Minister Noonan talks about building heights in Dublin

MJohnston · 04-05-2017 1:16pm

bear1 wrote: »

Anything fancy looking never seems to get off the ground, if it's done right and is easy on the eye I say what the hell.
Anyone know when planning permission will be sought?
I'd imagine due to that not being in the sdz this will be scrutinised quite a bit.

Details here: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1805325&page=8

cgcsb · 04-05-2017 9:54pm

It'll end up being cut to like 15 floors at most. It is visible from the lawn in trinners and the quays, which is simply unacceptable for an taisce, Irish Georgian society, David Norris and various other folks who can afford to live where they want and simply couldn't give a toss about the ordinary joes and Janes forced to commute from Kildare.

Bray Head · 05-05-2017 9:04am

To my eye it is not very different in scale or height from the Liberty Hall proposal that was shot down by ABP in 2012.

CatInABox · 05-05-2017 9:30am

Really hope that this is successful. A high rise tower in Dublin city centre, even a relatively bland one such as this, will prove that the world won't end suddenly with the construction of a tall building. It should make the Docklands even more attractive to developers once this gets built.

Victor · 07-05-2017 1:16am

Bray Head wrote: »

To my eye it is not very different in scale or height from the Liberty Hall proposal that was shot down by ABP in 2012.

A big part of the problem there was the plot ratio at 4:1. Possibly sustainable if Metro North was built, but not so without it.

Bray Head · 07-05-2017 6:43am

Victor wrote: »

Bray Head wrote: »

To my eye it is not very different in scale or height from the Liberty Hall proposal that was shot down by ABP in 2012.

A big part of the problem there was the plot ratio at 4:1. Possibly sustainable if Metro North was built, but not so without it.

Sustainable for construction in general or in this particular instance?

Transport infrastructure is a bit chicken and egg. Which comes first, the metro or the density?

bear1 · 07-05-2017 9:40am

Wasn't the liberty hall project refused cause of the heritage of the building or something?

Bray Head · 08-05-2017 8:34am

bear1 wrote: »

Wasn't the liberty hall project refused cause of the heritage of the building or something?

No. From ABP: "[font=verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif]it is considered that the scale and in particular, the height of the development as proposed, would be unacceptably dominant in the city, would be visually intrusive in the streetscape and riverscape and would seriously injure the visual amenities of the city and its skyline.[/font][font=verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif] [/font]"

CatInABox · 08-05-2017 10:41am

Bray Head wrote: »

No. From ABP: "it is considered that the scale and in particular, the height of the development as proposed, would be unacceptably dominant in the city

This kind of thinking drives me absolutely insane. We can't build tall structures in Dublin because we don't have tall structures in Dublin.

Bray Head wrote: »

would seriously injure the visual amenities of the city and its skyline."

"Visual Amenities"? Like what? The Spire? Or do they think that a lack of any significant skyline is, in itself, an amenity?

I despair.

Bray Head · 08-05-2017 11:02am

Maybe someone can help me out on this. There are a few principles for what any law should look like. As much as possible law should be clear, predictable, and equally applied.

Most civil disputes don't go near a court because it is reasonably clear who is in the right, and a negotiated settlement is cheaper and easier for both parties.

The application of planning law in Ireland does not to my eye obey any of these principles:

Clarity: planners use completely subjective and vague language in justifying their decisions. No one can really define what 'visual amenity' is, yet the term has legal implications
Predictable: the high share of rejected applications suggests to me that developers are genuinely unclear about what is likely to pass, and what won't
Equally applied: for example planners allowed Croke Park and the Spire, both more dominant and higher than the children's hospital at the Mater, which they rejected

If the application of planning law in Ireland obeyed all of these principles you would only have dispute in the very small number of cases that are rubbing up against the boundaries of what is acceptable. There would also be a much lower need for planners.

MJohnston · 08-05-2017 11:51am

CatInABox wrote: »

"Visual Amenities"? Like what? The Spire? Or do they think that a lack of any significant skyline is, in itself, an amenity?

I despair.

None of it makes any sense, because what 'injury' to any possible skyline or streetscape views could a replacement building have that Liberty Hall doesn't already?

Liberty Hall and Loop Line Bridge already destroy any aesthetic appeal that might exist in the area.

Victor · 11-05-2017 12:44am

CatInABox wrote: »

This kind of thinking drives me absolutely insane. We can't build tall structures in Dublin because we don't have tall structures in Dublin.

"Visual Amenities"? Like what? The Spire? Or do they think that a lack of any significant skyline is, in itself, an amenity?

I despair.

Placing tall building directly next to much lower buildings is incongruous. However, using a stepped approach is usually much more harmonious, e.g. as used at George's Quay.

CatInABox · 11-05-2017 9:47am

Victor wrote: »

Placing tall building directly next to much lower buildings is incongruous. However, using a stepped approach is usually much more harmonious, e.g. as used at George's Quay.

I wouldn't consider George's Quay to be a "high rise development" by any stretch of the imagination.

