St Annes Park Planning Application

Larbre34 · 18-02-2020 8:17pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I'd put money on it that regulations regarding fire and pyrite etc and energy ratings will have to be observed.

Insightful.

tricky D · 18-02-2020 8:17pm

donvito99 wrote: »

What is disproportionate and irresponsible about this particular and much needed development in the midst of a housing crisis?

They are far too extensive. If you care to take a look at the history of the planning applications you can see that the developments have more than doubled in the same spaces and floor areas have been reduced to shoe box sizes. Height restrictions have been removed.

The irresponsible stuff I have listed in the previous post. They are all based on good practices which were developed for good reasons and are now just ignored despite some of them being legally required. Ignoring legal requirements is irresponsible.

As for housing crisis, there are up to 180k unoccupied properties. If the powers that be bothered to make some dents into that figure we could make real progress. Note that these are already built so lead time would be slashed.

tricky D · 18-02-2020 8:21pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I'd put money on it that regulations regarding fire and pyrite etc and energy ratings will have to be observed.

The Techcrete site is going to 8 storeys but DFB only has 5 ladders that can reach that high and they are city centre based so fire cert issues.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 8:24pm

tricky D wrote: »

The Techcrete site is going to 8 storeys but DFB only has 5 ladders that can reach that high and they are city centre based so fire cert issues.

How will that affect the high rise proposals in Tara Street and elsewhere? The Johnny Ronan development for example.I think there are many buildings around higher than the ladders available. It's an issue for DFB and part of planning I guess.

donvito99 · 18-02-2020 8:26pm

tricky D wrote: »

They are far too extensive. If you care to take a look at the history of the planning applications you can see that the developments have more than doubled in the same spaces and floor areas have been reduced to shoe box sizes. Height restrictions have been removed.

The city needs accommodation. It needs a variety of accommodation. Ultimately, the market will decide if people will live in these "shoe boxes". (My gut says they will, in their droves).

The irresponsible stuff I have listed in the previous post. They are all based on good practices which were developed for good reasons and are now just ignored despite some of them being legally required. Ignoring legal requirements is irresponsible.

You've highlighted one instance in which a developer's calculation relating to spoil was contested? Is that so irresponsible as to prevent this development??

As for housing crisis, there are up to 180k unoccupied properties. If the powers that be bothered to make some dents into that figure we could make real progress. Note that these are already built so lead time would be slashed.

The mask slips. What absolute arse.

donvito99 · 18-02-2020 8:28pm

tricky D wrote: »

The Techcrete site is going to 8 storeys but DFB only has 5 ladders that can reach that high and they are city centre based so fire cert issues.

No it won't. Please provide evidence wherein the DFB will object to developments their ladders can't reach?

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 8:31pm

donvito99 wrote: »

It's actually outrageous that more people should be denied the chance to live 5km from O'Connell Bridge, near a DART station (with additional stock and the City Centre Resignalling coming down the line) and three spines under Bus Connects.
People are being forced to live in an outer commuter hell for fear of inconveniencing residents.

There's large scale developments planned or in progress going on 'upstream' of this in Coolock, Clongriffin, Balgriffin Howth Malahide etc which are all going to draw on that capacity.
I would not have objections if I had confidence that public transport and the road network could meet the demands of current and future residents.
I don't have any confidence that the planning here was granted with due regard to those concerns, given the size of the proposed development.
I suspect all it will do is create an inner commuter hell.

This was not objected to by just by a couple of local councillors, it was objected to officially by Dublin City Council.

donvito99 · 18-02-2020 8:34pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

There's large scale developments planned or in progress going on 'upstream' of this in Coolock, Clongriffin, Balgriffin Howth Malahide etc which are all going to draw on that capacity.
I would not have objections if I had confidence that public transport and the road network could meet the demands of current and future residents.
I don't have any confidence that the planning here was granted with due regard to those concerns, given the size of the proposed development.
I suspect all it will do is create an inner commuter hell.

This was not objected to by just by a couple of local councillors, it was objected to officially by Dublin City Council.

The reality is that people find a way. You just don't want them there in the first place.

New York, London and all other cities would have ground to a halt if what you say actually bears out in reality.

What an absolutely shameful view you have - basically, no more development in Dublin.

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 8:37pm

donvito99 wrote: »

The reality is that people find a way. You just don't want them there in the first place.
New York, London and all other cities would have ground to a halt if what you say actually bears out in reality.
What an absolutely shameful view you have - basically, no more development in Dublin.

