Say goodbye to Bradys Castleknock

dodzy

Planning permission for apartments would indicate the EOTR for this place. Food has always been bullet-proof, even if has been 'bring your own atmosphere' for years. Pity. Loved eating there. So that's the 12th Lock and Bradys dead. Shame.

ThisRegard

You mean the food in pub itself rather than one of the many guises the restaurant above went through?

I haven't been there in years, mainly because it's a pub that I always forget is there! I've often been around the village and wondered where I could go for a pint but I never remember it exists. I ran by it a couple of weeks ago and got a oh yeah, that place, must keep that in mind for the next time.

angryIreGamer

ThisRegard wrote: »

You mean the food in pub itself rather than one of the many guises the restaurant above went through?

I haven't been there in years, mainly because it's a pub that I always forget is there! I've often been around the village and wondered where I could go for a pint but I never remember it exists. I ran by it a couple of weeks ago and got a oh yeah, that place, must keep that in mind for the next time.

the new N3 really killed it. Though to be fair, I was never a fan

DvB

Genuinely surprised it lasted this long, hadnt been in it since the indian restaurant at first floor level closed a few years back & even then the pub itself was empty every time we went in, we nearly always headed to the 12th lock instead.

Agree with the comment above, with both pubs essentially in a residential cul de sac they were never going to get passing trade & seeing both closed so recently it seems the location itself was the killer. Shame to see venues close in D15 as we havent got that many decent ones IMO but business is business.

Larbre34

Wetherspoons, dealing fatal blows to pubs on the edge all over Dublin.

It is a pity though, Blanch village and surrounds could support one decent well run, good size, independent gastropub. I don't think it has any....

ThisRegard

I'd be surprised if Wetherspoons had much bearing on Bradys or the 12th Lock, different demographics?

former total

ThisRegard wrote: »

I'd be surprised if Wetherspoons had much bearing on Bradys or the 12th Lock, different demographics?

Definitely not. Can't see Wetherspoons being an issue.

The surprise is not that Bradys is closing but that it lasted so long.

dodzy

Granted its in a cul-de-sac, but for both (Bradys & 21th Lock), it was very easy access. It would have been easy for Bradys to market the pub better. A simple banner on the back wall of the pub looking onto the N3 advertising the place the N3 perimeter wall in in their back garden). When you think about it, easy access from city centre & M50 bound traffic for Navan direction. A simple turn off and back on with no laborious diversions or added mileage to take. Easiest access of any place for that traffic this side of Navan. Ample car-parking.

I just don't buy the line that the road layouts had (or needed to have) that much impact.

Cathmandooo

Remember the massive inflatable chef that used to be on the roof of the building? I think the pub was called Scotts then.

They definitely needed to be more visible to the masses, could be a grand spot for apartments though, such easy access on to the Navan Road and M50

dodzy

Cathmandooo wrote: »

Remember the massive inflatable chef that used to be on the roof of the building? I think the pub was called Scotts then.

They definitely needed to be more visible to the masses, could be a grand spot for apartments though, such easy access on to the Navan Road and M50

It was indeed, with a lovely restaurant upstairs

DublinDilbert

Their carvery used to be very good at the weekends, good for meeting friends for a good feed...

septictank

dodzy, is it actually closed or still trading.

Used to go to Scotts restaurant back in the late 80's lovely place.

Bargain_Hound

Was there yesterday for grub - it is still open trading.

dodzy

septictank wrote: »

dodzy, is it actually closed or still trading.

Used to go to Scotts restaurant back in the late 80's lovely place.

As BH says, still open thankfully. Can't see it being this way for too long now the PP has been granted.

Bargain_Hound

dodzy wrote: »

As BH says, still open thankfully. Can't see it being this way for too long now the PP has been granted.

Not without a battle from local residents, I believe.

ThisRegard

I'd be surprised if the residents didn't appeal it alright. I know there's apartments down by the 12th Lock but it's out of character to put some where the pub is.

ongarboy

"Out of character" is classic entitled NIMBYism and is the reason rents and house prices are so ridiculously high in Dublin and forcing 10s of 1000s of people to spend several hours a day commuting from outlying counties to get to work as developments or anything higher than 2 storeys are being refused permission in Dublin.