The fact is, any tall building in Dublin will look incongruous, at least until more buildings of similar size are built around it. They don't even have to be near each other, just look at London, where you can have a skyscraper right next to some Georgian size buildings. Does it look incongruous while standing right next to the two? Yes. Does it look incongruous while in context of the entire city? No.

cgcsb · 11-05-2017 8:35pm

My hope would be that once we have Exo, Capital Dock, Boland's Quay, Tara St and a new 16 floor at the poolbeg SDZ, anti high rise sentiment will die off.

knipex · 15-05-2017 3:36pm

cgcsb wrote: »

My hope would be that once we have Exo, Capital Dock, Boland's Quay, Tara St and a new 16 floor at the poolbeg SDZ, anti high rise sentiment will die off.

You mean like this

http://www.pbase.com/image/149332448

bear1 · 15-05-2017 6:38pm

knipex wrote: »

You mean like this

http://www.pbase.com/image/149332448

That doesn't include the new 15 storey that's going in does it?
Limericks skyline will look quite nice with that addition.

knipex · 16-05-2017 11:04am

bear1 wrote: »

That doesn't include the new 15 storey that's going in does it?
Limericks skyline will look quite nice with that addition.

Nope it doesn't. There is an artists impression of it but for some reason it excludes the Clarion..

The skyline coming in over the new bridge is pretty nice but coming in the Dublin road isn't so great nor to the Ballysimon road. The CEP plaza, while nice, sticks out as you come in that road..

In general teh city has seen some significant improvements over the last 5 to 10 years but the sooner they start on Patric street area the better, its a serious eyesore and pulls down the entire city...

bear1 · 16-05-2017 11:30am

Yeah when you're coming in from Galway it looks quite nice as you can see the buildings from a few km outside of the city.

Peregrine · 18-05-2017 2:57pm

So DCC is voting on the Poolbeg West SDZ (Glass Bottle site) at 3:30. Get your e-mails to councillors in ASAP if you want any hope of increasing the density.

BoatMad · 18-05-2017 3:08pm

Bray Head wrote: »

Maybe someone can help me out on this. There are a few principles for what any law should look like. As much as possible law should be clear, predictable, and equally applied.

Most civil disputes don't go near a court because it is reasonably clear who is in the right, and a negotiated settlement is cheaper and easier for both parties.

The application of planning law in Ireland does not to my eye obey any of these principles:
Clarity: planners use completely subjective and vague language in justifying their decisions. No one can really define what 'visual amenity' is, yet the term has legal implications

Predictable: the high share of rejected applications suggests to me that developers are genuinely unclear about what is likely to pass, and what won't

Equally applied: for example planners allowed Croke Park and the Spire, both more dominant and higher than the children's hospital at the Mater, which they rejected

If the application of planning law in Ireland obeyed all of these principles you would only have dispute in the very small number of cases that are rubbing up against the boundaries of what is acceptable. There would also be a much lower need for planners.

While your comments are true in and absolutist sense, they fail to understand that planning is a subjective process .

so planners, must take into account, the nature of the development, the advantage to the locality, the economics, the quality of the development and its suitability

These are all mainly " subjective " decisions , hence logical clarity has little meaning

If you talk to planners , you will realise why many planning applications fail, (a) direct contravention of the regulations (b) inconsistent with development plan or (c) Design inappropriate to the location ( i.e. a try on )

bear1 · 18-05-2017 3:28pm

Peregrine wrote: »

So DCC is voting on the Poolbeg West SDZ (Glass Bottle site) at 3:30. Get your e-mails to councillors in ASAP if you want any hope of increasing the density.

Is it for a specific building or simply to allow higher buildings?

Peregrine · 18-05-2017 3:33pm

bear1 wrote: »

Is it for a specific building or simply to allow higher buildings?

This is the current heights imposed on the SDZ plan that's due to be voted on this afternoon:

More than 70% 4-7 storeys with tiny tall blocks in some corners.

bear1 · 18-05-2017 6:16pm

Ludicrous that max heights are 7 storeys.
Surely to God they'll vote to push the limits higher.

Pterosaur · 03-07-2017 11:33am

This is a great way to solve the housing crisis, contain urban sprawl and attract firms from London in the wake of brexit.
City council rejects Johnny Ronan’s Dublin skyscraper

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/city-council-rejects-johnny-ronan-s-dublin-skyscraper-1.3141050

Idbatterim · 03-07-2017 11:58am

Take a look at the 4-5 floor proposal for the Irish glass bottle site. Joke stuff. The old centre should be be kept low -mid rise. It's the docklands and Irish glass bottle site etc that are the joke!

Peregrine · 03-07-2017 12:14pm

Pterosaur wrote: »

This is a great way to solve the housing crisis, contain urban sprawl and attract firms from London in the wake of brexit.
City council rejects Johnny Ronan’s Dublin skyscraper

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/city-council-rejects-johnny-ronan-s-dublin-skyscraper-1.3141050

Even more of a joke when you consider that the height of the proposal is just under the limit placed on the site by DCC's own LAP.

