cities that are low-rise and have protected skylines like Prague or Tallinn etc have very good reasons to be so with their spires and crenellations and all the rest of it – whilst Dublin is well – yeah….:a modernised, westernised, bland-from-a-distance provincial British city by design.
From that perspective yes it is capable of aborbing tall buildings, but still in a designated area, and in a restricted manner.
If one thing makes Dublin so different (and lucky) in comparision with its UK neighbours, or even up the road in Belfast, is the lack of nasty inappropriate towers from the 1970s, and not just in it’s core, but anywhere around its centre.
We’re very lucky that we have something of a blank canvas to work with.

An eight-ish story density is a very satisfying type of development to see, especally what limited examples there are at the moment in the Docklands. Low-rise does not equal bland: low quality certainly does.

hmm, didnt check this for a while… i never meant to say that dublin is not “21st century” just its planning towards high rise, high rise which is definetly needed. sprawl is very problematic and is eating up country round dublin. i am not adamant about high rise because i say wow when looking at new york or the like but becase this would solve so many problems in dublin, it would be great for public transport and solve congestion, communting times and deal with that nasty endless sprawl of ugly housing estates. i like the low rise skyline of dublin and the ocasional high rise cluster would only complement it if designed well, this dosnt mean i want a “audio metre” skyline, just a more capable inner city. btw, dublin is definetly not the equivalent of a birmingham suburb! birmingham has a population of 991,900 as of last cencus and thats it, dublin with “the greater area” included is over 1.2 million – larger than birmingham

Everybody that proposes skyscrapers here is being accused of wanting them just for the sake of it from what I can tell. I don’t want them just for the sake of it. Tell me, why do other countries build them anyway? Big countries and very small.

All this jumping between the ‘Dublin Skyline’ and ‘Point Village’ threads has me all dizzy of a friday evening. But the (ahem) more intelligent debate seems to be taking place here (so it’s obviously where I fit in best 😉 ).

It has been mentioned in passing by other posters, but it bears reiteration- tall buildings are generally uneconomical to build. Their positives are relatively few- international profile, landmark role (nothing to do with quality, I mean simply acting as a geographical landmark)- compared to their negatives. Further, their role in a city in providing residential accommodation is questionable, given the open space requirements, our national love affair with the private car (I’d love to believe it, but I can’t see ownership dropping appreciably just because we live closer together) which must be stored somewhere, etc. There is more of a case to be made for their use as office accommodation, but I wonder how we’d view them in 20 years when the office market has outgrown its suburbanisation phase and we’re all teleworking from our personal think-zones, and emails are automatically generated by our subconscious… Sorry, I’m getting carried away. But you get my thrust- would we be faced with the issue of what to do with all those obsolete towers?

What gets me is that there seems to be two camps arguing for height here- the densification lobby, with which I have a good deal of sympathy, and the ‘height-for-height’s-sake’ lobby, with which I have no sympathy.

Everybody that proposes skyscrapers here is being accused of wanting them just for the sake of it from what I can tell. I don’t want them just for the sake of it.

Linda- may I ask why you do want them, then?

Rjajc- I can’t agree that we should be trying to compete with the big world-players. An anecdote, if I may: a few years ago, when the Caravaggio ‘Taking of Christ’ was on display in the NGI, an American tourist was vox-popped on the radio for his opinion, and he said that while he liked the painting, he could see many more Caravaggios in Rome, and the same went for other artists who were far better represented in US galleries than they often were in their home countries. He said that the reason he visited national (and other) galleries in cities not renowned for their standing in international art circles was to see the art that local painters had painted, the kind of regional variations that, say, MOMA or the Met in NY can’t provide. He saw this regionalism as the very strength of these second tier galleries, rather than something to be ashamed of.

I think this has an application to the current debate. Dublin has a character peculiar to the city, as does Cork, Waterford, etc etc.- it can be seen even in the varieties of Georgain architecture they each have. However, it can’t be seen in the different tall buildings approved/proposed for each place. Anything that undermined the individuality of each should be resisted.

Two other things:

1) One of the things I liked most about Edinburgh when I lived there was the quality of the flats in the tenements buildings- ours had four bedrooms, two bathrooms, kitchen, sittingroom and small study, with 14 ft ceilings. There is nothing in Dublin remotely like them, more’s the pity.

2) Lexington:

in fairness to Cork City Council

Didn’t you mean “in fairness to Cork City Council, like“?

(Sorry, couldn’t resist. 😮 )

Eh, to tackle urban sprawl for a start. Do you want to see our beautiful countryside destroyed by urban sprawl? Field after field being taken over? Ireland has been described as one big building site. Dublin is growing out all the time and our population is growing too. So many people coming into Ireland. To remove traffic off the roads. To provide more employment in a way. To move along with the changing times. To provide more space in a small area so I can work where I live… I would much prefer to live in a highrise building in the city and work in that same area. The higher the building the more people you can fit in. A commute of 2ish hours to work AND back every single day is a pain and believe you me I know. I have lived in another country by the way. I lived on the 45th floor and found it a lot easier to travel down in a lift than sit in a car all day. I have better things to be doing. Having said that if a 100 storey building were to be built in Dublin somewhere resembling that of Hawkin’s House, Apollo House or Millennium Tower I would be furious. I like buildings to look well whether they are big or small. I am a firm believer of good architecture. That is just my opinion which I am entitled to. Everybody is entitled to their opinion ctesiphon just like you. I have never single out a person and knocked them for expressing their opinion. The people that propose highrises are really being knocked though. Nobody has answered my question. Why does any counrty go highrise??? If highrises don’t work out they can be torn down. It is not the end of the world building up. I have said it before and i will say it AGAIN, I do not want them just for the sake of it. Urban sprawl is obviously a big issue as we have a thread on it. I am not trying to upset anybody here. Someone did mention that Dublin takes up a huge area. It does. So many buildings are on hold. All the ones I have mentioned before. I can’t understand why. They aren’t even large highrises. These delays at building between 16 to 19 storeys is crazy. A few people have said that 8-10 storeys with the odd 20ish storey building would be ok but we can’t even seem to do that. So many buildings delayed. It is very frustrating. We shouldn’t delay on these. I also agree with proper context and location. Enough said. 🙂

interesting to note that the ddda has an edge over everywhere else in the country seeing as how permission can be granted by the ddda once a proposal seems to fulfil all their criteria. a good thing definetly if handled well but potentially disastrous!!!
the fact remains ireland is a small island, dublin a mushroom that continues to swell and going up is essential to the future sustainability of not just dublin but all major cities in ireland. and making better use of land and promoting sensible projects is vital. density is definetly an issue and unfortunately the point village seems to be a 32 storey tower surrounded by the standard 5 storey stuff. i guess a case of wait and see.
the urban plan is interesting with their ideas for tall buildings near heuston. perfect spot for a few tall buildings and high density living and i still maintain having tall feature towers around the city is a better idea than a glut in one spot. i am still a fan of the idea of denis o brien’s tower on morehampton road and glad to the sandyford tower going ahead (the 26 storey one) but we have to be wary of accepting every tower proposal as the way to go. last thing we need is a collection of cookie cutter bollocks making a balls of the docks!!!
one last thing when is the u2 tower project supposed to get under way or is that delayed because they have decided to push that one to 100 metres as well!!?!!

To be honest I really don’t know why people are getting so hot under the collar with each other. It does seem rather trivial. We are all friends here.

is playing around with the u2 tower’s height a good idea? they had a competition and that entry won so why not leave things as they are? i can see it slipping through the net as a result. we could end up with no u2 tower if this playing around continues.

@linda wrote:

Eh,

1. to tackle urban sprawl for a start…
2. To remove traffic off the roads. …
3. To provide more employment in a way…
4. To move along with the changing times…
5. To provide more space in a small area so I can work where I live…

Apologies for summarising your post. These are the main points you have made.

1. to tackle urban sprawl for a start…
Density is determined by floor area ratio, and height is just one factor in floor area ratio. Floor area ratio is determined by the total floor area of buildings in a given area divided by the total land area occupied by those buildings. High rise buildings are built as detached spires. Each building width between them reduces the FAR by 50%. So a 50 storey building with a footprint of 100m2, built on a site of 1000m2 has the same FAR as a terrace of 5 storey buildings built up to the roadway.

This is how Paris achieves approximately the same density as Manhattan and has far higher densities than Hong Kong or Monaco. Height gives the illusion of high density.

Now high-rise buildings can’t be built too close together, let alone terraced. So, high rise building tend to result in low average densities compared to terraces of mid height buildings.

2. To remove traffic off the roads. …
This point assumes that high buildings result in dense living which they don’t. And even if you did achieve the density it would mean there are more people available in a given area to congest the roads. Look at the streets in Hong Kong or Manhattan. Even when sufficient public transport is provided, a proportion of people continue to drive until the roads fill up. Of course these cities could just ban people from driving in the city but they don’t (though London and Paris are heading in that direction). I guess when you talk about removing traffic from the roads you weren’t including yourself.

3. To move along with the changing times…
Building high rise as a means of densifying a city is not a current trend]4. To provide more space in a small area so I can work where I live…[/B]
This point again assumes that tall buildings densify a city.

Sorry but I am not trying to cause tension. I was just thinking that if you were to build say a 100 storey skyscraper in place of Liberty Hall just an example mind, you would be able to squeeze in just as many people, if not more than a much wider building. Take the Irish Life Centre, if that were taller there would be more space to put in another building of lesser height beside it if not several. Building out all the time seems to be causing problems. I am not trying to agrivate anyone. I am just stating a viewpoint. My comments on highrise have certainly cause a stir. I am so new to this site and have obviously said wrong. I would hate to see a building of that height here in Ireland though. Our island is too small for that. It gives me great comfort to see that the likes of Luxembourg and Iceland are the same as us in a way. :confused:

Ah, poor linda.

“some” of the buildings that have gone up in this country over the past several years are terrible. bland and boring. no style whatsoever. i hate this use of red brick and timber along with grey in colour. box, box, box. where are all the decent architects? what ever possessed them to build these eyesores anyway? it makes me so annoyed. and yes they are eyesores no matter what anyone says.

Indeed I agree, we are very lucky. There was a time when this country was not in a position to debate such investment – the sight of a tower crane in the skyline was a topic of citywide discussion (“What’s going in there?” “Did you see what they’re building over there?” etc etc) and I do think that sometimes we may forget that the investment taken by developers is positive for jobs, renewal, the economy etc. We shouldn’t forget the importance of that, and in our on-going criticisms of developers etc, we should remember that the willingness of such to take an investment risk in this country all those years ago was generally a issue of welcome.I think it is important to also remember that now, given the position we are now so lucky to occupy, it is important to make sure that it is used wisely. It is important to see that our country and urban landscapes benefit as many positives as possible that we can obtain from such a position and that the marks those efforts leave on our nation long-term are ones we can look back on and say ‘we did our best’. Websites like this may not exist – or be as successful – had we not our current economic and social climate to enjoy – but given our circumstances, it’s important to allow for debate. Not everyone is going to agree on a particular project – even though some projects may sometimes generally feel better than others (e.g. regarding high-rise for example – I believe SJR by OMS for Dunloe Ewart felt right, as does the U2 Tower by Craig Henry, Eglinton Street & Water Street in Cork and Riverpoint in Limerick), we should allow for debate to explore all the options.

---

@ctesiphon wrote:

Didn’t you mean “in fairness to Cork City Council, like”?

No bother boy! 😉

@lexington wrote:

I do think that sometimes we may forget that the investment taken by developers is positive for jobs, renewal, the economy etc. We shouldn’t forget the importance of that, and in our on-going criticisms of developers etc, we should remember that the willingness of such to take an investment risk in this country all those years ago was generally a issue of welcome.

Lexington, your little piece reminds me of Pat Gallagher’s famous spiel in c1980 – “Building a better Ireland…better” 😀

i hate this claim that everyone who wants high rise wants new york, the fact is it WOULD solve alot of problems – economy damaging problems. urban sprwal as linda and other thread say is a very bad thing and is destroying our countryside, congestion is slowing the city considerably and communting times of two hours is something no one should have to live with. i think a jouney to cork is a big deal 🙂 and thats two hours, so what can you do with two hours? u can travel halfway acros the country to another city or you can go to work in dublin. footprints on high rise buidlings are smaler but once a certain height is reached higher density than a low rise building can be acheived to an almost limitless exetent, low rise building can be wide, but their width is limited. dublin will keep growing and once low rise buidlings have spread over every inch of grass in the city we will be left in the same sprawling mess as we are in now. i am not willing to accept high rise at any cost, as the others arguing the same point are not. we want good architecture and nothing less but high does not mean ugly. the best possible step dublin can take now is designate an area for a large high rise cluster and serve it well with public transport… this kind of thing would allow countess more to live in-city and bring an end to problems mentioned

Well let some proposals of real quality emerge in the right locations and I will be the first to promote them. Graham is absolutely right in what he says; the model is outside the City core to have high density developments at 8-10 storeys (once there is no important built/Natural heritage too close) punctuated by tall buildings.

@ihateawake wrote:

i think a jouney to cork is a big deal 🙂 and thats two hours

My God, how fast do you drive??? 😀

Linda- In essence, what I’m saying is that densification is the issue and I don’t see high rise as the answer. I won’t try and improve on Frank’s summary of the rationale or on Graham’s preferred strategy above.

PS I don’t mean to sound patronising, but if you’re going to hold a strong point of view, you just have to be prepared to defend it (and the tone of the defence is important too if you want to get your message across). Differences of opinion aren’t meant as personal attacks. It would be a dull site if we were all here just to confirm our prejudices and congratulate each other on our impeccable taste.

Now if you’ll excuse me, there’s a pint in town with my name on it and a half hour cycle between it and me, so I must away.

@lexington wrote:

My God, how fast do you drive??? 😀

Do you bill your clients for only two hours, I thought the train at two hours 50 minutes was doing well

i might have lied a little for the sake of argument 😀

Are you sure it wasn’t a misprint in the E.I.S.

ctesiphon, Graham your points are without doubt more rational than mine! They are well argued and ctesiphon I have to say I never thought of regional=good. That was a good point re the gallery. But what can we offer in terms of regional arch? Is your point that tall=big boys; small = regional therefore we should ‘use’ this? Using your comparison; What would draw the equivalent punter to Dublin in terms of modern architecture?

I will admit to being to an extent part of the height for height sake group- and the stronger argument does come from the other side. I have no illusions that height for height sake is anything but pure folly… But just one folly..please!?

I am a ‘lay’ Dub with a ‘more than average’ interest in my city’s built environment – i just want to go ‘wow’ in Dub more often. I do genuinely wish there was a downtown Dublin in the docklands. I have never gotten over its reduction to a suburban industrial estate. Oh god i hate it! The original proposal wasn’t even that high density – why do so many in Dub (officials) think what other cities can handle, we cant? Its only a building.

The docklands are medicore at best; awful at worst at the minute. 😮

Many the docklands can’t support the weight of tall buildings, as it was built on reclaimed land. It depends on what the docklands are built on.

Following a tip-off from saturday’s Guardian, I found this. Food for thought?

😮 Room at the top

@ihateawake wrote:

….the fact is [high rise] WOULD solve alot of problems….urban sprwal as linda and other thread say is a very bad thing and is destroying our countryside, congestion is slowing the city considerably

I’m sorry – I do not mean to sound snotty – but it’s just not getting through to the ‘pro-high-rise’ people: There is no connection between sprawl and high buildings. A choice between sprawl or high buildings is a false choice.

The reason sprawl happened is not because we didn’t build high buildings but because we built at low densities, in development designed for the motor car.

There is a huge volume of unutilised space on the upper floors of the 4 and 5-storey buildings all over the city centre. The Living Over the Shop incentive scheme of a couple of years ago failed.]extremely well[/I] in terms of density. Then you can have your taller landmarks (assuming they are worthy of landmarks, which nothing presented thus far for Dublin, to my eye, is).

