What’s up docks?

“DDDA plans to demolish its own building opposite Jurys Inn in late 2005”

About time too! wonder where they’re off to. Lots of reduced rent office space around there!

Has anyone seen the new BMW garage in the middle of Georges Dock?

I think it is an interesting way to launch a new car.

Mad! Have you seen it at night – like TOTP down there 🙂

@Lotts wrote:

“DDDA plans to demolish its own building opposite Jurys Inn in late 2005”

About time too! wonder where they’re off to. Lots of reduced rent office space around there!

directly across the liffy to a new purpose built building.

Was down in Grand Canal Basin last week .. lovely day … sat on the quayside by Hannover Quay and had my lunch. That place is going to be really nice once it’s finished. A friend was saying it would be ideal to have a killer whale or two in the basin…. can you imagine…. Feeding time….

So the rte has the Abbey moving to Georges Dock:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0616/abbey.html

where? i don’t get it, do they mean the stack house?

Their coverage was as typical as ever, as with all matters architectural, planning and environmental.
Not even the site was specified or shown on the news – just ‘next to the IFSC’ :rolleyes:

Today’s Times was also wierdly vague – near where the Speigel tent is, landmark building, large enough footprint etc, but no actual site.

Georges Dock is the one on by the Harbormaster.
I don’t see an obvious spot where a theatre can fit on this site.
Looking at the outer dock…

There’s the big waste of space that is the gravel garden to the left of the dock, surrounded on three side and there’s the dock itself I suppose. This is sometimes filled in with a temporary platform. There a Shakspeare tent there at the moment but I guess the national theatre will need something more substantial!

Then there’s the inner dock:

there’s already apartment buildings built inside the dock here (requiring an engineering overhaul recently I heard!)
Maybe the theatre will go here.
On stilts?

Knock the multistory carpark and sheds behind Jurys? (Jurys is first one east of stack-a)

According to the Indo today….

The water-filled site, facing the Liffey, is currently occupied by the Footsbarn theatre company on a temporary surface, with a Shakespeare production opening there last night. It is immediately past the weighbridge. The new Abbey will be before Stack A and Jury’s Inn, and will massively enhance the prestige of Dublin docklands, scene of phenomenal renewal recently.

I hope they aren’t really going to fill the dock, that would be stupid. The big gravel space might be it, I have been suprised in the past by how big that is.

@notjim wrote:

I hope they aren’t really going to fill the dock, that would be stupid. The big gravel space might be it, I have been suprised in the past by how big that is.

wouldnt be a bad place to site the abbey provided its not more of the same crap that has been built down there already..is the proposal to have the new theatre surrounded by water which could actually look very well!

@notjim wrote:

I hope they aren’t really going to fill the dock, that would be stupid. The big gravel space might be it, I have been suprised in the past by how big that is.

As I have mentioned before, the dock is basically already filled in. The bottom of the dock was raised so there is very little depth in it now.

Sure and I thought that was wierd too, but having the old dock there, with water in, albeit shallow water, is a real feature: a grand space. Filling it would take lots of the character from the area.

Yes, I agree with you Notjim. I was disappointed when it was filled in to be shallower as it turns from a working and functional feature into a purely monumental feature. However, I agree that it should be retained. I assume land costs and availability have something to do with it. Who for example owns the dock? Is it the DDDA?

Georges Dock is on the Record of Protected Structures:

Limestone ashlar dock walls with granite copings, granite and cast iron bollards, steps, lock gates, cast-iron mooring rings, ladders and winches

To which could be added ‘Iconic’ building of international standard 😉

I think they could probably get away with filling some of it did not get rid of it entirely. Anyway, I am just speculating. Best wait to see what the actual plans are.

its going in the dock alright. The protected bits dont include the water.

Think permanent building surrounded by moat.

It has potential but personally i think its a travesty.

isn’t this stupid, six and seven story buildings on sites that could take 10 or 11 and then they fill in one of the most attractive, interesting and dockish parts of the docklands. they should have put a science museum in the stack house when they had a chance and they would have no need of a landmark attraction what would fill in a significant and unusual open space.

Surely they realise the high level of services required of a theatre for back of house operations. Maybe it is to be an outdoor theatre in the round. That way it can be cheap and cheerful as long as everyone brings umbrellas, perhaps turn the Quay into a coliseum. Bread and circuses anyone????? Maybe this announcement has a bit of bloomsday about it.

The stuff built in London in the 80s (as per Only Fools and Horses :)) is better than that Lego concoction in the inner dock
When it was emptied recently (presumably for those engineering works) it proved the most dismal sight imaginable.

I cannot think of anything worse than dumping the Abbey in George’s Dock – and these temporary structures shouldn’t be allowed either, they look awful.
Isn’t it ridiculous – of all the brownfield sites in the city, not even one can be found for the Abbey, so they propose to build it on stilts in a pool of water – an area that was set aside as an amenity area!
(assuming this is the proposal as Rockflanders says)

@notjim wrote:

isn’t this stupid, six and seven story buildings on sites that could take 10 or 11 and then they fill in one of the most attractive, interesting and dockish parts of the docklands. they should have put a science museum in the stack house when they had a chance and they would have no need of a landmark attraction what would fill in a significant and unusual open space.

Notjim, I must say how much I like that term you have just used (invented?) ‘Dockish’. Maybe the name should be changed to the ‘Infilllands’? 🙂 There is much regret in London over the amount of former docks that were filled in. It really is such short-sighted thinking.

On the other hand, if it is between the two corporate buildings to the west of the dock it would have a lovely setting; is this possible, I am no judge of scale or sure what’s underneath the surface there. Surely building on the dock would be too perverse even for the ddda and again, why this obsession with the abbey a) and fancy shopping for the stackhouse b).

Such a ridiculous decision… I would have preferred to see the Abbey kept in “the old city”. The dock was also probably the nicest feature in all of the IFSC, I think the area will look really bland and industrial estate like without it. I think this is the worst option for a location for the Abbey they could have come up with!

Where else do people propose for the Abbey and why?

Got to be a better place!

The existing Abbey site along with the building to the front on Eden Quay which is only a facade retention. If the Auditorium was built from first floor to third floor level it could oversail Abbey St Old. The stage entrance and technical rig could go on the footprint of the existing theatre whilst the reception and leisure element could be accessed from a grand waterfront entrance on Eden Quay. The footprint exists.

I totally agree with notjim and others on the folly of covering Georges Dock or even the very high quality plaza between the original IFSC scheme buildings. Which is still the best executed commercial scheme in this city to my mind.

This would be the most ridiculous decision they could make. 😮 There must be plenty of liffey front sites between the IFSC aand the point that would be way more suitable, on either the north or the south side of the city. Isn’t there already a potenial theatre site in the south side of the docklands that would appear ideal.

I still believe the most suitable site would be the Carlton site on O’Connell St and this would be the most significant statement about how serious Dublin & Ireland takes their national street and national theatre.

I would throw in one other site that is 95% likely to become available in the short to medium term is part of the Guinness site along the quays or even is part of the Collins Barrack Museum site that also has Luas access.

hey, why don’t they culvert the liffey in front of the customs house and build the abbey there, that way it would be in both the north and south side and gosh what a setting!

well it makes about as much sense as building on georges dock.

in an amusing side note and in a ddda’ish display of sensitivity to the sea, it seems they never checked the times of the tides before booking the tall ships for this weekend: noone was able to visit them either afternoon because they were too low.

the new section of campshire looks great though, a bit overdone and i am sorry they got rid of the big lumps of timber, but the rachel joyndt (sp) light are such a pleasure.

@notjim wrote:

in an amusing side note and in a ddda’ish display of sensitivity to the sea, it seems they never checked the times of the tides before booking the tall ships for this weekend: noone was able to visit them either afternoon because they were too low.