This is a perfect site for medium density apartments (eg 4 storey) that is a stone's throw from key public transport nodes (Castleknock train station and the various buses that go through Blanch village) as well as established retail/health/educational and various other services.

As regards the closure of Bradys, I've lived in D15 about 12 years and never really noticed its existence apart from on my way to the 12th Lock. It just never seemed inviting and no one ever would have suggested it as a meet up point for drinks/food. Even though the 12th was also "out of the way", it had a well known good reputation and a "destination status" that people would drive out of their way to get to. If Brady's is still open this weekend, we might out of curiousity pop over to check it out for grub before it's demise.

ThisRegard

It's not the reason why rents are ridiculously high or why people commute so far. There have been plenty of apartments built over the decades, people wanted their bigger houses and were willing to move outside of Dublin to do so. Not everyone on a long commute do so out of having no choice.

As for the 12th Lock being a destination, it's a pretty disappointing one at that. There's a reason why it would be relatively quiet on Friday and Saturday nights.

ongarboy

ThisRegard wrote: »

As for the 12th Lock being a destination, it's a pretty disappointing one at that. There's a reason why it would be relatively quiet on Friday and Saturday nights.

Granted, I haven't been there in a couple of years but prior to then, it was always fairly difficult to get a table for food whenever I went there and this would even be on mid week evenings as well as weekends. I'm going back a few years so maybe its the Celtic Tiger era I'm remembering.

ThisRegard

Probably. I went sometime last year and had our pick of seats on a Saturday night, and was served out of date beer. It was a dour place when it wasn't packed on a sunny afternoon.

Bargain_Hound

Out of the hand full of times I have been to the 12th lock, it was never quiet. Certainly was a nicer alternative spot with different type of clientele over some of the pubs located in the village. I hope it re-opens. Regarding the quality of grub & drink - I never hold my expectations too high for pub grub, although never had any issues there.

ThisRegard

It wasn't quiet every time I've been there, but it was the most recent times.

septictank

The 12th lock has been bought and is opening in about 5 weeks by the people who have de Bruns so will be well run, looking forward to it.

py2006

Bradys has the best chicken wings in the area. Such a shame.

But I always found the bar service shockingly bad. I walked out on 2 or 3 occasions. It was quite notable that the 12th Lock regulars didn't move to Bradys.

Hopefully, when it re-opens it will bring the decent crowd back and not entice some of the clientele from Blanch village.

xl500

dodzy wrote: »

As BH says, still open thankfully. Can't see it being this way for too long now the PP has been granted.

Just to Clarify PP Has been applied for but not Granted Process is ongoing

Godge

xl500 wrote: »

Just to Clarify PP Has been applied for but not Granted Process is ongoing

I wonder will the same people who are objecting to the 12th Lock pub being reopened also object to Brady's being closed.

It can't make sense to oppose both projects unless you are engaged in NIMBYism.

SnakePlissken

Godge wrote: »

I wonder will the same people who are objecting to the 12th Lock pub being reopened also object to Brady's being closed.

It can't make sense to oppose both projects unless you are engaged in NIMBYism.

Who's objecting to the 12th Lock reopening? All I have read are the concerns that planning requirements are being gleefully ignored... Perhaps not gleefully as warning letters have been issued to the owner, but I've yet to hear anyone say they do not want to see this site reopen. Do please quote any post that suggests otherwise?

ThisRegard

Godge wrote: »

I wonder will the same people who are objecting to the 12th Lock pub being reopened also object to Brady's being closed.

It can't make sense to oppose both projects unless you are engaged in NIMBYism.

Find one person, never mind the plural, objecting to the reopening?

former total

Bradys got a mention on Prime Time this evening. 87 objections received, including local councillors, Joan Burton and Leo Varadkar.

Guess this one will end up at An Bord Pleanala.

ThisRegard

There was a FOI report published last week regarding politicians and objections to new developments. Clare Daly hypocriticaly, was one of the more serial objectors. I think a few objected to Bradys for the same reasons I mentioned in this thread a while back.

Here's the story and their letters

http://www.kenfoxe.com/2016/09/clare-daly-leo-varadkar-opposed-housing-developments-because-of-impact-it-would-have-on-neighbouring-property-values/

ongarite

Funny how public representatives who are complaining about the housing crisis & high rents turn into NIMBYs when a proposed development is in their constituency.