A factor that needs to be noted in this debate is that the higher blocks of buildings are, generally speaking, the further apart they need to be (to fulfil plot ratio and open space requirements, and so as lower-floor residents facing into a courtyard are not in semi-darkness most of the time), thus cancelling out any density gain after a certain height.

if a highrise scheme were to go ahead in the docklands, do you not think that people would find this new modern area an attractive living place(as opposed to living above a shop) thus cancelling out the need for sattelite towns round the city??? high rise can hold alot of people even if the footprint is small, more than a wide 3 story regardless of footprint, that space relative to the hight is far less as you are getting the floorspace of the footprint 20 times over(otherwise there would be no need for them, right?) – if manhatten were to convert fully to low rise there would be alot of people displaced overnight

not being snotty, you can say what u like, i could be wrong 😀

We can do our best now and try’n create high-density (for e.g. 6 to 9-storey) residential quarters in brownfield (i.e. previously used for industry) sites like the docklands. But that won’t have any effect on the sprawl we’ve already got – nor will tall 20 or 30 storey buildings.

I was at a very depressing lecture a while ago by an economist, Colm McCarthy. He essentially said that we’re f****d. He said the preceding decade (1990s) was very important to have gotten the development of the city right. But we didn’t – we just kept on doing the same thing; building low-density, car-oriented semi-d housing estates.

And anyway there are still councillors voting to rezone land for housing in towns in Wicklow, Meath and Kildare, because they’ve been lobbied by local landowners…..making more of the car-dependent sprawl that everyone deplores. And the government won’t intervene to stop it…It’s a mad, mad country….

@ctesiphon wrote:

Following a tip-off from saturday’s Guardian, I found this. Food for thought?

😮 Room at the top

These are fantastic photos and naturally I really don’t think there is a single contributor to this debate who would want this to be built in Ireland (god, the entire country would fit in one). This is scaremongering – high buildings DO NOT have to be ugly dystopias although perhaps given the social vision in Ireland this is probably what we would create. In my opinion, the issue of high rise buildings in Ireland is intimately linked to the lack of an underground in Dublin. I am not spawning a new thread, but my conclusion on all of this is that the Irish are horizontal two dimensional thinkers – we are not capable of building up or down and this explains our low housing density, our lack of a serious public transport network in Dublin and some of the ridiculous road ‘infrastructure’ which we have (why build underpasses and flyovers when you can have a car sitting in the middle of the Limerick to Dublin road trying to turn right across uncoming traffic so as to turn into his driveway on the far side). Lets face it, the Irish allegedly built New York, Boston, London and so on (or so we boast) but when it comes to home, we like to keep our feet on terra firma. Why, oh, why can many other countries DO things and we sit around discussing them for years. Get away from your computers and reach for your shovels…

@PDLL wrote:

This is scaremongering – high buildings DO NOT have to be ugly dystopias although perhaps given the social vision in Ireland this is probably what we would create.

Agreed that they don’t have to be ugly dystopias, PDLL, but scaremongering? I don’t think this is what the tall lobby is arguing for, nor is it what I’m arguing against- it’s really outside the terms of reference of this debate.
However, the thrust of a few of the messages in recent days on this thread has been that height is the answer to the densification problem, but for height to solve this, our simple rules of thumb such as plot ratio and open space requirements would have to be largely ignored. The type of development seen in the pictures is not the inevitable result, but it is a vision (the illogical conclusion?) of what unrestrained growth can lead to- the reductio ad absurdum we would do well to keep in mind.

Also, I just wanted people to see the pictures, which are nothing short of staggering.

We seem to be going around in circles here with the tall building lobby on these pages (with exceptions) just not understanding the arguements re density. Couple of points:

– Devin, you said the most consice and sensible thing in the whole thread: There is no connection between sprawl and high buildings. A choice between sprawl or high buildings is a false choice.

– Tall buildings will not replace Lucan – Tallaght – Clondalkin – Blanschardtown etc etc. Our problem with density lies not in the city centre which is now beginning to attain a reasonable European urban model of density but with our enless ex-urban sprawl. We do all seem to agree on this most important of points but continue fiddling about arguing on the wrong subject while Dublin grows further obese.
– The dockland should have – to my mind – been built to a 8 (-12 on the river front) story mixed use block design. This would have provided an ambitious extension to the current context existing within D1&2.

– Against this background tall buildings would be decided on sustainable, aesthetic and contextual grounds. They would be clustered in areas agreed by policy – rather than London’s unfortunate miss mash approach.
– Sustainable: Environmentally of course and near public transport interchanges etc.
– Aesthetically: Of the highest architectural quality – the standards being far higher than for noraml buildings given their exponential impact.
– Contextual: Outside of Georgian Dublin and outside important vista and sightlines etc.

As I said previously I’d pitch for NY Soho circa 1890 as an ideal model. Perhaps we should all call it a day on this one. Still, would recommend that people look at the this tread for an actual tall buildings proposal at Heuston Gate: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=4281

sorry to drag it on but i, or anyone else are not saying that high rise will result in a sudden evacuation of the “GDA” into the city centre but it will stop its growth if there is a continued trend of building high. im not suggesting 30 story towers everywhere in dublin, mabey half that, just to assure reasonable density with the occasional large scale building for “landmark” purposes. anything below 12 stories in the city is a disaster with our current problem. there is definetly a connection between height and sprawl, like devins economist said – “the preceding decade (1990s) was very important to have gotten the development of the city right. But we didn’t – we just kept on doing the same thing; building low-density, car-oriented semi-d housing estates.” had our plan been “higher” and more closley knit than there would not be the low density mess there is now, not 90story high towers, but at least something with double figures. tightly fit 4 or 5 story buildings would have not provided much more releif, certainly not of the scale called for.

I must say, I hope they build all of those buildings around Heuston Station. It would be something different for Dublin. Something we’ve never had before. They blew it with the dockland area of Dublin. Let’s hope they don’t blow this one either. Fingers crossed.

@ihateawake wrote:

but it will stop [sprawling] growth if there is a continued trend of building high.

Allowing tall buildings to be erected in Dublin City, even on a vast scale, is not going to prevent so much as a blade of grass in Meath or Kildare or Longford or even as far as Cavan from being rezoned for sprawling housing estates.

Or even within the boundaries of Dublin county itself, it seems very likely it wouldn’t change things in the slightest, from Balbriggan in the north to the outskirsts of north Bray in the south, we’d still get the same old low-density model, and compromise our capital’s core in the process.
It is a shift in mindset on a much broader level that is needed in Ireland.

An interesting point was made earlier here or on the other thread about Irish not being able to build down either, whatever about up. It was made in the context of public transport but the notion is equally applicable to residential development – we can’t even build houses with basements any more!
As usual, like a herd of sheep we adopted the UK model in the 1930s – one of the few features of American suburban development we could do well to actively consider.

@Graham Hickey wrote:

An interesting point was made earlier here or on the other thread about Irish not being able to build down either, whatever about up. It was made in the context of public transport but the notion is equally applicable to residential development – we can’t even build houses with basements any more!

Graham, I am happy to agree with what you have just said. In many European countries even small scale apartment developments come complete with underground parking – this helps reduce the amount of space required at surface level while also helps improve the appearance of neighbourhoods by removing unsightly cars from the streets and by allowing the development of small scale green areas, flower beds etc around the bases of buildings. With regard to standard houses, the same applies – the construction of basements gets rid of the need for such things as garages (and lets face it, most people do not use their garage for storing their car in Ireland) which would thereby help conserve space and increase density. It also helps reduce noise pollution (in many European countries washing machines, dryers etc qualify as noise pollutants), allows for a huge increase in storage space and a reduced need to have things sitting outside your back door which has an aesthetic impact in a neighbourhood. It also allows for the drying of clothes inside which again improves the ‘orderliness’ and appearance of a row of house etc. Minor things, you might say, but one reason many housing estates in Ireland look a bit gruppy is because of the clothes lines in the backgardens, the rows of cars outside the front door and so on. Certainly in the case of small scale apartment developments there is no excuse not to have underground parking – it would certainly be a contribution to increasing densities.

could you tell me why building dense in the centre, or in the suburbs, wont stop sprawl?

@ihateawake wrote:

could you tell me why building dense in the centre, or in the suburbs, wont stop sprawl?

Reasonably easy to work out. Unless there is a huge and unprecedented influx of immigrants into Ireland in the next 10 years (and I am not denying or rejecting this possibility), then there is a finite number of people in the State at any one point in time. I believe it is about 4,000,000 at the moment. Of this 4,000,000, there is a finite number that lives in the greater Dublin region – definitions vary from 1,000,000 to 1,200,000 from what I have seen. While it is unlikely that the construction of increased density living units (house, apartments whatever) in the city centre will have any effect on reducing the already existing expanse of suburbs surrounding Dublin, it stands to reason that if increased density living units are built in the city centre they could, if the conditions are economically and socially desireable, stem any future expansion of the suburbs. This, of course, is based on the assumption that the increased density living units in the city centre are both desireable and affordable.

If you take 1,000,000 grains of sand and spill them across a table they will spread out to infinity. If you spread them out across the table and then use your hands to push them into a small mound at the centre, the same 1,000,000 grains of sans will probably occupy the area of a saucer. Building increased density living units in the city centre, will – by itself – not answer the problem of urban sprawl. Put it in tandem with restrictions on how far one can build out and then it is quite simple. Consider Vienna – a city with about 1,700,000 people – its quite small in terms of its radius – no endless suburbia here as people live in high density apartments. Ditto Madrid. There are endless examples. It is all a matter of good maths and making Dublin a place that people will want to live in rather than escape at 5pm!!!!!

“Put it in tandem with restrictions on how far one can build out and then it is quite simple” – genious! has this not been considered by politicians? building dense/high seems to be part of the solution 😀

@ihateawake wrote:

“Put it in tandem with restrictions on how far one can build out and then it is quite simple” – genious! has this not been considered by politicians?

I could be mistaken, but it appears not, unless of course those who commute from the far reaches of Meath and Kildare do so for the craic. Perhaps it was considered at one point over a pint in the bar in Leinster House but densification seems to be lost on the only thing that is dense in Ireland, ie the politicians. You seem to have some inside insight which we could benefit from though (?).

@PDLL wrote:

You seem to have some inside insight which we could benefit from though (?).

im not sure what you mean or whether it was a joke :confused: but ill take the risk and ask you…?

A bit of activity around the Point today (and a board has appeared mentioning something about Point Village)… looks like it may be starting…

Does anyone know exactly how much of the land around the Point grounds that Crosbie owns? Does he own the site to the left on the river front?

@NeilA wrote:

A bit of activity around the Point today (and a board has appeared mentioning something about Point Village)… looks like it may be starting…

Does anyone know exactly how much of the land around the Point grounds that Crosbie owns? Does he own the site to the left on the river front?

Does the board show any pictures of the tower? Will the tower start now or at a later date I wonder?

No pictures on the board just a line mentionin the Point Village.

Looks like phase one of the Point Village development involves construction of a 3-storey underground carpark for the Point Depot. Should clear the way for development on the existing surface carpark land next year.

http://www.aaroadwatch.ie/dublin/traffic.asp?id=76281

@adhoc wrote:

Looks like phase one of the Point Village development involves construction of a 3-storey underground carpark for the Point Depot. Should clear the way for development on the existing surface carpark land next year.

http://www.aaroadwatch.ie/dublin/traffic.asp?id=76281

does this mean that the whole project will be built on that carpark? i have to pop down to the site soon, has anyone been there recently. I am quite excited about this development as there might be a tallish tower rising by next year! has anyone got any more info on this? or where can i find anything?

@Keen wrote:

does this mean that the whole project will be built on that carpark? i have to pop down to the site soon, has anyone been there recently. I am quite excited about this development as there might be a tallish tower rising by next year! has anyone got any more info on this? or where can i find anything?

There’s not too much to see going on down there just yet – they seem to be just clearing the site. Does anyone know if Crosbie got final planning permission for the tower itself?

Not sure whether its been posted before. Came across this website: http://www.pointvillage.ie

‘Ground clearence underway’

The tower has received planning permission according to the DDDA website. Looks like construction is about to begin. Id imagine it will be finished well before the U2 tower.

P.S sry if its been posted already.

It all looks very exciting and encouraging….but can anyone explain the logic in having the “U2 Experience” located across the river, in a whole seperate building from the alleged U2 Tower??? I cannot get my head around that!

Also, Not sure I like the graphical depiction of how the Point Depot itself will be redeveloped…..it looks like it will have “theatre-like” stalls which will make it less adaptable for anything other than concerts and musicals/plays…surely given the desperate need for a multi-purpose event centre in this city/country – that should be taken into consideration also??

its all a bit low rise and uninspiring isnt it 🙁

@Maskhadov wrote:

its all a bit low rise and uninspiring isnt it 🙁

Thats just one of those Mickey Mouse drawings. Its scale is bigger then that. Also incidentally the tower drawn there dosnt look like the other images ive seen.:rolleyes: For a 30 storey tower it would have to be of decent scale. Nothing compared to the 50 storey tower seeking permission around the digital hub though:D

The point is a good site for a landmark building but I will lay 10 to 1 on that the former Guiness site is redeveloped at a much more appropriate scale than has been proposed. If I held the Point site I would have gone for a cluster type effect but as I don’t…..

the tower doesn’t look too bad in that link.

@Pepsi wrote:

the tower doesn’t look too bad in that link.

this site has been up a while…i believe the underground carpark (1500 spaces) is already under construction but i have not been near the site yet, i have just seen it from a distance. Looks very busy though and that is promising…

@darkman wrote:

Thats just one of those Mickey Mouse drawings. Its scale is bigger then that. Also incidentally the tower drawn there dosnt look like the other images ive seen.:rolleyes: For a 30 storey tower it would have to be of decent scale. Nothing compared to the 50 storey tower seeking permission around the digital hub though:D

I hope it is just that !! With it being so far out from the city they could have really done something really inspiring and high rise. I just hope its not as bland and boring as the rest of the Quays.

I think the tower looks very ordinary. :rolleyes:
Ive just noticed that the railway line that runs beside the point which I thought was supposed to be kept doenst exist in the drawing. :confused:

The railway line was lifted a few months ago; it wasn’t great for rolling stock deliveries given the level crossing of East Wall Road, and any passenger potential it had is negated by the Luas extension.

Anyone have any idea as to the capacity of the redeveloped Point?

Presumably the stage is only placed at the entrance end in the drawing for ease of interpretation…

Originally posted by Graham Hickey
Anyone have any idea as to the capacity of the redeveloped Point?

14,000 I believe

wow – impressive. Well over a doubling of capacity.

Thanks for that TD.

Got this this morning:
Planning Permission for Point Village Granted

Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Planning permission for The Point Village in Dublin’s Docklands has been granted by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA). Full scale construction work has now commenced on the €800 million development. The planning permission covers the 23,000 square metre shopping centre, hotel, car park and cinema complex. It is expected that it will create 2,000 permanent jobs and is not dependent on any state funding or grants.

“Already we are in negotiation with anchor tenants as well as a number of hotel chains. We are planning to start signing contracts with a host of retail chains over the coming months,” explained Harry Crosbie, Chairman, Point Village Ltd. “The Point Village is an opportunity that will never come again – a combination of residential and entertainment schemes, a ready catchment area of professionals and attractions that will attract a footfall of millions each year.”

The Point Village will cover a 12 acre site surrounding the Point Theatre and include a the 23,000 square metre Shopping Centre, 13,000m2 of Offices, a 250 bed Hotel with 20 serviced apartments and a 12 screen multiplex cinema. The development will have as its signature building “The Watchtower” which, along with the U2 Tower, will form a maritime gateway to the city of Dublin. This 120 metre tower will include 500 m2 of office space, luxury apartments and an exterior rooftop bar and restaurant offering panoramic views over Dublin Bay and the city serviced by glass sided elevators which will run outside the building.

“It has always been envisaged that The Point Village would provide key retail services to the entire Docklands area,” Paul Maloney, Chief Executive, Dublin Docklands Development Authority pointed out. “It will also draw significant numbers of visitors to the area from across Dublin and Ireland as well as internationally.”

Access for shoppers and tourists will simplicity itself with the Luas bringing them into a new station in the middle of the Point Village. The site will be serviced by six Quality Bus Corridors and the proposed Macken St Bridge by Calatrava across the Liffey. The Dublin Port Tunnel starts right beside the development and the Liffey Voyage, a river taxi, will stop nearby. For those who wish to drive ample parking facilities will be provided in the 3 floor underground car park which has a capacity for 1200 vehicles.

