Devin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Yeah this has fallen somewhat into the shadow of the Carlton plans, but it’s a huge job in its own right. The glazed-box upper storeys seen here would be setback considerably of course, but it’s just going up so big ….
Image from dublincity.ie
There was a 19th century terrace demolished to build the Independent’s new offices. Not terribly sustainable.
@gunter wrote:
Leaving aside the ski slope itself, I think the biggest problem with this scheme remains (a) the amount of demolition and (b) the quality, or otherwise, of the proposed public spaces.
Yes there is a serious amount of demolition. It’s basically another Clarence: demolition of a string of protected structures behind the facades, and demolition of all ACA buildings, including the fine stone-fronted No. 45 Upr. O’Connell St., as covered earlier, for no good reason. The “public space” looks like a fraught suburban shopping-centre forecourt. Where’s the European outdoor room capturing the genus loci of O’Connell Street?
Now it’s easy to come on the internet and rubbish someone else’s work, but I am shocked and appalled by this development generally. The new architecture looks throwaway and trashy, an insult to the grandeur and civic design of O’Connell Street. The three architect practices involved have all done good work elsewhere, but the approach here is so far off what’s required that the site should just be given to someone else imo. I think most people are glad that the site is in Joe O’Reilly’s hands because they know he can deliver, but the present scheme needs to be fundamentally modified imo.
Some more views of the ski jump.
Had to go over the outline of some of them. What is it about the people who produce these photomontage views? The proposed developments are always rendered so that they practically blends into the sky.
@CTR wrote:
@archipimp wrote:
well eurocycles is still there ruining a whole street… and i get a feeling they keep replacing it with a slightly bigger version every week or so just to keep the shock value(as if it needed help to do that)!
It’s STILL there… I’m kinda used to it at this stage, but it goes to show that DCC aren’t too bothered about enforcement imho.
They ‘went legit’ in October by lodging a planning application for appropriate signage, which was granted permission in March – <a href="http://195.218.114.214/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=5562/07&backURL=Search%20Criteria%20>%20Ref. 5562/07
Oh groan why do you come back on something that was already covered in the last post. YES Dublin city is dense. 3 or 4 or 5 storey buildings joined to form terraces forming streets as we have in Dublin is dense. Dublin city within the canals is dense.
The issue here in relation to this Arnotts scheme is that Dublin City Council is not upholding its own Development Plan – An Bord Pleanala is. The inner city is protected from high buildings; the Development Plan says so. But time after time DCC have granted permission for high buildings which are subsequently thrown out by ABP for not complying with the Development Plan. More on that here: http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/property/2007/1025/1193238272990.html
In regard to the scaling back of the scheme, CC105 or JoePublic have you seen what was originally proposed and what it has been scaled back to? The problem was that the site was being HKR-ifed; given a gargantuan Smithfield-Market-style scheme bearing no relation to the scale of the surrounding area. What ABP have stipulated it be scaled back to remains a very substantial scheme.
@CC105 wrote:
Protection of the city centre skyline or lack of at 7 stories is ridiculous when the the sprawl is approaching 30 miles out.
Oh CRINGE:o, I thought this was cleared up by now!! The reason we have sprawl is because of 2-storey semi-d houses with front and back gardens extending for 30 or 50 miles, not because of heights in the city centre. The city centre is dense and compact at 7 storeys, at 4 storeys or at 3 storeys.
Something is deeply wrong in Dublin City Council planning department. Scheme after scheme after scheme – I could list dozens – that it puts through is being substantially changed or refused outright when it goes to An Bord Pleanala.
@ctesiphon wrote:
Simon’s Place smelling like the perfume counter in BT2?
Lol! But I suppose we should be thankful; in the old days Starbucks would have agressively bought out the Simon’s Place lease AND opened the one on the other side of the street before they got a bad name for that sort of thing.
The Starbucks mentioned above to open at the corner of George’s Street & Stephen Street has just got planning permission – Ref. 1301/08. Is there any chance that this one will attract a wider cross-section of the city community, because the College Green one has been full of knobs since it opened 2 & a bit years ago? Actually all 3 city-centre Starbucks so far seem to have been opened with Trinity College south-Dublin knobheads in mind, or “Valley Girls” in the Frank Zappa song. Look at the locations: one at each entrance to Trinity (the College Gn. one & the new one near the bottom of Dawson Street), and one in BT2s, Grafton Street, for when they totter up to buy their Ugg boots and skinny jeans.
The new Starbucks will be diametrically opposite (in ideology and in George’s Street) to Simon’s Place coffee shop at the entrance to the markets. Will a Starbuck’s fit in on boho South Great George’s Street? I suppose it will attract well-heeled airheads from the nearby business college on Aungier Street. But then airheads seem to come out of nowhere anyway whenever a Starbucks opens …
Nice critque of the scheme, gunter. And parts of it actually look MORE like the Berlaymont now than in your ’60s photo, since its noughties makeover (above). All wonderful energy and ergonomic credentials, but a little dissapointing from a ’60s heritage view. For the real thing, there’s a fantastic ‘downtown reprise’ of the Berlaymont in the shopping area called the Centre de la Monnaie. Hasn’t had a thing done to it since being built in 1971.