There was a spring tide this weekend wasn’t there?

As a daily cyclist, I think the new section of campshire is a joke. They have inserted chicanes along the cycle lane. Also, every 50 yards or so the cycle lane ends and is replaced with paving. Then it simply disapears before the cantilever bridge at Spencer dock. It all ties in to the obsticle course that is cycling from the Point up to Matt Talbot bridge. When I saw the design for the new lane I wrote to the DDDA asking for an explanation on the design. Still waiting. Like the rest of the cycle lane, I’ll be zigzagging through pedestrians (and chicanes) every morning.

A glimpse of the new Civic Plaza.

I quite like this building below. Could have been a few floors higher though, would have scaled well. It’s actually 3 seperate blocks linked by subtle balcony things. 🙂

This area below is under development just now. What a perfect spot for a highrise but I think it’s destined for a 5 story block 🙁

A new street in the making, about 2 blocks long, with a terminating few of the Iarnród Éireann offices on the north quays. Nice 🙂

Some nice pics there – yes that three-part apartment block seems to be setting a taller trend for the south quays which is to be welcomed. Looking at it the other day it was a relief to see some height being introduced – though the one problem I find with the Docklands stretch of the Liffey is that the river is its worst enemy, it is so very straight and boring.
Height or no height, you can’t seem to get away from dull, flat, cliff-like development lining the banks. Not sure how you can improve on this…

Those apartments are to be fitted out to an incredibly high standard – there was big demand for them when they went on sale as far as I can remember.
The IÉ building is one of the nicest in the city – the little dome is just a gem 🙂

i quite like the pictures myself. they are very good shots. i agree with you morlan that the fifth picture down is the perfect spot for a taller building.

8th June 2006

Well most of Morlan’s pictured developments are now nearing completion. Quite a number of smart new residential streets are being unwrapped round about now, linking Sir John Rogerson’s Quay to the Basin. Most are about four storeys in height, and rather bizarrely reminiscent of Mosney’s 1950s flat blocks – the design is somewhat better however 🙂

I don’t have a picture of those developments as the contractors wouldn’t have been best pleased at being photographed, but here’s a different street:

Back out on the Liffey, here’s what’s happening:

Flat.

Very flat.

Taller than the northern Docklands, but still – flat.
Certainly the U2 Tower in the distance will help things greatly at least.

Some individual buildings now:

Very nice, with The Ferryman sympathetically addressed. The circular part on the roof has already become something of a landmark, being so close to the Se

On the right-hand side of this building in the first picture, you can just make out an Edwardian redbrick warehouse building – it’s got a magnificent 1901 interior:

Didn’t manage to get any further east. But looking across northwards, this is what’s happening where it all started:

…i.e, nothing much bar Spencer Dock bloatedly emerging out onto the quay front:

This should be resolved if there’s something proposed for the left of this building on the site above. Anyone know?

It has a very impressive atrium running through the centre. Is it residential?

It relates well to the neighbouring Victorian:

…and you know who 🙂

Back on the southside, and all of the development taking place is really going in cheek by jowl in relation to the existing housing stock. It’s a refreshing contrast, but I can certainly see how those of the North Wall gave out about the initial Spencer Dock!

Quite extraordinary:

The Gasworks has yet to be pictured on Archiseek post-development. This is what it looks like:

I think it works well, if the intense glazing too corporate and faceless.

The concept overall is effective though – both structures retain their independence but still connect nicely together to form a whole.

Typical Victorian industriousness:

And from a distance – classic Fair City 🙂

Rather aptly with Dublin’s unsightly but charming television cable network in view; we’re one of the most cabled countries in Europe.

This should be resolved if there’s something proposed for the left of this building on the site above. Anyone know?

Think the National Conference Centre is to fill that spot just to the left of your picture Graham … anyone any idea of whats happening with that ?

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

Think the National Conference Centre is to fill that spot just to the left of your picture Graham … anyone any idea of whats happening with that ?

I may have some info on that either Sunday or Monday.

Hey took a look at those Gasworks apartments – first off its crazy inside that structure..like a roofless shopping mall if you know what I mean! Got a lift to the fifth floor .. man the one bedroom apartment was small. A mirror covering one wall to make it look bigger, even in the kitchen! Compact .. yeah it will be snapped up in a flash. I took some pics with my camera phone will try and post them later.

How many apartments are in it do you know?

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

Think the National Conference Centre is to fill that spot just to the left of your picture

Doh! And there was me thinking a few minutes previously ‘hmmm, I wonder where the NCC fits into all of this – the site seems to be taken’ :rolleyes:

OK here are the pics I took on my phone inside the Gasworks earlier today —

€900,000+ for the top floor ones!

I agree, docks looks completely flat… crying out for the u2 tower/”watchtower”
pics are excellent graham, as always

I want the best high-rise in the Docks known to humanity! I want them here, and I want them now!

There may be a chance of getting some height into the Custom House Docks area if the Dublin Exchange building (currently on the market) is redeveloped – but it will have to overcome the old planning scheme restrictions for the area (about 18-20 m as far as I can recall 🙁 )

@Graham Hickey wrote:

8th June 2006

Well most of Morlan’s pictured developments are now nearing completion. Quite a number of smart new residential streets are being unwrapped round about now, linking Sir John Rogerson’s Quay to the Basin. Most are about four storeys in height, and rather bizarrely reminiscent of Mosney’s 1950s flat blocks – the design is somewhat better however 🙂

I don’t have a picture of those developments as the contractors wouldn’t have been best pleased at being photographed, but here’s a different street:

Back out on the Liffey, here’s what’s happening:

Flat.

Very flat.

I thought if there was anywhere you could have tall buildings it would be in these totally redeveloped areas, in the docks, why arn’t there any?Are there a load of tiny terraced houses behind that row of buildings stopping them from building higher?

While I do like some of the buildings above I do think they are very flat. I am looking forward to seeing the U2 Tower go up. It should make a nice change to the area. Is the U2 Tower starting any time soon? I think the sooner they start it the better.

The general reason for the uniformity is that every developer seeks to comply with the various ‘planning schemes’ which apply to the docklands area – because compliance with the ‘scheme’ ensures a much quicker planning decision (a compliant proposal is effectively decided by the DDDA in 8-12 weeks – without any rights of third party appeal).

The ‘planning schemes’ vary but in general are restrictive with regard to height.

You seem to be critical of this publicrealm…. but surely isnt it good planning to develop a ‘scheme’ and the implement it, rather than simply consider developments which have been drawn up without any regard to how the final area should look. I would have though what you are refering to is the whole rationale for the planning sysrtem.

Not withstanding that the ‘schemes’ may be open to criticism and, if necessary, amendment

i really do approve overall of the developments in the south quays. They look far better in reality , than in these photos . Passing by today , they looked splendid.

An announcement on conference centre etc should be made within the month.

@publicrealm wrote:

The general reason for the uniformity is that every developer seeks to comply with the various ‘planning schemes’ which apply to the docklands area – because compliance with the ‘scheme’ ensures a much quicker planning decision (a compliant proposal is effectively decided by the DDDA in 8-12 weeks – without any rights of third party appeal).

The ‘planning schemes’ vary but in general are restrictive with regard to height.

so well all these guys want to build there trump towers can we say tough s*** you had your chance?

thanks PR but it really doesn’t explain it?

Is it the Kevin Roche designed NCC which is to be built or a different building?

Is it just me or are the new buildings on the south side of the river staring to look quite well? Admittedly they are not stunningly new or original buildings but a big improvement on the existing stuff i.e. IFSC Phase 2 etc….
Any thoughts?

IFSC original 3 blocks yet to be surpassed.

BKD have gone down hill more than most

@Thomond Park wrote:

IFSC original 3 blocks yet to be surpassed.