It is expected that The Point Village will be one of the busiest shopping precincts in the city with over 45,000 people living in the Docklands alone as well as the coastal wealth belt. The Point Theatre, which is to be expanded to 15,000 capacity laid out in the style of a curved Roman amphitheatre which will be one of the great venues in Europe, allowing the intimacy of a small venue, will cater for 2 million visitors each year, while a double size Vicar Street is also planned for the development.

Hamilton Osborne King has been appointed to handle all enquiries regarding premises.

lol, the Liffey Voyage is a river taxi, is it?
Sounds like a good development, and they’re right about the ‘gateway’ thing between their tower and U2’s.
With luck, this will pull up the ‘crew cut’ look of the docklands.

When the new bridge is built, it will make for a good photo with the towers either side of it. If you stand on the east link toll bridge, you can imagine how things might look in a few years.

Just been looking at the point village website and you have to hand it to Harry Crosbie, if the finished article turns out anything like what is proposed then it will be absolutely fantastic. Hopefully this will provide inspiration to other developers ( not to mention the planning authorities ) to think beyond the mundane projects we have become accustomed to thus far. We simply have to start making the most of the economic success the country has enjoyed in recent years as I have no doubt that Dublin has the potential to be right up there with the best of what Europe has to offer. Here`s hoping.

Just looking at this image
http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2006/000265.html

Tthe tower is a horrendous piece of design in my opinion. Just highrise dross with little or no architectural merit.

is construction of the tower itself starting now too or will this be built at a later date?

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

Just looking at this image
http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2006/000265.html

Tthe tower is a horrendous piece of design in my opinion. Just highrise dross with little or no architectural merit.

I agree. The tower looks almost castellated, very strange and in general it’s awful

1st Question – Is this tower now under construction as we speak?

2nd – How can you fit 35 storeys into 120m? That sounds a little tight to me:confused:

3rd – Whats with the architecture of that proposed tower….looks really bland or something.

🙂

€800m Point complex to cater for the high life

ADVERTISEMENT

IT’S being billed as the ultimate in Celtic Tiger luxury high-rise living and entertainment and the response to Irelands’s coastal “wealth belt”.

A 15,000-seater Roman-style amphitheatre and a 120 metre-high apartment skyscraper soaring more than 35 storeys are included in an €800m redevelopment of Dublin’s Point Theatre area approved yesterday.

The massive development will see the audience capacity of the Point almost doubled from its current 8,000 limit.

The new-look Point will have the biggest stages in Europe.

There will also be a second Vicar St music venue on the site, twice the size of the current premises also owned by Point owner Harry Crosbie.

For those fond of high living a signature apartment building to be known as ‘The Watchtower’ will soar 120 metres above the capital.

The 35-storey high skyscraper will be one of tallest ever to accommodate homes and will be as high as The Spire on nearby O’Connell St.

Homeowners will be able to enjoy a drink and meal in the rooftop bar and restaurant on the skyscraper.

The Watchtower will house 300 apartments with a starting price of €500,000, Mr Crosbie said yesterday.

An exterior rooftop bar and restaurant will have unrivalled panoramic views over Dublin Bay.

It will be serviced by glass-sided elevators which will run outside the building.

The landmark project will create 2,000 permanent jobs.

Work began yesterday as soon as permission was granted and is due to be finished in just 14 months.😮 The Point Village plan approved by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority includes a 23,000 sqm shopping centre, hotel, car park and 12 cinema complex.

It will cover a 12-acre site surrounding the Point Theatre on the north docks.

Mr Crosbie said they were already in in negotiation with anchor tenants as well as a number of hotel chains and were planning to start signing contracts with a host of retail chains over the coming months.

“The Point Village is an opportunity that will never come again – a combination of residential and entertainment schemes, a ready catchment area of professionals and attractions that will attract a footfall of millions each year,” he added.

Paul Maloney, DDDA chief executive , said it had always been envisaged that The Point Village would provide key retail services to the entire Docklands area.

He predicted the project would draw significant numbers of visitors to the area from across Dublin and Ireland as well as internationally.

The site will be serviced by six Quality Bus Corridors, the planned Luas line to the Point, and the proposed Macken St Bridge by Calatrava across the Liffey.

A three-floor underground car park will have a capacity for 1,200 vehicles.

Treacy Hogan

I am happy of the prospect of a large shopping centre in this area as i live in Fairview this would be the nearest especially if it is served well by busses. I would not knock the tower just yet as altough it is just a glass box by design, these can have appeal in the skyline. It will be more than likely built of steel and therefore built in the 14 month timeline. The whole area will be a magnet and create a larger city centre, which is just what dublin might need. At present the city centre is very small compared to the greater Dublin area it is supposed to be the centre of.

Don’t get it, the article says that the DDDA were unhappy with the original design, it being too ‘bland’
(not a word i’d be using if i was in the DDDA, given the sleep inducing stuff they’ve already presided over)

Is this yoke in the photomontage actually the revised design ? and are these blind gobshites actually happy with it now ?

Does it actually grow outward at the top? 😮

If they’re going to build something rubbish, they might as well keep it simple.

Here’s a quick chop:

It’s go to be the thinest highrise I’ve ever seen. That thing will be swaying all over the gaf. :p

It’s odd that the Dockland’s Authority requested that a more distinctive tower be built to compliment the U2 tower and they come up with this – to be honest I prefer the previous design – it may have been uninspired but it isn’t an eyesore

that actually does look better Morlan :rolleyes:

is STW responsible for the revised ‘design’ ?

……and only two cars but three bycycles. Is there a cuckoo living in that there foliage up high?

Em..I especially like the two-storey greenhouse that appears to be housed in the top two storeys of the tower… 😀

@Morlan wrote:

Does it actually grow outward at the top? 😮

If they’re going to build something rubbish, they might as well keep it simple.

Here’s a quick chop:

It’s go to be the thinest highrise I’ve ever seen. That thing will be swaying all over the gaf. :p

Does it grow outward? Just looks like it goes straight up in that render.

Thinnest tower in the world? I guess you haven’t seen these then.

By the way, will the tower be next to the water like the U2 tower or will it be set back?

The render was changed to show it going straight out. The real render does appear to go out at the top, hence my comment that it looks almost castellated

The website has been updated today:

http://www.pointvillage.ie/

Looks like its on.

BTW 120m s hardly a ‘skyscraper’.

it actually looks like this skyscraper is being built! i can’t believe my ears.

yeah but it looks crap pepsi …

yeah, i couldn’t agree more.

If that’s what the finished articles are gonna look like either side in the picture well then they look shite. The Point Tower looks stumpy and very isolated. I’ve given up on the Dublin Docks!

The Watchtower is an apt description – a place to look out from, not something to look at. The top is awful, and the glazing generally uninspiring.
What a missed opportunity 🙁

The new look Point by contrast sounds fantastic; the capital will finally have a decent large scale performance venue. The seating sounds very similar in arrangement and capacity to the Globe Arena in Stockholm.

The render Darkman provided does not look good, drab, uninspiring, dull etc etc…..

Also, the high rise building on the south of the liffey is the U2 tower???
If so it also does not look good. hopefully not final deign!

hopefully some pictures of the tower’s progress will be posted over the coming months.

This is very exciting, I for one will definitely post photo’s of progress over the coming months. This will really give the city a new dimension.:)

i wonder was this skyscraper featured on the news recently? i saw nothing. i thought ireland’s first skyscraper would be in there somewhere.

@Pepsi wrote:

i wonder was this skyscraper featured on the news recently? i saw nothing. i thought ireland’s first skyscraper would be in there somewhere.

Thats because this is something you just expect to find to find in a 21st century city. I was in both Brussels and Amsterdam recently and for cities not even the size of Dublin i was constantly looking up at their glassy towers. The recently built Dexia tower in Brussels in particular

http://www.skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=2327

it’s also not “news”… this has been on the cards for years and another 32 storey tower is under construction near heuston plus a 20 storey block was granted out in Sandyford and of course the U2 tower was recently approved. This really is no big deal..

i know there has been talk of these towers for quite some time but i just thought that they might of had something on the tv regarding the construction of ireland’s first skyscraper. i’m glad i missed nothing so.

Originally posted by Keen
Thats because this is something you just expect to find to find in a 21st century city. I was in both Brussels and Amsterdam recently and for cities not even the size of Dublin i was constantly looking up at their glassy towers. The recently built Dexia tower in Brussels in particular

Thats because those cities, like others in Western Europe, have been richer far longer than Ireland, until very recently an island isolated off the West coast, the poor man of Europe. Why build gleaming office blocks when there was no work, and why build tall apartments in a country with mass emigration? Now that has changed of course, and the building boom will lead to skyscrapers – a whole change of attitude is required amongst city planners – they know tourists love the low skyline (yes, they do!), but are finally coming around to the idea that ‘Urban Sprawl’ does not work, and will hopefully now build up in the docks.

@The Denouncer wrote:

Thats because those cities, like others in Western Europe, have been richer far longer than Ireland, until very recently an island isolated off the West coast, the poor man of Europe. Why build gleaming office blocks when there was no work, and why build tall apartments in a country with mass emigration? Now that has changed of course, and the building boom will lead to skyscrapers – a whole change of attitude is required amongst city planners – they know tourists love the low skyline (yes, they do!), but are finally coming around to the idea that ‘Urban Sprawl’ does not work, and will hopefully now build up in the docks.

I dont know if emmigration is so much of a factor because i read somewhere that they are currently planning to build the tallest res tower in europe in poland somewhere, also warsaw has a long history of high rise. Just check out the latest plan here ]http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=783[/url]

I was driving down lexington ave here a while ago and spotted this really ugly building at 425 lex av, while this alone is not news, the fact it reminded me so much of this watchtower is! i really hope that this turns out better than the renders, if not it may kill the chance for any future higher building plans

[ATTACH]3512[/ATTACH]
why couldnt we design something more in the vain of the majestic chrysler (pictured behind)
with the top coming to a natural point rather than this

Property developer Harry Crosbie will submit new proposals next week for his proposed Watch Tower skyscraper on Dublin’s North Wall Quay, opposite the new U2 Tower on the southern side of the Liffey.

Property developer Harry Crosbie will submit new proposals next week for his proposed Watch Tower skyscraper on Dublin’s North Wall Quay, opposite the new U2 Tower on the southern side of the Liffey.

Crosbie has hired a British company to help him revamp the design of the architects Scott Tallon Walker building, after the docklands authorities said the original design was too bland. The tower, which will be as tall as the Spire on O’Connell Street, is designed to complement the U2 tower on the opposite side of the river, which has a more radical design.

Crosbie’s tower is part of a €800 million development around The Point which received planning permission in November from the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA).

However, the DDDA was concerned that the tower was not radical enough in appearance for a structure that would act, along with the U2 tower, as a visual ‘‘gatepost’’ to Dublin.

At 36 floors, the tower will dwarf all buildings around it.

As things stand, the structure is designed to look like two glass posts with the top six floors protruding outwards to make way for an enclosed roof garden.

A spokesman for Harry Crosbie said a ‘‘fenestration’’ company had been hired in Britain to re-work the look and new plans were on the way.

‘‘The DDDA made a couple of negative comments about the tower, so Harry decided to have a second look at the whole thing and to redesign. We can’t say anything more at this stage, but the new design will go in in about a week’s time,” he said.

Planning permission was granted on the grounds that the Watch Tower building was amended, and construction of other parts of the scheme has already started.

The tower will include apartments, offices and a rooftop bar and restaurant with views over Dublin city and bay.

The scheme includes a new shopping centre, a hotel, underground car park and 12-screen cinema. Both the DDDA and Scott Tallon Walker declined to comment, directing all calls to Crosbie.

GOOD ! don’t know why he had to look to an english firm for help though, plenty of young firms here capable of producing something interesting.

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

GOOD ! don’t know why he had to look to an english firm for help though, plenty of young firms here capable of producing something interesting.

Isn’t this the 3rd attempt? 1st was bland and the 2nd one (i.e. current version) wasn’t any better…

Is there any pictures of the re-designed Point Village Tower?

Yes it would be the second attempt to alter this tower.

It really is a hideous building though with that top-heavy capital. It is as if it’s attempting an ironic take on early 20th century skyscrapers, placing the wide pedestal base at the top instead.

Notably a new firm of architects haven’t been brought in that would ruffle STW’s feathers – rather a ‘fenestration company’ is to undertake the reordering. Surely they couldn’t undertake any major structural alterations?

Better then previously in my view but is it good enough?:)

http://www.pointvillage.ie/overview.html

Is it just me or does this look taller then 120m?

Looks like the equivilent of 40 storeys high IF you take into account the Gardens on top. I am definatley not a fan of that cage like structure on top. I hope they are not implying they are going to tinge the windows green!:(

Its still hard to picture this on the skyline though without better renders. Otherwise I think we should be happy the other plan was dropped. Still looks rather bland despite the improvement. So 3rd attempt and still nothing great.

an improvement i suppose but nothing special, looks quite familiar really …

this ‘gateway’ idea is a little basic, oh i know lets put a big high rise on this side & better still one to match on this side ! i have visions of driveway pillars with cast concrete eagles…

there needs to be some scaling up around both & preferably not exactly symmetrical DDDA ! otherwise its just gonna look like two big dicks :rolleyes:

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

an improvement i suppose but nothing special, looks quite familiar really …

this ‘gateway’ idea is a little basic, oh i know lets put a big high rise on this side & better still one to match on this side ! i have visions of driveway pillars with cast concrete eagles…

there needs to be some scaling up around both & preferably not exactly symmetrical DDDA ! otherwise its just gonna look like two big dicks :rolleyes:

Could the Heuston Gate tower look any more basic? Nothing inspiring about that at all. As for PV, its better then Heuston Gate, but the idea does indeed look very similar. Also I find the lack of glass in HG a little disturbing – Hawkins House round 2? Neither tower though is a patch on the proposed U2 tower.

I don’t mind Heuston Gate, think it will sit quite well, although obviously a lot depends on final materials spec etc, quite a safe design. However, it does look as if its basic outline is being replicated here, not sure if its the design or more this gateway concept that i have a problem with.

TBH, In my view, there is no such thing as a ‘gateway’. I think the planners, when they want tall buildings, just mention that concept to appease the inevitable objectors. I dont think the DDDA really believe that once these buildings are built it is going to give some dramatic maritime gateway to Dublin. Thats just seems rediculous. Rather I think they will try to present these buildings as a stepping stone to higher buildings down the line at other points toward the docks. I think once the 100m barrier is broken alot of people will get over this nonsense about Georgian Dublin being destroyed by a couple of tall buildings. These buildings wont even be visible from Georgian Dublin and yet thats one of the objections going around against tall buildings in the Grand Canal Docks area.

None of the heritage groups ever objected to tall buildings in the Grand Canal Dock area. Therefore to suggest that heritage groups have an objection to tall buildings is dishonest.

What heritage groups do object to are poor quality buildings being sited where heritage buildings could suffer negative impacts.

The building proposed for Point Village doesn’t look great; it is a building that doesn’t really define itself as being much more than a form clad in glass.

Something like http://www.panpeninsula.com makes a much more confident contribution.

I never said any paricular groups were critiscising plans for Grand Canal Docks. Mostly local objectors pointing out an impact on Georgian Dublin to Bord Pleanala even for rediculously small buildings like the Malt House. I remember the objections to that. Comical in fact. It could hardly be called ‘highrise’! Also remember Treasury’s original plan for Spencer Dock? The one good thing is that BP did not throw it out on the basis of Georgian Dublin being cited as vulnerable by an 80 metre construction on the North side of the Liffey! NIMBYism is as strong as it ever was in Dublin and people will point to anything to get something stopped.

RE: Heritage Groups. If I am completely honest I think heritage groups in Dublin are against high rise full stop, the vast majority of them anyway.

Anyway back on topic, I agree nothing inspiring here with the new plan:(

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

there needs to be some scaling up around both & preferably not exactly symmetrical DDDA ! otherwise its just gonna look like two big dicks :rolleyes:

Yes, brilliantly put!

I like the new design , a little bland, hopefully the next round of changes will improve that………..

I think the gardens on the top is a pretty cool idea.

Maybe its just me but I dont really like the cage type structure at the top. The garden idea looks fine IMO. At least the building is bulkier as well.

Point Village

Planning Approved
Full section 25 planning permission has been received for this existing development and construction has commenced.
—

It looks exactly the same as Heuston Gate! 😮

It’s bad enough that practically every new office development in north Dublin city centre looks identical, at least those are max 6/7 stories. If these two look the same then there’ll be no escaping the mediocrity!
I’m not an architect, but I imagine a fairly large number of posters/observers here are…is it de rigeur nowadays to not have many original ideas?

