darkman

@PVC King wrote:

Thanks for acknowledging that the image I posted is the new proposal. As this dates from August 2005 when the price was listed at €200m less than the current cost.

I have never argued against grade separation of the major flows i.e. Getting all flows from the N7 south onto and off both directions of the M50 this is required. But levelling the mad cow to acheive this is not required as the other slip roads will render the mad cow enirely sane.

The issue here is how a project with a total life of 4.5 years has gone up in price by 25% in less than 2 years.

This is blatent mis-managment of scarce resources and bear in mind that all of these projects have a 10 year payback with interest.

Thanks for acknowledging that the image I posted is the new proposal.

– huh? Thats the old proposal. A stupid design tbh. We are not exactly streching the National budget atm. There is ample room for further increase in cost to get the upgrade right or else – as has already been said – we will be back revisiting this in a few years. Im happy to see the money spent if it means a freeflowing M50 – which im very confident it will. Im very happy with the new interchange design. It is an excellent and intelligent design (something which is rare in Ireland unfortunatley).

@PVC King wrote:

Are you going to address the issues of specific cost or simply repeat yourself?

There are very very limited differences between Andrew Duffy’s 2005 images and the image above. Bearing in mind that the entire Monastary Road bridge costs €12m and is a whopping 50m tall the €200m overspend is digraceful and further evidence that the NRA are still entirely hapless at financial accounting.

Martin Cullen strikes again

The point im trying to get across to you is that the new design is completely different to the old. Unrecognisable and is much bigger. Its as simple as that really.

I will post the old image later.

@AndrewP wrote:

I presume the Luas line is being completely rerouted. Isn’t it great we have so much money now we can afford to rip up tramlines that are only a few years old? Also, love the fantasy world in these photomontages where red cow/M50 traffic is only a few brightly-coloured cars and trucks at regular 50-metre intervals. The sun is beaming, so it can’t be Christmas Day…

Like the N4 its a full sphagetti junction so it should solve most of the probelms there.

There is something new in the latest plan for the red cow but I cant quite put my finger on it;)

Ah I see now – Monastary road junction.

This is probrably a good pat of the reason the cost is increasing. Bits and pieces seem to be constantly being added.

@Frank Taylor wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Frank Taylor wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I think this building is 70 metres tall. Is it?

Anyhow for a small city like Cork to even have that is good in my view. Realistically demand for housing or offices would constrain the asspirations of developers to go taller then this IMO. I just dont think Cork can sustain a few 70 metre buildings never mind taller ones. Anyway you can all be delighted that for the next few months you have the tallest building in the state;)

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