Bray Head · 03-07-2017 1:42pm

Subjective aesthetics triumphs again!

bear1 · 03-07-2017 2:00pm

Pterosaur wrote: »

This is a great way to solve the housing crisis, contain urban sprawl and attract firms from London in the wake of brexit.
City council rejects Johnny Ronan’s Dublin skyscraper

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/city-council-rejects-johnny-ronan-s-dublin-skyscraper-1.3141050

I'm in no way surprised.
If it's anything over 10 storeys the masters who control anything excitement **** themselves in anger.
How in the name of fook is it that limerick is able to get these (albeit smaller) towers approved in the city center but dublin can't.
Why in Gods name would companies want to relocate here when there is no space for them nor is there any appetite for a tall modern building to accommodate them.
I hope he appeals on the grounds it's been submitted using their own ****ing guidelines.
Gob****es.

cgcsb · 03-07-2017 6:46pm

It's pretty upsetting when DCC refused the Tara St tower in spite of the fact that their own LAP allows for a higher building. The reasoning being that it can be seen from the north strand. And what you might say?
Something must be wrong here are the councillors in the pockets of companies that develop housing estates in Kildare?
I do hope this is successfully appealed.

Conchir · 03-07-2017 7:17pm

IGS are happy anyway.

Their comment "There is a place arguably for tall buildings..." is frustrating to say the least. Please please please let this be appealed successfully.

bear1 · 03-07-2017 8:20pm

What are the chances of it a) being appealed and b) being approved..
Nope a hope.

Idbatterim · 03-07-2017 8:23pm

cgcsb wrote: »

It's pretty upsetting when DCC refused the Tara St tower in spite of the fact that their own LAP allows for a higher building. The reasoning being that it can be seen from the north strand. And what you might say?
Something must be wrong here are the councillors in the pockets of companies that develop housing estates in Kildare?
I do hope this is successfully appealed.

No the councillors are in the pockets of nimbys whos vote they go looking for every few years. Biggest vote grabber is probably " not in our back yard"

technocrat · 03-07-2017 9:32pm

bear1 wrote: »

I'm in no way surprised.
If it's anything over 10 storeys the masters who control anything excitement **** themselves in anger.
How in the name of fook is it that limerick is able to get these (albeit smaller) towers approved in the city center but dublin can't.
Why in Gods name would companies want to relocate here when there is no space for them nor is there any appetite for a tall modern building to accommodate them.
I hope he appeals on the grounds it's been submitted using their own ****ing guidelines.
Gob****es.

Soon Limerick will have the best river skyline in Ireland.
Dublin will come in 3rd place if Cork get their 40 storey tower approved which I believe is highly likely.
Really is shocking that the capital city will end up with a CBD that looks like a bland suburban business park!

Jayop · 03-07-2017 9:41pm

technocrat wrote: »

Soon Limerick will have the best river skyline in Ireland.
Dublin will come in 3rd place if Cork get their 40 storey tower approved which I believe is highly likely.
Really is shocking that the capital city will end up with a CBD that looks like a bland suburban business park!

If cork or Limerick really pushed it they could end up looking spectacular and possibly draw some of the growth out of Dublin. Just because it's the capital now doesn't mean it always has to be.

bear1 · 03-07-2017 11:37pm

technocrat wrote: »

Soon Limerick will have the best river skyline in Ireland.
Dublin will come in 3rd place if Cork get their 40 storey tower approved which I believe is highly likely.
Really is shocking that the capital city will end up with a CBD that looks like a bland suburban business park!

When is the Cork decision?
The thing is and I suspect it could be the next stages.
If limerick gets this approved it would mean the average heights of the shoreline would be over 10 storeys so you'd then have developers sending 20 storeys for planning and it would gradually raise the city higher as there is a good counter balance on size going on.
Dublin is a mess, 11 storeys there, 20 over there then 16 on that side and so nothing is in scale.
So when a 22 storey comes along you can tell straight away it will be rejected.
I'd have a hoped for better reasons but this is dcc and an taisce we are talking about.

bear1 · 03-07-2017 11:38pm

Jayop wrote: »

If cork or Limerick really pushed it they could end up looking spectacular and possibly draw some of the growth out of Dublin. Just because it's the capital now doesn't mean it always has to be.

I'd say they aren't pushing it so as to not over step their mark.
Cork and limerick are dark horses and it wouldn't surprise me if they are the ones to get their buildings approved.

marno21 · 08-07-2017 1:55am

There seems to be more of an impetus in Cork to get the Docklands redevelopment right.

Stark contrast to DCC who seem content in wall to wall shoeboxes in the Docklands in Dublin. It's worse given the interest in buildings from the likes of JPMorgan and further going forward. It's impossible to gauge the future demand for buildings at present due to the fact that we don't know exactly what Brexit is yet, and here we are rejecting tall buildings to appease a small group of old people who likely wouldn't be around to see the new buildings anyway.

Deplorable stuff. Anyway roll on Cork and Limerick's much better attempts.

Minister Noonan talks about building heights in Dublin

Comments