Yawn, I can’t believe they brought in English architects to improve the design and that’s what they ended up with.

blah, the current u2 tower proposal is bad, this point tower is terrible. When you look some of the proposals for residential skyscrapers around the world today, these proposals pale in comparison. Both of these projects should be amazing proposals and serve as an inspiration for more skyscrapers in dublin… and they look sh*t.

very bog standard and small.

I would not rush to criticise it simply because those renders are poor in quality. Some computer generated images of it against the skyline would be helpful. Actually it may not look to bad at all if the glazing looks nice.

Also it may look small there but against the surrounding skyline even a 120m building will look big indeed.

darkman, I showed it around my office today and the amount of people who compared it to the Ballymun towers is phenomenal. That’s not a good advertisement for a building.

yeh but jdivision, many Irish people, when confronted with any residential building over 4 storeys ,compare it to Ballymun. Unless of course you work with architects and planners? then i’d be concerned..

I know that the place looks like a bit of a flat souffl

Crosby seems to be pushing ahead quite quickly with this … so it looks like the ‘watchtower’ will be the first of the proposed batch of taller buildings to be constructed & will for a while at least be the tallest building in the state.
Supposed to be all finished by end of 09 …

Tallest on the Island indeed quite easily. Maybe the developers are not prepared to splash out cash on some spectacular design. It has to be said though its a big improvement on the last plan which looked terrible.

Imrovement, yes. Original in any way, no.

I was saying dont judge the building yet till we get better renders. Here are a couple.

It could be argued that at 35 storeys it is not tall enough but it looks ok there.

They are changing their images with the weather. Maybe they are reading this forum 😉

Nothing special. Very boring design.
They’d want to come up with something a little better than that, if they want dubliners to ever accept skyscrapers.

Yet another unoriginal design. One word to describe it. Yawn. :rolleyes:

I’m actually more interested in the design of the point depot. It looks really poor. Yet again another poor design that can’t incorporate a nice modern design into a old classic building.

What exactly is Point Village?
the web site says:

Shopping centre with 300,000 sq.ft of double height retail space.

Is this a ‘retail park’? As in B & Q, PC World, Land of Leather?

@Frank Taylor wrote:

What exactly is Point Village?
the web site says:

Is this a ‘retail park’? As in B & Q, PC World, Land of Leather?

A new “city quarter” is what they’re calling it.

Those renderings look good!

ah its ok, nothing like a dramatic sky render to elevate a building beyond what it really is … it does look better than the previous effort though, particularly when viewed from down river.

I don’t think the last render looks too bad, as long as the cladding and quality turns out alright. As it’s a residential tower i’d like to see the interior as well and the quality of the apartments, it’s a far cry from some horrible overdesigned resi towers built around the place that turn out poorly finished (i would love someithng like Eureka or Q1 in Dublin though…:cool: )

so there should be quite a few high riseish buildings in the area, completed are grand canal dock and the georges quay tower, liberty hall, alto vetro is being built, monte vetro possibly or definetly? u2 tower, point village, what about the 100m in spencer dock? tara street station is supposedly going ahead again, there were also plans for a 19 storey build beside the point depot, is the irish glass bottle site to have a high rise element? am i missing any?

Press release that was sent out earlier:
The WatchTower, the final piece of The Point Village in Dublin’s Docklands, has been granted planning permission by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA). The 120 meter tower will now be topped with a 10,000 square foot multistory brasserie and bar along with a viewing deck all serviced by bullet lifts running up the outside of the building. This 120 metre tower will also include 500 m2 of office space and luxury apartments.

“We will be running a major international competition to commission a piece of art to go on the roof of the WatchTower,” explained Harry Crosbie, Chairman, Point Village Ltd. “The details will be made public in the next few weeks but there will be a substantial prize fund.”

The Point Village will cover a 12 acre site surrounding the Point Theatre and include a the 30,000 square metre Shopping Centre, 13,000m2 of Offices, a 250 bed Hotel and a 12 screen multiplex cinema. The development will have as its signature building “The Watchtower” which, along with the U2 Tower, will form a maritime gateway to the city of Dublin.

“This is the final piece of the jigsaw and we’re delighted,” stated Crosbie. “As we are already in the ground working this will be the first skyscraper in completed in Ireland. And I’m told that on a really clear day you should be able to see Wales from the viewing deck.”

Access for shoppers and tourists will simplicity itself with the Luas bringing them into a new station in the middle of the Point Village. The site will be serviced by six Quality Bus Corridors and the proposed Macken St Bridge by Calatrava across the Liffey. The Dublin Port Tunnel starts right beside the development and the Liffey Voyage, a river taxi, will stop nearby. For those who wish to drive ample parking facilities will be provided in the 3 floor underground car park which has a capacity for 1200 vehicles.

It is expected that The Point Village will be one of the busiest shopping precincts in the city with over 45,000 people living in the Docklands alone as well as the coastal wealth belt. The Point Theatre, which is to be expanded to 15,000 capacity laid out in the style of a curved Roman amphitheatre which will be one of the great venues in Europe, allowing the intimacy of a small venue, will cater for 2 million visitors each year, while a double size Vicar Street is also planned for the development.

Hamilton Osborne King has been appointed to handle all enquiries regarding premises. The building contract for The Point Village has been awarded to Michael McNamara & Co.

Yes looks like this will be the first ‘skyscraper’ in a Dublin context until the 130m U2 tower. Good that this looks like it actually will happen and should alleviate somewhat the STW flat effort of Spencer Dock.

i think those renderings look pretty good

@jdivision wrote:

Press release that was sent out earlier:
…………“We will be running a major international competition to commission a piece of art to go on the roof of the WatchTower,” explained Harry Crosbie, Chairman, Point Village Ltd. “The details will be made public in the next few weeks but there will be a substantial prize fund.”…..

………………The Point Theatre, which is to be expanded to 15,000 capacity laid out in the style of a curved Roman amphitheatre which will be one of the great venues in Europe, allowing the intimacy of a small venue, will cater for 2 million visitors each year, while a double size Vicar Street is also planned for the development………

Is there any more info on how the artwork will sit on the roof?
Will it sit atop and be actually part of the building ?

Also is there any more info or renders of the new point interior or exterior
(most exciting part of this whole project imo)

Great that it got the go ahead!

Just wondering if someone could clarify something. I was just reading this article from the news page on this website:

The developers of the Watchtower project say foundation works are already under way at the site and the tower should be completed by the end of next year. It will be one of two skyscrapers in the development.

Is that the U2 tower across the river or this devlopement on its own?:confused:

That’s incorrect. The other tower (U2) is in the Grand Canal Dock development NOT the Point Village development. Sure, it’s not even in the North Lotts. Might be worth sending them an email.

I cant understand really the lack of enthusiasm or indeed comment on what will be Irelands first skyscraper in a Dublin context. Is it that its Northside of the Liffey? Is it the design? Is it the developer? Why the lack of ‘excitement’ that this building will actually smash the 100m mark. It will finally put the nail in the coffin of Belfast, for example, having a taller building (and Cork too). This is a big deal for Dublin and id have expected far more enthusiasm for it. Since its actually going to happen! Is it not tall enough – 35 floors? What is it thats making this project attract less attention then the U2 tower? This project is incredibly significant for our city in my view. Maybe when the lift shaft is going up its significance might dawn on some:rolleyes:

Ive emailed the developers looking for further renders. This building is going to look very big on the Dublin skyline. The renders we have, I would suggest, underdo its visual impact significantly.

@darkman wrote:

Is it the design?

This is it I think

@malec wrote:

This is it I think

But its a very smart design. Remember the Millenium ‘tower’ had the same dismissal yet it looks good on the skyline. Sometimes keeping it simple is the best and its by no means a bad design. I also hold by the view that once the lift shaft goes up there will be a ‘sudden’ interest.

darkman I agree, so far the docks has been lacking, so this will be a good start on the road to what is should be. When this is up, U2 Tower, the Sam Beckett bridge, Grand Canal Square, and maybe the other one planned near the Bolands Mills are complete, then the docks will start to look a lot better.

I think you ll be waiting and waiting for the u2 tower also Hueston Gate.
The u2 tower will peobably be redesigned and resubmitted for planning so i reckon this time next year before they may even start thinking of getting on site and doing something here.Its only an idea at the moment.
The watchtower should look good.So far the docklands are disappointingly bland.

@darkman wrote:

I cant understand really the lack of enthusiasm or indeed comment on what will be Irelands first skyscraper in a Dublin context. Is it that its Northside of the Liffey? Is it the design? Is it the developer? Why the lack of ‘excitement’ that this building will actually smash the 100m mark. It will finally put the nail in the coffin of Belfast, for example, having a taller building (and Cork too). This is a big deal for Dublin and id have expected far more enthusiasm for it. Since its actually going to happen! Is it not tall enough – 35 floors? What is it thats making this project attract less attention then the U2 tower? This project is incredibly significant for our city in my view.

Tall alone is not impressive. Every 2 bit city around the world has them, desperately trying to portray themselves as advanced.

Now, the turning torso in Sweden, that’s impressive. And the Gherkin and the Grande Arche and the Torre Agbar in Barcelona. But this is just a regular office block – only its residential and it has a cage on the roof and it’s a little higher on one side than the other. So what?

I’d be impressed if they built something that spanned the river.

What do you think of these buildings in Glasgow, Darkman?

Do you find them exciting? Would they make you impressed with Glasgow? Would they be even better if they were another 10 floors higher?
When I see this proposal for Point Village, I am no more moved than I am by seeing these buildings in Glasgow a couple of weeks ago. They make me feel nothing.

You can post a good and bad example of anything. However IMHO the Watchtower and U2 Tower will generate a lot more excitement than what is there already and will be more pleasing to the eye than what is there already. The Docklands needs something, and if the Watchtower is the first tentative step on the ladder to a better Docklands and perhaps a better skyline, then so be it.
We’ll finally get a measure of its impact when its built, until then all the pro and anti discussions in the world will mean nothing.

@darkman wrote:

Maybe when the lift shaft is going up its significance might dawn on some:rolleyes:

Frank good points but if you only highlighted the line above line you might get a straight answer. 😮

Maybe my interpretation is unfair of you Denouncer and some other posters such as Pepsi & Darkman, Stira etc but I have to agree with Devin’s take that many posters are obsessed with height to the exclusion of the underlying quality of proposals. This project will work but it is most certainly no role model to be followed.

Its not an obsession. Small or large the design is important of course but the Docklands would definitely benefit from tall buildings, yes indeed.

@The Denouncer wrote:

the design is important

Call me simplistic but would you not say that nothing else is important; quality is quality whether it is 1cm or 1000m from top to bottom.

In consideration of any design a major component is site suitability; whilst this site is suitable for a tall building many others are not.

What I find difficult to understand is that many of those (who like everyone else) have waited until know for a really tall building in Dublin are so quick to praise this building. It is mediocre at best and if it were proposed for London or Hong Kong people would yawn.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Tall alone is not impressive. Every 2 bit city around the world has them, desperately trying to portray themselves as advanced.

Now, the turning torso in Sweden, that’s impressive. And the Gherkin and the Grande Arche and the Torre Agbar in Barcelona. But this is just a regular office block – only its residential and it has a cage on the roof and it’s a little higher on one side than the other. So what?

I’d be impressed if they built something that spanned the river.

What do you think of these buildings in Glasgow, Darkman?

Do you find them exciting? Would they make you impressed with Glasgow? Would they be even better if they were another 10 floors higher?
When I see this proposal for Point Village, I am no more moved than I am by seeing these buildings in Glasgow a couple of weeks ago. They make me feel nothing.

I see your point but in fairness the tower proposed for the North Lotts looks far better even on the drawn renders then those Glasgow buildings look in reality. I think this tower will look good, I point to the millenium tower again. Remember (and this is something people here seem to forget) not every high rise can be the most stunning of buildings. I think the point village tower looks slender and sleek and the glass looks nice with the blue tint. You have to take into account its location aswell. I think it will be far more interesting then the renders suggest. I think its best to wait until we at least have more information.

@PVC King wrote:

Frank good points but if you only highlighted the line above line you might get a straight answer. 😮

Maybe my interpretation is unfair of you Denouncer and some other posters such as Pepsi & Darkman, Stira etc but I have to agree with Devin’s take that many posters are obsessed with height to the exclusion of the underlying quality of proposals. This project will work but it is most certainly no role model to be followed.

Hi PVC

I am absolutely convinced that no substandard design of skyscraper should be allowed built in Dublin. I take design very seriously. Hueston Gate is high but its design shocks me tbh. It horrid and I personally dont want to see that tower built as it is.

My point about this tower is that it has the potential to sit quite well in that area of the North Lotts. Im looking at it more from the point of view of its geographic location. IMHO this design looks to me like it will fit quite well. Like eveything else though we will just have to wait until construction begins.

@darkman wrote:

I think this tower will look good, I point to the millenium tower again.

Do you think the millenium tower looks good?Here’s a photo Morlan posted:

It looks like any apartment building on the Costa Del Sol, but without the balconies. Zoe Developments, no?

The context of that building is lovely: water right up to the edge on two sides, gets the evening sun, a sunny marina below. Due to the location, not that many people are affected by the shadow casting. I wouldn’t mind if they had gone double the height there: 50 storeys. I guess the height was determined by that mill building across the road.

Remember (and this is something people here seem to forget) not every high rise can be the most stunning of buildings.

Why not? If you want to spend millions cramming a huge amount of floorspace into a tiny plot, should you not have to provide amazing design quality in return?

I think it will be far more interesting then the renders suggest.

It’s rare for a building to turn out looking better than its renders. If you of a case where this has happened, I’d like to see it.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Do you think the millenium tower looks good?Here’s a photo Morlan posted:

It looks like any apartment building on the Costa Del Sol, but without the balconies. Zoe Developments, no?

The context of that building is lovely: water right up to the edge on two sides, gets the evening sun, a sunny marina below. Due to the location, not that many people are affected by the shadow casting. I wouldn’t mind if they had gone double the height there: 50 storeys. I guess the height was determined by that mill building across the road.

Why not? If you want to spend millions cramming a huge amount of floorspace into a tiny plot, should you not have to provide amazing design quality in return?

It’s rare for a building to turn out looking better than its renders. If you of a case where this has happened, I’d like to see it.

Millenium tower (or the models they had at the time)is an example Looked poorer then it actually does in reality because of its setting that you mentioned. However the most obvious is probrably the Ulster Bank building. To say that looked a bad idea in the renderings was an understatement. In fact as far as I remember the developers actually used it as some sort of threat unless a revised scheme got the go ahead. Any it looks quite well IMO.

Not all buildings can be of ‘spectacular’ design simply because economics dictate it. With the housing market now on shakey ground developers will be few in number looking for ‘spectacular’ high rise in Dublin. Thats not to say every high rise cant look good on the skyline. Of course they all should look good. However if your expecting clusters of buildings like in Dubai, thats not going to happen. IMO the best we can look for are good high rise buildings with some spectacular designs in there. I think in terms of spectacular high rise maybe the commercial market woud be a better bet at the moment as opposed to the property market.

The other issue with the ‘watchtower’ is the renderings because we actually have not got enough perspectives. The design cant be that bad because if your planning to sell a 5 million euro penthouse at the top it would want to be something reasonably special! To equate it with those buildings in Glasgow is unfair.

The location will sell the penthouses; the closest analogy you can draw is with a hideously ugly bungalow that is the only one off house in an area of outstanding natural beauty. The occupants don’t care what it looks like because they are they only people who have the perfect view without seeing their property exterior when sitting on the porch chilling with a cool beer on a summers evening.

In any event two factors will determine the value of the penthouses firstly the floor areas and secondly what someone is actually willing to pay for it. It has nothing to do with height and little to do with its design quality from 50m or 5kms.

Interestingly the penthouse world record is held by a very low building at One Hyde Park See Here Which although a much shorter building than this will have a more positive impact on the urban environment. Had a similarly textured approach been done on the point depot building it would have had more of a building. In time it will be regarded as the Aviva Tower to the U2 Towers Gherkin

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Do you think the millenium tower looks good?Here’s a photo Morlan posted:.

