Talbot Street, Dublin

I still like my architectural competition idea. Imagine that 60 architects were let loose on the street with a building each to play with!

Ten buildings a year for six years.

I could turn into the quirkiest, most exciting street in Europe, let alone Dublin.

Mall Mart – with it’s cunning play on WalMart.

You gotta love it…

Is there anything on Talbot Streetworth keeping – nothing leaps to mind at the moment.

At the railway end if you are heading north on the Train you can saee the vast areas that are being redeveloped down that end of the street. More of the same please

The buildings on the north between the railway bridge and amien street are ok, espessially the corner building and no. 44, the dutch billy style one. there is a planning ap for 38? to 45, basically demolish everything except the facade of 44 and 45, two six story mixed use blocks and a new street connecting talbot street and foley street. probably will be an improvement.

I love the competition idea!

There’s only 12 buildings listed on this street, which given it’s location would could make it the worst developed street in Dublin.

The listed few are :

Talbot House (Department of Education?)

11-19 (block of 9 buildings from O’Neills Shoes up to O’Sheas Hotel at corner of gardiner street lower)

59 Licenced Prem
74 Licenced Prem

One of these I’m sure is on the corner with Talbot Place and is well worth a look. If you are walking from Connolly Station its at the first corner to your left. Before bridge. Look above the windows and you’ll see quite detailed plaster(?)work with the heads of some foreign looking chaps (all different). The building, I’m told, was a tea store once upon a time and of course nothing sells tea better than a caricature of a china man. It’s build details such as these that make dublin wonderful. Can’t remember the name of the pub at the moment but they gave me a fine pint not so long ago.

And of course there’s some Joycean places on the street (and every other street in Dublin!) if you’re that way inclined:

Olhausen’s pork butcher at 72 Talbot Street
Barclay and Cook Bootmakers 104 Talbot Street
Gillen’s Hairdresser at 64 Talbot Street
O’Beirne Brothers Tea and wine merchants at the corner of Talbot and Mabbot (Corporation) Streets
Baird’s stonecutting works 20-25 Talbot Place

Unfortunatly some dignified buildings were lost in the Dublin Bombing in the 70s

I know that pub you mention ew, one of the finest buildings on the st, it has a black ‘shopfront’ and is bricked above st level, with detailed cornicing & eaves etc, a charming Victorian building.

The pub you refer to is called Molloys – I prefer Cleary’s pub around the corner on Amiens St. but Molloy’s is very good too. Shame that the first floor is rented to a construction company who insist on advertising with the tackiest plastic sign – it really takes away from what is a fine corner building.

Molloys is a lovely building… Clearys is a great pub

Theres another classic Victorian pub, on the outside at least on Pearse St that’s really fantastic, its 3 storeys, with deep eaves and all round-topped sashes intact.
(just though I’d throw that in)

o’neill’s?

No idea!

North Earl St is looking very fine with all of its overflowing hanging-baskets.
Top marks CC!

There is a lot of activity on Talbot Street at the moment, planning applications, new schemes and most of it has been dug up. Does anyone know if there are any plans to introduce a new paving layout on the Street?

I agree…the Lenehans replacement is a good piece of infill.

Yes – not a fan of the rendered section but overall nice – the brick is a very good match to the neighbouring early Victorian terrace.
Let’s not mention the ground floor though 🙂
I think the best aspect of the dev is that it’s residential, it has a positive impact on the street.
Some things remain the same though – there was a big scuffle of sorts on it yesterday at about 9 in the morning, about 100 people had stopped in various places to watch the proceedings – construction workers had to intervene.
Various comments of ‘I love this street, always great for the entertainment’ etc being made 🙂

There’s a new water-main being laid, hence the mess. The obstacle course is being retained however, save some Mall-type red surfacing being added.

Here’s the new red-brick from a few weeks ago – the corner is nice but I cannot believe that plastic or whatever they are infill panels are still being used in 2004. The residential red-brick across the road is a nice contribution too I think.

Originally posted by StephenC

Finally a planning notice has gone up for the currently delapidated siite around the railway bridge here. It included a new pesedtrain street through to Foley St.

