Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Dublin - Building heights

12467

Comments



  • That Mark Keenan article is some wild hyperbole alright, but he is their property editor. It's fairly standard stuff and what the indo was pimping back in the boom right up to the point when it all blew up in our faces.

    Repeat after me: "Renting bad, buying good"....."you'll never go wrong with bricks & mortar" etc etc etc

    It's a shameful article from Mark Keenan. Zero journalistic or editorial integrity to have that published.

    I'm critical of much the Irish Times publishes, particularly in relation to infrastructure projects, but in fairness, I don't think their standards are ever that low. The Indo is desperate at times.




  • kn0c2H5


    This on The Irish Times. Why aren't any of the parties anti-NIMBY given this is the public mood?




  • Dats me wrote: »
    kn0c2H5


    This on The Irish Times. Why aren't any of the parties anti-NIMBY given this is the public mood?
    Photo not appearing?




  • Photo not appearing?

    https://imgur.com/a/kn0c2H5

    Does that work? It's a screengrab of the Irish Times link to the article on the Glasnevin apartments and the comments complaining about it not being tall enough and that nine stories isn't a tower.




  • Amirani wrote: »
    It's a shameful article from Mark Keenan. Zero journalistic or editorial integrity to have that published.

    Check out his LinkedIn . He's basically spent 80% of his almost 30 year career writing property sections.

    He's not a news / investigative / current affairs type journalist, he's mostly just a shill for estate agents....


  • Advertisement


  • Whatever about the journalistic side of that article, the comments in that article from politicians are a symptom of the cancer on Irish society that has us with this mess of being unable to build anything of use to anyone for fear of creating minor inconvenience to people.

    Lets take this development and examine it fundamentally. This site is located on one of the main thoroughfares into the city centre, already well served by bus services and well within cycling distance of the city centre. However, in 8 years time (which won't be far after its built), it'll be located:

    Along TWO core bus corridors
    250m walk away from a Metro station and TWO DART line stations, which will be the biggest transport interchange in the country.

    Dublin has a shortage of housing, an even bigger shortage of housing with decent transport links and transport infrastructure. This plot of land will be one of the best served in the country by public transport, with two DART lines, the buses and Metros every 90 seconds. No one would even think of driving in this area at peak times.

    If land like this can't be developed for apartments; there will be no end to the housing crisis. The opposition parties are constantly criticising the Government for their (lack of/inadequate) housing policy. Lets see what the opposition says:

    FF Councillor Paul McAuliffe: "monsterous", “A two-storey building beside nine- storey building, I think it’s shocking.”
    SF Seamus McGrattan: "“a dangerous precedent in other areas of the city”.
    PBP Andrew Keegan argued on future ownership of the development rather than the development itself (this is not a reason to object in a housing shortage).
    Labour Cllr Aine Clancy said it would be "overbearing" on existing buildings in the area alongside the partly completed new one.

    If this is the best that we have to offer, there is no end in sight for the ongoing housing problem. 9 storey buildings within (or beside) the canals should be the standard, not something to object to.




  • marno21 wrote: »
    Some common sense shining through

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/green-light-under-fast-track-planning-for-265-apartments-on-dulux-site-1.3868339

    265 apartments beside a Luas stop is what Dublin needs in droves.

    Unless you happen to live very near it and have to worry about the extra people trying to get on the Luas in the morning like I will. Plus my daughter was all excited and said maybe she could buy one of the apartments when they're built. She was fuming when she heard they were all for rental!!




  • marno21 wrote: »
    Labour Cllr Aine Clancy said it would be "overbearing" on existing buildings in the area alongside the partly completed new one.


    I've a very easy solution to "overbearing" - build several tall blocks there :p

    The most common objection I see to any plans is "out of character with the area", well yeah, the first time you do something of course it is, and the more you prevent it, then nothing will ever change.


    marno21 wrote: »
    PBP Andrew Keegan argued on future ownership of the development rather than the development itself (this is not a reason to object in a housing shortage).
    So he was perfectly fine with Gannon buidling 3bed semi's that cost €1.5million each on the site instead?




