nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Planning application for 28 story building at Junction6

Gemma1982

Just saw today that there is a planning application to demolish Junction 6 in Castleknock to build a 500 room hotel. It seems very strange given that Junction 6 sat empty for 5 or 6 years and it is only recently that a good few good businesses have opened up there and they seem to be thriving. I was really disappointed to see the application as our family use junction 6 a lot - my two daughters do dance and swimming lessons there and I’m in the gym there. A drive through coffee place has only opened there in recent weeks so I would have thought that their lease would be for a minimum of a year. Whole thing is strange and disappointing for the area.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ongarite

It's a real hodge podge of business there. Hard to work around the existing legacy mega gym setup.
I would guess that the owner is looking at big losses with current setup due to COVID-19 restrictions so better to sell up.

Hurrache

It's been pretty busy lately, go into it the last couple of weeks and the carpark has been pretty full.

blanch152

A sensible use for the location. It was silly to leave it there when they built the junction, and it is sort of cut off from the rest of the village.

Larbre34

Definitely a case to be made for intensification of that site, but double the height of the Crowne Plaza? I don't see it passing muster myself.

jack presley

It'll be absolute madness if planning permission is granted for anything like what is proposed at that location. It's in the middle of a motorway junction and they want to add a 459 room hotel and 4 office blocks and 232 car spaces. Granting planning permission for the original site was one of the worst planning decisions I can remember and showed such a lack of foresight so why make it worse by allowing this!

That's just what the M3/M50 interchange needs at 5pm on winter's evening, loads of more cars looking to get out. I must look at their traffic management proposals in the application.

bobbyy gee

why do they need hotel in castleknock

Pinoy adventure

How can 1 object too a planning application ?

jack presley

Pinoy adventure wrote: »

How can 1 object too a planning application ?

http://planning.fingalcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/wchintlogin.display?ApnID=FW20A/0142

There's a fee (€20 I think) to make an observation/objection. 6 October is the deadline for making a submission.

jack presley

it's ok folks. My concerns about traffic were unwarranted. Everyone will be cycling or using the excellent bus connects and/or train (including the Luas extension to Finglas) to get there. Seriously, the traffic management plan is about 80% about how it is so accessible by public transport and the magnificent cycling infrastructure we have in this city. And then there's a small bit about driving......

It's laughable.

My biggest concern with this development is that sometime in the future (might be 10 or 20 year's time) the M50/N3 junction will need to be properly upgraded and CPOing the site will be a hell of a lot more difficult if there's a massive hotel in situ there.

Gemma1982

I agree with the traffic concerns. A recipie for disaster. What impacts me more immediately though is the loss of some really good family amenities if the current structure is demolished. There are a huge amount of excellent fitness classes for adults and kids up there along with hairdressers, beautician, kids play centre etc. I was only talking to a friend today whose baby is in crèche there - it is the only crèche in the vicinity that takes babies. A lot of businesses there who have worked so hard to establish themselves.

VonLuck

jack presley wrote: »

It'll be absolute madness if planning permission is granted for anything like what is proposed at that location. It's in the middle of a motorway junction and they want to add a 459 room hotel and 4 office blocks and 232 car spaces. Granting planning permission for the original site was one of the worst planning decisions I can remember and showed such a lack of foresight so why make it worse by allowing this!

That's just what the M3/M50 interchange needs at 5pm on winter's evening, loads of more cars looking to get out. I must look at their traffic management proposals in the application.

Just to play devil's advocate here for a minute, there's already roughly the same number of car parking spaces at Junction 6 so they're not increasing the number of cars going in or out of there.

jack presley

VonLuck wrote: »

Just to play devil's advocate here for a minute, there's already roughly the same number of car parking spaces at Junction 6 so they're not increasing the number of cars going in or out of there.

Yeah that's true but how often is that car park full? With a hotel and multiple office blocks, they all will be and there will be more people coming and going at peak times as opposed to now.

But as I said, my biggest objection to this is to do with any further development on this site basically killing off any chance of any further upgrade of the M50 interchange that will someday be needed.

VonLuck

jack presley wrote: »

Yeah that's true but how often is that car park full? With a hotel and multiple office blocks, they all will be and there will be more people coming and going at peak times as opposed to now.

But as I said, my biggest objection to this is to do with any further development on this site basically killing off any chance of any further upgrade of the M50 interchange that will someday be needed.

I assume the original planning application for the existing development had considered the traffic implications. I'm not sure how busy Junction 6 was when it first opened but it's likely to have declined in car volumes going to/from it.