Agreed. It’s amazing that in all the time since there’s been nothing else really worth writing home about – haven’t been in chq yet but that’s possibly sole exception. In reality the docks are blandness personified. I lived there for eight months a few years ago and that was enough for me. Admittedly there’s a few more things after opening since but it was really boring living there.

By the way Thomond Park, confirmation of what I said recently was provided in Gunne’s Bimonthly property commentary which was issued yesterday:
Meadows and Byrne, who recently acquired a new outlet at the Northern Cross complex on the Malahide Road, are expected to be the new anchor tenants for the CHQ development in Dublin docklands.

Who designed IFSC phase I? I believe STW were responsible for the bland industrial estate style crap that is phase II. At least the south docks are (in places) an improvement on that..

Burke Kennedy Doyle

Thanks, shame (to my knowledge) they haven’t had a more prominent role since.

There is substantially more money in a scheme like Dundrum Town Centre than bespoke infill

The DDA have moved across and down the river, to the building marked with the arrow above, at the corner of Sir John Rogerson’s Quay and a new street (no nome yet). According to the newspaper article posted at the start of this thread, their former yoke of an office (left, above) was supposed to have been demolished in “late 2005”, but it’s still there now blocking the north campshire ……. hurry up and knock!

The main structures left now on the south campshire are these two brick warehouses (centre of picture), probably dating to the early-20th century. Although they have a certain local architectural and historical value, it would probably be better to demolish them for the sake of an unobstructed campshire.

Up until recently, the space seen here between the two warehouses was fenced off and people were keeping their boats there (!). But the fencing was removed recently and now you can walk there again.
.
.

Great cycling facilities down there, judging by Devins last photo…I am hoping that DDDA are about to mark out that new path – or the cycle festival being held down there this weekend really would be a joke 😮

I’ve been wondering why those bollards aren’t at the edge of the path. Any ideas?

BJ Marine used to be there, but they have moved to Malahide.

With regards to the footpath, I recently walked along it, and I was suprised that it has simply been laid on top of the old cobbles and crane tracks. I kind of figured that it was only temporary, but I still couldn’t really figure out why it had just been poured over the cobbles. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

@hutton wrote:

Great cycling facilities down there, judging by Devins last photo…I am hoping that DDDA are about to mark out that new path – or the cycle festival being held down there this weekend really would be a joke 😮

Just one point of clarification- AFAIK the cycle festival is nothing to do with the DDDA. It’s an independent festival which just happens to be taking place in the docklands, timed to coincide with the Dublin City Cycle.

(Though I’m sure the DDDA is happy to have the festival in chq as it does their profile some good on the bike front, unlike most of the so-called facilities down there…)

***

I think I reluctantly agree with you, Devin, regarding the two brick warehouses. I passed them the other day again and, though I’m very fond of them as structures with a great patina (those doors are fantastic, sadly currently scarred by insensitively placed Dublin City Cycle posters), they do really sit quite awkwardly on the campshires now. For the sake of a clear run on the bike (IF they put in quality tracks) and a clear view down the quays I think on blanace they should go. But if they were just to replace them with more trees then I’d rather keep the buildings. A boardwalk on the river side of them might solve the problem of insufficient space for cyclists and pedestrians, and would also open the possibility of a new use being found for them.
(I hate it when the bike side of my brain fights with the conservation side…:( )

keep them . they have great potential. a board walk around would sort out any cycling acces problems.

Knock them !! There are enough redbrick warehouses in Dublin. the benifits of a decent river side area far outweight the conservation/heritage value of the two warehouses.

I would think that they should be kept as they break up the quays nicely. I think we might be suprised out how bland this area would look without them.

definetely. They should be kept. The possiblity of a boardward extending in a crescent shape around them should be considered. (it might be possible although storms /flooding etc etc.).

They could be really interesting additions to the liffey if redevelopped. One would certainly make a very cool nightclub. And while that might not be the msot desirable use from the point of view of the purists that frequent this site , it would certainly help to re invigorate the area.

Saw something similar in budapest or prague and is twas only massive

@a boyle wrote:

definetely. They should be kept. The possiblity of a boardward extending in a crescent shape around them should be considered. (it might be possible although storms /flooding etc etc.).

They could be really interesting additions to the liffey if redevelopped. One would certainly make a very cool nightclub. And while that might not be the msot desirable use from the point of view of the purists that frequent this site , it would certainly help to re invigorate the area.

Saw something similar in budapest or prague and is twas only massive

I think they should be kept and turned into bars with restaurants – hopefully with a better operator than the Excise across the water. I suspect the Kellys will become involved in these properties eventually. They now own Thomas Reads and developed the sites behind in a jv with the Carrolls.

Y’know having read the last few posts, I’m starting to come around to thinking the warehouses should be kept. My main gripe against them was that when you are walking or cycling pleasantly along the campshire, you are squeezed out beside the speeding traffic for a few hundred yards in order to get past the them. But that’s not the warehouses’ fault – it’s the traffic’s. But a boardwalk here would solve that. And there would be no visual problem with a boardwalk here, unlike the existing boardwalk in the city centre.

I wonder what is the DDA’s position on the warehouses?

Warehouses Shmarehouses. They have to go, They totally disrupt the flow of foot and pedal trasport down the quays by essentially squeezing two in to one. Coming off the cyclepath on to the road and into traffic is quite dangerous. Because of the buildings all the pedestrians walk in the cyclepath knowing they will have to get around those buildings. I can’t see them ever being developed in to anything as there would be no parking in the area. The two restaurants on the north campsire have a hard enough time drumming up business. A board walk around them would be possible for pedestrians, (bikes could use the new path) but I really don’t see this happening. To be honest, I don’t see boardwalks coming down the quays at all as it would disrupt the docking of any boats which the DDDA seem to encourage.

By the by, the DDDA are not in the building with the sloped glass roof. That’s the new McCann Fitzgearld building which has yet to be opened (I’m guessing Qtr 4). The DDDA are further down the Quays, in which building I’m not sure. And they’re old offices should definately go pronto.

i thought there was something (electrical?) in those warehouses that made them difficult to move ?

I think all the development to date is incredibly bland and could have done with another 3 or 4 floors when you consider the width of the liffey. Although there are one or two exceptions to this rule.

By the way.. what is going between Spencer dock and the point ? it looks all pretty low rise from what I can see.

@Maskhadov wrote:

I think all the development to date is incredibly bland and could have done with another 3 or 4 floors when you consider the width of the liffey. Although there are one or two exceptions to this rule.

By the way.. what is going between Spencer dock and the point ? it looks all pretty low rise from what I can see.

Ground-scrapers. You are spot on – the width of the Liffey would allow for many more floors. This is where the DBM 50-odd storey schemes should be – and NOT in the historic core:mad: !

@a boyle wrote:

One would certainly make a very cool nightclub.

I don’t think you’re aware of the size of these buildings a boyle – they’re pretty small, although a boutique nightclub could be spot on alright ]must[/b] be addressed either way. But even to open up the gables as spacious ‘tunnel’ walkways could be an interesting idea if they proved to be unviable as commercial entities, with the door spaces to the river and road also left open. Just as industrial curiosities if nothing else – reductionist perhaps, but better than demolition.
If in ten or twenty years time Docklands is nearly as thriving as the inner city, it may be regretted that these strutures weren’t retained because they weren’t commercially viable at the time.

With regard to Warehouses and specifically those around the Grand Canal Basin, I would like to add these thoughts:

Although I agree that in some settings, a long vista and uninterrupted campshires could be appealling, there is little demand for more “riverside walks” here. The neverending (and dull) liffy campshires are within about 100 metres. If you spend any sustained period of time here (as I did sailing in the basin in my youth), you’ll realise that nine out of ten days, the grand canal basin is a windswept, uncomfortable place to be. So nobody will be sitting out in nice, European style chairs, observing their yachts-. no matter how many empty berths DCC provide.

