admin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
true their photomontage is horiffic stuff but the basic idea to shift Dublin Port is a good one & should happen long term. IF we are to have high rise in this city, they should be confined pretty much exclusively to this area.
Good point the idea of reclaiming 36 acres of sea in Galway Bay to create berths for cruise liners is even crazier
https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=5145&highlight=galway+cruise+liners
Well done
10 years and what have we seen in planning terms.
30,000 one offs a year and no tall buildings
does PD stand for ‘Pitiful Densities’?
or is it ‘Petrol Dependency’?
or even ‘Politiicised Decentralisation’
The tail assimulated years ago you might as well vote FF
Sean Dunne’s Jurys site plans rejected
Monday, 14 May 2007 19:05
Developer Sean Dunne’s plans for the Jurys Hotel site in Ballsbridge have been rejected by local councillors.This evening the South East area committee voted to reject the draft area plan which would have allowed high density commercial and residential construction.
A number of councillors queried whether city officials – in agreeing the plan – were faciltating the huge price paid for the site by Mr Dunne.
AdvertisementHe was reported to have paid a total of €260m for the site, which works out at €50m an acre.
No real surprise there
The Landlord is standing
The Port tunnel was the largest infrastructural project ever undertaken in this state, its construction was far from fiasco but was marred with the usual media mud slinging loaded with inaccuracies. The project was NOT over budget.
Reasonably objective appraisal here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_port_tunnelMetro North should be the Middle of the three proposed underground lines.
DoT are the only ones out of step with the general consensus on that!
Where is the damn interconnector?
Reason for edit: Thought you meant Metro West – Which given the Minister for Transport in question could equally have been chosen First 😮
Darkman you sound like your world has fallen asunder.
Metro north is out for Procurement, results of which are scheduled for this summer.
Agreed that projects in Ireland take a long time, everything is consensus based, a reflection of the main party in power.Social structures are very similar as are the resultant attitudes.
The diffrence between the two are that progressive local authorities like Westminster and The City have more influence over government than vice versa. Hence the better built environment.
Berlin is probably a better example as the germans are more technical generally and municipal authorities are permitted to take on larger debt burdens.
Base line you can build literally anything in Ireland once its low enough
@GregF wrote:
When they had their boom in the 80’s they got signature architecture from the likes of local greats such as Richard Rogers and Norman Foster as well as many a renowned foreign architect. With this came a thriving art scene as well. Since then Britain has flourished with signature architecture not only in London but throughout the country. Wembley Stadium the latest addition to London. (What would we do without the GAA and CrokePark, at least they showed initiative and vision.) .
The 1980’s in London delivered Lloyds and little else it really was mid to late 90’s before standards improved beyond bland pension fund spec development to owner occupier spec. The outlook os certainly better than the backdrop.
@GregF wrote:
As what the Darkman said regarding our Celtic Tiger boom and architecture here, all we seemed to have got are acres of overpriced undersized houses and appartments and roads with roundabouts and traffic lights.
Regarding the paltry state of the country from which we came, as what the Denouncer said, it is true, we have come a long way, considering we had SFA to start with. But that does not excuse our conservatism when it comes to the arts and architecture. It is so bad that it is like the time when the Catholic Church had control of and a say about everyone’s lives here.
Can we please leave the Church out of this, bottom line pre 1995 Ireland architecturally was driven by cost concerns and low rental levels impeding the ability of developers to build attractive buildings aimed at higher end occupiers.
What happened next was that the DOE did not issue proper guidelines compelling developers to raise design standards.
The AIG building on the corner of North Wall Quay and Guild St sums it all up for me
You can throw in most of Cork St as well
Suggestion:
Change existing outlandish thread title to:
‘failure of ireland to build skyscrapers‘Discuss:
whether or not this actually constitutes the ‘failure’ of a nation.
or maybe don’t bother, high rise is done to death, of course it does not.yes but every bloody one of them are proposing massive tax cuts, so how any side will have sufficient funds given the moderating economy to provide us with the investment that we need is in question.
@paul h wrote:
Thats very interesting, do you think a change in government would actually make a diiference with fast tracking major pieces of (critical) infrasructure?
Or is it maybe the actual system is the problem, where individuals can hold up project that will benefit the country as a whole
At the risk of sounding like some kind of dictator, there should be a need to weigh things up and make decisions based on how they will benefit the nation, not how it will affect a few individuals.
There should be cold hearted decision makers where national infastructure projects are concernedIf Mr O Brians grocery store is in the way of a new metro stop(national road, important office complex etc..), then its adios Mr O’B
I genuinely do, there would certainly be a more balanced split between roads and public transport for starters.
Of course there has been a lot more quantum of development in the past 15 years but I would strongly contend that this has been a macro gain as opposed to localised micro gains.
Over 30% of residential units built are one off houses, probably another 40% are large housing estates in areas that are not ideal locations and would be rejected as locations in almost all other OECD countries.
The next decade has to be about quality of life and infrastructural initiatives that are focussed on the existing population and not about growth for the sake of growth.
The FF stated election policy that we need to create another 250,000 jobs and continue with the same development pattern would be humourous if they didn’t intend to actually do it.
What Ireland needs right now is to take a step back realise that the workforce is already suffcient and provide the transport, health, education and communications systems to support the existing population to the same standards as you would expect in nordic countries.
I am not racist but the idea of economic growth to accomodate 200,000 migrants from Eastern Europe does not appeal especially considering that a very small percentage of the population profit almost exclusively from the minimum wage and maximum rents that this section of society are offered.
@johnfp wrote:
Emigrate, be proud to be Irish and come home in 15 years ( and hope for the best my friend )
The late Brian Lenihan once made a point that emmigrants were lucky to go and see new places and opportunities and he was slated for it.
There are many fantastic opportunities outside Ireland both careerwise and culturally.
My own view is that things were going well in Ireland 1994 – 2000 when returning emmigrants had influence and new ideas were emerging every second.
Maybe its just me but sometime during 2000 we stopped analysing how money was being made and just looked at the numbers and those in control stopped listening to anything other than their own thoughts.
The result is as described above a massive wasted opportunity.
Yet one feels it is not all doom and gloom once we change government and the planning framework can be reformed and a proper transport put in place to support higher densities and taller buildings in appropriate places.
Fupp all done a new beginning to do
Agreed it gives the vista from the Ha’penny up Crown Alley a very International flavour.
What caused chaos was the creation of a Plaza on Dame Street and the destruction of the streetline and stunning buildings that were demolished to make way for it.
Had it been built in the backland even deeper than its present position and the Dame Street line kept intact then I may have had a different opinion as that site is very very deep in comparison.
The Clarence site in contrast is only a slip of a plot with no real depth and the Quays are infinately more exposed to long views than Fownes Street and Cope Street
You are obviously in a minority of one on the appopriateness of the siting of the Central Bank which is a really innovative building in terms of design for a cleared site and engineering techniques. Its location on the fringes of Temple Bar in what was the centre of the traditional banking distict with numerous examples of victorian pomposity was fundamentaly flawed in planning terms.
Now if it were on Grand Canal Basin and five stories higher it would really have gained international critical acclaim