In an ideal world the interchange would not need to be upgraded with the push towards improving public transport, plus with the expected tolling of the M50 along different stretches of the road it may actually reduce usage and pressure on the junction.

Caranica

I drove past junction 6 last week around 3pm and the car park was almost full. Was shocked

Brock Turnpike

And yet again D15 will end up with another terrible planned and inadequately serviced development. It's a ****ing joke at this stage.

Larbre34

Old Navan Road residents concerned about 5 storey co-living dev.

28 storey hotel 50 metres away - 'hold my beer'!

blanch152

Larbre34 wrote: »

Old Navan Road residents concerned about 5 storey co-living dev.

28 storey hotel 50 metres away - 'hold my beer'!

A lot of people will struggle with the intensification of development over the next decade.

I often look at the Blanchardstown SC and wonder why there isn't another two or three stories of apartments on top of it, and why the car parks aren't replaced with multi-storey ones so that some can be developed.

Larbre34

They will, but if people feel they are being asked to bear more than their fair share, they won't roll over on it.

jack presley

Larbre34 wrote: »

Old Navan Road residents concerned about 5 storey co-living dev.

28 storey hotel 50 metres away - 'hold my beer'!

This will be their view

kdevitt

jack presley wrote: »

This will be their view

They'll potentially have to look past this eyesore first -

VonLuck

kdevitt wrote: »

They'll potentially have to look past this eyesore first -

How is that an eyesore? Certainly far better than what's there at the moment.

kdevitt

VonLuck wrote: »

How is that an eyesore? Certainly far better than what's there at the moment.

Because it looks horrendous?

Bradys doesn't look super these days either, but that's mainly down to it being allowed to rot.

ongarite

It was never a good looking building or fitting of the area.
It looks like a warehouse or industrial unit that's stuck in the middle of a housing estate.
Even before the M3 or M50 it caught the eye and not in a good way.

Larbre34

kdevitt wrote: »

They'll potentially have to look past this eyesore first -

A five storey apartment building? Perfectly anonymous and unobtrusive looking, just like examples all over the City.

kdevitt

Larbre34 wrote: »

A five storey apartment building? Perfectly anonymous and unobtrusive looking, just like examples all over the City.

I don't think you're setting a high bar there.

Edit - totally unobtrusive!

no.8

jack presley wrote:

It'll be absolute madness if planning permission is granted for anything like what is proposed at that location. It's in the middle of a motorway junction and they want to add a 459 room hotel and 4 office blocks and 232 car spaces. Granting planning permission for the original site was one of the worst planning decisions I can remember and showed such a lack of foresight so why make it worse by allowing this!

jack presley wrote:

That's just what the M3/M50 interchange needs at 5pm on winter's evening, loads of more cars looking to get out. I must look at their traffic management proposals in the application.

Tbh this is not unusual in large cities. Bei useful location for airport / ferry traffic and those wanting quick access to services

blanch152

Larbre34 wrote: »

A five storey apartment building? Perfectly anonymous and unobtrusive looking, just like examples all over the City.

I agree with you. The Bradys development has no issues from a visual point of view.

It is important from a development point of view. Despite all the hand-wringing and crying, there is no evidence, good or bad, on whether co-living developments work in Ireland or not.

I am sure there are people who will complain about the experiment being on their doorstep, but change and experimentation have to happen somewhere.

Larbre34

Its a proven model in other big Cities. Has to be a first time for everything in Dublin also.

I don't have a problem with co-living as part of a healthy residential mix. I spent some time working on the Continent and lived in versions of co-living spaces that operated as high end student accommodation at other times of the year. They were excellent and ideal for my short term needs.

The risk is that developers try to build too many of them and they end up turning into long term accommodation for the wrong people and that they be impeccably managed and operated. But thats a planning concern and a manageable one. In principle though, they have their place and I think with the hospital, TUD, and other big employers in the area from where people come and go, the Brady's site is a suitable location. I'd expect it to gain permission in the end.

larbakium

Hi, are you aware of these intends?
Some of us think that such a project could have detrimental social, local traffic, environmental and geographical impact. What is you opinion?

Below are shared details of the planning as well as where you can sign to support the objection/concern, if you choose to do do.

Objection form:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfqmyysv-PtoM6AnA7DI4uT100O8XVjwKMSffz64Xzt4pz3lw/viewform

Planning details;
1.http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/NorthgatePublicDocs/00671672.pdf
2.http://planning.fingalcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=FW20A/0142&theTabNo=8

miamee

Larbakium, I've moved your post to the this pre existing thread about the same building.