admin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Ah sure lets have a 20 storey here, a 40 storey there, doesn’t really matter if Dublin ends up with a wide scale visual hotch potch, does it ?
This is too high for the site; buildings of this size should be confined solely to docklands.
I take it DCC’s high rise report is resting on a bottom shelf somewhere, not that I ever agreed with its conclusion that numerous high rise gateways to a low rise city core (including docklands) was appropriate.
Anything over twenty stories should be confined to the upper docklands area, forming a modern backdrop to the city core without impacting negatively on it.
DCC need to make a strategic decision & stop this random high rise nonsense.
As the Folkstone-Calais Tunnel has proved both aviation and ferries survived the tunnel.
Dublin to UK doesn’t have the passenger loadings to justify upgrading of the rail line accross North Wales to Crewe let alone a £3.4bn tunnel which is costed to 21 miles in length alone.
It may take a flight to get to Scotland from either London, Dublin or Belfast but the cultural links between both Scotland and Ireland are strong enough to ensure that such sums needn’t be wasted on such a vanity project!
@JoePublic wrote:
What should the DDDA constantly be faulted for their new-found ambition?
If I was in the DDDA I’d be close to throwing in the towel – let’s just cut and paste some more boring 6-storey square boxes by Irish architects into the remainder of the docklands and be done with the bloody thing.
The DDDA have created one of the blandest city quarters in the western world. The fact that this appears to have finally dawned on them does not mean every random gimmick they come up with should be universally accepted as they attempt to salvage the situation.
Looks fairly dated to me, although maybe thats because we’ve been looking at it for 8 years :rolleyes:
Interested to see how the glazed cylinder will work out … at least it will provide some light relief from the monotony of the north docks that the DDDA has inflicted on the city.
There is no rule of thumb as land is a hetrogenous commodity!
I’d agree with Stephen C’s caution in relation to any potential protected structures and or potential impacts on adjoining and or neighboring protected structures.
I further would add that for an application on a tight site to be successful a very high quality standard of urban design would be required so when weighing up the financial maths I would add additional sums for higher costs on external finishes.
A recent ABP decision that I am familiar with gave 2000 sq feet on a 1100 square foot site with an additional 2 car spaces (enclosed) and 650 sq feet of roof gardens equating to 93% site coverage. The architect really did a fantastic job and minimised all impacts on adjoining occupiers and as a result of the quality of the architecture I believe strongly that the new addition will lift the tone of the area including an adjoining consevation area.
What you really need is the opinion of a conservation specialist who could advise from the stand point of a hypothetical objector of the closest protected structure.
CIAI
Are you suggesting an underground retail environment?
I understand that most retail in Japan is subterranean and has something to do with the Japanese female propensity to avoid sunlight and preserve skin from the effects of sun-aging.
I am interested to know if you are proposing something similar here and I further look forward to assessing the Japanese retail model later in the year! 😉
Its a lot better than what i had envisaged, though definitely the wrong spot for it, would sit much better in parkland or a vast expanse of water.
If it is to go there, and it appears there’s little anyone can do about it, should he not be looking down on the bridge or water ?
I’d like to see a montage with it and the Calatrava bridge taken from the junction of Custom House Quay and Beresford Place; could get a little jumbled down there.
I do agree that it is harmless as a stand alone if not quite devoid of inspiration
@jdivision wrote:
There was plans for a Chinatown in Smithfield but like all these plans in Dublin it got dropped. If Dublin City Council ever gets its act together the Markets area could be a good place for it, particuarly the Market building itself which could be great as an indoor stall type food place similar to those in Camden Market (albeit most of those are outdoors)
I think the Covent Garden style proposal for Lysaght’s Fruit Market will work without any specific theming but feel that if the overall area is to see a benefit beyond the obvious attraction of a single building and known demand from the Four Courts then adjoining streets should be brought into play. In the absence of tax breaks the chances are that the Moore Street temporary lets will scatter to the four winds.
Which would be a pity!
Simple way to make it happen elsewhere would be to give 100% occupier municipal rates relief but limit the scale of company turnover to say €1m p.a. to be eligible for such relief. Totally agree on MSG it is the cooking equivelent of Hawkins House!
CC I appluad your idealism but JD’s point needs to be further explained; none of these businesses would be in this location if this was not a redevelopment play. The buildings in question would simply be let to High Street multiples and sold on in lots as investments and the land behind these shops would be non-performing and of no benefit to the City.
What we would all love to see is a dedicated China Town with some good Japanese & Vietnamese restaurants as well something along the lines of the area between Leicester Square and Shaftsbury Ave WC1 London being done in Dublin. The way it respects the existing street grain yet is entirely distinctive.
For once I hope the next area / theme selected for an Action Area plan moves away from Museum and Cultural quater and moves towards cultural inclusion as its theme and for once it might just be realistic. Unlike Smithfield, Harp, Docklands, North East Inner City etc etc
@GrahamH wrote:
Croagh Patrick isn’t doing hot coals yet is it?
It didn’t this year but if they went the traditional route and walked to the reek then the soles of their feet would surely exhibit similar levels of cleansing!
I’m sorry but all this nostalgia for a retail model based on selling terralean school apparell and bingo gear is turning my stomach.
George at ASDA sell school gear from £4.50 €6.50 a piece no stand alone retailer can survive selling Shanghai standard apparell.
I view the unit as a great opportunity for the street to put in a more viable anchor unit to draw the hoardes using the bus routes heading west.
This area needs a BID programme now.
Even though Frawley’s was tack town, I was sad to see it go – very much part of the area, a local institution you might even say 😉
All comes back to a comment made by Tom Phillips at the Smithfield enquiry in 2000.
“developers have no problem making development contributions once the sums are spent for the improvement of the immediate area or specific purpose the contribution is levied under”
Given the amount of development contributions paid out in this area over the past decade it should not look the way it does.
As for the retailers I am sorry to see Gilna’s go they were very good on the one occaision I used them but Frawley’s really isn’t any loss. This area needs to go the way of Camden Street as it will never be a Capel or George’s Street again.
Webers ‘Industrial Location Theory’ dictates that firms will locate at the median point between supply and demand.
That is why London Paris & FFM are the biggest hubs.
