Vertigo? U2 tower to be taller
- This topic has 628 replies, 101 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
First they lodge a plan for a 60 metre tower and then the DDDA say they’ll raise it to 100 metres. And now second they put in the planning application and they want 130 metres:eek: Nothing against them doing it really, I think there’ll be little if any extra impact with the 30 metres but it really sounds like this is turning into the ‘Incredible Expanding U2 Tower’
I say go for it. In my view a building becomes a skyscraper at around 150m. What I mean by that is a building really starts to be impressive due to height at this point, below this tall buildings are just “highrise”. 🙂
Of course it depends on the design but I don’t think it depends a lot on context. For example when I walk by the county hall I’m always impressed with how much the renovation improved it but am never impressed by the height, even though it’s the tallest in IrelandIt sounds like the building it sticking to 100M at the ‘shoulder’ but the 10m will be added to the rooftop feature which is a substantial part of the overall building. I think it would look great though, and make it a real icon for the city centre especially if it was lit up and a lot of detail was put into the roof feature. And more importantly it now surpasses Hueston gate’s height of 123.55M!
@Cathal Dunne wrote:
First they lodge a plan for a 60 metre tower and then the DDDA say they’ll raise it to 100 metres. And now second they put in the planning application and they want 130 metres:eek: Nothing against them doing it really, I think there’ll be little if any extra impact with the 30 metres but it really sounds like this is turning into the ‘Incredible Expanding U2 Tower’
😮 Does anybody feel that a landmark building such as the U2 tower should be planned in conjunction with the City Council from the drawing board on, rather than adding a bit here, a bit there to gain height for heights sake?
I’m all for a statement building BUT the way this project is going seems to be some sort of penile or height substitute, sorry Bono!!:eek:The announcement on the preferred tenderer will be made later today, I’d be shocked if it’s not Liam Carroll
EDIT: Sorry I think I got mixed up with the NCC preferred tenderers
Dermod Dwyer, Chairman/CEO of SDICC stated: “On behalf of the whole SDICC team, I am pleased to welcome the Minister, The NCC Steering Committee and our respective teams to Spencer Dock and to acknowledge the pro-active role all have played to bring the Public Private Partnership (PPP) tender successfully to this penultimate point in the process. It is a real recognition for Kevin Roche, the architect, the NEC group as designated managers, CMP/Sisk the building contractors, the extensive Irish and international professional team, and the other major stakeholders particularly the promoters Spencer Dock Development Company (SDDC) – led by Treasury Holdings, all of whom have demonstrated a strong commitment and belief in this project over many years.”
He continued “This is a unique PPP project which requires the successful Tenderer both to provide the site, and to design, build, finance and operate Irelands National Conference Centre for 25 years. The finished iconic NCC building would be where Ireland and Dublin host the world for conferences, meetings, exhibitions and related events. Its proposed central location and high specification would undoubtedly put Dublin in a strong position to attract and compete for international conferences. The SDICC management team, in co-operation with the major sector stakeholders, are now ready and willing to get on with this important business. Already firm enquiries have been received in respect of a number of large international meetings including the world congress for a large professional body.”
@Rusty Cogs wrote:
JDivision
Did you say you had news about the Spencer Dock development ?
Not huge but they are conducting a tall buildings survey in the north Lotts area and it is likely to result in significantly higher buildings being allowed in certain areas, Spencer Dock is expected to be one of the areas to benefit.
@jdivision wrote:
Not huge but they are conducting a tall buildings survey in the north Lotts area and it is likely to result in significantly higher buildings being allowed in certain areas, Spencer Dock is expected to be one of the areas to benefit.
i think they realise the bollocks that has been made of the rest of the docklands..to little to late?
There’s currently about five cranes on site, all dealing with the construction of the PWC offices (fronting on to the Liffey) and the apartments behind. The site of the National Conference centre is currently being used as a storage area for building materials.
apparently it’s a “building with a shoulder parapet at 100 metres above street level crowned with a new recording studio for U2 in a penthouse to a final height of 130 metres above street level” so 130 metres then?
It’s a pity it’s a section 25 application. Had it been a normal one, someone could have appealed and asked for an oral hearing. And given Boo’s penchant for attending these types of events, we coulda gone and looked on in awe/heckled/got an autograph/thrown fruit… whatever floats yer boat
Are U2 going to need a studio in three/four years time. Surely the African Queen will be out of bombastic stadium dross by then. Then again, look at the Stones (or Status Quo) !
At 26m’s wide this buildng will look like a match stick. The dimensions dont seem to fit. How are they going to twist it with such a narrow width and within 130m’s by 45 degree’s? I dont believe thats even practical. Expect larger and taller structure IMHO higher then 150m’s. Could an architect comment on this?:rolleyes:
^^ That’s only a 5 to 1 ratio, nothing compared to some being built around the world at 10 to 1 height to width ratio or more. The fordham spire in chicago goes through a 360 degree twist and is around 500m tall. That gives 90 degrees every 125m
yep, its a similar footprint to trump tower, ny, which rises to 270m or so.
Off Topic – the highest slenderness ratio i have come across is 11:1 for trump tower,… i’ve read that 12:1 is considered the upper limit for buildings (that was in a book published 15yrs ago). Has anyone come across any higher slenderess ratios? How high can we go, would say a 15:1 ratio be possible?
I think it depends on the building. Obviously the more populated your building is the more elevators you need and the thicker your tower has to be. Super-luxury residentials could probably go really high since there’ll never be a large amount of people inside.
The highcliff in hong kong is also a really thin one:
Another tower I came across, is to be built in dubai I think and is about 400m. I think this is around the limit.
@Morlan wrote:
I believe there is a crane being erected right in the middle of the site. Can anyone confirm?
There seems to be a crane (albeit not a very tall one) right on the footprint of where the tower will go – think its only gone up in the last week so….
@NeilA wrote:
There seems to be a crane (albeit not a very tall one) right on the footprint of where the tower will go – think its only gone up in the last week so….
I was down there yesterday and can confirm it’s still one big hole in the ground.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
