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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Dublin - Building heights

12467

Comments

  • #92
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,521 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Topgear on Dave wrote: »
    That Mark Keenan article is some wild hyperbole alright, but he is their property editor. It's fairly standard stuff and what the indo was pimping back in the boom right up to the point when it all blew up in our faces.

    Repeat after me: "Renting bad, buying good"....."you'll never go wrong with bricks & mortar" etc etc etc

    It's a shameful article from Mark Keenan. Zero journalistic or editorial integrity to have that published.

    I'm critical of much the Irish Times publishes, particularly in relation to infrastructure projects, but in fairness, I don't think their standards are ever that low. The Indo is desperate at times.


  • #93
    Dats me
    Registered Users Posts: 333 ✭✭Dats me


    kn0c2H5


    This on The Irish Times. Why aren't any of the parties anti-NIMBY given this is the public mood?


  • #94
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,346 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Dats me wrote: »
    kn0c2H5


    This on The Irish Times. Why aren't any of the parties anti-NIMBY given this is the public mood?
    Photo not appearing?


  • #95
    Dats me
    Registered Users Posts: 333 ✭✭Dats me


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Photo not appearing?

    https://imgur.com/a/kn0c2H5

    Does that work? It's a screengrab of the Irish Times link to the article on the Glasnevin apartments and the comments complaining about it not being tall enough and that nine stories isn't a tower.


  • #96
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,520 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Amirani wrote: »
    It's a shameful article from Mark Keenan. Zero journalistic or editorial integrity to have that published.

    Check out his LinkedIn . He's basically spent 80% of his almost 30 year career writing property sections.

    He's not a news / investigative / current affairs type journalist, he's mostly just a shill for estate agents....


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,344 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Whatever about the journalistic side of that article, the comments in that article from politicians are a symptom of the cancer on Irish society that has us with this mess of being unable to build anything of use to anyone for fear of creating minor inconvenience to people.

    Lets take this development and examine it fundamentally. This site is located on one of the main thoroughfares into the city centre, already well served by bus services and well within cycling distance of the city centre. However, in 8 years time (which won't be far after its built), it'll be located:

    Along TWO core bus corridors
    250m walk away from a Metro station and TWO DART line stations, which will be the biggest transport interchange in the country.

    Dublin has a shortage of housing, an even bigger shortage of housing with decent transport links and transport infrastructure. This plot of land will be one of the best served in the country by public transport, with two DART lines, the buses and Metros every 90 seconds. No one would even think of driving in this area at peak times.

    If land like this can't be developed for apartments; there will be no end to the housing crisis. The opposition parties are constantly criticising the Government for their (lack of/inadequate) housing policy. Lets see what the opposition says:

    FF Councillor Paul McAuliffe: "monsterous", “A two-storey building beside nine- storey building, I think it’s shocking.”
    SF Seamus McGrattan: "“a dangerous precedent in other areas of the city”.
    PBP Andrew Keegan argued on future ownership of the development rather than the development itself (this is not a reason to object in a housing shortage).
    Labour Cllr Aine Clancy said it would be "overbearing" on existing buildings in the area alongside the partly completed new one.

    If this is the best that we have to offer, there is no end in sight for the ongoing housing problem. 9 storey buildings within (or beside) the canals should be the standard, not something to object to.


  • #98
    holliehobbie
    Registered Users Posts: 393 ✭✭holliehobbie


    marno21 wrote: »
    Some common sense shining through

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/green-light-under-fast-track-planning-for-265-apartments-on-dulux-site-1.3868339

    265 apartments beside a Luas stop is what Dublin needs in droves.

    Unless you happen to live very near it and have to worry about the extra people trying to get on the Luas in the morning like I will. Plus my daughter was all excited and said maybe she could buy one of the apartments when they're built. She was fuming when she heard they were all for rental!!


  • #99
    Rulmeq
    Registered Users Posts: 1,056 ✭✭✭Rulmeq


    marno21 wrote: »
    Labour Cllr Aine Clancy said it would be "overbearing" on existing buildings in the area alongside the partly completed new one.


    I've a very easy solution to "overbearing" - build several tall blocks there :p

    The most common objection I see to any plans is "out of character with the area", well yeah, the first time you do something of course it is, and the more you prevent it, then nothing will ever change.


    marno21 wrote: »
    PBP Andrew Keegan argued on future ownership of the development rather than the development itself (this is not a reason to object in a housing shortage).
    So he was perfectly fine with Gannon buidling 3bed semi's that cost €1.5million each on the site instead?


