jdivision
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Seamus, that route is already served via the Luas. they probably felt it would make more sense to go via south city centre in order to create a near radial route around the inner city.
@alonso wrote:
where did you get that firhouse plan from? that’s news to me….is it just the Tallaght line from the DTO plan?
i seem to recollect a senior official in the department of transport saying it to a Dail subcommittee meeting. I think it was shown in Oireachtas Report but not sure if I ever saw it in a newspaper. I’ll do some searching.
The plan I believe is to leave the tunnel bore under the Green in the “hope” – because they’re not sure if it can be restarted – that the line will eventually be extended to Firhouse.
Re: Iveagh Gardens, the point is the underground has to be next to the Luas station. It has to be St Stephen’s Green. I would hope there’s ways in which the trees can be temporarily moved. The lawn in the Iveagh Gardens is actually the only purpose built archery practice ground in Ireland (afaik). There’s also an elephant from Dublin Zoo that died in 1922 buried there. Not that that makes it worthy of preservation but thought it might interest people.
If you’re talking about the Iveagh Gardens you must be kidding, it’s the nicest park in the city, far nicer than St Stephen’s Gren. The whole reason for doing it at St Stephen’s Green is that it will link up with the Luas green line. This has been known about for two years at least. The deep tunnelling method should work and the undergound station could end up being superb, similar to some of the London underground stations
@tommyt wrote:
ColIt is worth a wander into the courtyard there for a scooch around-You get a great view of the 4 bed semis that are built off Cuffe St-none of these ever seem to come on the market which has always surprised me-there’s not many of them and they look like they would be more at home in an English Home counties/commuter town. A very desirable little enclave
There was a two-bed one off Cuffe Street on the market last year I think asking e525,000 if memory serves.
There is a tall buildings survey underway in docklands in Dublin so developers are leaving buildings at that height but putting foundations etc in place to allow a substantial increase in height when it is finally allowed.
@fergalr wrote:
When will it end?! I was under the impression that there were only so many appeals possible before you run out of courts!
Clinton is to challenge constitutionality of CPO legislation now.
@phatman wrote:
The Patrick Street facade is being retained, predictably, it being the original frontage. I do consider it quite bland, but appreciate its significance and it does seem to fit in with the adjoining buildings.
Slightly off topic but everyone thought they were keeping the facade of their Henry Street shop in Dublin too which is currently being renovated but it disappeared into the rubble too despite it not being mentioned in the planning application as far as I could see. Same thing might happen there.
@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:
😀
true the balcony does make it look like there’s a few more stories in there … but when viewed in relation to 3 story pub beside ? dodgy render.
In fairness way I see it the pub is three storeys and would be height of atrium in criminal court building based on render. Then double height floors above.
wearnicehats wrote:It was sad the way it all worked out for her but don’t forget that, at the time, it wasn’t a particularly feted house and it was sold on to someone else and Corb only painted a few murals on the walls. You could argue that it was in a pique of jealousy or you could argue that he was using an influential client to flog his own wares. It’s a pity he didn’t do it more on his own blandness.I find all that designing everything down to the doorknobs a bit overwhelming. I did like some of her furniture though – the black and chrome sofa]
She wasn’t told the house was for sale and Corbusier also put those huts in the backgarden which horrified her. The house design was also wrongly attributed to him in several publications and based on the programme it seems he did nothing to correct that.PVC King wrote:Top marks as always Mr HickeyAny news on where the proposed redevelopment is at]
It’s been down to two for a while: Ballymore and a British companyPart of the site has been vacant since the 1970s, incredible. It’s basically stuck in the courts, awaiting a Supreme Ct hearing or verdict, not sure which off top of my head.
@hutton wrote:
Then theres the Carlton site, where Sean Carey assisted by Ciaran MacNamara saw fit to initiate CPO’ing the site, only 2 years after it got permission, and apparently just after the UK based Grosvenor Group had indicated their interest in being the anchor investors. This was well covered in both Village and Phoenix last year. Happily although the CPO is not yet complete, DCC thru its agents saw fit to sell off Carlton for less than 50M in an untendered deal to Joe O’ Reilly of Castlethorn. Among the more interesting clauses in the deal is one which apparently give JoR up to 7 years to develop, and if not satisfactory he can sell it back to DCC at full market price. Nice when you can get it. Suffice to say, no section 183 had been passed by councilors releasing the sites, and the first they were aware of the deal was last year – after the 16 Moore St people started kicking up a fuss. How, eh, interesting :rolleyes:
Off topic but all of the above was first reported in The Sunday Business Post. And it’s not apparently giving O’Reilly seven years, it’s written in the deal. I wrote about it having seen the document. Sorry to be sensitive about it but somebody on this thread previously accused me of “flying a kite” regarding the Carlton site even though everything was subsequently proved accurate.