Further, Very few people actually travel down that side of the Basin. It isn’t – and never will be – a route from A to B.If you Walk down the North side of the Basin (towards the lock), you come to a dead end! (Although until recently, there was a delightful traveller camp there.

Finally, and Importantly, these buildings give the Basin it’s CHARACTER. They frame the Vista, and as water gently laps against them, you can feel the history of the place. The Dialogue between the water and little windows, Boats docked right against your living room, is the type of elegant and interesting building stock that Dublin is rapidly losing. Something far more innovative could have been done with these empty shells. Perhaps the idea of a boardwalk would have worked, with the Warehouses on the campshires Sheltering people and restaurants as they walk around.

It is no longer the “Dublin” Docklands, it’s just yuppie housing, visible in the Soulless, Yuppie filled, wind swept developments which have sprung up all over the North and South of Britain: Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester, et al.

I would like to add that I feel the North Docklands have been quite successfull and I’m not for one moment suggesting that the docklands should be low rise. I just feel that DDDA have compromised. They have neither produced an outstanding design or vision. Or retained any of the “feel” of the area. They have bulldozed a lot of history and replaced it with a lot of what passes for suburban housing on the continent. A series of gated, self contained blocks, with little or no hope of community.

surely cafe stalls would be swamped with all the offices around there, keep em we don’t need more windsweptness

@CM00 wrote:

it’s just yuppie housing, visible in the Soulless, Yuppie filled, wind swept developments which have sprung up all over the North and South of Britain: Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester, et al.

I would like to add that I feel the North Docklands have been quite successfull and I’m not for one moment suggesting that the docklands should be low rise. I just feel that DDDA have compromised. They have neither produced an outstanding design or vision. Or retained any of the “feel” of the area. They have bulldozed a lot of history and replaced it with a lot of what passes for suburban housing on the continent. A series of gated, self contained blocks, with little or no hope of community.

Yes but all is not lost . I am pinning my hopes on this new arts center (note not the abbey / no no not the abbey). I thinks if schawtz personnally oversees the square to her satisfaction , and yer man with the glasses gets the abbey right (sorry no arts center ) it could really bring the whole thing it to focus. Currently the building to the left of the square is pretty much finished . I think i can safely say it is the best building in the docklands so far . It has some kind of glass which gives the whole front a different colour depending which angle you look at it. It is really a very good office block (no photos sorry)

If this turns into a disapointment then cm00 is right the whole exercise will be a failure over all, and the docklands will remain a sterile yuppie sleepover with no life at all.

@CM00 wrote:

Although until recently, there was a delightful traveller camp there.

Still there on Britain Quay, connecting the extreme east ends of Sir John Rogerson’s and Hanover Quays. I cycled right through it the other day- met some kids from the Ringsend flats across the lock who were looking to get their horses back. So not all ‘just yuppie housing’, at least not yet.:)

Thinking about the boardwalk idea some more – even just a 100m stretch at these warehouses – I think it could really work.
I love it when the bike side and the conservation side of my brain don’t fight.;)

As I have always said the Dublin Docks is really a missed opportunity. It could have been more spectacular in many ways. It was a blank canvas to start with. What a no-no now. Whats to redeem it in some ways still remain on paper or are still concepts floating about. Hardly a great advertisment for the Celtic Tiger. Business folk and suits from abroad attending the IFSC lauugh no doubt at the toy town boxes. Mean-arsed architecture morelike.

if they are to be kept, any boardwalk to accommodate pedestrians should run from sean o’casey to beckett bridge – a crescent shaped thing at that point would look tacked on, particularly on this straight stretch of quay wall…

Not sure about them myself, i’d probably get rid of them given their location, would like to keep them if there was more space.

Originally posted by GregF
As I have always said the Dublin Docks is really a missed opportunity. It could have been more spectacular in many ways. It was a blank canvas to start with. What a no-no now. Whats to redeem it in some ways still remain on paper or are still concepts floating about. Hardly a great advertisment for the Celtic Tiger. Business folk and suits from abroad attending the IFSC lauugh no doubt at the toy town boxes. Mean-arsed architecture morelike.

In may ways we are a wealthly country with the mentality of a poor one. We are not there yet, but we are getting there. When U2 Tower and Point Village, Spencer Dock projects like the Convention Centre, Sam Beckett Bridge, and Grand Canal Square are built, then things will look better. By then we will have evolved to a wealthly country with the mentality of a rich one, hopefully. Maybe.

@Rusty Cogs wrote:

If you built a stretch of board walk around the back of those buildings it would become a haven for the types who currently destroy the amenity up on Eden Quay. With the building as shelter behind them that strech of board walk would become a complete no go zone. There’s already often a group of day time drinkers at the city side of the warehouses. I’ve walked up the north quays only to observe female members of the troop half way down the stone steps urinating in to the Liffey. The idea of turning them in to some sort of arcade of shops is just not going to happen as they are pinned between a busy road and the river. About all you could do with them is hollow them out and put in a glass roof. But to be honest, I can just see the people who would use it most already.

where do people from the offices gather to sit out side to have lunch on a day like today?

@hutton wrote:

Ground-scrapers.

Whats that ?

@a boyle wrote:

Yes but all is not lost . I am pinning my hopes on this new arts center (note not the abbey / no no not the abbey). I thinks if schawtz personnally oversees the square to her satisfaction , and yer man with the glasses gets the abbey right (sorry no arts center ) it could really bring the whole thing it to focus. Currently the building to the left of the square is pretty much finished . I think i can safely say it is the best building in the docklands so far . It has some kind of glass which gives the whole front a different colour depending which angle you look at it. It is really a very good office block (no photos sorry)

If this turns into a disapointment then cm00 is right the whole exercise will be a failure over all, and the docklands will remain a sterile yuppie sleepover with no life at all.

Yeah, i was down there the other day, and was thinking how nice all those ‘yuppie’ apartments looked in blazing sun. I had never realised that Schwartz’s scheme had started construction (sorry no pics). The first of the metal uprights for the red poles were up, in one of the middle sections.

Personally, i think that its going to be an amazing space in 4/5 years time, with the potentially impressive libeskind performing arts center and the new hotel beside. I’m looking forward to seeing it finished

The blue glass was very cool on the building to the left.

Right, I was down there this evening and took a pile of photos, It does look a lot better in the sun and I do feel better about the developments as they’re nearing completion. I maintain that the campshires should be better managed and will upload some photos, Including the Travellers! :p bit by bit. Here is a taster anyway. The blue building on the left, and the red “needles” which are tacky and cool at the same time

And a few more…

Sorry about the blurring on the last shot.:rolleyes:

The new roadways/laneways connecting the riverside to the canal dock are all super bland to, even down to the trees planted,… birches, i know they’re native and all but they’re just so scandinavian, winter, cold, bleak. There’s no warmth to the place , no joy, no eccentricity, no lushness. Everything seems to be sharp angles and shiny glass, so completely souless.
Doesn’t look like there’s any retail units gonna be opening up down there either apart from the three on the canal dock, just offices and sterile living environments.

was that you on the bike CM00this evening??

Does anyone else think the new bridge on the docks will spoil the view ??

yes . we .don’t use the liffery , we bridge it.

the particular bridge is very beautiful by all accounts , but we seem to have far too many. i would hack off butt bridge . it doesn’t do anything.

Are the poles in your shots the red poles with wrapping at the base CM00?
Dimensions look different to the test pole if they are ?? haven’t been down there in ages … thanks for the pics.

I think that red pole which people think is a test pole is something different. It would seem that they tried to test out red paving around it, but I think the new ones were always to be a different design to this one.