That’s actually the 22 story photomontage I made. it’s not that tall in reality.

haha – sorry Morlan, they should have hired you.
Do you ever suspect that these buildings are designed in Excel by colouring in the cells?

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Tall alone is not immpressive…………………….I’d be impressed if they built something that spanned the river…………………………..

.

Maybe something like this Frank
[ATTACH]4570[/ATTACH]
The Collosus at Rhodes……..now thats a ‘Landmark Gateway”:D

The design looks OK, nothing more and it will be the poor cousin of the eventual U2 tower
I’m hoping the glass has a ‘blue’ tint as some previous post mentioned because it looks a kind of green to me

This is what it really looks like

@Frank Taylor wrote:

h
Do you ever suspect that these buildings are designed in Excel by colouring in the cells?

haha yes, that comes after the excruciating task of extruding the square footprint x no. of metres upwards

Does anyone have an update on this? Very little coverage on this. I passed by the site last Saturday but did not get a chance to see what they were actually doing. Just a bit interested. Also i didn’t see any 50 foot Elvis poster??

http://www.dublintraffic.com/Site0Camera125.jpg

Well, this is the camera facing the point and as you can see the only thing that makes this image special is that there is nothing going on at all.

Bare in mind too that this is apparently supposed to be finished by 2009 – Not going to happen now.

based on a city council traffic camera ?

I cant understand really the lack of enthusiasm or indeed comment on what will be Irelands first skyscraper in a Dublin context. Is it that its Northside of the Liffey? Is it the design? Is it the developer? Why the lack of ‘excitement’ that this building will actually smash the 100m mark. It will finally put the nail in the coffin of Belfast, for example, having a taller building (and Cork too). This is a big deal for Dublin and id have expected far more enthusiasm for it. Since its actually going to happen! Is it not tall enough – 35 floors? What is it thats making this project attract less attention then the U2 tower? This project is incredibly significant for our city in my view. Maybe when the lift shaft is going up its significance might dawn on some

Its attitudes like this that make this country seem somewhat backward at times. Yes lets have a parade because we’re finally building a skyscraper over 100m when people in manhattan and chicago were building them over 100 years ago.

Why the lack of excitement? Maybe its a good sign maybe its a sign we’re growing up and no longer view the development of a high tower as say equal to the excitement generated by the first man landing on the moon say..

@Keen wrote:

Does anyone have an update on this? Very little coverage on this. I passed by the site last Saturday but did not get a chance to see what they were actually doing. Just a bit interested. Also i didn’t see any 50 foot Elvis poster??

There is a large deep hole north of the Point Depot, covering the development site. The 50-foot Elvis poster is mounted on six stacked 40-ft containers.

This is the one I think. I can also tell you there is a crane on site but not a big crane…..but definatley some movement down there at last.

At least they chose the younger Elvis, not the sequinned Las Vegas one.

@Hiivaladan wrote:

At least they chose the younger Elvis, not the sequinned Las Vegas one.

lmao

any pictures of this crane floating around?

There are a couple of small cranes beside the point – looks like enabling works to me. No pics. Getting information on the tower itself is like pulling teeth,

This is the best I can find and even it is out of date with the tower design.

http://www.savills.ie/images/commercial/10006333/_brochure.pdf

There is nothing on the Scott Tallon Walker site either.

If anyone else digs up anything else please post it!;)

Im also very confused at exactly what is suppose to be finished by 2009 – the shopping center, the tower, the point???????

Drove past the site today. Definately construction work going on behind the Point. Looks like foundation works. Also confirmation that the tower will be 35 storeys high. http://www.crosbieproperty.ie/point2.html

great news.

Looks like the tower is growing. :rolleyes: Cant see half of the Point now.

Saw the lift shaft today but is it the actual tower though?

i hope it is the tower. i’m getting tired of waiting.

The plans suggest it is the tower! Irelands first 35 storey has started!?:D :rolleyes: 🙂

Lets hope its better then the renders 😀

If there was some actual news I would send in the defibrullators for some posters on this site

This rehashing of no news is becoming tiresome.

I most defo would consider this as news. 😀

Normally you would be right, however this is Ireland and in Ireland we have been waiting a long while now for these 30+ floor building to actually start being constructed and not be stuck on the plans like U2 and Heuston etc.

Now quick, wheres my defibrillator. Ouch that hurts . Quick give me that laughing gas…. Ahhhhhhhhh yes thats better.:D

Look at the line up on the board!

This was always going to happen once planning consent was secured

You would probrably realise the significance when the lift shaft reaches a certain height. I think its great news:) (assuming of course it is the tower which were not 100% sure but anyway…). It could be the building to the right of the tower – the shopping center? http://www.mcnamaraconstruction.com/experience/projects.asp?id=108&proj_section=2

Can’t someone working in the area just ask one of the builders down there if the lift shaft is for the 35 floor tower.

Passed there yesterday – looks like the district centre to me – sorry skyscraper fans

I know someone working on this project,they are still completing the fire cert for the tower-its not due to start until the end of september

@shed wrote:

I know someone working on this project,they are still completing the fire cert for the tower-its not due to start until the end of september

Are you sure you not thinking of Heuston Gate? They are also waiting for their fire certificate.

No pretty sure he said the watchtower

Yeah had a look today at the site.Initially i thought it was the tower.Its a fairly significant looking lift shaft but according to the plans it looks like it may be further away from the road than that.Its surprising considering the builder is on site since late last year one would have thought the tower would be priority and that a fire cert would not be holding up construction.If the current shaft levels go up another couple of levels then you would have to assume its the tower.Although those cranes dont look like they would be suitable to go higher with the shaft’.
Also seen as Hueston Gate was mentoned is there a builder on site and is this now due to start soon?

Looks like there is another shaft going up further down toward the point.

Dunnes Strores to anchor shopping center:

http://www.ddda.ie/index.jsp?pID=93&nID=94&aID=433

Drove past today, alot of activity there now, and the second lift shaft has a tower crane being built next to it…..;)

i guess we’ll know when a very tall crane goes in there. i can’t wait for the watchtower to go up.

Hey there…not been vocal on here in a while, but I know for a fact (I know someone involved) that the lift shafts currently under construction are for the District Centre. Work on the Tower itself is due to commence quite soon though too. As mentioned before, they are still waiting for to sort Fire Cert.

how high is dis bad boy?is it 100 r 130 lik U2

Wow, Lots of construction going on in this pic, that’s a lot of concrete shafts for the district centre, how many stories is it supposed to be anyway? And we have a tower crane up!

35 storeys high the tower will be. It says it will be 120m however I suspect that it may well be a little higher.

@Keen wrote:

Wow, Lots of construction going on in this pic, that’s a lot of concrete shafts for the district centre, how many stories is it supposed to be anyway?

Distric Centre is 6 floors with one setback.

Judging by the camera angle, these lift shafts are for the Distrct Centre

You are such a Photoshop showoff Morlan! LOL

the tower is quite a bit in from the river isn’t it?

Aye, 185 meters to be precise. U2 tower is only 25m from the river.

@StephenC wrote:

You are such a Photoshop showoff Morlan! LOL

One of my favorite pastimes! 🙂

@Morlan wrote:

Aye, 185 meters to be precise. U2 tower is only 25m from the river.

One of my favorite pastimes! 🙂

That kind of compromises the whole ‘gateway’ concept, but maybe that’s not so bad. But there should be a great view of the point tower up that street there, whatever it’s called.

As I’ve said elsewhere previously:
@ctesiphon wrote:

Why do we keep hearing about the notion of a ‘gateway’? Has anyone here ever approached Dublin up the Liffey from the bay? This concept is about as valid as calling the U2-Point pair ‘two fingers to Europe’. Can we drop it, please?

(Also, Morlan- you know that’s a live link to the DCC traffic camera you’ve put in there, I presume? ;))

I have my doubts now that that is the district centre.Must be the tower.Are they only building one side of the district centre first in that case.It definitely looks to high now.I eat my words if i m wrong of course

@ake wrote:

But there should be a great view of the point tower up that street there, whatever it’s called.

Yep, will be worth the 12 Euro tunnel toll when flying home to skip depressing Dorset street and see this instead :p

@ake wrote:

But there should be a great view of the point tower up that street there, whatever it’s called.

Yes, it should be a fantastic view from Harbourmaster Place with the tower terminating the street 1.3km away. It will be one of the longest linear streets in Ireland.

A perspective from Mayor Street Upper & the Spencer Dock development.

And another view from Mayor Sq.

View from Grand Canal Dock.

@mcdanish wrote:

I have my doubts now that that is the district centre.Must be the tower.Are they only building one side of the district centre first in that case.It definitely looks to high now.I eat my words if i m wrong of course

it does look high alright. i hope it is the tower. 🙂

Its great to check back onto this site and see this progress (of sorts)

Thanks for the work posting the pics Morlan, and the live cam, sweet!! 😉

What site do you get the traffic cam shot from? I have a http://www.dublincity.ie page but the cams only go up to no.98 or something

@paul h wrote:

Its great to check back onto this site and see this progress (of sorts)

Thanks for the work posting the pics Morlan, and the live cam, sweet!! ]www.dublincity.ie[/url] page but the cams only go up to no.98 or something

No probs 🙂
dublincity.ie doesn’t show all availalbe cameras for some reason. You can access all of them here: http://dublintraffic.com/cameras.htm

@Morlan wrote:

Yes, it should be a fantastic view from Harbourmaster Place with the tower terminating the street 1.3km away. It will be one of the longest linear streets in Ireland.

And more good news – work seems to have begun on Luas. The route is sectioned off all the way from Connolly down to the Point.
Pics below show Upper Mayor Street and Lower Mayor Street.

These works are (on Mayor St Lower, at least) for the relocation of services, IIRC the LUAS itself will be on the southern half of the street, rather than the northern which is being worked on at the moment.

Ok thanks. I had an idea it was just preliminary works as there are no contractor / company notices anywhere.

Well i’m basing that on a leaflet they dropped into the apartment before they started digging up the street, the works on Mayor St Upper could be more substantial, I’m not sure.

Fair play to Harry Crosby all the same. At least he’s got his finger out and got on with the job.

tis a pity that fashionable street will be a messy building site for the next few years.

i took a drive down here today. the concrete piles don’t seem to be getting any taller.

One of the lift shafts went up another floor this afternoon. Having driven past the site the gap between the point and the district center is quite small now. Had me thinking surely one of those lift shafts is the tower!? Anyway the one that went up today actually makes that shaft look a little tall for a shopping center but maybe thats just the nature of the build ing – i dont know……..

i noticed that too. it’s all a bit of a mystery to be honest.

the concrete piles don’t seem to be getting any taller here. i imagine if one were the watchtower it would be going up a lot faster.

@Pepsi wrote:

the concrete piles don’t seem to be getting any taller here. i imagine if one were the watchtower it would be going up a lot faster.

A second crane on site and the point is coming down brick by brick.Things gathering pace on this site i m sure the watch tower will start to rise in the next couple of months.

@Pepsi wrote:

the concrete piles don’t seem to be getting any taller here. i imagine if one were the watchtower it would be going up a lot faster.

According to an interesting articule in the current edition of Business and Finance magazine which focuses on all proposed highrises for Dublin, it said the Point Tower was waiting on a fire certificate before it could actually commence construction. So any existing construction or concrete shafts must relate to other buildings being built in the complex.

The property developers informd me today that construction on the tower has already started. 🙂

I agree it cant be long now before it starts going up. The site is a hive of activity now:

@Morlan wrote:

The property developers informd me today that construction on the tower has already started. 🙂

i hope it has started. we’ve all been waiting a long time for them to build it.

@darkman wrote:

I agree it cant be long now before it starts going up. The site is a hive of activity now:

i can just about make out another (small) concrete pile to the right of the site going up. i wonder what that is?:)

Fair play to Harry Crosbie!

http://www.pointvillage.ie/images/GERRYRYAN2007.jpg

:rolleyes: Sure has a quirky advertising campaign.

Here are the excavation works for the tower. You can see the Point Depot to the left.

The excavation works at the back of the truck must be for the escalators in Point Square.

And the District Centre

Why are you assuming they don’t have a fire safety cert darkman??

Thats what was said on this forum recently and in some of the newspapers – whether its still true or not – I dont know:confused:

Heuston Gate is waiting for its Fire Cert, not sure about the Point Tower though.

Morlan it may be difficult to gauge from where you took the picture but can ou say how advanced the excavation for the tower might be?:)

It’s impossible to tell from the gate, but I’m guessing it will Dec/Jan before we see the lift shaft rising out of the ground.

From your pictures it looks like the District center is going to be a pretty big building on its own! The footprint looks quite large.

Sorry, this is old news, but 130,000 square feet for Dunnes, that’s half of Dundrum Town Centre 😮

Dunnes Stores and Point Village Announce Anchor Tenant Agreement

Today Dunnes Stores revealed that it will be the anchor tenant for the Point Village. The deal will see Dunnes take 130,000 square feet of space spread over three floors within the retail element of the village.

The new Dunnes Stores outlet will feature the full Dunnes range including a large food court and fresh produce section, fashion for all the family and home furnishings/furniture.

A spokesperson for Dunnes confirmed the move and stated that the company was looking forward to providing a much needed facility incorporating its full range of products for the growing population of not only of the Docklands but also the surrounding residential catchment. “This will be another City Centre flagship store for us which will include the most up to date modern facilities for customers taking advantage of the quality and design of the Point Village and the extremely customer friendly 1300 capacity car park. The store will incorporate travealators as well as customer lifts.”

“Being able to come to an agreement with the biggest and most respected name in Irish retailing is particularly pleasing,” explained Harry Crosbie, Chairman, Point Village Ltd. “And we’ve agreed a plan that will see Dunnes leading one of the most remarkable retail developments the country has seen. The Village will include the Watchtower opposite the U2 Tower which together will form a marine gateway to the city.”

The Point Village and its shopping quarter will be serviced by a mix of public and private transport. Central to this will be the LUAS line which will serve the Point’s own station, along with at least six quality bus corridors along the quays and the Dublin Port Tunnel. Two new Liffey bridges will connect the site to the southside. River taxis are being introduced and the ferry across the Liffey is coming back.

With an expected population of 65,000 people the Docklands is expected to contribute a significant number of customers while the PointVillage sits at the centre of Dublin’s coastal wealth belt, and will provide a unique retail experience to a much larger catchment area. Meanwhile the Point Village Complex will also act as a major tourist attraction and will be serviced by a 275 bed hotel to be operated by the Clarion Group in addition to a newly extended Point Arena and a new Vicar Street.

Harry Crosbie is also chairman of the National Conference Centre at Spencer Dock and the Libeskind theatre at Grand Canal Quay. These two projects, along with the Point Village will act as people magnets, shifting the centre of gravity of the city down the river Liffey. All in all the development is 1.85 million square feet and will cost €850 million. Construction is well advanced.

cant wait for this bad boy to rise! 120m is gonna have a big impression,nearly twice the height of any existing building with the exception of those chimneys. My only concern is the design is nothing special and as irelands first true high rise its gonna turn people off..

Interesting view of The Point there Morlan. Looks like a derelict Big House in the country 🙂

Apparently in the redevelopment of The Point itself, its western wall will be demolished and the theatre extended out towards the city, thus preserving the river and rear facades. It’s being conducted by the leading international venue designers HOKSVE at a cost of €80 million, and will have a capacity of 14,000 in amphitheatre style as previously mentioned. The project is expected to have the remarkable turnaround time of about 18 months, reopening in late 2008, having only closed in August. That’s private sector efficiency for ya.

The new entrance is to be through the arched facade fronting the quays afaik… it’ll be nice to have a decent venue of this size & good location too. Was at a gig in the RDS a while ago and it really is just not suitable, dreadful layout, no atmosphere, crap sound.

No change there then 😀

Passed The Point this evening: the building is a gutted shell, wilh no roof and all the walls buttressed and braced – a facade retention of epic proportions. The westerm wall is also just beginning to come down – looks like someone’s taken a big bite out of the top of it. Impressive so much has been stripped out and the structure secured in the six weeks since the last event was held there at the end of August.

I think the new point is the best part of this, it sounds good – purpose built14000 seater,
Thank god someone out there is thinking big!!

Is there any drawings available of the plans or layout or the building itself??

i see a fourth concrete pile going up on this site. i saw it through a traffic camera. i must say it’s going up very fast. does anyone know what it is?