I'll leave you to your straw man and the cloud cuckoo land you're in if you think Dublin's public transport is anything like those cities.

dubrov · 18-02-2020 8:43pm

odyssey06 wrote:

I'll leave you to your straw man and the cloud cuckoo land you're in if you think Dublin's public transport is anything like those cities.

In fairness, if you don't believe this development will meet the demands of its new residents then you won't believe anywhere in Dublin will.

With a massive local park, high desirability and proximity to the dart station, I would have thought it's exactly the sort of place where building should occur

tricky D · 18-02-2020 8:44pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

How will that affect the high rise proposals in Tara Street and elsewhere? The Johnny Ronan development for example.I think there are many buildings around higher than the ladders available. It's an issue for DFB and part of planning I guess.

You'd have to ask DFB.

donvito99 wrote: »

The city needs accommodation. It needs a variety of accommodation. Ultimately, the market will decide if people will live in these "shoe boxes". (My gut says they will, in their droves).

People will indeed buy them but they will still be shoe box sized. Like I said, take an actual look at the history of the applications if you have the time.

donvito99 wrote: »

You've highlighted one instance in which a developer's calculation relating to spoil was contested? Is that so irresponsible as to prevent this development??

Well the law says it is. How ignoring the law is anything but irresponsible is a bizarre position.

donvito99 wrote: »

The mask slips. What absolute arse.

Any chance of a proper counterpoint.

donvito99 wrote: »

No it won't. Please provide evidence wherein the DFB will object to developments their ladders can't reach?

They are in consideration phase so no objection yet but the local station chief stated it is an issue in conversation so no such evidence available. Believe that if you like or not, or give him a call.

return guide · 18-02-2020 8:55pm

tricky D wrote: »

The Techcrete site is going to 8 storeys but DFB only has 5 ladders that can reach that high and they are city centre based so fire cert issues.

it will have dry risers (pipes), which will allow DFB to connect a water source at the base of the building and their fire fighting equipment on what ever level they choose to fight the fire. The same for any office block built in Dublin for years.

Once built DFB will visit the site to familiarise themselves with escape routes, aotomatic smoke vents, fire lifts etc.

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 9:04pm

dubrov wrote: »

In fairness, if you don't believe this development will meet the demands of its new residents then you won't believe anywhere in Dublin will.
With a massive local park, high desirability and proximity to the dart station, I would have thought it's exactly the sort of place where building should occur

I'm not sure what desirability or even being adjacent to the park has anything to do with concerns re: the size of the development versus the capacity of the transport network to absorb it.
By that logic we could take half the park for houses and no one would have grounds for objections?

I'd love to live there but I think this is going to negatively impact anyone trying to get into city centre from new or existing properties.

The DART stations nearby are already overloaded capacity wise at rush hour as are the bus routes along Malahide, Howth and Clontarf roads.
There may be extra public transport capacity coming, but will that be able to cope with (a) the people switching from cars, (b) the large developments already happening in Dublin Bay North and (c) the scale of this development? Is the future capacity planning even considering those developments?

The best place for large scale development is in the centre \ docklands \ port itself where it does not put extra demand on peak routes which are already overloaded. I'm not saying no new development in Dublin, but I think the size of this development here and in this place is wrong.
And I'm not the only one - DCC don't just object outright to any and every development as they have done for this one.

We have a long thread for the objections to this development and different thred for the one in Howth. There's none for the 380 property development in Marino. This is not "no to all development", this is "no to this development".

downtheroad · 18-02-2020 9:18pm

The Howth Road plan under BusConnects is the H Spine, the only 1 of all the spines that doesn't cross the Liffey. The Howth Road does not have a fully segregated bus corridor and bus regularly get caught in traffic every morning at several points. The 130 bus is a further walk from this site and is also at capacity in mornings and evenings.

The Dart as already alluded to is at capacity during rush hours and the current proposal of Peaktime.ie asking passengers to change the time they travel is not a solution. Additional carriages are on order but until the level crossings are removed the Dart frequency cannot increase to the levels needed.

An Educate Together school for Clontarf, Killester, Raheny (most of Dublin 3 and 5) recently opened in prefab buildings on the grounds of Suttonians Rugby Club in Sutton, because a suitable location couldn't be found in the local area.