There are great things happening down on Foley St, up to a couple of years ago it was one of the most derelict streets in Dublin, now with this application the final piece of the rejuvination jigsaw s complete. I haven’t seen the application and I hope that it is a positive addition to the streetscape.

Graham,

The picture you posted is the new Independent newspaper offices, it is one that definitely didn’t translate well fom the renderings to the flesh. But from an Urban economic viewpoint it will probably have the desired effect.

It’s interesting that if you take out the corner glazing, the building falls flat on its face in design terms.

Here’s the new residential infill, again from a few weeks ago – the ground floor has since been clad in lots & lots of shiny granite:

And another view:

21/12/2004

Here’s some more pics of two neighbouring developments on the street, the contrast in quality between the two is notable. Both are across the road from ‘Independent House’.

This one is the better of the two, a very good quality red-brick has been used in this building and the overall standard of finish is very high. The over-use of brick recently has recieved a lot of criticism and justly so in most instances, but it still has a role to play and is more than suited to attractive pieces of infill such as this. The timber detail is equally fine.
Perhaps one criticism to be made here is why red brick had to be used – brown could have worked equally well next to the stock brick of the neighbouring Victorian pub.

And a corner view:

And the neighbouring development – predictable stuff:

@Graham Hickey wrote:

And the neighbouring development – predictable stuff:

that last Building is shite – looks like it cost 50p to ‘design’

and the ubiquitous spar

sparbucks…

Super Valu is sharpening its knives directly across the road – hopefully they’ll eat it alive.

The last building is quite literally a box with holes punched in for windows – the brick used is not nice either, that multi-shade variety.
You have to love the chateau first floor windows though, all that’s missing are some Louis XVI frilly balconies and a grieving maiden or two 🙂

@Graham Hickey wrote:

Super Valu is sharpening its knives directly across the road – hopefully they’ll eat it alive.

The last building is quite literally a box with holes punched in for windows – the brick used is not nice either, that multi-shade variety.
You have to love the chateau first floor windows though, all that’s missing are some Louis XVI frilly balconies and a grieving maiden or two 🙂

You’re so roght about the supervalue it is huge in comparison to the Spar and has a much more user freindly format as well.

Regarding the latest addition to the Street as it is Christmas I will be generous, the proportion is quite good… for a piece of furniture.

Now that Iceland are pulling out of the Republic (the supermarket that is :)), and Musgraves & Co are sniffing about, what’s the likelihood of another Spar/Centra/Super Valu/Mace moving in to their Talbot St unit?

It would officially be the Convenience Capital of Western Europe.
I don’t know what the locals do when they venture out to other areas of the city – must be shell-shocked at the notion of having to walk more than 8 yards for a pint of milk 😮

There are no locals – they’ve all been displaced by convenience stores 😉

I’m glad Iceland are pulling out – one less UK brand in Ireland. Let just hope that Tesco don’t snap up all of Iceland’s stores. Grrr

I`m not as yet convinced by all of this “Convienience Store” stuff……..well ok maybe the Con….bit..
The entire genre appears to owe little to any sense of community or the oft misused term “Living City”.
One of the most enduring aspects of a visit to Paris for example is the surprising number of Owner Operated SHOPS as opposed to sterile mini-markets such as Super/Spar/mace etc etc.
These little places appear to subscribe to the open-all-hours principle and feature the proprietor and family members sitting readin or listenin to Arab radio stations.
From experience these places stock a range of “Stuff” easily as great as the SterileStore and often in sensible open portions too.
I am old enuf to remember the debate which surrounded our entrance into the EEC and the political heavies who were wheeled out to tell the native Irish that we had to modernize or face eternal damnation and be lost forever.
The corner shop simply had to go,it was inefficent,unhealthy and unable to cater for the then modern societal needs (1970`s).
Well shiver me timbers,whaddya know……having popped a waistband button on my trousers during a visit to Brussels last year I was directed to a small seamstress/haberdashery where at nine o clock of an evening I was able to have that single button refitted in jig time for €2 by a VERY nimble fingered lady.
Thankfully a large swathe of Europe has managed to take the Original bland grey mass of EEC/EU regulations and use the bits of value to them whilst nodding in the direction of the rest.
Ireland,however,in its rush to be liked continues to impliment and police quite a few of the more nonsensical ones as was witnessed by last years fiasco in Galway when the Local Health Boards resident young PC zealot swooped on the French Farmers Market which had been Invited to operate there during arts festival week .
The youtful grad dutifully slapped closure orders on a number of the stalls on a wide range of public health issues.
Sadly the Health Board had not the Balls to question itself as to why France,with its preponderance of such food and produce markets manages to keep its citizens remarkably free from some of the forms of Cancers and Circulatory diseases which continue to ravage the native Irish population whilst the frogs sell their cheese and agricultural produce fresh from the farm without chilling and wrapping it in plastic first.
Or maybe its the lack of a good home grown grape variety that is the nub of the problem…… 🙂