@Pepsi wrote:

i see a fourth concrete pile going up on this site. i saw it through a traffic camera. i must say it’s going up very fast. does anyone know what it is?

If anything it’s another shaft for the District Centre. They haven’t even finished excavating the foundations for the tower yet.

there is now a fifth concrete pile going up on this site. i wish they’d ever hurry up and build the tower.

Someone please have a picture of the gutted Point 😀 I hated that place so much that a picture of the ruins would be very satisfying 😀

I’m confused. I was on the loop line bridge this morning and saw some concrete piles nearer the river with different cranes to the ones in this photo…2 piles i think and they were about 10 stories tall guessing that they were taller than that Spencer dock building by about 2 floors and were poking up behind it. Is this anything to do with the point otherwise what could this be? Looks to be where the tower is planned but you can’t see them in those traffic camera shots?

Might it have been the Conference Centre in Spencer Dock?

Dosent really matter once this baby starts to rise there certainly wont be any confusion. Cant wait to see all those nimbys look up in horror…

it does look like it could be the conference centre alright.

I work near by and it is definitely the conference centre, on memory I believe the feature glass barrel at the front will be close to 50 metres in height:)

God, I’m not liking the look of those renders. Very Generic looking.
For Ireland’s first skyscraper, they could have come up with a more interesting design.

True the design is very bland but hopefully when we get the first skyscraper out of the way we might get some good looking designs, (like the bank of China tower in Hong Kong or something that actually looks different), for future ones. Although this could work the other way if the Watchtower looks crap when it’s built.

Here’s the Bank of China tower for those who haven’t seen it.

Any evidence as yet that this tower is on its way up?

STW are always very safe or even bland with their designs. Some of their buildings look very refined, clean and quite striking(Spencer Dock Development)but alot of their architecture is quite soulless and unimaginative i feel

I don’t think Scott Tallon Walker have been since the late 70s. Ever since its been

Grey cladding
all right angles
except for 45 degree roofed atriums
Golden section windows
Stagnation
Funny window canopies
Bland
Cheap college buildings
Grey
Boring
More greyness
Dull corporate architecture

with one or two exceptions..

But wasn’t the watchtower redesigned by some British ‘fenestration’ company? Replacing the even blander uglier stw design.

DCC should have sent them back for a fourth redesign I reckon.

Already posted this but its been overlooked obviously. As soon as a big lift shaft starts going up toward the left hand side and at the back of the current construction – that will be the tower. No sign yet.

A real tower, compare this to anything proposed for Dublin? Perhaps the DDDA should take a trip to Dubai to see twisting and height.

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=1209

@CC105 wrote:

Perhaps the DDDA should take a trip to Dubai to see twisting and height.

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=1209

…and unsustainable vanity projects built on virtual slave labour.

Walked past the whole development today on my way down Castleforbes road. This is a damn big project, about 8 piles in the site, some underground parking is starting to take shape and there is still a huge hole where there tower should be, lots and lots of work going on. The point is half stripped, only the front facade left, and some huge steel beams going up behind it already. I took a pic with my phone, Apologies for the dodgy angle! 😛

Great shot
Is this the new point? looks huge

I’d say its the shopping centre Paul …

Anyone who can really should go down to have a look at this site in the flesh. I passed it today and it is a development of mammoth proportions. It’s a like a warzone down there! Massive levels of excavation over vast tracts of land, huge lift shafts sternly cropping up across the landscape, sprawling steel section frames rising like Meccano sets, the site teeming with life, and all against the backdrop of a gutted shell of a Point Theatre.
Truly incredible scenes – well worth a look.

Any thing on the tower yet? foundation works? will be interesting to see developement of the tower through 2008, this is the only of the proposed high rise developements that’s defo going ahead as far as I know. Heuston Gate and U2 Tower seem to be suspended in planning oblivion. The National conference centre will be quite tall though. Nearly as tall as Liberty Hall.

Heauston Gate has planing permission and will go ahead,apparently its waiting on a fire cert.AFAIK this tower should be under construction by now so have no idea whats going on.

is anyone else worried that the tower element of the point development may become a casualty of the propety slump or even delayed until the market recovers? i presume that apartments in such a landmark building would quite be expensive, thereofre im thinking that given the current market conditions would they sell??

Rent them out. After the shopping centre is fully let I’d be surprised if its investment value didn’t cover land cost plus construction cost (provided of course that market holds up in some way). After that it’s profit.

I agree the shopping centre will deliver significant investment value as the area literally from Clontarf to Merrion is seriously under shopped.

I don’t subscribe to a major residential housing slump in the medium term as supply has virtually dried up if recent housing starts are anything to go by; if this is built it will take at least 2 years to completion allowing plenty of time for the market to recover like it did in late 1993 after the 1991 slump.

@paul h wrote:

Great shot
Is this the new point? looks huge

I think this is interesting !!

@Overworked wrote:

I think this is interesting !!

Not sure about that very square looking point depot, tower looks lost all on its own

I have to admit, i like the new Point !!!

@Overworked wrote:

I think this is interesting !!

Point looks like a petrol station. Some kind of dome surely would be the natural thing.

Yea, great big glass dome would be sweet, but the high cost would be a factor im sure

Great pictures Overworked thanks, any shots of the planned interior??

@paul h wrote:

Yea, great big glass dome would be sweet, but the high cost would be a factor im sure

Great pictures Overworked thanks, any shots of the planned interior??

I would imagine and hope the acoustic engineering necessities dictated the form, wouldn’t a dome be a nightmare sound wise?. Dublin’s never had a purpose built arena sized venue for concerts so hopefully it’s a marked improvement soundwise…

Surely the perfect spot for Fosters skycatcher!

@Overworked wrote:

I think this is interesting !!

I think the tower looks worse than I expected. Ballymun architecture for the 21st century. I predict it will be hated by people within five years of completion.

@Overworked wrote:

I have to admit, i like the new Point !!!

Where did you find the images? I can’t find anything about it on the architects or engineers’ websites.

@tommyt wrote:

I would imagine and hope the acoustic engineering necessities dictated the form, wouldn’t a dome be a nightmare sound wise?. Dublin’s never had a purpose built arena sized venue for concerts so hopefully it’s a marked improvement soundwise…

if i’ve learned anything (and i probably haven’t), its that there is no limit to what can be achieved – engineering wise…

Yes hopefully (dear god) it will be a marked improvement.
It certainly does not look too hot from the outside but as your Grandmother would say – it matters what your like on the inside

I have to admit though, the last few gigs I went to in the Point, the sound was bloody excellent. They got a new rig about 3 or 4 years ago and it blew me away the first time. Back in the day it was absolute arse but in recent times it was great. I really can’t wait for this to take shape.

I’ve been told that the foundations for the tower have been laid, and they are now driving girders into the perimeter. Bag of shite? I can’t tell. I’m here in Valencia smoking hot Spanish women.

“Ye’d be up dere in de Point Teartre in Dublin, and you’d be singin a song, like, and you’d be wonderin if anyone could hear a fuckin’ word yer sayin'” – Christy Moore.

C’mon, An Pointe Nua! Hurry the fuck.

Those renders don’t inspire really. Makes the Point look like a B&Q outlet. But I’ve seen the new frame going up in the flesh and its got nice dimensions, so hopefully the real thing will look better. Incidentally, what’s with dropping the “Depot”? Always thought Point Depot was a great name. But I digress..

why exactly is there such a long delay in bulding this skyscraper? it should be well under construction! it’s very annoying.

Anyone care to take a gander through the east gate on East Wall Road? The tower foundations are right there, like. I was there 4 months ago. An update would be great.

Passed there the other day, no real movement on the tower as yet – the retail element is flying up though (probably as they have signed up tenants already) and the residential nature of the tower means there is no point in building until the market correction (ahem) is complete.

Huge banner of Gay Byrne “the first mayor of point village” – whatever they are on this week I don’t know?!?!

Thanks.

There is a 12 mtr deep hole for the 3 story basement of the tower. Currently, at the bottom of this, they are driving (Drilling) 1 mtr wide & 25 mtr deep piles into the ground to support the weight of the tower

If piling has started then this is officially under construction.

about bloody time!!!!!:D

well hallelullah !!
Ive wondered why in ireland they seem to build the lift shaft first, then the rest of the building?
over here they build each entire floor plate upwards , floor by floor

i’m not holding my breath. that’s too good to be true…

Reckon the point will be ready for when Dustin brings the Eurovision back next year? 😀

Even tho its a night time graphic this is my fave render of the project,arguably the least wel designed of the big three but personally I quite like it.

The Point Has to be open by the end of this year – I recall reading that there are already major acts lined up to give it a major relaunch so their dates are not likely to flex with changes to building schedules etc. All publicity including the site selling “premium seats” says “opening in 2008” also.

So yes Eurovision 2009 WILL in fact be in the Point…;)

I have to say, I can’t wait for it to open. It’s apparently the only arena type venue in Europe designed specifically for concerts. The much lauded O2 inside the dome in London, by the same design team, is compromised by having the typical long basketball court configuration whereas the Point will have a much squarer plan meaning more of the audience will be sitting facing and in closer proximity to the stage. Fair play to Crosbie for having such vision – with the Point and the new Grand Canal Theatre suddenly Dublin will have two world class cultural venues. Im not a huge fan of the externals of either scheme but from what I can tell both will have superb facilities and interiors.

@BTH wrote:

Im not a huge fan of the externals of either scheme but from what I can tell both will have superb facilities and interiors.

I imagine that the externals weren’t the priority on the Point anyway, but did they have to go for the aesthetics of a loaded container ship?

It ought to have been possible to express a contrast between original fabric and the contemporary additions without resorting to the aesthetic device of polar opposites.

Is there no room for subtlety in today’s architecture.

It would help slightly if the three sad gables weren’t left there like memorials to the lost shed roofs. HKR proposed the same treatment for some two storey warehouses on the Digital Hub (windmill) site, and it didn’t work there either.

Adding height above retained lower layers is absolutely a valid urban intensification approach, but if you’re going to take the roof off a structure and add several new storeys, you have to sacrifice the whole roof, including the gables, otherwise the resultant structure just looks parasitic not symbiotic.

@gunter wrote:

I imagine that the externals weren’t the priority on the Point anyway, but did they have to go for the aesthetics of a loaded container ship?

That’s exactly what it looks like alright. I’d have hopes that the lighting scheme will add a bit of drama to the proceedings but Id have preferred something a lot more simple and elegant in architectural terms – think the new layers on top of Tate Modern, not the trendy randomized effect that dosent seem to relate in any way to the proportions of the old facades.

And now that you mention it, losing the gables and levelling off the top of the existing structures would make a world of difference to the overall effect. No doubt though keeping as much of the existing structures as possible was a pre-requisite to get over the preservation lobby… I actually think that the glazed facade should maybe have come down and layered OVER the flanking rubble stone wall, with an in -between zone that would have been fantastic for lobbys, bars, restaurants etc. and the historic stone wall as a dramatic internal feature. The side elevation – probably the most seen of all – is a bit flat and dull in the scheme under construction – nice original arched windows granted but the overall composition with the big glass box hovering overhead is pretty clumsy.

Just snapped these passing by yesterday;
[ATTACH]6995[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]6996[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]6997[/ATTACH]

What’s all this about ‘getting rid of’ the gables on the Point building? It’s not just a case of appeasing ‘the preservation lobby’; without the gables, the building would have a ‘short front and sides’ look and the ‘new’ architecture (which you admit lacks imagination) would be put into even starker relief. You cannot just get rid of historic architecture; if you’re going to ‘add’ to it you can’t eliminate it to suit the new style. Better to demolish it and lose a part of urban history forever than mutilate it. What will be the lifespan of the ‘new’ Point – 25, 20 15 years…? Too late then to say that the old rail depot had some integrity.
Some of you clearly have all the historical sensitivity of the madman who planted the mine in the Four Courts and destroyed the archival history of 700 years; most of what is built today will be so yesterday tomorrow.

It’s great to see a big development like that actually in progress. The Heuston Gate has hit a dead end, the U2 Tower seems less twisted in architectural design and more twisted in legal complexities. Well done, Harry Crosbie, for seeing this project through. Perhaps the others developing the U2 Tower and Heuston Gate will be motivated by this development and hurry up.

The amount of people that must be working on that site. I’d imagine big developments like this are helping to soak up builders that are less busy on other projects now the building sector is in correction.

Just to clarify, neither of us were talking about removing the external gable that can be seen in the large image I posted above. I realize reading back that it sounds like I was justifying shearing the whole top off the front block!! Rather it’s the three blank ends to the old sheds that will be stranded amid all that glazing that I could happily lose. They can be seen in the shot from across the river above. Personally I think they look ridiculous, tokenistic and take away from the elegance of the front facade when seen from across the river.
And for your information Johnglas, I’m VERY historically sensitive. 😉 I just also happen to have strong opinions as to what is worth retaining and how to balance conservation with an end result that will be visually harmonious. In this case taking away the gables would just be tinkering – it’s going to be a fancy glassy lump with a nice old facade wrapping around two sides and nothing more exciting anyway.

On a more positive note, great to see that big things CAN be built quickly in this country.

Those renderings are quite good, even though the new architecture looks somewhat bland. As BTH says, will they have the Point finished in time next year for to host the Eurovision after Dustin wins it this year ?

BTH: I’ve no reason ro doubt your sensitivity, but I’m not convincedit’s such a big issue and to destroy the old to justify the aesthetics of the bland new seems to me a step too far. What if in 10 years time everyone hates the current intervention and wants to redo it making more positive use of the old building form?

Just to back up BTH on his explanation of the disembodied gables argument, sorry if I caused confussion before.

I hadn’t realized that the new glass mega-box spilled out over the western elevation of the old Point Depot, or did I understand you to say that this side wall is gone completely!

Either way,I don’t think this one is going to win conservation project of the year!

What happened to ‘Protected Structure’ status, or was the ‘exceptional circumstances’ clause invoked? If a structure is ‘Protected’ under the DCC Development Plan, but the planning authority is now DDDA, does that mean the structure is now not ‘Protected’ or, would we be able to tell the difference anyway? Where was that nice DCC conservation lady who savaged the Lord Norman scheme for the Clarence Hotel?

I know that the priority here is to deliver the world class concert venue that we haven’t had since Hawkins House replaced the Theatre Royal, but if it doesn’t fit on the Point Depot site, without knocking down half the Point Depot, then you have to find another site. I don’t know, stick it on stilts in the river! No, cross that out, I did not say that.

Great. So it’s world class on the inside but it’s B&Q on the outside! I had hoped for more. Is this some kind of Doctor Who thing?

Is the tower definitely under construction? It’s really exciting to see something actually getting done! does antone know the satus of the new luas bridge going across Spencer Dock?

I can confirm that they are continuing with the foundations for the watchtower. In the meantime, here is a render of the Northern Elevation of the New Point

It’s a real shame that they couldn’t have built this on the next site over, and we could have had two decent buildings side by side (a great concert hall and a great exhibition hall) instead of one schizophrenic one.

Nice rendering , but the final revamped building doesn’t really amount to anything much visually. Looks like a big office meets an Aldi, very bland and suburban. The lack of symmetry too adds to it’s overall odd look.

It looks like a vast expanse of open space which I’m not keen on. Given our weather and the location, I suspect that regularly this will be a bleak windswept desert. I’d rather more was packed into the site and that they made some attempt at creating an urban feel by building a denser variety of buildings.

@jimg wrote:

It looks like a vast expanse of open space which I’m not keen on. Given our weather and the location, I suspect that regularly this will be a bleak windswept desert. I’d rather more was packed into the site and that they made some attempt at creating an urban feel by building a denser variety of buildings.

Small bit of refuge under this yoke.

they seem to be working on the foundation for the tower a good while now. why is there such a long delay in going to construction?

That’s always the slow bit; once it passes ground level it will shoot up.

I passed the Point earlier today. The tower looks to be up about 5 or 6 storeys, but I couldn’t get a good shot. The front is starting to look even less ‘classy’ than the renders suggested, which is saying something.

I took a quick snap of the main block where it extends out past the front facade. The render hinted at some arty vertical slit window thing, on a random pattern, but what is emerging looks like the back of a standard toilet block, fronting the river!

Maybe somebody has more up-to-date information.

I couldn’t really concentrate after seeing this mega poster on the corner facing the toll bridge.