The traffic at the crossroads of Brookwood Avenue/Howth Road/Sybil Hill is completely backed up every morning as is the Howth Road inbound. The roads will struggle to handle more vehicles.

657 apartments in this area is going to place a lot more pressure on infrastructure that is already at capacity and needs to be invested in before these apartments are completed.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 9:24pm

return guide wrote: »

it will have dry risers (pipes), which will allow DFB to connect a water source at the base of the building and their fire fighting equipment on what ever level they choose to fight the fire. The same for any office block built in Dublin for years.

Once built DFB will visit the site to familiarise themselves with escape routes, aotomatic smoke vents, fire lifts etc.

Exactly, you would think that there are no high rise buildings anywhere in this country whether office of homes vulnerable to fire.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 9:27pm

downtheroad wrote: »

657 apartments in this area is going to place a lot more pressure on infrastructure that is already at capacity and needs to be invested in before these apartments are completed.

Tough that. There are many places in Dublin that cannot avail of DART or LUAS and have building going on. You can object for sure, but like most people are insular. Go figure.

dubrov · 18-02-2020 9:30pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

I'm not sure what desirability or even being adjacent to the park has anything to do with concerns re: the size of the development versus the capacity of the transport network to absorb it.
By that logic we could take half the park for houses and no one would have grounds for objections?

I'd love to live there but I think this is going to negatively impact anyone trying to get into city centre from new or existing properties.

The DART stations nearby are already overloaded capacity wise at rush hour as are the bus routes along Malahide, Howth and Clontarf roads.
There may be extra public transport capacity coming, but will that be able to cope with (a) the people switching from cars, (b) the large developments already happening in Dublin Bay North and (c) the scale of this development? Is the future capacity planning even considering those developments?

The best place for large scale development is in the centre \ docklands \ port itself where it does not put extra demand on peak routes which are already overloaded. I'm not saying no new development in Dublin, but I think the size of this development here and in this place is wrong.
And I'm not the only one - DCC don't just object outright to any and every development as they have done for this one.

We have a long thread for the objections to this development and different thred for the one in Howth. There's none for the 380 property development in Marino. This is not "no to all development", this is "no to this development".

I am not disagreeing with you on the docklands but that does not cater for all the demand. Many don't want to live in the city centre (although many do) and the proposed development offers the advantages of suburbia while still being fairly close to the city centre.

I haven't experienced the northern dart route during rush hour but the southern dart run is nowhere close to capacity. If you are unlucky you might need to push in.

If it is the Griffith avenue development in Marino you are referring to, there may not be a thread here but there are loads of objections to it. It is a much smaller development as well.

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 9:40pm

dubrov wrote: »

I am not disagreeing with you on the docklands but that does not cater for all the demand. Many don't want to live in the city centre (although many do) and the proposed development offers the advantages of suburbia while still being fairly close to the city centre.
I haven't experienced the northern dart route during rush hour but the southern dart run is nowhere close to capacity. If you are unlucky you might need to push in.
If it is the Griffith avenue development in Marino you are referring to, there may not be a thread here but there are loads of objections to it. It is a much smaller development as well.

Of course the demand is there, but it's not just the housing that needs to keep pace with the demand it's the transport too.

If you're lucky on thr northern dart route you might not need to push in - at least in the D3 and D5 stations...
I'm sure it will be a much sought after address. Hell, you could develop all of St Annes (not implying you favour this) and the area would still be a great place to live in terms of desirability and amenities e.g. shops restaurants the promenade and bull island...
Until you try to get to work heading city centre direction during rush hour

noodler · 18-02-2020 9:42pm

The north dart run is indeed at capacity at peak time.

Just for fyi.

I am not against these properties being built of the pitches can't be brought back.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 9:42pm

Are there any council developments in say Knocknarra or whatever is the place to live in Galway now, or in Cork, or wherever.

Lets get real. Council is council, private is private. End of.

I do understand the angst of those who bought and scraped and fought for a mortgage, to realise they are living beside a 20% person who didn't have to do anything but have a rake of kids.

You can castigate me all you like, but unless you provide for yourself you should have no choice where you live. Your mammy will be fine. It's your kids you need to look after.

downtheroad · 18-02-2020 9:44pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Tough that. There are many places in Dublin that cannot avail of DART or LUAS and have building going on. You can object for sure, but like most people are insular. Go figure.