On Elm Park generally; When I pass out this way, I think: ‘How did Merritt Bucholz get away with building a series of modernist blocks here? Were the Booterstown/Sandymount/Merrion Village-Green-Preservation-Socs. not horrified? : ‘They dont fit in!’ ‘They’re opressive!’ ‘They’re depressing!’ etc. etc.
Ahaaa … I’d forgotten what was there. You would think somebody was deliberately trying to downgrade shop uses in the O’Connell Street area shop by shop.
It’s just been put back to the 14th of May!!
I saw a very bad red & white Polish one on Capel Street.
. 
The takeover of Dublin by Spar continues at this former Centra, D’Olier Street, with de rigueur deterioration in visual amenity.
I see Best menswear at the Spire is closing down. Pity, it was one of the few shops on O’Connell Street to fit into the ‘Champs Elysee shops’ vision of the 1998 IAP. What will replace it? If you look at the three adjoining shops – a Carroll’s, an Abrakebabra and a sex shop – the signs are not good. Maybe Spar would consider taking over the lease (shriek!)
Still in the O’Connell ACA, a double-front poundshop recently opened on Abbey Street Lr. Are we winning or losing?
Is it just me or has the size of the public space to the west of the square been reduced in the latest proposal compared with the earlier one?
The idea of the Victorian market building being situated in the middle of a square has definitely been eroded somewhat in the latest proposal by new buildings.
Both schemes:
The Pearl Insurance building on Westmoreland Street and the art deco Dunlop building on Stephen Street Upper both had new steel windows made in recent years for the Westin Hotel & Dunnes developments respectively. So there might be an Irish company who repairs steel windows also. However I don’t if it was an Irish company who did the Dunnes & Westin windows …
[align=center:2tu0y4oj]\\\\[/align:2tu0y4oj]
This was in the news last week!!! : Galway Councillor on PVC
@CC105 wrote:
Does anybody know what if anything is happening with Bolands Mills?
There was this in the paper last May informing that a new plan was ready, but afaik nothing has been lodged yet:
RADICAL NEW DESIGN FOR €125M DOCKLAND SCHEME INCLUDES TALL BUILDINGS
Docklands Development – A new proposal to be submitted for the Boland’s Mill site includes two tall buildings, writes Gretchen Friemann
A radical new design for the sprawling 19th century Boland’s Mill site in Dublin’s docklands will be submitted to local authorities within the next two months after developer Sean Kelly decided to take a different approach with a new firm of architects.
Scott Tallon and Walker (STW), the company that is currently involved in the redevelopment of Landsowne Road stadium, had proposed three high-rise, 1960s-style office blocks for the scheme, ranging from 12 to 16 storeys; the plan was rejected by Dublin City Council last October on the grounds that it would be “out of scale” with the surrounding area.
In the latest application, Kelly intends to again seek planning permission for two tall buildings. However, it is understood their design will be very different to the previous proposal.
Plans for a four-star, 53-bedroom, boutique hotel have also been scrapped in favour of a residential element that will see the protected cut-stone grain store, that dates from the 1830s, turned into an apartment complex.
Kelly explained he was taking a “fresh approach” to the project and confirmed he had parted ways with STW. Another architecture firm is yet to be appointed to the €125 million scheme, but industry sources point out that the new architects are likely to be under a great deal of pressure to get this latest application approved by the planning authorities.
In November 2004, Kelly’s development firm, Benton Properties, paid €42 million for the vast historic site that fronts on to the Grand Canal basin. Many in the industry speculated at the time that such a steep price could only be justified if planning permission was given for a high-rise development.
This new proposal will again include two new office blocks rising to 12 and 16 storeys, despite the fact that city officials ruled against his first submission because of its “excessive height, bulk and scale”.
However, Kelly remains confident the tall buildings will not present a problem to planners as “there is already a precedent for high-rise on the site” with the existence of the towering concrete grain silos that have dominated the area’s skyline since the 1950s.
Others in the industry argue the height issue is the main obstacle to the development of such a key site. As one source pointed out, the Dublin Dockland’s Development Authority (DDDA), which holds joint planning authority for the area with Dublin City Council, has been far from consistent on its guidelines for where high-rise buildings should be located.
The organisation was, in fact, one of 20-plus objectors to Treasury Holdings’ application for a 32-storey tower that would have directly adjoined Kelly’s site.
The company, headed by Johnny Ronan and Richard Barrett, eventually withdrew the proposal before city officials gave their decision. Kelly acknowledges that if his scheme is submitted to the DDDA it will be rejected as the organisation’s development plan for the area states that buildings cannot exceed eight storeys.
However, he points out that Dublin City Council has designated Heuston Station and the docklands as two suitable locations for “landmark buildings”.
The 32-storey tower at Heuston Gate in Kilmainham is already under construction, but other developers have been caught out by the vague guidelines on this issue.
Last week Sean Dunne’s proposal for a 32-storey skyscraper resurfaced when local councillors voted against the adoption of a draft area plan that would have accommodated the property developer’s ambtious project.© 2007, 23 May – The Irish Times