Just on this building at the junction of Marlborough Street as mentioned in another thread, it really is a shame what a decrepit state it is in:

Not only is it a lovely building, reminicent of many European townhouses, but it also appears to be a very rare early Victorian facade in a city centre that was stripped of them in 1916 and 1922.

It’s actually a good example of what parts of then Lower Sackville Street used to be like: tall Wide Streets Commission buildings with applied Regency/Victorian stucco decoration, though in this case it seems the entire building dates from the 1830s-40s, possibly even townhouses orginally which would make it rarer still.

The windows are so remarkably early that it’s a wonder they’ve survived – that’s Talbot Street for ya 🙂

Simple 1820-1840s horns:

Also unusually tall elegant windows:

The stucco requires a lot of repair:

At last the bulding was recently sold, marketed as suitable for apartment development to the rear, so hopefully we’ll see some action soon. Surprisingly this building isn’t protected from what I can make out, so those Georgian sashes may very well disappear.
Note it’s also heavy stapled at the top:

Has anything been done to this building or any application been made to alter its internal arrangement.

Something really should be done as this is really very unsightly and undermines much of the progress made on other sections of the street in recent years.

That stucco building above could be lovely.

Does anybody know what is happening with these hoarded off buildings (below) on Talbot Street? Can’t search cos I don’t have street numbers (& can’t be arsed trawling through 177 Talbot St apps on the CC’s site).

The building up against the bridge is quite nice. It is clearly a late-Victorian or Edwardian copy of a Dutch-influenced, late-17th/early-18th century house with narrow windows & decorative gable, the ones we are told Dublin was full of back then. A lot of original gable-fronters were still being demolished throughout the 20th century, as documented by Maurice Craig, yet this careful copy shows that there must have been some awareness of their type around 1900 ..….. or …… is it a refacing of an original which had a similar facade? That would be quite interesting. Either way, I hope it is not just about to be demolished ….. hope ….

Had a brief chat with the proprietot of the internet cafe that was there before it started to redevelop. He said it was structurally unsound but the council wouldn’t let the owners knock it. From viewing the inside of the building from the top deck of the bus I think this is the case. There are a lot of RSJ’s and other supporting beams up inside the shell at present. The internet cafe guy was hoping to relet the premises when finished

Nos. 42,43,44 and 45 were the ‘New Electric’ cinema in 1938 and before that the ‘Electric’ was at 44 and 45 (from 1911).
It later became a ‘Cinerama’ with the associated big screen in 1963 and in 1972 the Capitol moved there following its closure in Prince’s Street. It continued as a cinema til 1974, was empty til about 1977 or so and then became a carpet showroom.

There was cinema signs on the building until the late 1980s anyway because I recall seeing them on my way to trains in Connolly as a student.

The New Electric Cinema, set back at a angle to Talbot Street and approached by a long passage from the Talbot street entrance, was completely demolished in late 2005.

There was, I understand, apartments (what else) to be constructed on this site, which is accessed from Amiens Street also. Progress should most easily be viewed from the DART or rail line. As the photo shows, the Talbot Street facades are retained.