ROCK GOD!

It seems that the Point are signing up acts already.

I don’t know if they’re goin’ to get away with God Rock though, I thought Papa Ratty was just the leader of one of the ‘God Rock’ tribute bands.

My god that grey cladding looks horrific,lets hope the overall development will be to a higher standard.

That silver grey cladding is the pits alright – it’s not even zinc or steel, it looks like cheapest of the cheap kingspan aluminium….

It’s not looking good, is it? When the SECC (Scottish Exhibition and Conference Centre) was built here in the late 70s, it was clad in some pedestrian metal cladding and painted salmon pink! It is now battleship grey and doesn’t look any better.
Has anyone seen any illustrations of what the interior will look like? Presumably they’re spending their money there.

only 3 weeks ago people were saying that they were still working on the tower’s foundation. how can it have shot up to 5/6 storeys already? is the tower really under construction or is it some other part of the point project we’re seeing above? if it is the tower, cool.:)

Its always like that Pepsi, the big hole takes for ever and then next thing you know its built and the fit out takes ages.

that can’t be the final facade surely ??????????? !

how come we’re not seeing a concrete pile above? shouldn’t that be the first step to building such a tall tower block? alto vetro had one and that’s about half the height of the watchtower. it seems a bit odd.:confused:

@Pepsi wrote:

only 3 weeks ago people were saying that they were still working on the tower’s foundation. how can it have shot up to 5/6 storeys already? is the tower really under construction or is it some other part of the point project we’re seeing above? if it is the tower, cool.:)

Sorry about this, I thought this was the tower. I forgot that there was another lower building in front of the tower. Like I said, I was distracted by the pope.

They’re sticking the drum rings on the conference centre, if that’s any compensation.

seems to be decent progress with the ncc alright, looks to be ahead of schedule given the 2010 completion date ? (not that we haven’t waited an age to get to this point).

I knew that couldn’t be the tower the lift shaft should be the first thing up

What’s the deal with the picture of the pope?
Is he planning a trip to Ireland or something?

that would be an ecumenical matter.

Not architectural. In other words, I have’t a clue, for one

@Blisterman wrote:

What’s the deal with the picture of the pope?

well we’re all talking about it, so i guess thats the deal/purpose.

the luas works are going well. the bulk of the track work is set to commence at the end of this month on upper mayor street. The luas will most likely be up and running before the tower’s finished

The luas will most likely be up and running before the tower’s finished

Dont they have to build the bridge through Spencer dock first though, and that probably wont start for a while until most of the spencer dock development is nearly finished.

I’m surprised that that much work has been done on the bridge already. I was down there last week and had a look from the docklands station into spencer dock and didnt see much (admittedly its not that close to the bridge site and I just assumed that whatever was going on there was normal work on the SD development).

AMSE Wins Contract for Point Village Watchtower

31/3/08

AMSE has secured the structural steelwork contract for the Point Village Watchtower, which will be the signature building in an €800 million development on the North side of Dublin Quays.

The Watchtower will rise over 120 metres over the Quays and will include luxury apartments, office space, a mini TV and radio studio and rooftop bar and restaurant with panoramic views over Dublin Bay and the City.

AMSE will fabricate 2500 tonnes of steel for the project, which will be erected on site by our specialist erection crews in 50 weeks. The expected completion date for the project is 2009.

AMSE is delighted to once again be working with Main Contractors McNamara Construction, Structural Engineers O’Connor Sutton Cronin and Architects Scott Tallon Walker.

http://www.amse.ie/Point_Watchtower.htm

http://www.kone.com/en_TH/main/0,,print=true&content=69160,00.html

So that sounds pretty positive,about bloody time,so can we now safely assume that there is indeed excavation work being carried out on site.

If structural contracts are signed and timeframes like ’50 weeks’ given (which is less then a year) then presumably it is underway. I wont be convinced till I see the lift shaft rise though but yes seems like good news for once. Excavations could well be finished. It could be ready to go. Fingers crossed we end up with something…..just to prove to Dubliners high rise does not automatically equal bad.

The liftshafts are under construction at low level. Won’t give my sources away, but they have definitely started work on it!

What’s all the Cloak and Dagger Jason Bourne stuff?
It’s only a medium sized tower going up….no big deal!

It’s a huge deal the tallest building in Ireland kinda deal

It’s not really that big a deal,I mean same basic concepts as any other buildings!!!But I think it’s location is a bit odd. It seems to be going into that large excavation almost directly behind the point itself. It’s a bit….random.For want of a better description.It’ll just be kinda sticking up there in the middle of nothing in particular….

dan it will close the vista from amiens street straight down Mayor street

Do we not all want to be able to see straight from Amiens street to the containers in the Docklands?No?!!
Yeah, I hear you, but it is a slightly random location. Where does the Luas end down there, it seems to be going in a dead straight line down the middle of the IFSC, Spencer Dock, and on to the Point.Does it go to the Docks aswell?

It terminates right at the watchtower
(too big to paste in, it wrecks the thread)
http://www.rpa.ie/upload/documents/Line%20C1.jpg

Here’s a more detailed plan of the area

As for heading to the docks, well the powers that be, haven’t a plan for the eventual extension of the Luas to the Dublin Docks. With the Docks moving to a new Balbriggan deepwater port with in the next 10 to 20 years, and of course the eventual redevelopment of the area, I just hope the Luas can get around the tower.

@dan_d wrote:

The liftshafts are under construction at low level. Won’t give my sources away, but they have definitely started work on it!

any sign of those liftshafts getting any higher? it has been a month. i still can’t get over how quick alto vetro’s liftshaft went up. :confused:

Crosbie plans ‘Giant Man’ project as colossal attraction
DEVELOPER HARRY Crosbie has unveiled proposals for a 35m (110ft) high “Giant Man” that will allow visitors to walk around inside and learn about how the human body works.

Mr Crosbie got the idea when he visited Corpus, a similar project at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands. He bought the licence and has got financial approval for the € 55 million project, which will now be submitted to Dublin City Council for planning permission.

Mr Crosbie said the Giant Man will be one of the centrepieces of the € 850 million Point Village which includes the refurbished and extended 14,000-seater Point theatre, reopening as the O2 in December.

“What the docks need most of all is people and we see this and the new O2 as a giant people-magnet. We want to move the centre of gravity of the city eastwards and down the river.

“We think it would be a phenomenal attraction for young people and there are just not enough tourist attractions in the city. I think we will be able to pull visitors into it in a way nearly to the extent that the Guinness Hop Stores does.”

Visitors will enter the giant’s brain through a lift to the 10th floor. They will then descend down the spinal cord, stopping off at all the major organs on the way to the feet. There will be screens at every turn with information on how the body works.

The project is supported by the Royal College of Surgeons. Its chief executive Michael Horgan said they were “delighted” to be associated with it. Trinity College provost Dr John Hegarty said it had the potential to capture the imagination of the public and “allow tangible interaction with the sciences”. It has also been endorsed by the Ireland Fund. Its chairman, Loretta Brennan Glucksman, said she was proud to be associated with it.

Mr Crosbie said the Giant Man could be built next year if planning permission is granted. He is confident a deal can be done with the council.

“My local councillor is Bertie Ahern – he advises me on matters like this all the time and he’s hugely supportive. Bertie Ahern is my man. Perhaps we could put his face on it, or Bono. Who knows?”

© 2008 The Irish Times

Interesting.

Image http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/2008/0705/1215207406481_1.html

If bono’s face goes on it, I’ll bomb it. Couldn’t stand another U2 vanity project. Wouldn’t it be kind of similar to the giant man proposed to be built in the liffey?

eh Bertie is his local Councillor? TD Harry, he’s a TD. Anyway if his face is on it it will have to be supported by a very very brass neck

Is Elvis Presley still gonna be opening the Point Village in 2009 ? 😀 Me thinks Mr Crosbie has a few loose screws

Drove past the Point site, and the shaft is up to just above ground level. You can see the steel sticking out the top of the shutters (if the gate is open, and you happen to be stuck in traffic!).Shaft’s well under way.

how do you know it’s the shaft for the tower? it could be for something else. there are a lot of shafts on this site. don’t get me wrong, i want this built. i just don’t believe it. so many buildings like this were meant to be built yet they are nowhere to be seen.

Yes, great and all, that Ireland is building its first tower. But need I remind you what it looks like?

It’s pretty horrendous.. top heavy, bland.. etc.

And we can’t rule out that the tower will be halved in height, or scrapped altogether, due to the recession, regardless of how high the lift shaft is.

Its incredible that from all the members on this forum nobody can verify whether this is actually u/c or these are the shafts for the tower,is there any planners,architects out there that can bring some clarity to all this,i’m sure the planning documents are round somewhere ,could some qualified person maybe have a look and confirm whats happening on site.

@Morlan wrote:

Yes, great and all, that Ireland is building its first tower. But need I remind you what it looks like?

It’s pretty horrendous.. top heavy, bland.. etc.

And we can’t rule out that the tower will be halved in height, or scrapped altogether, due to the recession, regardless of how high the lift shaft is.

Lol! Might end up looking like its stumpy splay-top counterpart in Rotterdam:

@Morlan wrote:

Yes, great and all, that Ireland is building its first tower. But need I remind you what it looks like?

It’s pretty horrendous.. top heavy, bland.. etc.

And we can’t rule out that the tower will be halved in height, or scrapped altogether, due to the recession, regardless of how high the lift shaft is.

Morlan ffs keep up with the times man! Thats no longer the design! Seriously a better design was chosen and like it or not this will be the only skyscraper of the Celtic Tiger era so you would be best served getting behind it and not posting images of what wont be built.

On the shafts – Crosbie seems an ambitous guy but if I were him I would not go ahead with a residential tower atm. The property market is in freefall. However if Crosbie has the balls (and I hope he does) to go ahead with it then fair play. At least he has a vision and guts.

The tower is to be completed in 2009 – they would want to have started!

Yeah Morlan – get with it! First people are talking down the economy, and now they’re talking our towers out of extinction. It’s simply unacceptable. All hail the tower.

And the revised design. Much more elegant.

😮 Doh, and I’ve even seen that new design and commented on it before.

I’ll sit in the corner with my pipe and slippers. 🙂

lol I thought they did not have permission for the advertising……..

tribune.ie

Crosbie in row over illegal advertising at Point
DUBLIN City Council is taking legal action against concert promoter and developer Harry Crosbie over an unauthorised advertising structure at the Point Theatre site on North Wall Quay in Dublin 1. Crosbie is redeveloping the Point and surrounding land to include an enlarged concert venue, a skyscraper dubbed The Watchtower, apartments, a shopping centre and a hotel.

On the site he erected a structure comprising six plywood-clad shipping containers which are stack*ed on top of one another and then braced to two more shipping containers on the ground. Crosbie has used the ads for lighthearted publicity, includ*ing claiming Elvis would play the reopened venue and referring to Pope Benedict XVI as a rock god.

Dublin City Council served an enforcement notice on the site on 18 February “requiring the removal of the unauthorised advertising sign”, a spokeswoman for the council said. The notice was not removed within the required timeframe and the council then initiated legal proceedings.

The council also investigated Crosbie for alleged breaches of working hours at the Point Depot site. A condition of the planning permission was that construction was confined to 8am to 6pm, Monday to Friday and from 8am to 2pm on Saturdays. No construction was allowed on Sundays and public holidays, unless otherwise agreed. A spokeswoman for the council said a warning letter under Section 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 was issued to the owner/developer of the site on 24 January but inspections at the site yielded “no evidence of any breaches of working hours”. “The site continues to be monitored,” the spokeswoman said.

Neil Callanan

June 22, 2008

I can confirm that the tower is definitly under construction. they are still below ground (3 stories in total), but it is possible that they may stop at ground level due to the current economic climate.

@Overworked wrote:

I can confirm that the tower is definitly under construction. they are still below ground (3 stories in total), but it is possible that they may stop at ground level due to the current economic climate.

I would not be supprised. Did it look like they were working on it?

Overworked, have you seen the tower under construction with your own eyes? If the current economic climate was a reason for the delay, why wouldn’t they have dissasembled the underground lift shaft by now?

I don’t mean to be smart, but they’ve already constructed some of the shaft, and you don’t”disassemble” that kind of thing, short of destroying it completely. Also I know people on the job, that’s the reason I was saying it has definitely begun construction.
T’would be absolutely sickening if they had to stop at ground level.What an incredible waste of time and money.And a really big hole left in the ground!!!!!

cgcsb, nothing would surprise me. The developer of Beacon South in Sandyford has jacked it in and stuck a tarpolin over the front of it

Alot of appartment blocks under construction around Dublin atm where the workers just walked off site and left them half built. Looks very depressing.

Herald.ie

CITY SKYSCRAPER HEADING UP

By -Andrew Phelan

Friday July 11 2008

THE property market may be collapsing but work on raising Ireland’s first residential skyscraper has got underway.

Businessman Harry Crosbie is pressing ahead with his ambitious 32 -storey “Watchtower”, which is beginning to emerge from its foundations at the Point Depot.

Construction of the 120-metre tower is expected to take two years.

When complete, it will be one of the centrepieces of the €850 million Point Village scheme, which includes the all-new, renamed O2 Arena.

The skyscraper tower will be made up mainly of luxury apartments, with some office space, restaurants, bars and a public viewing platform on the top floor.

The tower will be topped with a 10,000 square foot brasserie and bar along with a viewing deck all serviced by bullet lifts running up the outside of the building.

With progress on the proposed U2 Tower on the other side of the Liffey stalled, Crosbie’s landmark building will be the first highrise development to make its mark on the docklands skyline.

– -Andrew Phelan

2 Years?

It probably wont take 2 years, I’d say he means 2 years from when they broke ground, not from this point on, because its taken them 9 months (just guessing there) from when they started on site to get to this stage.

I’d say the lift shaft(s) will fly up but the floor plating would take more time and the fitting out always takes alot longer, I’d say 2 years from now is a fair enough time line. It’s unlikely to be finished by 2009 me thinks

It took 18 months to build the Empire State Building…can’t remember how many lives!

this is good news and it’s about time too. 🙂

yeh and it’s always the lift shafts that have the major impact. When Dubliners see 32 storeys of them rise up there’ll be a lot of “jaysuses” audible around there

i must say i find this very exciting. i honestly thought they would never build it. 32 storeys is very big for dublin. that’s twice the height of liberty hall. the location of this watchtower seems good to me. i think they should build quite a good few of these highrises at this location with a few more directly opposite the liffey. it would give dublin a whole new dimension. having said that, i do believe that highrises should be kept well away from the lowrise historical district. i hope that people post pictures of the watchtower’s progress. i can remember 10 years ago or so when they proposed a much taller one george’s quay plaza as well as the rest yet no proper highrises were built. i’m just glad to see the watchtower going ahead. i hope the finished product looks good. it’s hard to tell from a photo. i do like the sound of an observation platform. i’ll just have to get a look at that.

You make a refreshing change, I like your enthusiasm,pepsi!
It will look good, and it will look even better if it’s balanced out by other buildings as tall in the same area, although that might be hoping in vain. Give it a shot, let’s face it, no matter what building was built here, some people wouldn’t like it.

I’m happy its finally underway but really do feel quite indifferent,we should have several of these dotted around docklands but instead the whole regeneration project hasn’t lived up to any expectation,its really a continuation of what we already have in the city,some nice developments coming on stream now but for me overall it was a failure and i believe people in ddda are realising that now.

If this tower is built, does anyone know if it will be the tallest building in Ireland? …(both North and South)

@GregF wrote:

If this tower is built, does anyone know if it will be the tallest building in Ireland? …(both North and South)

Easily. The Obel in Belfast will be 88m high. The next highest under consideration in Belfast is the Aurora – 108m high (this is thought unlikely though due to the property slowdown in the North) – The Watchtower is 120m high.

If Cork’s Atlantic Quarter goes ahead, it’ll be in the mix too – tallest tower is 111m.

I also have it on good authority (he he) that the Watchtower is under construction…with a slight ammendement to the original plan but with no change in it’s height. They have decided to allocate more floor space to office, and less to residential, given the current and predicted climates.

@electrolyte wrote:

They have decided to allocate more floor space to office, and less to residential, given the current and predicted climates.

They are afraid peoples carpets will be damaged in the floods?

@notjim wrote:

They are afraid peoples carpets will be damaged in the floods?