From The Sunday Business Post yesterday:
Carroll’s time extension plea refusedLiam Carroll has been refused an extension of time for the development of a tower building and three other blocks next to the proposed U2 tower.
Dublin City Council has ruled the limited nature of works which have been carried out at the former Hammond Lane metalworks site, compared to the overall scale of the development, mean the extension should be refused.
It follows an earlier refusal, in November of last year, to grant an extension of time to complete the development.
In anticipation of the refusal, Carroll lodged proceedings in early March in the commercial court, using a vehicle called Burwood House Developments (Ireland), challenging the council’s refusal to extend the five-year planning permission.
Carroll has also had builders working on the site in recent months and is arguing sufficient works have been carried out in order for the extension of planning to be granted.
If Carroll loses the case he is unlikely to be allowed to develop a tower on the site.
Last year, the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) brought in an amended planning scheme for the Grand Canal Dock area that makes the siting of the landmark tower site specific, meaning the only allowable site is the adjoining one on which the U2 tower is to be built.
‘‘The requirements for such a tower would not be satisfied by any other landmark tower that may be permitted or constructed in the Grand Canal Dock area,” stated the draft amendment.
Permission for the Carroll development was originally sought in 1999, when Dunloe Ewart was still controlled by Noel Smyth and was finally approved by An Bord Pleanala on February 7, 2002.
That plan proposed the construction of almost 26,500 square metres of offices, 231 apartments, a leisure centre, creche, shops and restaurants.
The scheme involved the construction of three blocks, ranging from five to seven storeys, and the tower block rising to just under 100 metres, which was to be 19 storeys with an additional mezzanine floor.
There would also have been almost 450 car parking spaces.
When the DDDA decided to invite applications to develop the U2 tower site, Carroll was regarded as favourite to be named as preferred developer of the 120-metre U2 tower site, but in a major surprise he wasn’t on the shortlist, which comprises Ballymore Properties, Royal BAM Group, a joint venture between Treasury Holdings and Sisk, Sean Dunne’s Mountbrook Homes and the River II Partnership.
The shortlist of developers are now required to bid for the current U2 tower design and their own architect’s design for the Britain Quay site.
@stira wrote:
for the glass bottle site and surrounding development land, could they not extend the interconnector or metro and use a cut and cover method, before the land is developed?
They’re planning on extending Luas to it instead
If it’s going to be a conference centre the delegates won’t be getting the bus. Far better to have a direct link to Kent Station and the airport for coaches. They’re not going to be getting on Bus Eireann afterwards.
@shed wrote:
just seen according to the sky scraper news page DE was cancelled..wonder why? is it common for developers to go through the expenses of employing architects to draw up plans and do detailed renders and recieve permission and then not go through with it? I assume it adds value to a site ect
That’s not true. Construction on the substructure has begun and the proposed development is subject to a legal dispute.
From The Sunday Times last month:
THE property developer Liam Carroll is limbering up for a court battle with Dublin city council over the scuppering of his plans for a 100-metre skyscraper to rival the proposed U2 tower in Dublin’s docklands.The structure, twice the height of Liberty Hall, would be part of a huge proposed development at the old Hammond Lane Metalworks at Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, right next door to the proposed 130-metre U2 tower that local development authorities are promoting.
A development plan for the area published by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) only allows for one of the skyscrapers to be built.
Carroll had been in talks with the authorities to build the U2 tower, but was not on the short list of tenders announced by the DDDA last month. His Burwood House Developments (Ireland) has now filed legal action against the council in a division of the High Court over the council’s refusal to extend five-year planning permission for his rival tower.
Dunloe Ewart, the property company taken over by Carroll in 2002 after Noel Smyth, its chairman, was ousted, received permission from An Bord Pleanala for the Hammond Lane tower the same year, but it is yet to be built.
Carroll applied to the council for an extension to the permission last year, but the council refused on the ground that substantial works had not commenced on the site. The developer is understood to be arguing that sufficient works have begun and has applied again for an extension to the planning permission. The council is currently considering the second application and a decision is expected within the next two weeks.
The council is expected to contest Carroll’s legal action, however, if the matter reaches court in the meantime.
