Goodbye An Bord Pleanala!

bear1 · 08-11-2013 11:23AM #1

Ok not for good but thank God they will be bypassed for this:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/fast-track-plan-for-dublin-docklands-approved-1.1587697

I think this is what Dublin needs, a nice few skyscrapers and with some decent height.
Would make the city look so much more modern.
The U2 Tower would probably have been nice but I doubt that is going anywhere.
So it got me thinking, what other projects would have been completed if ABP were taken out of the equation altogether?
I seem to remember plans in the 00's of a huge theme park in Finglas I believe which was shelved by ABP.. could be wrong though

Dravokivich · 08-11-2013 11:26AM

Don't see the point in it. We don't have the facilities to support it and there's a fúck tonne of empty buildings around the docklands already. What's the use in bigger emptier buildings?

D1stant · 08-11-2013 11:27AM

Less urban planning is exactly what we need

bear1 · 08-11-2013 11:37AM

I can see what you guys are saying, job-wise though I think it's good news. Plus I imagine a good few more international companies would probably move over or further expand, all in all I don't think it's bad news

seamus · 08-11-2013 11:40AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

Don't see the point in it. We don't have the facilities to support it and there's a fúck tonne of empty buildings around the docklands already. What's the use in bigger emptier buildings?

There's a chicken-and-egg issue with the docklands. Businesses won't move there because there's so much wasteland and run-down buildings, and there's so much wasteland and run-down buildings because businesses won't move there.

There's a tech hub growing in the Grand canal dock area, which has modern buildings interspersed with crumbling abandoned factories and huge empty lots like the U2 building.

Presumably the aim here is a big prestige building that will encourage companies to locate 500+ people there, which will then encourage smaller companies to locate there too, stimulating demand.

There is a transport shortfall there though on the south side. They should look at having the Luas Red line do a loop after the Point - across another bridge parallel to the east link to Ringsend and then straight back down Pearse St to link up with the new section of rail from Stephen's Green to Abbey st.

munchkin_utd · 08-11-2013 11:45AM

seamus wrote: »

<snip>

There is a transport shortfall there though on the south side. They should look at having the Luas Red line do a loop after the Point - across another bridge parallel to the east link to Ringsend and then straight back down Pearse St to link up with the new section of rail from Stephen's Green to Abbey st.

Is a dart station 100m from Google and 500m from the new Facebook offices not to mention very regular busses down Pearse st not enough?

And thats aside from the fact that the Grand Canal Dock area is well accessible by bike

o1s1n · 08-11-2013 11:46AM

Just reading up on the U2 Tower;

The predicted price of a 2-bed apartment in the tower was estimated in October 2006 at €1-1.5 million

Hah! My god, I can only imagine the further debt we'd be in now if that had gone ahead.

bear1 · 08-11-2013 11:47AM

It would make it more attractive though if there was another Luas line connecting that area to the rest of the city

carlmango11 · 08-11-2013 11:47AM

D1stant wrote: »

Less urban planning is exactly what we need

Yes because An Bord Pleanala did a great job during our construction boom.

seamus · 08-11-2013 11:54AM

munchkin_utd wrote: »

Is a dart station 100m from Google and 500m from the new Facebook offices not to mention very regular busses down Pearse st not enough?

Dart isn't light rail though. You wouldn't get a dart to get yourself from Grand Canal Dock to Grafton St.
I should have clarified that's what I meant. The area is surprisingly isolated from the commercial centre of the city. You've no hope of getting onto Dame Street and back in a lunchtime.

And thats aside from the fact that the Grand Canal Dock area is well accessible by bike

It is, but the closest Dublin bike station to the city centre is a 25 minute walk away.

They are planning on putting a number of stations there in 2014 though which should help.

Maximus Alexander · 08-11-2013 11:55AM

munchkin_utd wrote: »

Is a dart station 100m from Google and 500m from the new Facebook offices not to mention very regular busses down Pearse st not enough?

And thats aside from the fact that the Grand Canal Dock area is well accessible by bike

It's not really enough, no. I work in the docklands on the south side of the river, and there is a definite transport problem. The Dart is fairly near by, but it serves a limited area and is of no use to me.

The buses are much the same, there are certain areas that you just can't get to easily from here. I lived in Dundrum last year and I had to get a Luas, followed by a 20 minute walk which is really not ideal. I started cycling, but most people won't do that.

Driving is not an option as there is no parking available in the area, apart from some private spaces which can be rented for ~€150 per month.

Sure, you can take a bus down Pearse Street into the city and then get another bus to pretty much anywhere. However, because of the way the fares work you have to pay twice, and that makes your commute fairly expensive, not to mention unnecessarily long.

It's not exactly impossible to get here, but it's not straightforward, quick or cheap enough to be much of a draw either.

bear1 · 08-11-2013 12:00PM

Wonder how long it will be before the work will start on the Docklands?