He he, my bad, I should have added the word “economic” as in “economic climate. Flats won’t be snapped up as quickly as office space

Some cgi stuff of the interior (& exterior) … opening first week of December, though not at full capacity by then it seems …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy4LaHQba4o

What’s the deal with calling it a ‘roman amphitheatre’ in that clip – its just an amphitheatre, this ain’t rome and the ancient romans certainly would have made a better fist of the exterior

Check this out:

http://www.theo2.ie/

@Rory W wrote:

What’s the deal with calling it a ‘roman amphitheatre’ in that clip – its just an amphitheatre, this ain’t rome and the ancient romans certainly would have made a better fist of the exterior

what about Mansfields Georgian Conference centre.

@archipig wrote:

Check this out:

http://www.theo2.ie/

Well I’m not calling it the F’n O2. I cant stand corporate naming. Its the Point or Point Depot and always will be. :rolleyes:

@weehamster wrote:

Well I’m not calling it the F’n O2. I cant stand corporate naming. Its the Point or Point Depot and always will be. :rolleyes:

They should have called it ‘point o2’

The o2 is Pointless

Sound of coats being got

I have been led to believe that work on the Watchtower has stopped at ground level. Can anyone confirm this? :mad::mad::(:(

yes it has stopped since the friday of the builder’s hols.It’s on hold for 3 months,they’re waiting to see “how things go”.It was on the news that day, but I also know people down there, and it has definitely stopped.

Are you saying that just the tower has stopped or the whole point village? because Harry Crosbie was quoted in the Irish Times last saturday saying that it’s full steam ahead?

Good day to you all … I’m presently putting together a short history of the Docklands and have of course found plenty going on in East Wall and North Wall, as well as the whole Poolbeg – Ringsend – Irishtown – Pearse Street area … I’m uploading new information all the time but always interested in feedback … 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

just the tower

builders get three months holidays now? I always thought that was a privilage reserved for teachers and TD’s

Probably more like permanent holidays….for something that big, I’m not sure what they think is going to magically change in 3 months.And I don’t know why construction can continue on everythin else on that site.you can actually see the top of the tower when you drive past the gate into the site.

I dont understand this… If the tower can be seen, its obviously made some progess. With the rest of the village open what is crosbie going to do with the tower. A completed tower raises the profile of the whole development, but an uncompleted one will be a visual blight on it. I remember someone here saying these are “not things you simply deconstruct”….major lurker btw…. so is he goin to box it up in glass or something :confused: Does he have any interest in saying he “waiting” as opposed to cancelled, doesnt seem realistic that things will shape up in 3 months.
Is resumption likely even in the long term?

I share your confusion about this entire project, it could have been half way finished by now.

Add it to the list so…

The small, jaded response to this news says a lot really.

I remember someone here saying these are “not things you simply deconstruct”….major lurker btw…. so is he goin to box it up in glass or something

That may have been me.Apologies if I seem to be lurking, but I don’t have a massive amount of time on my hands to spend reading every single item on these boards, and posting replies.I manage to occasionally read stuff, that’s about it!
On topic, I don’t understand as much as anyone else, why you’d go to the trouble of digging a massive hole in the ground,pouring something up to ground level and then abandon it..possibly indefinitely…in the middle of a high profile development, part of which will open in the next couple of months.Its an eyesore, a massive waste of money, I imagine it’s a safety issue aswell to leave it sitting there in close proximity to a public building that will attract crowds of people, and overall, a complete waste of time.Takes away from the credibility of the entire project aswell.But it seems to be the way things are going in the industry.

@dan_d wrote:

I remember someone here saying these are “not things you simply deconstruct”….major lurker btw…. so is he goin to box it up in glass or something

That may have been me.Apologies if I seem to be lurking, but I don’t have a massive amount of time on my hands to spend reading every single item on these boards, and posting replies.I manage to occasionally read stuff, that’s about it!
On topic, I don’t understand as much as anyone else, why you’d go to the trouble of digging a massive hole in the ground,pouring something up to ground level and then abandon it..possibly indefinitely…in the middle of a high profile development, part of which will open in the next couple of months.Its an eyesore, a massive waste of money, I imagine it’s a safety issue aswell to leave it sitting there in close proximity to a public building that will attract crowds of people, and overall, a complete waste of time.Takes away from the credibility of the entire project aswell.But it seems to be the way things are going in the industry.

I have no doubt the tower will be completed but I would bet that it will be fininshed as an office building not as a residential tower.

@dan_d wrote:

That may have been me.Apologies if I seem to be lurking, but I don’t have a massive amount of time on my hands to spend reading every single item on these boards, and posting replies.I manage to occasionally read stuff, that’s about it!.

Hheh, sorry dan, got me wrong there, was talking about myself… lurking rocks 😎
Would like some more free time myself…

The office/res decision would seem most the likely reason for the pause alright.

I hope they dont pull the plug on the tower…it will be even more difficult to address the docklands uniform height if they do. Im sure they could give more over to office space.

Being Crosbie

Aug 9 2008

‘Acting the maggot with posters’ at the Point Village site is just one of the many ways Harry Crosbie continues to make his mark on Dublin’s docklands, writes GEMMA TIPTON

‘I’M NOT A normal guy,” rock music promoter, haulier and property developer Harry Crosbie tells me cheerfully when I arrive at his house. And with a vague promise of “coffee later”, and a large dose of energetic charm, he ushers me in. It’s a breathtaking place, a converted Georgian warehouse, right on the river. It’s no wonder that Michael Jackson, when he called in for tea, stayed for hours.

Once upon a time, before Dublin’s docklands became what it is, there were more warehouses, both Georgian and Victorian, that could have been similarly transformed into the most stunning places to live. Now they have been demolished, and glass and steel predominate. Slender stone façades are topped by the flimsy balconies of city apartments, and Crosbie’s home is an anachronism, but a very, very beautiful one.

It also flies in the face of his belief that the answer to Dublin’s problems (or one of them, at least) is density. It is density that will make the infrastructure work, that will make public transport make sense, that will provide urban shopping hubs. Density is, in fact, the key to his current development, Point Village. And Point Village is, he tells me with pride, “the biggest construction job in Ireland”. I can’t help wondering why that pride isn’t tinged with sheer fear. It can’t be a comfortable time to try and shift 350 apartments, plus find tenants for shops, cafes and restaurants.

But, Crosbie points out, it can’t just grind to a halt either: “this thing is too big to stop, it’s an €850 million job, and it can’t be turned on and off like a tap. We’re building a village,” he continues, “and we’re determined that that village will have its dry cleaners, shoe makers, its art gallery and artists’ studios, its own train station [ the Luas], and that being in our village will be the exact same as being in Sandymount village.”

There will be a number of key differences, however. Sandymount does not have a massive music venue in its midst (“completely soundproof”, Crosbie promises), nor has Sandymount been designed by those maestros of cool-steel-and-glass-architecture, Scott Tallon and Walker. Equally, Sandymount was tenanted and occupied long before either Celtic Tiger or Economic Downturn were even twinkles in Ireland’s eye. “The market has flipped over,” Crosbie admits. “So the choice is very much in favour of the user now. It has become a buyers’ market. Whereas, a few years ago, we would have been forming an orderly queue of our tenants, now we will be much more civil to these people because there’s fewer of them, and we need them more than they need us.” This is also why Crosbie appreciates the decision of Dunnes Stores, and Margaret Heffernan in particular, to sign up as anchor tenant for the Village. “They’re putting in the biggest and best and sexiest Dunnes in the country,” he announces, delighted. “Margaret Heffernan is a great woman altogether.”

So too is Loretta Glucksman, according to Crosbie. Glucksman is the chairwoman of the American Ireland Fund, and of Crosbie’s Giant Man project, a 100ft tall (seated) figure of a man installed beside The Point. “I saw him in The Netherlands,” he says. “He sits, attached to a building, and you go up to the 10th floor, and you enter into his brain . . .” You then continue, down through the body, past the heart, the liver, the reproductive organs, and out – presumably at the toes. Crosbie is partnering the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland and the medical faculty at Trinity in the project. “It’s a big thing,” he says, in what is probably the only understatement of our meeting. Rising behind the Giant Man will be Ireland’s first skyscraper. Forty storeys tall, and topped by a five-storey structure of stained glass windows by British artist Brian Clarke. This will house a brasserie and a viewing deck, and at night will light up the sky.

Meanwhile, the Point, now renamed The O2, is having a complete make-over, and is being transformed into a 15,000 seat auditorium, with “the biggest proscenium arch in the world. People will be stunned.” And what about the smaller Daniel Libeskind-designed theatre a couple of blocks down? “I own that as well,” says Crosbie calmly. “And I’m also the chairman of Spencer Dock across the road,” he adds, evidently enjoying himself.

The economic downturn with its accompanying headaches isn’t too much of a worry, then? “We had this project banked many years ago, and we hadn’t any big borrowings when we started. The way we do banking is conservative – while we might take risks and act the maggot with posters, with money we’re very conservative.” The posters Crosbie is referring to are what got me talking to him in the first place. He has replaced the “coming shortly” board that, for years, let Ireland know when Westlife or Boyzone’s next visit would be, with a changing set of posters. These are, in his own words “puzzling, mildly amusing, and sometimes annoying”, and with them he has managed to create an advertising enigma not seen since Big Ed Loves Mona.

“But they’re not ads,” he is quick to point out. Instead, “because it’s such a huge job, and because I spent the best part of my life setting it up, I thought I’m going to have a bit of fun with this.” The posters have included advance notice that Pope Benedict is coming soon, that Gerry Ryan is to open a chip shop (named Cod Piece), and that Gay Byrne will be the first Village mayor. “It’s completely me,” says Crosbie. “It’s nobody else, and I just put up whatever I fancy.” This leads him to muse on what it would be like if all the ad agencies agreed two weeks in the year when every billboard would be similarly non-commercial, and given over to anything funny, quixotic or puzzling instead. “Give ads a holiday,” he suggests.

Fun, more than money, is important to him. Things have to be commercial, he insists, but “once you get to a certain point you realise that there’s only so much that money can do for you. People who don’t have money find it very difficult to understand this. But in fact you quickly reach a point where God gets his own back, where he makes everything ordinary by repetition. Because we deal with rich pop stars, we come across this all the time, we call it ‘the ho hum factor’. It’s when they’re on the private jet and they’re saying ‘are you telling me this is a Gulf Stream Four and not a Five?’.”

Crosbie’s position, where he can create an entire new city quarter (although not without planning controversies, and some applications refused along the way), and also have fun with idiosyncratic posters, is, he tells me, hard won. “It’s hard, relentless graft,” he says. “And I haven’t taken the money and run. I could be swanning around a beach in the Bahamas with Russian chicks if I wanted to, but I don’t want that.” He’s also adamant that, whatever the economic climate, he’s staying put.

“I only operate within the docks. I don’t know anywhere else. And it amuses me to hear of people, who know nothing about property, buying things in Bulgaria. I wouldn’t buy something in Donnybrook, because I don’t know how Donnybrook works, and I’ve been doing this for 30 years. I work in streets where I’ve been working since I was 16 years old. The idea of ordinary people saying they’ve bought holiday flats in Bulgaria, that is definitely going to end in tears.”

So what about those developers who don’t like the look of post-Celtic Tiger Ireland and have, indeed, taken the money and run? “I think they’re sad men. They don’t understand that money is only a tiny part of what it takes to be content. You only get out what you put in. And in the end, money on the level we operate is only a scorekeeping mechanism. It’s not for spending. Capital and money are different things.”

I never get my promised coffee because Crosbie is on to the next thing. “I have a ferocious work ethic,” he says, “and confidence to the point of mania. My wife has to hit me with a rolled-up newspaper to stop me. But that’s not a bad thing.”

• O2 (The Point) is scheduled to reopen in December, possibly with Leonard Cohen. Point Village will be released in phases from 2009.

© 2008 The Irish Times

The guy seems pretty cocky and arrogant and convinced his entire project, tower and all, is going ahead come hell or high water:confused:

Sunday business post :):):)

Crosbie set to press ahead with Dublin skyscraper
24 August 2008
Businessman Harry Crosbie has reaffirmed plans to complete his 120-metre skyscraper in Dublin, despite the collapse in the property market, writes Gavin Daly.

A spokesman for Crosbie said that the Watchtower development was going ahead as planned, despite speculation in the construction sector that work on the project had stalled.

‘‘There hasn’t been any change [to the project],” said the spokesman for Crosbie, who said that the building was due to be completed in the second quarter of 2010.

If the project is completed as planned, it will the first residential skyscraper in the country. In the past week, users of the architects’ website Archiseek.com speculated that work on the Watchtower had stopped at ground level because of economic uncertainty.

The 39-storey Watchtower is part of Crosbie’s €850 million Point Village development on Dublin’s north quays. The development, on 12 acres, would include a shopping centre, offices, hotel and cinema, as well as the redeveloped Point Theatre music venue, renamed the O2.

The Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) had intended that the Watchtower would form half of a ‘‘maritime gateway’’ to Dublin, standing across the Liffey from the planned U2 Tower. However, the U2-backed project has stalled, and the DDDA is still in discussions with the consortium behind it.

I’m glad this is going ahead – I’d rather like to buy one of these myself, you’ll sell at least one mr. Crosbie!

Great news. Hope this will give a confidence boost to other high profile developments in the docks.:D:D:D

Is this tower (39 or 40 storey’s?) likely to be built via the lift shaft going up first as on previous high rise ish constructions in Ireland? Or will it be a crane attached to the side job? Anyone know?

Great to see something positive in the papers!

BTW I think someone is telling fibs about this buildings actual height – Can 40 storeys be squeezed into 120m:confused:

Slight Tangent – Can a building that’s only 120m high be seriously called a skyscraper? :rolleyes:
Anyway as for the go ahead, I’ll believe it when I start seeing the centre core appearing from the hole in the ground. 😉

@weehamster wrote:

Slight Tangent – Can a building that’s only 120m high be seriously called a skyscraper? :rolleyes:
Anyway as for the go ahead, I’ll believe it when I start seeing the centre core appearing from the hole in the ground. 😉

My point is its probrably higher then 120m. Can 40 storeys be considered a ‘skyscraper’:confused:

It is a skyscraper in a Dublin context though.

One Canada Square, the tallest building in the UK and the sixth Tallest building in Europe is 50 storeys tall.
Then surely a 40 story tower can be considerd a skyscraper by international standards. It’s no Burj Dubai (I’m aware that Dublin and Dubai have a simillar population) but for our first skyscraper it’s not bad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Canada_Square

Moar photos.

I hope they build something to the immediate left of the point, its not so nice

Blue lighty things

Umm, shinyer in real life

Not so sure what this could be, I know what I want it to be…

and a micra

and gcd theatre

Total cop out

This angle was more intersting with my eyes.

Last one round the corner

Taken today btw.

Treasury owns the lands to the left of the point. They have plans for the site due to be completed 2010!!! 7 storey building!:)

I’m glad there’s something going beside the point as it’s new western facade (bland massing) really needs hiding

I’m happy somethings being built to the left of the point but really only 7 storeys. 🙁 is it not time to break the monotony of the 7-10 story blocks along the North Quays? maybe something a little bit taller. And it’s so far from the Historic core of the city, there’s no way An Taisce could reasonably object

reason is not a prerequisite

@cgcsb wrote:

I’m happy somethings being built to the left of the point but really only 7 storeys. 🙁 is it not time to break the monotony of the 7-10 story blocks along the North Quays? maybe something a little bit taller. And it’s so far from the Historic core of the city, there’s no way An Taisce could reasonably object

I was expecting more height from this development,but its got planning permission 3848/07 with 20+ conditions attached to the development. Very bad black and white photos on dublin city council(oldies). Architect is hjlyons. This was prior to ddda decision for 20 storeys in the docks. Maybe they might apply for new application!!!!!??

@johnny21 wrote:

Treasury owns the lands to the left of the point. They have plans for the site due to be completed 2010!!! 7 storey building!:)

Dear God that building is revolting, what a shocking waste of land to have a sprawl of a structure like that.

Where are the objections to these land robbing monsters?
How can anyone prefer a building like this to something that could use half the amount of land or less?

you’ve made a very good point paul h. i don’t like it one bit either. how can anyone allow such a thing to be built? is this the best we can do?

That’s phase one, a second phase is planned