  • Unless you happen to live very near it and have to worry about the extra people trying to get on the Luas in the morning like I will. Plus my daughter was all excited and said maybe she could buy one of the apartments when they're built. She was fuming when she heard they were all for rental!!

    People need places to rent. Not everybody wants to buy or needs to buy.






  • Advertisement


  • I like it, which probably means it will be objected to and won't happen!




  • marno21 wrote: »


    And the nimbyism starts, did someone mention there were votes up for grabs?

    'Johnny Ronan's hanging gardens more akin to Manhattan,' says mayor

    https://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/johnny-ronans-hanging-gardens-more-akin-to-manhattan-says-mayor-38082132.html




  • Its not even nimbyism considering its not really anyone's back yard there...

    That's actually quite a nice looking building. How can, according to that article, 84% of people be in favour of taller buildings in the docklands yet somehow politicians think its a vote-getter to shut it down. Of course, they are happily trotting the ludicrously false dichotomy that anything that isn't 100% social housing is somehow part of the problem. Depressing.




  • True, nimbyism is probably the wrong word. Objecting to it because its different and not what we're used to plus goes against the grain of current social housing good, capitalist housing bad agenda.




  • I don't understand the thinking with politicians, councilors, planners etc. in the is country when it comes to tall buildings. The docklands area is wasteland essentially, yet they continue to refuse planning for interesting and modern looking structures. We need to build high in certain areas of the city, and if we do it, we may as well make the buildings stand out and look interesting. In recent years London has built some really interesting tall buildings that add some character to the city. Personally I'm not a fan of the shard but it still adds something to the skyline. Then you have the walkie talkie building which I think is really cool, the gherkin, the one with the three holes on top etc. Why can't we do something similar, but on a smaller scale, in the docklands.

    Rant over




  • OEP wrote: »
    I don't understand the thinking with politicians, councilors, planners etc. in the is country when it comes to tall buildings. The docklands area is wasteland essentially, yet they continue to refuse planning for interesting and modern looking structures. We need to build high in certain areas of the city, and if we do it, we may as well make the buildings stand out and look interesting. In recent years London has built some really interesting tall buildings that add some character to the city. Personally I'm not a fan of the shard but it still adds something to the skyline. Then you have the walkie talkie building which I think is really cool, the gherkin, the one with the three holes on top etc. Why can't we do something similar, but on a smaller scale, in the docklands.

    Rant over

    Agree re the docklands, and also with “build high in certain areas of the city”…but really only in certain areas rather than plant tall buildings in between older and lower ones wherever there is some space, like happened with liberty hall or the old central bank, both really bad examples of how not to do a city…




  • Podge_irl wrote: »
    Its not even nimbyism considering its not really anyone's back yard there...

    That's actually quite a nice looking building. How can, according to that article, 84% of people be in favour of taller buildings in the docklands yet somehow politicians think its a vote-getter to shut it down. Of course, they are happily trotting the ludicrously false dichotomy that anything that isn't 100% social housing is somehow part of the problem. Depressing.

    The same politicians are also ideologically opposed to social housing




  • And, just a thought beyond building heights per se…does Dublin currently really have that massive influx of companies etc. to justify the massive construction boom anyway? Do we have numbers on that? Is all that new office space really needed? Or is it just for some developers to make billions (again), and a bubble to blow up in the face of us all (again)…I have a bad feeling about it all somehow…




  • And, just a thought beyond building heights per se…does Dublin currently really have that massive influx of companies etc. to justify the massive construction boom anyway? Do we have numbers on that? Is all that new office space really needed? Or is it just for some developers to make billions (again), and a bubble to blow up in the face of us all (again)…I have a bad feeling about it all somehow…

    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0409/1041581-cbre-office-take-up-report/




  • Peregrine wrote: »

    Well, let’s just hope this is sustainable and works out in the end…


  • Advertisement


  • Got emailed this file today as I gave a submission re the revision of the planning guidelines in the dock lands.