Teyla Emmagan · 08-11-2013 12:05PM

This is bananas. Why have structures and safeguards in place when they are then bypassed? Look at the hideous planning decisions that have already been made in this country - whatever gombeen thought this was a good idea needs their head kicked in.

bear1 · 08-11-2013 12:11PM

Hopefully then the past will show us the error of our ways when it comes to planning the future

Eventually these types of projects would be needed as the cities will only get bigger so a proper detailed plan and forecast is needed so this could be a good opportunity to see if the council are on the right track or not.
Time will tell but I maintain that jobs wise its good news

neris · 08-11-2013 12:14PM

the southside of the quays isnt to bad and is well developed already with a few small pockets of further development but the north quays after the convention centre to the point is a kip and wasteland and should be sorted out first but with dublin city council i wouldnt trust them feckers an inch with either side of the river

humanji · 08-11-2013 12:14PM

I can't help but feel that large amounts of money have just been passed under a lot of tables, in many brown envelopes.

Dravokivich · 08-11-2013 12:20PM

seamus wrote: »

There's a chicken-and-egg issue with the docklands. Businesses won't move there because there's so much wasteland and run-down buildings, and there's so much wasteland and run-down buildings because businesses won't move there.

There's a tech hub growing in the Grand canal dock area, which has modern buildings interspersed with crumbling abandoned factories and huge empty lots like the U2 building.

Presumably the aim here is a big prestige building that will encourage companies to locate 500+ people there, which will then encourage smaller companies to locate there too, stimulating demand.

There is a transport shortfall there though on the south side. They should look at having the Luas Red line do a loop after the Point - across another bridge parallel to the east link to Ringsend and then straight back down Pearse St to link up with the new section of rail from Stephen's Green to Abbey st.

I get you, but look at Park West then. That got built up and is as empty as the wasteland before it. If you want to clean it up, get rid of the buildings that have fallen into disrepair. But there is no point on building up over'em when there's so much vacant already.

Can't throw a Luas over at that end, as the bridge will need to be able to be opened/closed for waterway traffic. Dart Underground would have been a more realistic feeder for that.

Gee Bag · 08-11-2013 12:43PM

carlmango11 wrote: »

Yes because An Bord Pleanala did a great job during our construction boom.

ABP only get to decide on individual planning applications, they don't set planning policy.

seamus · 08-11-2013 12:43PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

I get you, but look at Park West then. That got built up and is as empty as the wasteland before it. If you want to clean it up, get rid of the buildings that have fallen into disrepair. But there is no point on building up over'em when there's so much vacant already.

I do agree on that point; there is a lot of modern vacant property there. But I also recognise that a single prestige building might encourage the rest of that space to fill up. Might...

Can't throw a Luas over at that end, as the bridge will need to be able to be opened/closed for waterway traffic.

It doesn't open that often, technically there's no reason why the Luas can't be run across a lifting bridge, there are ways of splitting the overhead lines.
An interim measure though could be a terminus in Ringsend (there's plenty of space for it). The beauty here is that this line could feed both the red and green lines, giving a Ringsend - Saggart route and a Ringsend to Brides Glen route.
It would also probably the cheapest and quickest Luas extension possible because the run down Pearse St to the new line extension is straight and wide.

Stick a Terminus on South Dock Road and run the line straight from there to Hawkins st. There's enough room there for two Luas lanes + 2 traffic lanes.

D1stant · 08-11-2013 12:55PM

carlmango11 wrote: »

Yes because An Bord Pleanala did a great job during our construction boom.

Yes you are right. But the Bank regulator did a sh1t job also - should we get rid of bank regulation too?

These functions are required. If they don't work, fix them. Do not remove them. That's all.

Dravokivich · 08-11-2013 12:58PM

seamus wrote: »

I do agree on that point; there is a lot of modern vacant property there. But I also recognise that a single prestige building might encourage the rest of that space to fill up. Might...

There was also one of'em in Park West too! :P

seamus wrote: »

It doesn't open that often, technically there's no reason why the Luas can't be run across a lifting bridge, there are ways of splitting the overhead lines.
An interim measure though could be a terminus in Ringsend (there's plenty of space for it). The beauty here is that this line could feed both the red and green lines, giving a Ringsend - Saggart route and a Ringsend to Brides Glen route.
It would also probably the cheapest and quickest Luas extension possible because the run down Pearse St to the new line extension is straight and wide.

Stick a Terminus on South Dock Road and run the line straight from there to Hawkins st. There's enough room there for two Luas lanes + 2 traffic lanes.

Well even not open often, can be enough to disrupt the amount of trams available for services on either side. But the affect on that, would be something for city planners to weight up pros/cons for. A line spurring off down Pearse st would act most likely little more than a shuttle service, similar to what they do between Heuston / Connolly. It sounds a bit much to me, when there's other stuff that may be more in demand/ required.