SnakePlissken

Clare Day would protest the opening of a crisp packet.

daymobrew

ThisRegard wrote: »

Clare Daly hypocriticaly, was one of the more serial objectors.

I am impressed that she objected to developments where the developer had not finished other developments or they had pyrite:

In four of the nine cases, Ms Daly opposed the plans because the developer involved had previously been involved in estates that were left unfinished or where pyrite had been used.

The local authority can block planning permission on a site where the applicant has not completed another site! The local authority should be using this law without requiring TDs or members of the public to point the issue out to them.

ThisRegard

daymobrew wrote: »

I am impressed that she objected to developments where the developer had not finished other developments or they had pyrite:

Yeah, unfinished developments is a good reason to object and something I agree with. However it's not really the fault of the developer that they were supplied with materials contaminated with pyrite. It's their actions after the discovery of pyrite in the homes that matter.

daymobrew wrote: »

The local authority can block planning permission on a site where the applicant has not completed another site! The local authority should be using this law without requiring TDs or members of the public to point the issue out to them.

There's at least 5 member of the socialists in some form or another on Fingal CoCo , maybe they should have done something before a TD had to get involved.

Pat Dunne

ThisRegard wrote: »

There's at least 5 member of the socialists in some form or another on Fingal CoCo , maybe they should have done something before a TD had to get involved.

As Councillors and TD's are public representatives, you will find that they are making the objection/observation based on the number of contacts they have received from members of the public in the constituency.

ThisRegard

I understand that. But out of the other side of her mouth she decries the lack of housing. Yes, it's most likely developments that have no social housing within them, but people buying these may free up such housing.

daymobrew

I was unsure whether to start a new thread.
A new planning application has been submitted for this site.

Website:
https://bartrablanchardstownshd.com/

Summary: 210 "bedspaces", communal living/kitchen/dining rooms on each of the 5 floors.

Details:

The development will principally consist of: the demolition of the existing part 1 to part 2 No. storey over partial basement public house and restaurant building (1,243 sq m) and the construction of a part 1 to part 5 No. storey over basement Build-to-Rent Shared Living Residential Development (6,549 sq m) comprising 210 No. bedspaces (182 No. single occupancy rooms, 4 No. accessible rooms and 12 No. double occupancy rooms). The development also consists of the provision of communal living/kitchen/dining rooms at each floor level to serve the residents of each floor; communal resident amenity spaces for all residents including tv/cinema room at basement level, gymnasium and lounge/reception area at ground floor level, a library/study at third floor level and a private dining room at fourth floor level; external roof terrace at third floor level (78 sq m) facing north-east, north-west and south-west; external communal amenity courtyards at basement (170 sq m) and ground floor level (336 sq m); external amenity space at basement level accessed from the communal living/kitchen/dining room (30 sq m); balconies at third floor level facing north-east/north-west (14.35 sq m); resident facilities including launderette, linen store, accessible WC and bin store; 2 No. accesses to the public park along the north-eastern boundary; 2 No. carshare parking spaces; a lay-by and delivery bay; emergency gate access to the courtyard (north-west boundary); bicycle parking; boundary treatments; hard and soft landscaping; plant; PV panels; substation; switch room; generator; lighting; and all other associated site works above and below ground. The application contains a statement setting out how the proposal will be consistent with the objectives of the Fingal Development Plan 2017 – 2023. The application contains a statement indicating why permission should be granted for the proposed development, having regard to a consideration specified in section 37(2)(b) of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, as amended, notwithstanding that the proposed development materially contravenes a relevant development plan or local area plan other than in relation to the zoning of the land. www.bartrablanchardstownshd.ie All submissions to be made to An Bord Pleanala.

daymobrew

The previous planning application in 2016 was for 34 x 2 bedroom and 7 x 3 bedroom units - a total of 89 bedrooms.

This new application is for a lot more people!

The downside to objecting to something is that something worse can come along.

miamee

It sounds like a co-living space with the communal living/dining room/kitchens on each level but I thought there was an issue with those? Actually maybe I am just thinking of this - a similar development in Rathmines (same company) was recently refused planning permission by Dublin City Council.

RoryMac

Is this type of development aimed at students or young professional types?