  • #100
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,520 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    holliehobbie wrote: »
    Unless you happen to live very near it and have to worry about the extra people trying to get on the Luas in the morning like I will. Plus my daughter was all excited and said maybe she could buy one of the apartments when they're built. She was fuming when she heard they were all for rental!!

    People need places to rent. Not everybody wants to buy or needs to buy.


  • #101
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,344 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Johnny Ronan has submitted outline plans for a 44 storey/155m building in the Docklands

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/battle-for-the-dublin-skyline-are-you-ready-for-johnny-ronans-world-class-hanging-gardens-38079925.html


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    prunudo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,017 ✭✭✭prunudo


    I like it, which probably means it will be objected to and won't happen!


  • #103
    prunudo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,017 ✭✭✭prunudo


    marno21 wrote: »
    Johnny Ronan has submitted outline plans for a 44 storey/155m building in the Docklands

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/battle-for-the-dublin-skyline-are-you-ready-for-johnny-ronans-world-class-hanging-gardens-38079925.html


    And the nimbyism starts, did someone mention there were votes up for grabs?

    'Johnny Ronan's hanging gardens more akin to Manhattan,' says mayor

    https://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/johnny-ronans-hanging-gardens-more-akin-to-manhattan-says-mayor-38082132.html


  • #104
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,241 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Its not even nimbyism considering its not really anyone's back yard there...

    That's actually quite a nice looking building. How can, according to that article, 84% of people be in favour of taller buildings in the docklands yet somehow politicians think its a vote-getter to shut it down. Of course, they are happily trotting the ludicrously false dichotomy that anything that isn't 100% social housing is somehow part of the problem. Depressing.


  • #105
    prunudo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,017 ✭✭✭prunudo


    True, nimbyism is probably the wrong word. Objecting to it because its different and not what we're used to plus goes against the grain of current social housing good, capitalist housing bad agenda.


  • #106
    OEP
    Registered Users Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭OEP


    I don't understand the thinking with politicians, councilors, planners etc. in the is country when it comes to tall buildings. The docklands area is wasteland essentially, yet they continue to refuse planning for interesting and modern looking structures. We need to build high in certain areas of the city, and if we do it, we may as well make the buildings stand out and look interesting. In recent years London has built some really interesting tall buildings that add some character to the city. Personally I'm not a fan of the shard but it still adds something to the skyline. Then you have the walkie talkie building which I think is really cool, the gherkin, the one with the three holes on top etc. Why can't we do something similar, but on a smaller scale, in the docklands.

    Rant over


  • #107
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    OEP wrote: »
    I don't understand the thinking with politicians, councilors, planners etc. in the is country when it comes to tall buildings. The docklands area is wasteland essentially, yet they continue to refuse planning for interesting and modern looking structures. We need to build high in certain areas of the city, and if we do it, we may as well make the buildings stand out and look interesting. In recent years London has built some really interesting tall buildings that add some character to the city. Personally I'm not a fan of the shard but it still adds something to the skyline. Then you have the walkie talkie building which I think is really cool, the gherkin, the one with the three holes on top etc. Why can't we do something similar, but on a smaller scale, in the docklands.

    Rant over

    Agree re the docklands, and also with “build high in certain areas of the city”…but really only in certain areas rather than plant tall buildings in between older and lower ones wherever there is some space, like happened with liberty hall or the old central bank, both really bad examples of how not to do a city…


  • #108
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,268 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Its not even nimbyism considering its not really anyone's back yard there...

    That's actually quite a nice looking building. How can, according to that article, 84% of people be in favour of taller buildings in the docklands yet somehow politicians think its a vote-getter to shut it down. Of course, they are happily trotting the ludicrously false dichotomy that anything that isn't 100% social housing is somehow part of the problem. Depressing.

    The same politicians are also ideologically opposed to social housing


  • #109
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    And, just a thought beyond building heights per se…does Dublin currently really have that massive influx of companies etc. to justify the massive construction boom anyway? Do we have numbers on that? Is all that new office space really needed? Or is it just for some developers to make billions (again), and a bubble to blow up in the face of us all (again)…I have a bad feeling about it all somehow…


  • #110
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    Wayne Gorsky wrote: »
    And, just a thought beyond building heights per se…does Dublin currently really have that massive influx of companies etc. to justify the massive construction boom anyway? Do we have numbers on that? Is all that new office space really needed? Or is it just for some developers to make billions (again), and a bubble to blow up in the face of us all (again)…I have a bad feeling about it all somehow…

    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0409/1041581-cbre-office-take-up-report/


  • #111
    Wayne Gorsky
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Wayne Gorsky


    Peregrine wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0409/1041581-cbre-office-take-up-report/

    Well, let’s just hope this is sustainable and works out in the end…


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    G_R
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,022 Mod ✭✭✭✭G_R


    Got emailed this file today as I gave a submission re the revision of the planning guidelines in the dock lands.