Which includes a new street linking through to Foley street

@tommyt wrote:

Had a brief chat with the proprietot of the internet cafe that was there before it started to redevelop. He said it was structurally unsound but the council wouldn’t let the owners knock it. From viewing the inside of the building from the top deck of the bus I think this is the case. There are a lot of RSJ’s and other supporting beams up inside the shell at present. The internet cafe guy was hoping to relet the premises when finished

Thanks. The building is definitely worth retaining.

@GrahamH wrote:

Now that Iceland are pulling out of the Republic (the supermarket that is :)), and Musgraves & Co are sniffing about, what’s the likelihood of another Spar/Centra/Super Valu/Mace moving in to their Talbot St unit?

It would officially be the Convenience Capital of Western Europe.
I don’t know what the locals do when they venture out to other areas of the city – must be shell-shocked at the notion of having to walk more than 8 yards for a pint of milk 😮

I saw an add in today’s Metro advertising for staff for TESCO Express for a new outlet in Talbot Street. I wonder where they are locating (the unoccupied rebuilt building opposite Irish Life Mall that used to be called Mallmart?) I don’t recall any other large building on that street that would facilitate a Tesco store. Echoing the poster’s comments above, Talbot St really will be the Convenience capital of Euope with Dunnes, SuperValu, 3 Spars and now a Tesco – I’m sure I’m leaving out one or two other convenience stores!

@GrahamH wrote:

Just on this building at the junction of Marlborough Street as mentioned in another thread, it really is a shame what a decrepit state it is in:

Something worth noting- I spotted recently that this building has a corrugated roof.

(Thanks tomk for reviving the thread- I couldn’t find it a while ago to post this fragment of info.)

There was a 19th century terrace demolished to build the Independent’s new offices. Not terribly sustainable.

Why is (at the least) facade retention never considered for these?
I’m no architect, but surely retaining the facade at the street, then having higher (presumably glass) floors recessed is preferable to complete demolition of the existing buildings?

was sustainability an issue?

Well re-use of existing buildings is a core principle of sustainable development.

The new development by the railway viaduct on Talbot St is nearly ready, is create a short new st going north and a small plaza under the railway:

@notjim wrote:

The new development by the railway viaduct on Talbot St is nearly ready, is create a short new st going north and a small plaza under the railway:

Good to see a new street going in here; I’ve always found the area behind very forbidding so opening it up may just integrate the street behind that little bit more. With the amount of hotels and guest houses down here if a street grain similar to Temple Bar were to be created there is no reason why this couldn’t become a budget version of Temple Bar for tourists reliveing Temple Bar of the weekend overcrowding it suffers from.

The park on Foley St, at the end of the new Street, is closed for refurbishment. This really has the potential to be a lovely area. It already has a nice mix of activity, from apartments, hotels & hostels, offices, the DCC Gallery & Dance Ireland HQ (everywhere needs a few artsy types) on Foley St. and quite a number of nice independent cafe’s & restaurants. Not to mention the proximity of Connolly Station & Busaras delivering thousands to the area daily. Sadly, as with much of the North Inner City, the number of strung out junkies hanging around the area really spoils it. If that issue can be overcome it has a lot of potential.

sarsfield: it doesn’t help to call anyone ‘strung out junkies’ – it’s a fact of modern life. We either decriminalise drugs and treat it as a medical and social problem, or actually try and rehabilitate addicts instead of feeding them methadone so we can all just sweep it under the carpet. Why are the visible addicts in the North Inner City and not Ballsbridge? Discuss.

@johnglas wrote:

sarsfield: it doesn’t help to call anyone ‘strung out junkies’ – it’s a fact of modern life.

But they ARE strung out junkies. The solution may be up for discussion but the issue isn’t.

Your language is; they are people and it is sometimes well to remember that. Much of our current ills have been caused by money-grabbing, ‘there is no such thing as society’ capitalists; does it achieve anything by calling them ‘parasites’ who have ended up not being ‘junkies’ in the inner city?

@johnglas wrote:

Why are the visible addicts in the North Inner City and not Ballsbridge?

Have you been to Roly’s lately? And that’s just the ‘visible’ ones. Not to mention Mother’s Little Helper, alive and well in the farmhouse chic kitchens of D4 still, johnglas, make no mistake.