    TL;DR version: massive majority of submissions (bar 2 or 3 local groups, out of c.90 submissions) supported increasing building height and density for a variety of reasons.

    The recommendation is that they have revised the guidelines in some of the city blocks. Most of the revisions are from 6 to 8 storeys but there is a few additional spots now designated landmark buildings, applications for which will be given consideration regardless of height and judged on their merits with regard to the surroundings.

    Overall positive - I dont think it goes far enough, but I'm hopeful that we will get a few nice landmark buildings out of it given the clear appetite from the public for height in that area of the city.

    Pdf of the report is too big to attach but here is a link for anyone interested.

    http://bit.ly/2WKGUUW




  • Whoever sanctioned building new 6 storeys in this area should be shot. What a waste of land




  • I'm really happy to hear about An Bord Pleanala's decision to approve Johnny Ronan's new tower block at Tara St. I heard the news when a report was done by Miriam O'Callaghan on RTÉ's Prime Time on RTÉ One some time last month. The report was about building high rise buildings in Dublin City. She had two people there with her for an interview across the quays across The Convention Centre talking about more of this topic. I thought it was pretty interesting to hear it. I do have a question though about this new building. Is this building going to tie up with the redevelopment of Tara St. DART Station in the future. I remember seeing proposed plans for this site on the CIE Group of Companies website nearly 10 years ago. Is this new building a revised plan of this original proposal.




  • I'm really happy to hear about An Bord Pleanala's decision to approve Johnny Ronan's new tower block at Tara St. I heard the news when a report was done by Miriam O'Callaghan on RTÉ's Prime Time on RTÉ One some time last month. The report was about building high rise buildings in Dublin City. She had two people there with her for an interview across the quays across The Convention Centre talking about more of this topic. I thought it was pretty interesting to hear it. I do have a question though about this new building. Is this building going to tie up with the redevelopment of Tara St. DART Station in the future. I remember seeing proposed plans for this site on the CIE Group of Companies website nearly 10 years ago. Is this new building a revised plan of this original proposal.

    It's a completely different proposal. The original proposal was a complete redevelopment of the station including building over the station. This proposal won't do that. Maybe a slightly better entrance area but that's about it.

    However, MetroLink is tying up with the DART station on the site to the south.




  • Does anyone know of the tara st tower is actually going ahead or if there is any progress/info? I know there's planning but really that can just be to add value to flip the site.




  • cgcsb wrote: »
    Does anyone know of the tara st tower is actually going ahead or if there is any progress/info? I know there's planning but really that can just be to add value to flip the site.

    CIE owns the site and has an agreement with RGRE to develop it. RGRE can't just flip it.

    Besides, Ronan has put way too much time and money into this not build it.





  • That's actually brilliant, you can see that the councillor has two different stock answers, and she had to bring them out one after the other, showing everyone how utterly ridiculous her positions are.

    When she's asked about any developments in her area:

    "This is too large, will have traffic impacts, and is not in keeping with the area"

    When she's asked about the housing crisis:

    "Homes are desperately needed in Dublin"

    The disconnect is so jarring for me.




  • It's a very good example of why this will never be a well run city


  • Advertisement


  • It's a very good example of why this will never be a well run city

    What's shocking to me is that this isn't the usual DCC blocking it, but ABP. It's only been a few months since the government made it clear that up was the way to go, and this is an absolutely ideal site for it. It's on a major bus route, that will be upgraded during the Core Corridors project, and it's next to a major interchange station to be built during the Metrolink/DART expansion projects.

    There is literally no other site in the entire city that will be as favourable for public transport. It's a massive disgrace that this could get turned down.


Advertisement