I must admit that I was suprised to see how quickly this was going ahead the other day when I walked past.

By the way, nice images CM00. There has been lovely light over the last few evenings.

i suspect the poles will turn out the same as the single one already in place. I think what has been screwed in place already are the lower stems. I suspect that an upper part will be placed on top of each stick , that way they can get at the bulbs when they eventually break!!

It is nice to see this going ahead so quickly.

There was a discussion which ended on another thread where someone asked if they could name ten new buildings of quality , it is such a shame that following years of building in the ifsc we have nothing of note , and are hoping that this center revives things. The original ifsc buildings are probably the best , and certainly finish off beresford place quite nicely, i don’t think anybody will be writting about this decade kindly.

dead right a boyle, the original bkd building has aged pretty well whereas some of the new stuff lining the quays already looks dated and is jut not worthy of a new city centre space … hopefully the few major projects left will lift the area.

I’ve been browsing the DDDAwebsite and theres lot’s of new goodies:

Some great aerial shots of the docklands up in pdf form here

Also a detailed mapof area.

@Maskhadov wrote:

was that you on the bike CM00this evening??

Yeah that was me! 😎 Got a few strange looks from security guards, travellers, etc. Lotts, there’s also a beautiful scale model of the whole south docks proposal (including Libeskinds’ centre) in the DDDA offices. Got into trouble for photographing that!

Thanks for posting those images Lotts. I accidently inverted one of them whilst trying to rotate it. It looks bizarre, so I thought I would post it.

edit, oops, I can’t seem to attach it. I think it is too big. Anyway, it was a bit of a pointles post. I just thought looking at an arial photo of Dublin inverted looked interesting. Apologies, but I don’t think I can post it.

@phil wrote:

Thanks for posting those images Lotts. I accidently inverted one of them whilst trying to rotate it. It looks bizarre, so I thought I would post it

Like this Phil? It is kinda cool.:)

That does like kind of mad alright, but I was referring to something different. The only way I can think of describing it is what it would look like if you put it on an overhead projector the wrong way up. North looks like it is south and vice versa. It took me a few seconds to realise exactly what it was that I had done. I tried to put it up again, but it is too big and I can’t figure out how to make it smaller.

I think I have it now:

Heh. I was trying to work out what the green space near the IFSC was, when I realised it was the dock. So it’s not grass after all!:eek:

@CM00 wrote:

I think I have it now:

That’s the one. Sorry I couldn’t manage to upload it, but then again I only discovered it as a result of my excellent computer talents! 😀

That photo confuses me greatly :confused:

Very recent photo indeed, as Trinity’s new building is exactly at that stage of construction.
Also shows what a meandering, long-winded route the Loop Line is:

well done with the pictures CM00

I hate those travellers burning all that crap. Most days there is black smoke coming from the halting site.

I love the above pic ! I think some skyscrapers on the port would really finish it off !

i am hopefull the u2 tower and the new abbey theatre will convince people that modern achitecture can be big and nice. because i firmly believe that when it comes to modern architecture dublin did not get off to a good start, (save the airport).

Then maybe it might be possible to envisage further tall buildings . Perhaps it is a good thing that we did not build much high rise so far during this boom so far, considering the dross that has been built.

Some more shots, sorry if this is disrupting the conversation!

North Docks…

Some of the Remaining Grand Canal Basin Vernacular..

its all so low rise… even 120 meters isnt anything that is massive….

I hope they fill from spencer dock till the point with something nice…. mostly everything on the south side is drab, flat and boring. Very disapointing.

Next step is to get rid of the east link bridge and replace it with a tunnel (maybe as part of the eastern bypass)

And here are the famous Liffey Campshire Warehouses. Leave them alone! 😀 They have a nice human scale. the one pictured still had it’s “Haworth & Son, Yachtbuilders” sign on it. There were very few people all along the quays, but as I took this picture, there were about 20+ people USING the quayside, in the psychologically enclosed space. I think too often we get caught up on the grand scaled, uninterrupted statement, without getting down to the gritty reality that people, and modern culture-need layers, -known on this site as clutter..

(Final shot is the expansive Liffey quay. Would you walk it? What’s the destination? What’s the point?)

exactly CM00, because at the end there is a load of pikeys living in caravans

Today’s Indo;

WORLD- class designers have been invited to come up with a plan to build a “remarkable icon” in Dublins’ docklands. Together with the proposed new Point Village tower, the 100m tall U2 Tower is set to change the Dublin skyline.

Yesterday, the DDDA officially inveited expressions of interest form “world class developers and design teams” to design, construct and finance a 0.78 hectare site -including the U2 tower- at Sir John Rogerson’s Quay.
The project also includes the design and construction of an 11,500 sq mt building on the adjacent Britain Quay site.

The U2 Tower will be primarily for residential use, with the band’s recording studios on its top two floors and a two storey basement car park. There is also provision for a possible marina and boardwalk.

“This project presents a landmark development opportunity todeliver a unique and remarkanle architectural icon for docklands and the city of Dublin”, according to etenders.gov.ie

Winmill Lane today: Is this the site?

windmill lane is not the site. The tower is to be built at the end of Britain Quay where the Dodder joins the Liffey. Looking at some of your other photos you were there the other night! (Thanks for the pic by the way.)
Look at THISto see more detail.

@CM00 wrote:

(Final shot is the expansive Liffey quay. Would you walk it? What’s the destination? What’s the point?)

People will walk along here in the same way that they take a stroll along Dun Laoghaire Pier. The apartments and offices being built along this quay will house more than the population of many well known Irish towns.

Also if this weather keeps up…

@Lotts wrote:

windmill lane is not the site. The tower is to be built at the end of Britain Quay where the Dodder joins the Liffey.

Where the “pikeys” are now.
For your info Maskhadov they are ‘members of the travelling community’.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

design? does that not suggest that theyre selling the site with pp and the tower as designed may not necessarily be built

Hopefully, vile if you ask me.

That would make one wonder what the future is with the remainder of the DDDA flagship projects such as the Airies and Liebskind buildings.

In fact if the docklands is completed without these 3 projects the area will be the most homogenous and bland district constructed in Northern Europe in the past decade on foot of the establishment of a dedicated urban renewal agency.

One feels that DCC would have done a far better job

well the U2 tower will certainly make a big improvement in whats currently there at the moment 😀

Yesterday, the DDDA officially inveited expressions of interest form “world class developers and design teams” to design, construct and finance a 0.78 hectare site -including the U2 tower- at Sir John Rogerson’s Quay.
The project also includes the design and construction of an 11,500 sq mt building on the adjacent Britain Quay site.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

design? does that not suggest that theyre selling the site with pp and the tower as designed may not necessarily be built

@Bago wrote:

Hopefully, vile if you ask me.

@Thomond Park wrote:

That would make one wonder what the future is with the remainder of the DDDA flagship projects such as the Airies and Liebskind buildings.

In fact if the docklands is completed without these 3 projects the area will be the most homogenous and bland district constructed in Northern Europe in the past decade on foot of the establishment of a dedicated urban renewal agency.

One feels that DCC would have done a far better job

How did you reach that conclusion given that project no longer has any gaurantees of completion?

From that Indo piece I simply would have taken it that they were just looking for someone to construct the project and maybe design some of the other buildings, other than the U2 Tower.
However if it means the current tower may not necessarily be built, then that is great news imo, because I think the U2 Tower is a crap design and not worthy of a major icon for Dublin.

Originally posted by Devin
I think the U2 Tower is a crap design and not worthy of a major icon for Dublin.