Seems a strange location for so many shared living rooms

AlanG

Thanks for posting, it seem quite over the top for the area. These seem like bedsits without even cooking facilities.

No car parking for 210 residents would ring a lot of alarm bells if I was a local - it is not as if that part of Blanch is near a transport hub, one train line and a linear bus route is not enough transport for this sort of development.

I think this may be designed to frighten locals into accepting some subsequent application that will be slightly more appealing.

L1011

These would be targeting ebay/paypal/IBM support/languages staff mostly

Former Former

It's as good a location as any for this type of development I suppose.

The lack of parking is a bit mad though. Will people really not have cars, or will they just park on the surrounding streets?

Great idea in theory, but if I was a local resident I'd be absolutely raging.

Nijmegen

Developers can argue it’s within a very short walking distance of both bus and rail connectivity as well as a load of in situ jobs.

Zaph

The vast majority of the rooms are 16m2, with a few 18m2, presumably they're the double rooms. A whole extra 2m2 for a second person. There are no floor plans for the rooms themselves on the website, but the Flythrough video doesn't make them look too appealing. A fold down bed with only room for a single folding chair and what appears to be a tiny bathroom tucked in the corner. I'll be shocked if this gets planning permission, but as AlanG already said, it's probably to lay the groundwork for what they really want to build there.

d15ude

RoryMac wrote: »

Is this type of development aimed at students or young professional types?

Seems a strange location for so many shared living rooms

I assume it's aimed at young professionals as an alternative to flat shares.
Could be ok, if well managed. But there needs to be parking included in the planning!

beauf

They should build a park and ride there for the train station and the Greenway.

Lots of space for building proper sites all along the train line from 12th lock to Ashtown.

It was a mistake to build tiny apartments in the past it still is.

But this is an obvious ruse to get something else accepted.

Pete_Cavan

It's definitely not a ruse for something else, if they wanted something else they would have applied for it. Bartra are all about coliving developments and have applied for several others around the city.

I think coliving units are a good solution for a certain demographic but I don't think this is a good location for it. It suits young people who don't spend a lot of time at home, mostly for sleeping, which is fine in the city centre. I don't think any of these young professionals will be interested in living in this location.

miamee

Zaph wrote: »

The vast majority of the rooms are 16m2, with a few 18m2, presumably they're the double rooms. A whole extra 2m2 for a second person. There are no floor plans for the rooms themselves on the website, but the Flythrough video doesn't make them look too appealing. A fold down bed with only room for a single folding chair and what appears to be a tiny bathroom tucked in the corner. I'll be shocked if this gets planning permission, but as AlanG already said, it's probably to lay the groundwork for what they really want to build there.

This was one of the reasons that it was refused PP for a similar building in Rathmines, that the occupier could not enjoy he apartment and furniture without having to rearrange everything. I.e. no room to swing a cat.

AlanG

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It's definitely not a ruse for something else, if they wanted something else they would have applied for it.

This is standard practice for many developers and most negotiators. They have been refused this kind of development in a few places with far better transport links based on the type of room provided and the lack of space for a person to live.

It's no problem for them to let the locals expend loads of energy fighting this and then they come in with a compromise that would have looked crazy at first but in light of the first offer will look reasonable. Getting an extra few dozen apartments into the site is worth several million to the developers so it is well worth it for them to play a long game.

Pete_Cavan

AlanG wrote: »

This is standard practice for many developers and most negotiators. They have been refused this kind of development in a few places with far better transport links based on the type of room provided and the lack of space for a person to live.

It's no problem for them to let the locals expend loads of energy fighting this and then they come in with a compromise that would have looked crazy at first but in light of the first offer will look reasonable. Getting an extra few dozen apartments into the site is worth several million to the developers so it is well worth it for them to play a long game.

It is not standard practice for developers to spend thousands of euro and waste half a year applying for something they don't want to build. Planning decisions are made on the basis of regulations and guidelines, not the amount of energy locals expend! Regardless of whether the building contains apartments or coliving units, the size and mass of the building will still have the same limitations. Applying for coliving units now certainly won't get you an extra few dozen apartments later.

Bartra have gotten approval for a coliving project in Dun Laoghaire and have indicated that they will build it. They were refused twice in Rathmines because of issues relating to that application. I have no doubt that they will go again in Rathmines for coliving units again. Both of these contradict what you have said.