Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Spiral ramps at Dublin Airport

  • 04-03-2025 01:35PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭


    Brilliant news today that Fingal County Council have made the correct decision to refuse permission for DAA to demolish the iconic spiral ramps at T1. Those ramps are an integral part of the fabric of the airport and are a symbol of the airport, I am old enough (just) to remember the car park up there. Probably as important in visual/historic terms as the original terminal.

    Now that this proposal to remove them has been rejected, should they be refurbished to deal with any structural issues and reopened as a car park? It would require clearing whatever is in that space, but should be a worthwhile endeavour considering the parking pressures at the airport. 600 parking spaces were available across the two levels when it was shut.



«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24 Skyte


    Iconic? Its a bit of concrete, I never got the fanatacism with this brutalist 'architecture' if you can call a ramp architecture. They should level the thing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,006 ✭✭✭✭GBX


    Serves no real purpose other than from a nostalgia point of view. Don't see the reasoning to keep it to be honest.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 869 ✭✭✭corm500


    A car ramp built in the 70s? A symbol of the airport? This is why we can't have nice things.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,427 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    Based on that post you'd be forgiven for thinking he was talking about something built by the Romans or the Vikings.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,871 ✭✭✭cml387


    It was originally closed for security reasons as being too close to the airside. Can't see that changing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Most of the space that was a carpark is already used for other things (offices, workshops etc). There is a small amount of executive (as in daa staff, not Platinum Services) parking there; which was planned to be removed.

    It will never reopen and indeed planning would never be given for it to reopen either, FCC are very much restricting the amount of parking on-site.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,454 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    Horrible ugly thing and was barely ever used as a car park, spending most of its life empty.

    This is just FCC objecting to pretty much everything the DAA are trying to do, to actually try and operate one of the most vital pieces of infrastructure in our country. Other sensible countries would look on with horror.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,231 ✭✭✭Allinall


    I travel through the airport about 40 times a year, and I didn't even know this existed.

    On that basis it should be razed. Put something useful in its place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Not empty but long since (1980s or so) re-used for other space. The ramps are still used for access for loading in stuff; but rarely; and for the exec carparking.

    There was no proposed replacement with anything - the proposal was just to remove them; seal the holes up for energy efficiency.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73 ✭✭TerrieBootson


    I can't imagine a ramp built for 1970s cars would be much use for modern ones anyway, so why be forced to keep them?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    if they can't reopen the old car park via the ramps, they should demolish the rest of the terminal and build a new car park in a 60s brutalist style that connects to the ramp. If necessary move the airport somewhere else to facilitate this theme park of brutalist architecture. People can park their cars, marvel at the design, then get a bus to the new airport in Kildare or wherever.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,604 ✭✭✭recyclops


    I would say most are travelling to the airport from either red or blue carpark so do miss them, I always liked them and dont mind brutalist buildings, Didnt really say anything beyond knock them otherwise that side would look stupid compared to rest of building, I do think the below looks quite good tbh so agree with this from council

    "The council has also refused planning permission after finding that the demolition of the spiral ramps would diminish the quality of the proposed facade works granted as part of a planning application lodged in 2020.

    The planning authority stated that this would result in the eastern facade of terminal one being of a lesser design quality, becoming visually dominant when viewed from the surroundings and would be seriously injurious to the visual amenities and character of the area."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 208 ✭✭Tippman24


    Looks like a fxxxxxx bunker to me that Hitler had on the west coast of France ad part of the Atlantic Wall.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭davetherave



    I'm sure DAA would love to reopen them as a car-park at €40 a day for short-term parking, but your mates in Fingal CoCo made a determination as part of approving Terminal 2, that the number of short-term car parking spaces can't exceed 4000. You can't demolish them, but you also can't use them for parking….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,391 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    No, they wouldn’t - it would be a huge headache for them. This structure could never be used for public parking, as it’s too close to the airside (i.e., secure) part of Dublin Airport. Security is much tighter these days than in the 1960s when this was built.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    And it was specifically closed after the often forgotten UDA bombing of the airport, in which a staff member died.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭dublincc2


    Some people appear to have taken what I said out of proportion.

    If they were demolished to be replaced with infrastructure that would improve the service at T1 then of course that would be a separate matter, but as was pointed out above the plan was to knock them down and put nothing in its place, just to plug the two openings apparently.

    My point being how that they are here to stay, why not revert them back to their original use? Even for the sake of posterity if not for the addition 600 parking spaces.

    Was the rooftop ever open for parking or was it always within the terminal itself? There were two floors but it’s hard to make out how it functioned with limited info. I’m almost sure I remember going planespotting from a rooftop area with friends at a birthday as a child.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    They are still used for their original use, as already explained here - for loading and access to the executive parking spaces.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,836 ✭✭✭10-10-20


    I'm all on for brutalist architecture being part of the landscape but it should be functional and not impede progress. That spiral lump of a thing might be defined as iconic but virtually no concrete structure is constructed without an expectation of around 50 years of use, so that's going to look like an 80's FIAT once the rebar spalls and the patch-work of concrete fixes makes it look like it was hit with a bunker-buster. Move on and let the DAA spend the maintenance money on maintaining the functional structure of T1. Or better still, require them to replace the 70's brutalist spiral with a modern interpretation of the style.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭dublincc2


    So why not open it up for public car parking?

    The Troubles are over and if any terrorist wanted to destroy the terminal I can think of at least two more efficient methods which obviously I won’t state here, my point being that is an overblown and outdated concern. Instead of having sprawling car-parks in the area around the airport such as Dardistown/Toberbunny and having to bus passengers over you have 600 spots directly above the terminal.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 823 ✭✭✭GSBellew


    I think it looks better as is with them than without as proposed, perhaps if they carried the new facade treatment on around the side where the ramps are now it would look better.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,871 ✭✭✭cml387


    You cannot have a publicly accessible area so close to the apron/airside. In fact security requiremants have massively increased since the early seventies. Ask anyone who needs to get an airside pass.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    This has been explained to you multiple times already



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,746 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    No problem with them going but jeez there is literally zero architectural imagination gone into this new facade. Crap looking.

    you wouldn’t get that many cars now, so be no real point. I’ve been up there.. not that big a space.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭dublincc2


    Was the old car park actually open to the roofspace or was it under a roof over two floors?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,459 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    They are inevitably going to be removed at some point. They have zero architectural or historical value. Hopefully it is overturned at ABP.

    They have a pretty huge footprint as well, could easily put a more useful structure in place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,871 ✭✭✭cml387




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,722 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    It was inside, two floors worth.

    It could not be on the roof, as the ramps do not reach the roof.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭dublincc2


    I have a vivid memory of being on the roof of the ‘new terminal’ as it was then and looking at planes below. I am nearly sure the car was parked there as well.

    So what is the explanation for that? Was there some vehicular access to the roof even briefly?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭dublincc2


    There could be an internal ramp up to the roof?



Advertisement