Wasn’t the U2 Tower the winner of a competition..can people on these forums post the designs they entered in the competition? Devin lets see it, post your superior entry below:

@The Denouncer wrote:

Wasn’t the U2 Tower the winner of a competition..can people on these forums post the designs they entered in the competition? Devin lets see it, post your superior entry below:

Well said, I stand by this design and i hope mit gets built. Did anyone ever see ‘Turning torso’ in Sweden? Well i did up close and its facking gorgeous, I can only hope it turns out similiar…

@PVC King wrote:

How did you reach that conclusion given that project no longer has any gaurantees of completion?

Are you talking to yourself again Thomond Park?

If anyone want’s to see the other designs, they are at
http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/index.html

The winner imho is not an entirely crap design, but, as Devin points out, it is not worthy of a a major icon for Dublin.
Nobody I know that has looked through the list of entries has picked Craig Henry Architects entry as a favorite.

Maybe one of the designs that failed to win can be used across the water in the Point Village. Its a pity that a 32 storey building is the best we can hope for, while towering over Dublin, would be a minor building in many other cities, though I like the design. Certainly better than Liberty Hall anyway

@The Denouncer wrote:

Its a pity that a 32 storey building is the best we can hope for, while towering over Dublin, would be a minor building in many other cities, though I like the design.

Why do you want to go higher. As you say a 32 storey tower will literally dominate the skyline…why do you think we need a higher range of buildings.

Something like the 170 metre Spinnaker Tower in Portsmouth would be ideal, and I don’t believe any building in the Docks would dominate the city, however it would add and not detract from the current *cough* ‘skyline’.

@The Denouncer wrote:

Something like the 170 metre Spinnaker Tower in Portsmouth would be ideal, and I don’t believe any building in the Docks would dominate the city, however it would add and not detract from the current *cough* ‘skyline’.

ooh to think the spike could have been like that…i saw the 135 meter olympic tower (?) in Barcelona as well, which was quite impressive.

i don’t think Dublin needs any buildings higher than 32 storeys (at the moment) but its a nice leap from 5-15 storey monotony…thinking of others cities the size of Dublin, we need to aim in their direction (there are exceptions of course like Frankfurt, Rotterdam etc.)

Amsterdam’s tallest is the 135m rembrant tower
Lisbon’s tallest are two 110m residential towers (which are quite nice)
Brussels has a few tall office towers tallest is 150m and a 145m tower u/c
Birmingham’s Holloway circus that was built last year is 130m

I think we are aiming for the right height here, we just need a few of them to catch up with similiar skylines
Otherwise we will have have a huge ‘landmark’ tower that will stick out like Montparnasse in Paris
Hueston gate will be 140 m to spire and is a good landmark tower for any european city of our size
The gateway to the city is also a reasonable height

However i do think the docks have great potential for a massive tower…and something very ‘iconic’
But lets built up to that first by going ahead with U2 tower, point village (i don’t know about you, but i’d love an apartment in EITHER tower!!!

I’d love to see something for tourists, something 200 metres or so.
“Get the Luas to the exciting new 200 metre Yeats Tower and have a bite to eat on the 50th floor overlooking this historic literary city, whilst listening to the Abbey players as they recite some of W.B. Yeats most eclectic work.”

i agree . I think the u2 could be very nice, depending on how close it fulfills the architects vision.

however if it is not possible to find a developer … well if you are breaking through the ceiling of 10/11 storeys, then make it big high and beautifull.

That Spinaker thing in Portsmouth looks terrible – pure retro-future kitsch in the vein of that ridiculous hotel in Dubai, the Burj Al Arab…
It’s also been a complete disaster from a constructional point of view, opening 5 years late and having to close agan because the lift dosen’t work properly. And because it’s a bespoke lift designed specifically to fit the tower they have no idea how to fix it. Now it looks like it’s going to have to be ripped out and replaced, closing the tower for at least another six months.

Give me the U2 tower any day – i think that the inital winning entry was fairly poor but the new, higher version looks much more elegant and will add a touch of class to the fairly uninspiring Docklands.

BTW, the mateus hotel seems to be going up pretty quickly – I’ve only seen it from the railway line into Connolly but it looks to me like a whole section of the “checkerboard” facade is complete to the south of the building. Im I correct in assuming that this is the hotel or is it some other building entirely!?

@The Denouncer wrote:

I’d love to see something for tourists, something 200 metres or so.
“Get the Luas to the exciting new 200 metre Yeats Tower and have a bite to eat on the 50th floor overlooking this historic literary city, whilst listening to the Abbey players as they recite some of W.B. Yeats most eclectic work.”

how about closing down one of the poolbeg chimneys, repainting it and sticking a huge saucer on top a la CN tower, stick a radio antennae on top and hey presto?

Originally posted by Keen
how about closing down one of the poolbeg chimneys, repainting it and sticking a huge saucer on top a la CN tower, stick a radio antennae on top and hey presto?

Nah, that’d be just plain stupid looking.

^_^

In fairness denouncer, I think keen’s just taking the piss – note icon posted beside title.

here is a couple of pics i found of our neighbours i think they are a little dated so there is probably many more additions to these skylines
im not saying they are particulary nice but its just to show where we are in terms of high-rise and are maybe behind the times so to speak
[attach]2551[/attach]
[attach]2552[/attach]
[attach]2553[/attach]
[attach]2554[/attach]
[attach]2555[/attach]
[attach]2556[/attach]
[attach]2557[/attach]
[attach]2558[/attach]
[attach]2559[/attach]
[attach]2560[/attach]
[ATTACH]2565[/ATTACH]
[attach]2561[/attach]
[attach]2562[/attach]
[attach]2563[/attach]
[attach]2564[/attach]

The world is a mess

yes, i was taking the piss!

nice little collection there paul h

vienna and brussels suprised me when i first seen them (I think the Millenium tower is missing from the Vienna skyline there)

just thought i would add some skyline pics when i was in Berlin last month…

first one is postamer platz (tweeked a bit in photoshop due to bad weather)
2nd and 3rd are unknown
4th is city centre as seen from tiergarten (zoom)

I know you were messing Keen! But I denounced that plan out of pedantic habit. :-
Those other EU states are well ahead! 🙁

Dublin:

so my conclusion from the europe pictures and i guess from the us cities i know is that tall buildings look best when clustered and crammed in together and the rest of the skyline left unpunctuated by isolated towers. paris has it right and it works out like that in frankfurt too because everything is in the financial district. i certainly hope noone is supposed to look at the picture of leige and think, why can’t we be more like that! i also think its funny to see toronto here, without question a complete mess of a city; considering the resources, wealth, population, historic building stock, etc, toronto gets really poor value out of the urban environment.

I didn’t see a photo of Toronto in that post. I think the one you are referring to is of Berlin (The bottom one?) However, I think this discussion is verging on the ridiculous in that a general concensus appearing over the last few days seems to be that any highrise is good highrise, and that we should just plonk them up to prove that we are not ‘behind’ other European cities. As Notjim already said, those images illustrate some good examples, but also illustrate some terrible examples of building high within a city. For example, Gdansk is definitely not a city Dublin should aspire to in terms of its approach to highrise.

Is it possible future development springing up around metro north in that empty space between might yeild dublin’s la défence? Are there any provsions for development densities along this corridor? I like keens idea:D though isnt there something similar on a smaller scale in smithfeild

@The Denouncer wrote:

Maybe one of the designs that failed to win can be used across the water in the Point Village.

Tower across the water was designed by STW. And yes, it makes me want to yawn.
http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2005/000163.html

and not surprisingly looks fairly similar to their proposal for the u2 tower … granted the photomontage is fairly distant.

http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/stw/1_lge.html

STW – “we think inside the box” (TM)

their proposals for dun laoghaire, u2 tower & point village are all pretty lame, well to me anyway !