Tough what? Is it not reasonable to expect that appropriate investment and upgrades are made in areas when accommodation for over 1,000 people is being built? And that is in addition to the apartment block right next door to this site called Ardilaun Court, which is on the site of the old St Pauls swimming pool.

So the area loses a swimming pool and green space, which are replaced with hundreds of people and their cars etc and you think it's fine not to bother upgrading the local roads, bus routes, dart station to actually allow these people get from their new homes to their jobs?

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 9:45pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I do understand the angst of those who bought and scraped and fought for a mortgage, to realise they are living beside a 20% person who didn't have to do anything but have a rake of kids.

I don't think DCC lodged a formal objection to this over that 20% - in fact they would lap up that aspect of it.
This could be 100% private, it would still have 99% of the same objections to it.

tricky D · 18-02-2020 9:47pm

return guide wrote: »

it will have dry risers (pipes), which will allow DFB to connect a water source at the base of the building and their fire fighting equipment on what ever level they choose to fight the fire. The same for any office block built in Dublin for years.

Once built DFB will visit the site to familiarise themselves with escape routes, aotomatic smoke vents, fire lifts etc.

Agreed, but there is little if any detail of any of this. There is precious little on fire matters overall, and where there is, it is shoddy...

11. EXACT LOCATION OF HYDRANTS TO BE AGREED WITH OFFALY COUNTYCOUNCIL FIRE OFFICER AS PART OF THE FIRE CERT APPLICATION.

pg 30 https://claremontshd.ie/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/Documents/planning-application-documentation/engineering/18.386%20Civil%20Infrastructure.pdf

So there's some copypasta quality planning.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 9:53pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

I don't think DCC lodged a formal objection to this over that 20% - in fact they would lap up that aspect of it.
This could be 100% private, it would still have 99% of the same objections to it.

20% Social is mandatory now. Objections are from the pearl clutching brigade.

Housing needs to be built and everyone is giving out about it, but as soon as a development is mooted in a high end area it's never good.

Honestly.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 9:56pm

downtheroad wrote: »

Tough what? Is it not reasonable to expect that appropriate investment and upgrades are made in areas when accommodation for over 1,000 people is being built? And that is in addition to the apartment block right next door to this site called Ardilaun Court, which is on the site of the old St Pauls swimming pool.

So the area loses a swimming pool and green space, which are replaced with hundreds of people and their cars etc and you think it's fine not to bother upgrading the local roads, bus routes, dart station to actually allow these people get from their new homes to their jobs?

Compare and contrast to areas with no access to DART.

People who voted for more housing are full of sht.

Not in my area but build it everywhere else apart from close to me thanks.

Holly13 · 18-02-2020 9:57pm

Too many people on the DART already. Every time I hear an ad/campaign for more people to use public transport, I think to myself - no, no, no, stay in your car- there is no room for you!

downtheroad · 18-02-2020 10:00pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Compare and contrast to areas with no access to DART.

People who voted for more housing are full of sht.

Not in my area but build it everywhere else apart from close to me thanks.

I didn't say not to build it everywhere else apart from close to me though. Just pointing out that the area is under a lot of strain and that this proposed development should come with investment to the infrastructure to the local area to support the addition to the local population.

odyssey06 · 18-02-2020 10:02pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

20% Social is mandatory now. Objections are from the pearl clutching brigade.
Housing needs to be built and everyone is giving out about it, but as soon as a development is mooted in a high end area it's never good.
Honestly.

No, as has been pointed out on this thread multiple times people welcomed development in Howth until they saw the scale of it. Just because housing needs to be built doesn't mean we should ignore the capacity of the area to absorb it.

Are there any grounds under which you would be willing to concede that an objection could be valid?
Remember that DCC lodged a formal objection to this development i.e. not on some technicality that could be addressed, but to its fundamental nature.

If don't seem willing to grant any valid grounds for objections, in the current housing climate - so let the authorities be honest about it and ban all objections in RPZ zones.

Spanish Eyes · 18-02-2020 10:08pm

Look, housing will be built in Coolock, Clongriffin, Finglas, Sallynoggin, Clondlalkin, Adamstown and so on.

Never in Howth or St Anne's or Dalkey, Killiney etc. It's a no brainer.

I'm talking new developments here.

tricky D · 18-02-2020 10:13pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Never in Howth.

Ah stop. How many times does it have to mentioned that good development is welcomed.

St Annes Park Planning Application

Comments