08-11-2013 01:06PM

humanji wrote: »

I can't help but feel that large amounts of money have just been passed under a lot of tables, in many brown envelopes.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but that's the first thing that I thought, too.

It almost reads like something from an episode of The A-Team.

"The city planners so corrupt, that he's letting them put up buildings left, right, and centre! It's gonna kill off the demand on our poor little family run farm that just happens to be right next to this large multi-storey building empire that's going ahead"

"Isn't there a planning board that this could be appealed to?"

"There was, but.. well.. Kirkland and his men pushed them out. Now they can build whatever they want, wherever they want, with no one to answer to!"

"Im'ma need my tools, Hannibal!"

... Sorry, Im just humouring myself now...

WilyCoyote · 08-11-2013 02:17PM

At long last a bit of rational thinking and force to bypass those effing mandarins. If only this could have been done 20 years ago!

Mint Aero · 08-11-2013 02:24PM

Yes and about time too. I like some of the empty lots/wasteland in the docks, they've a certain charm about them.

CucaFace · 08-11-2013 02:24PM

This is a great idea and really we have nothing to lose.

First off there is a city centre accommodation shortage at the moment and apartments are badly needed again (Mad isn't it but its true).

Plus I cant see too many Irish developers or Irish banks being in a position to build this so the investment would come from foreign developers and banks thus leaving all the risk on them, while supplying badly needed construction jobs in the capital.

Really nothing to lose on this and its about time the council got with the times and started to allow tall buildings like this.

K-9 · 08-11-2013 02:26PM

humanji wrote: »

I can't help but feel that large amounts of money have just been passed under a lot of tables, in many brown envelopes.

It's very hard to get away from thinking that, always make me think of Hawkins House and the ESB HQ, though I never understood the need for the total ban for buildings above a certain height.

After reading the article though, ABP will be involved initially but there will be limited grounds of appeal after the first building in the area is granted.

neris · 08-11-2013 02:33PM

K-9 wrote: »

It's very hard to get away from thinking that, always make me think of Hawkins House and the ESB HQ, though I never understood the need for the total ban for buildings above a certain height.

After reading the article though, ABP will be involved initially but there will be limited grounds of appeal after the first building in the area is granted.

hawkins house and that other 1 beside it, apollo house i think its called and lump liberty hall in and that part of town must have been built on A4 sized brown envelopes. Youd think the dept of health would get out of hawkins house and flog it for development. though theyd prob have union uproar and the idea of staff having to move a new modern built office block and then theyd be looking for pay offs to move

Cool Mo D · 08-11-2013 02:42PM

D1stant wrote: »

Less urban planning is exactly what we need

What we need is to make it easier to build in the city, and harder to build in the middle of nowhere. One of the reasons we have so many ghost estates is that it was easy to throw up a cheap estate miles away from where people worked or grew up, and hard to build tall buildings in the city.

In the boom, Dublin should have built up, instead of sprawling all over Leinster. Its way too late coming, but making it much easier to build tall buildings in the city is good urban planning.

darragh16 · 08-11-2013 02:44PM

I don't agree with the 22 storeys, surely they could cap it at say 15 storeys instead?

Gee Bag · 08-11-2013 02:45PM

CucaFace wrote: »

This is a great idea and really we have nothing to lose.

First off there is a city centre accommodation shortage at the moment and apartments are badly needed again (Mad isn't it but its true).

Plus I cant see too many Irish developers or Irish banks being in a position to build this so the investment would come from foreign developers and banks thus leaving all the risk on them, while supplying badly needed construction jobs in the capital.

Really nothing to lose on this and its about time the council got with the times and started to allow tall buildings like this.

I agree with you 100% that tall buildings should be built in Dublin (and elsewhere).

I disagree with the notion that an Bord pleanala should be sidelined. During the boom ABP where just about the only organisation with teeth that stopped utterly inappropriate developments.

The planning and development laws and bylaws need to be changed to allow for taller buildings and then ABP can make appropriate descisions on individual planning applications.

IMo this move allows developers too much influence over the planning process, it strikes me as a return to the the bad old days of planning in Ireland.

K-9 · 08-11-2013 02:46PM

neris wrote: »

hawkins house and that other 1 beside it, apollo house i think its called and lump liberty hall in and that part of town must have been built on A4 sized brown envelopes.

Considering the links between FF and developers in the 60's through TACA, the body set up to fund raise for the party, I'd be suspicious as well.

Youd think the dept of health would get out of hawkins house and flog it for development. though theyd prob have union uproar and the idea of staff having to move a new modern built office block and then theyd be looking for pay offs to move

I think there was talk of it a few years back but I suppose the crash put an end to that. Think I remember reading about sick building syndrome and Hawkins House, must be a shyte hole to work in, so they'd probably save any pay offs from reduced sick pay.

Goodbye An Bord Pleanala!

Comments