You are right Peter, its very similar. Very bland and unexciting.

latest from ddda website

U2 tower design : fill in the blank 😀

hmm…

😀

very interesting press release from July 16th on http://www.ddda.ie

It talks about the buildings height – 100m to ‘shoulder’ with a max provision of 20m for a ‘roofscape’. This means the overall max height is 120m!
It also goes into detail on the provision of a bridge (public access), a public space, the layout options for the other unite around the site and of course the design guidelines for this ‘landmark tower’

I think the DDDA might feel that they have generally made a dogs bollocks of the Dublin docklands regarding its visual impact, innovation, an exciting place to live etc…so they are trying to patch it up with all this guff and last minute bits and pieces of a few towers. To initially have a mininmum height of 3 storeys or whatever it was in this area was ludicrous as the outcome now is truelly awful. Anyone that pays over half a million or more for an appartment here are robbing themselves in reality. Peter Coynes precedent has fucked up what could have been far far better. (he has fucked back to Scotland now, has he not, and handed the reigns to some other civil servant type.)The skyline of Frankfurt in the photos looks the biz, (as well as London and Paris; Barcelona looks lost as well.) A similar cluster of even just a few towers in Dublin docklands would have made an immediate and striking impact for this part of the city, and also act as a better selling point regarding finance, corporate business etc…than what’s there now. What’s there now is truelly awful as it gets more and more completed by the day. An assortment of run of the mill bollocky blocks does not make it unique in any way. 🙁

Frankfurts skyline up close is truly awesome, they are soaring towers indeed. Then again, it has the muscle behind it for such towers – large banks reside there mostly. Also in Rotterdam as Europe’s largest port has a nice skyline down at its docks. This is probabely the difference between Dublin and europe’s larger skylines. Hotels also make up a large amoint of European skyscrapers which were built in the 60’s or 70’s. Ireland has only grown up really in the last decade economically and commercially but i agree we could have turned this around years ago.
Also, I don’t understand the focus on such residentail towers either, can’t we not afford to build taller office blocks? I guess the apartment market is much stronger. I mean nobody cares when they are at work if they are on 5th floor or 50th floor, When you live there, it does count. So why can’t we find large corporate tenants/hotels to fill office blocks and save our huge business parks from being built in the sticks. A modern downtown in the docks with proper rail links would have been a solution, I wonder have we blown a golden opportunity. 🙁

phil – yes, sorry, i glanced at berlin and because of the long straight road and the needle like tower, thought it was toronto, dumb, looking again it looks nothing like. i just have a terrible toronto adversion which is triggered by the slightest thing. apart from that, i agree with you, this debate is always wierd – focussing on height rather than quality.

Although Gdansk hasn’t got a good example of high rise compared to the other cities pictured; however, look at how neat the terracotta pitched roofed buildings are and how both the backs and fronts of the buildings look presentable, uniform and tidy. Compare that of any shot of Dublin city and you’ll see hotch-potch, mis-match, grubbiness, filth, and irregularity all gone beyond. And when you think that Gdansk was under the dreaded bankrupt Commie regime for years and suffered during WWII as well.

just a couple of more pictures. to be honest they do not even scratch the surface of whats going on out there.
I think in ten years time you are going to see a complete transformation accross europe in regards to skylines as they shake of their old world shackles. the entire world is seeing an incredible explosion of high rise constuction
http://skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64

istanbul
[ATTACH]2578[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2579[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2586[/ATTACH]

milano

[ATTACH]2581[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2582[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2585[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2583[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2584[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]2585[/ATTACH]

oh my god WOW. Makes what is happening in Dublin boring and unimportant

@Maskhadov wrote:

oh my god WOW. Makes what is happening in Dublin boring and unimportant

oh for the lack of ego driven white elephants

Why oh why would we want anything remotely like that muck that’s planned for Milan? Where’s the grace or elegance in the proposal. All I see are a series of self regarding, ego driven edifices scattered on a lump of parkland with no discernable logic or form. Each individual building may have their merits but together the result will be revolting. And what is the point of the Liebskind block in the middle? Torre C? Awful stuff…

I look forward to looking down and seeing the Sam Beckett Bridge, flanked by the U2 Tower and Point Village Tower. As I said before, we are in a period of transition, a wealthy country with the mentality of a poor one. And very conservative. This will change over time, but at the moment all we can do is look at countries with greater vision, who got there first.

Paul H,
Istanbul is an example of how not to build high-rise. The Karakoy side looks shite as a result of the crap built there, typical example being the one you posted – I think itis the Hyatt? It totally overpowers the Dolmabace Palace. Even worse is the neighbouring Ritz Carlton, which looks like a kid’s effort with Lego with a greenhouse on top.
See http://www.ritzcarlton.com/hotels/istanbul/photo_tour/hotel/property_overlooking_water.asp
The Four Seasons did a lovely job on their hotel, a conversion of the city jail. Idea for the ‘Joy?
KB2

Very true Denouncer….we are indeed very, very conservative …..but also very careless. Pity we didn’t apply this tight arsed conservatism to the saving of the historic fabric of our cities architectural gems that have suffered over the years…… and it’s still happening today. The Dublin docks was an ideal spot and a blank canvas to have any sort of contemporary and exciting new architecture which could be viewed and admired from near and far. Instead we get toytown legoland, and another proposal of plonking a giantnormous monolith building in perhaps one of the most significant and historical parts of the city…the James ‘s St /Thomas St vicinity. These streets still have fine old 18th century type houses and instead of being restored and treated with a little bit of respect, will no doubt be botched and bulldozed to make way for yet another fucking overpriced crappy appartment scheme for upstarts buying a lifestlye which they are mind numbingly sold in the daily media.

@GregF wrote:

Very true Denouncer….we are indeed very, very conservative …..but also very careless. Pity we didn’t apply this tight arsed conservatism to the saving of the historic fabric of our cities architectural gems that have suffered over the years…… and it’s still happening today. The Dublin docks was an ideal spot and a blank canvas to have any sort of contemporary and exciting new architecture which could be viewed and admired from near and far. Instead we get toytown legoland, and another proposal of plonking a giantnormous monolith building in perhaps one of the most significant and historical parts of the city…the James ‘s St /Thomas St vicinity. These streets still have fine old 18th century type houses and instead of being restored and treated with a little bit of respect, will no doubt be botched and bulldozed to make way for yet another fucking overpriced crappy appartment scheme for upstarts buying a lifestlye which they are mind numbingly sold in the daily media.

dunno if i agree with the argument about the location, i have seen skyscrapers in London and Rotterdam work very well with their victorian or 18th century surroundings, it makes for a nice contrast of old and new…as longas its done well…i think acid rain or chewing gum has a worse affect on retaining heritage streets than a skyscraper…unless you really miss the view from ‘that angle’ 😉

Here’s the remainder of my pics. I’ll add comments when I can, too tired from resizing now~! 😀

New Streets…

First one is of the gasworks, the others are on the south quays

Everyone’s favourite O2 Building: :rolleyes:

Plus my personal favourites from the day (just for good measure 😀 )

That last one looks like Gordon St. off Barrow St. Used to live there.
You can see the muck scraper beside the drainpipe at ground level, they used to scrape their boots off it.

Not all of the above picture are new streets. One is the fantastically monikered Misery Hill! pertaining to its past as a waystation for lepers entering/exiting the city. Hope it is retained as it is the street’s rightful title.

Has the name Hannover Square been taken yet?

Looks like work has begun on Alto Vetro in the last few days. The advertising hoardings are gone, and the footpaths around it have been taken over by various pieces of machinery. Incidently, does anyone know what was here before and how Treasury came to own such a small plot. how long has it been open quay-side for? Was there a small building here a few years ago. I am finding it quite hard to remember to be honest.