    TL;DR version: massive majority of submissions (bar 2 or 3 local groups, out of c.90 submissions) supported increasing building height and density for a variety of reasons.

    The recommendation is that they have revised the guidelines in some of the city blocks. Most of the revisions are from 6 to 8 storeys but there is a few additional spots now designated landmark buildings, applications for which will be given consideration regardless of height and judged on their merits with regard to the surroundings.

    Overall positive - I dont think it goes far enough, but I'm hopeful that we will get a few nice landmark buildings out of it given the clear appetite from the public for height in that area of the city.

    Pdf of the report is too big to attach but here is a link for anyone interested.

    http://bit.ly/2WKGUUW


  • #113
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,268 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Whoever sanctioned building new 6 storeys in this area should be shot. What a waste of land


  • #114
    dublinman1990
    Registered Users Posts: 8,299 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    I'm really happy to hear about An Bord Pleanala's decision to approve Johnny Ronan's new tower block at Tara St. I heard the news when a report was done by Miriam O'Callaghan on RTÉ's Prime Time on RTÉ One some time last month. The report was about building high rise buildings in Dublin City. She had two people there with her for an interview across the quays across The Convention Centre talking about more of this topic. I thought it was pretty interesting to hear it. I do have a question though about this new building. Is this building going to tie up with the redevelopment of Tara St. DART Station in the future. I remember seeing proposed plans for this site on the CIE Group of Companies website nearly 10 years ago. Is this new building a revised plan of this original proposal.


  • #115
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    dublinman1990 wrote: »
    I'm really happy to hear about An Bord Pleanala's decision to approve Johnny Ronan's new tower block at Tara St. I heard the news when a report was done by Miriam O'Callaghan on RTÉ's Prime Time on RTÉ One some time last month. The report was about building high rise buildings in Dublin City. She had two people there with her for an interview across the quays across The Convention Centre talking about more of this topic. I thought it was pretty interesting to hear it. I do have a question though about this new building. Is this building going to tie up with the redevelopment of Tara St. DART Station in the future. I remember seeing proposed plans for this site on the CIE Group of Companies website nearly 10 years ago. Is this new building a revised plan of this original proposal.

    It's a completely different proposal. The original proposal was a complete redevelopment of the station including building over the station. This proposal won't do that. Maybe a slightly better entrance area but that's about it.

    However, MetroLink is tying up with the DART station on the site to the south.


  • #116
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,268 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Does anyone know of the tara st tower is actually going ahead or if there is any progress/info? I know there's planning but really that can just be to add value to flip the site.


  • #117
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Does anyone know of the tara st tower is actually going ahead or if there is any progress/info? I know there's planning but really that can just be to add value to flip the site.

    CIE owns the site and has an agreement with RGRE to develop it. RGRE can't just flip it.

    Besides, Ronan has put way too much time and money into this not build it.


  • #118
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,724 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    https://www.thejournal.ie/glasnevin-apartment-rejected-4700463-Jun2019/

    9 storeys

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR99Mu92rj30LSvcSDNnYIfwt8vebyV12-_jlcDr3VCO8ytlKGe


  • #119
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,230 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    https://www.thejournal.ie/glasnevin-apartment-rejected-4700463-Jun2019/

    9 storeys

    That's actually brilliant, you can see that the councillor has two different stock answers, and she had to bring them out one after the other, showing everyone how utterly ridiculous her positions are.

    When she's asked about any developments in her area:

    "This is too large, will have traffic impacts, and is not in keeping with the area"

    When she's asked about the housing crisis:

    "Homes are desperately needed in Dublin"

    The disconnect is so jarring for me.


  • #120
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,724 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    It's a very good example of why this will never be a well run city


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,230 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    It's a very good example of why this will never be a well run city

    What's shocking to me is that this isn't the usual DCC blocking it, but ABP. It's only been a few months since the government made it clear that up was the way to go, and this is an absolutely ideal site for it. It's on a major bus route, that will be upgraded during the Core Corridors project, and it's next to a major interchange station to be built during the Metrolink/DART expansion projects.

    There is literally no other site in the entire city that will be as favourable for public transport. It's a massive disgrace that this could get turned down.


Advertisement