ro_G
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Originally posted by garethace
What I would be interested in inexperiencing though, is the underground walking link between the Berkley and the new building. You can normally only look down through the sky lights and see the people underneath moving about.nowt special to be honest
Originally posted by Diaspora
I believe it is called bottom up policy development.Isn’t bottoms up policy development about meeting developers in the pub, the passing of envelopes, and a cheery ‘bottoms up’ before consuming a large port 😉
“Saving the Irish from the Irish” – hmm. It’s all very subjective.
I dont like the way the floors are laid out in there at all. The open drop in the middle is not practical in the slightest – a great disapointment when i got an access card and got to go inside
Tom Parlance: “I got an extra 16 stories put on this building for the civil servants staying in Dublin”
Charlie McCreedy: “Sure Tomo didn’t even know about the first 16 stories”
CRH are probably the only ones who could scale up to the bigger contracts and benefit from such a deal, and they could probably get in via their US holding.
They are the No.1 national producer of asphalt in the US. Begads.
i dont understand why it’s voluntary – they should force people to relocate. We are civil servants after all. Serviture is the game.
lol. Civil Servants in BMW’s post benchmarking 😉
well, my thinking is this is short term discomfort for long term change. Therefore, unfortunate but neccesary for long term. That said, I got the thin edge of the wind – bloody Waterford!
Don’t get your point Diaspora, decentralisation has nothing to do with being market-led. It is for the most part anti-market. By design. Which is a good thing in principle. It could be argued that civic monies are best spent being practical. But then again, would we have the buildings of the past with that mentality?
if any capital project costs more than €120k it should by right, be put to open tender, unless the OPW have some other scheme on the boil. – i.e. they pre-design the buildings and then just tender the construction.
my guess is that the budget for this will not induce spending on landmark buildings.
I think a representation of Dublin’s trading past and present (from the trading in the dock from visiting and docked ships to the financial trading in the IFSC) would be a fitting and beneficial use of the Custom House. But alas, the cynic in me sees it being poached by a department if not kept in the public debate.
Ah don’t get me wrong I’d like to see it used for something good but I just can’t see it happening, and without specific public pressure to do something with it I would gamble on it becoming just more civil servant office space.
Personally. I’d like to see it used a Now and Then exhibition of Docklands Devlopments.
Govt Depts? Extracting Premium Value? Ehhh. I work for one of one of our auspicous government departments (under Finance) and they don’t even have premium tea-bags, never mind an abstract notion such as premium value from a building.
I currently work in a pre-fab by the way. 🙂
For buildings McCreevy can sell, lease whatever, they will focus on them first. The ones they have sunk costs in, and can’t release such as Customs House wont be considered early as they cant generate short term cash.
don’t forget there are other gov. depts staying in dublin – nothing to say they wont relocate or spill into this building
would the AAI use an architecture centre to display current competitions? or do RIAI have the bag on that?