Sorry, to edit, but just found a small piece about it. I think I remember the small building that is referred to now. It was a strange sort of pinky orange colour as far as I remember. Anyway, more information about Altro Vetro on these web-pages

http://www.sca.ie/

http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=58

http://www.homanobrien.ie/housing02.html

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php?id=1345

It was like a small detached house, you mostly noticed it because it was a bit akward getting past it, particularily if you were pushing a pram; the pavement narrowed and had a rail.

TCD must be wetting themselves with such a tall building opposate their Enterprise Centre.

Ah yes, I remember it. Was almost like a country cottage. I think they were piling? when I walked past there the other day. They had one of those large, vertical drills anyway.

Yeah there used to be a cottage there. I’m keeping my eye on this development from where I work, and Grand Canal Square (a lot more red poles seem to have gone up).

@phil wrote:

Looks like work has begun on Alto Vetro in the last few days. The advertising hoardings ar…………

http://www.sca.ie/

http://www.treasuryholdings.com/projectDetail.aspx?id=58

http://www.homanobrien.ie/housing02.html

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php?id=1345

Thanks for the shay cleary link phil
Is this project approved??
[ATTACH]2810[/ATTACH]

Speaking of highrises, has anyone come across this image?

@paul h wrote:

Thanks for the shay cleary link phil
Is this project approved??
[ATTACH]2810[/ATTACH]

i never heard anything about this before, what is it? is’nt that on city quay? or george’s quay?

@Keen wrote:

i never heard anything about this before, what is it? is’nt that on city quay? or george’s quay?

It’s the old arts centre on the corner. Was bought by Alanis and the Kelly family if memory serves a few years ago. Planning has yet to be sought for it

Hot off the presses. It’s the Kevin Roche building:
The Spencer Dock International Conference Centre Ltd (SDICC) consortium, warmly welcomes the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, John O’Donoghue, T.D.s announcement that it has been designated as the Preferred Bidder for the public/private partnership to design, build, finance and operate the National Conference Centre at Spencer Dock.

The SDICC now looks forward to completing the ongoing process with the Office of Public Works and their professional advisors to finalise contractual details to allow the SDICC consortium to swiftly commence work on providing Dublin and Ireland with a landmark state-of-the-art National Conference and Exhibition Centre.

Dermod Dwyer, Chairman/CEO of the bidding consortium (SDICC) stated: “I am delighted that the tender process has reached this important milestone. 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, “Its central location and high specification will put Dublin in a strong position to attract and compete for international conferences.”

The SDICC consortium continues to be bound by the confidentiality agreements as part of the OPW tender process and consequently will not be issuing any further comment until a formal announcement is made.

ah yes i know the arts building. Any more details about this proposal?

@malec wrote:

Speaking of highrises, has anyone come across this image?

Im all for the high rise at the port but those buildings hardly inspire anykind of awe.

This PD document was discussed in a Dublin Port thread iirc

@jdivision wrote:

This PD document was discussed in a Dublin Port thread iirc

Sorry, I didn’t know that. I just came across this image on the web and was surprised to see something like this. I agree the buildings shown aren’t the best but it’s only an idea of what the place could look like, not what will actually be there.

They should get the ball rolling on this PD idea. Simply by putting a cap on the expansion of Dublin port, appointing a committe looking into how to best most all the stuff from the port to other ports around the country and someone to draw up a masterplan for the entire docks.

What they did with the Quays was less than inspiring. I hope they dont repeat the same mistake.

I agree but given that this administration have had 9 years to do it and have chosen not to hardly inspires confidence. A start on the T21 agenda in 2000 would have releived many of the problems that are now critical.

Just coming in on this here people.Been reading back through posts.Interesting buildings.I agree…it’s all being done in bits and pieces.You’ve got all these “chunks” of development, and within each one, the buildings are fairly similar.But each “chunk” is different to the next.Not that you’d want every building to be the exact same or similar throughout the docklands, but a bit more planning between the whole lot might help.
And you’re right, Altro Vetro is well under way.

This looks like it might be of interest to some archiseek users. I would certainly be in favour of seeing the area on front of the Custom House fully pedestrianised once the Port Tunnel is open. It forms such an important part of Dublin in terms of linking the city to the docklands. It would also be good to see different functions taking place under the loopline.

@DDDA wrote:

3. DESCRIPTION AND PROJECT BRIEF Area for new design is marked in red

The Authority seeks to appoint a consultant Architect/Landscape Architect to]www.ted.europa.eu[/url]) and on the etenders website (http://www.etenders.gov.ie). Budget: The project budget is set at €6,000,000.0 for phase one construction which will incorporate the area of Custom House Quay to the front of the Custom House and George’s Quay to the south. Other areas will be phase in collaboration with Dublin City Council and the Office of Public Works later.

Wonderful News! And on so many levels, as this affects many different parts of the area as well as the building itself.

Currently this part of Custom House Quay is nothing short of a wasteland, paved in acres of concrete slabs with little visual interest. Saying that, any new scheme ought to remain almost equally deferential to the building it flanks, but certainly more low-level interest can be introduced in the form of distinctive paving, sunken lighting and smart seating, perhaps with a central area addressing the portico and centre block. There’s fantastic views of the building to be had from here that are rarely featured in popular photographs – perhaps the scale of it just has to be experienced to be appreciated – and yet the Victoriana seating along here all faces the other way, across the river! Any new seating must be back-to-back in design.

One of the rare investments made by the Corpo in the bad old days is the lovely limestone quay wall along CHQ which is a great asset when one considers the muck of the George’s Quay railing across the river – the building’s principal viewing point. And of course nobody’s bothered to maintain it in decades and is in typically disgusting condition, something you wouldn’t even see in Moscow or decrepit capitals of eastern Europe, where pride is taken in such things. The state of it is shameful. Not that such a utilitarian structure should be there anyway; all of this sweep along with the Matt Talbot railings need complete replacement. It’d also do wonders for arguably Dublin’s most elegant contemporary bridge. Similarly seating and lighting is required on George’s Quay too, and in this case smart lamp standards can be erected along the quay as they’d don’t impede views from here. It’d make for a lovely, softly lit viewing point, especially observe the Custom House’s new floodlighting which must be a part of this plan!

Beresford Place is more tricky, and should the quay become pedestrianised it would make it even more difficult to redesign the place if more traffic was to be diverted onto it as a result.

This is an interesting and hugely challenging project. I hope it goes well!

I wonder how the dominance of motor traffic throughout the area will be addressed. In particular the multi-stage crossings required to walk by the river from chq to eden quay.

The other tricky point will be reversing the complete abandonment of this area (also Eden Quay, and Burgh Quay) to the homeless, the addicts, and the mentally ill.

I think the opening up of the grounds of the Custom House would involve unlocking the gates rather than removing the railings…

While the quay walls are such an important feature of Dublin’s riverside, I think stepping the whole section of quay in front of the Custom House down into the river would be an excellent idea. It would visually connect the Custom House to the river and create an excellent public space.

I am delighted Georges Quay is being tackled..its a disgrace considering its prominent position. I agree that this section of the city is surprisingly desolate and ignored. A new lease of life is just what it needs and its important that reduction of traffic be seen as an important element in that. I am also happy Beresford Crescent is being tackled before its too late. Overall I welcome this project, particularly its ambitious scope.

Monday is the five year anniversary of 9/11 – a big milestone for all those affected.
.

i saw a program on that and it was amazing anyone else see it on rte,it went over all the chances the US goverment had to stop al-queda but didnt take?anyway apparantly the terrorists who did this horrible thing were wanted terrorists already but they were aloud walk straight onto the planes using their real names and all!

@paul h wrote:

Thanks for the shay cleary link phil
Is this project approved??
[ATTACH]2810[/ATTACH]

Does anyone know who the architects are on this one?

Looks good, will it pass?

@damnedarchitect wrote:

Does anyone know who the architects are on this one?

Looks good, will it pass?

It was an entry in a competition. No guarantee that that’s what will be built