As to your question- they’re in the north inner city because that’s where the clinics are. They’re around Baggot Street too, because there’s a clinic there- and that’s D4.

There are myriad points that one could proffer in this debate, but none of them have anything to do with architecture or planning, so the conversation properly belongs elsewhere. However, the fact remains that many people don’t feel comfortable walking the north inner city – in the last month I’ve seen defecation, oral sex, violence, vandalism and theft within a five minute walk of O’Conell Street – and I think that’s the point Sarsfield was trying to make. You might be right about his language, but so what? I’d argue that the point remains valid.

Of course it does and I agree with your general point, but language is important and badmouthing any group in society just dehumanises them (and excuses ‘drastic’ solutions). Of course no-one is comfortable with some of the street denizens you mention, but I thought there was a view about ‘designing out’ what is thought to be undesirable. My point is we all should be careful about language (without being afraid to say what we think) and in imagining that social problems are always ‘somewhere else’ or belong to some ‘other’ group in society.

Johnglas, not to be argumentative and I admire your social conscience and all the rest but really, what is the politically correct term we could use for the unfortunate citizens in question? I can see when you’d describe them as “addicts” or “users” or whatever but in this case the area in question has a lot of in-yer-face, obnoxious and intimidating people who are “on something” hanging around. I’d be tempted to call them a lot worse then “strung out junkies”!

Bact to the subject – the little street that’s been created looks pretty good, nothing too exciting just tidy and elegant. It’s unfortunate that the buildings shown earlier in the thread were knocked to make way for it though. Worse is the way that the newly exposed pillars of the railway bridge have been treated – simply boxed in and roughly rendered. They look shockingly bad beside the cast iron original pillars.

Yes; that is the big negative in an otherwise appealing development, it would have killed them to make the new pillars match the old?

@johnglas wrote:

Your language is; they are people and it is sometimes well to remember that.

Apologies. I’ll refer to them as the pharmaceutially challenged in future :rolleyes:

And seriously, I wasn’t being disparaging. I’m curious what you think I should call them.

On topic, I don’t like the way the new building joins with the older stuff on the Amiens St. site. The styles/colours/finishes clash badly.

I thought this would be more of a problem than it is; since it meets the old buildings but doesn’t follow the building line and is penetrated by the viaduct, it seems to me to work quite well visually, the parapet line matches but the material doesn’t.

I really like Talbot st. Its a bit gritty , rough around the edges, and a nice little ethnic mix to liven it up for me

As for the junkies – bit like the pigeons , filthy creatures (for the most part) but you tolerate them as being a part of European street life.

Hmmm but then again i’ve yet to see a group of pigeons surround a petit asian girl scared out of her wits at 8am trying to make her way to work* in the pissing rain and demand money

*whose taxes help fund the jobless bums

Some pictures of the new development – to be titled ‘Joyce’s Walk’. The entrance buildings are yet more identikit offsprings of Dunnes of Henry Street™, but in a slightly more palatable context methinks…

Simple and elegant nonetheless. The brick further down has a more pleasant quality. The new street is more of a passageway really. Some more tree planting wouldn’t go amiss, and the pavement could be wider.

As BTH and notjim have mentioned, the treatment of the previously concealed bridge piers has been horrific. Left as they are they’re just plain ugly, and if to be painted (likely) they’re crying out to be graffitied. Really, such appalling treatment of the public domain. I cannot believe this, the most obvious element of the entire project to get right, has been so clumsily butchered. It pulls down the entire street. Some simple yellow brick cladding is all that was required as even a basic solution, matching that of the elevations further down the street.

The new shopfront fronting Talbot Street is elegant.

Which is more than can be said of those of Billy and his friend – what ridiculously scaled and detailed concoctions.

Was Planning so bowled over by the generous concept of a new thoroughfare that they just waved through all these details? Nonetheless the upper facades look very well, but their new faux Georgian makeover is dubious and poorly considered. For a start surely these buildings had plate glass sashes originally? (before the 70s aluminium went in). Equally the new glazing bars are too thin relative to the chunky sash frames, while the lovely deep orange of these machine-made Victorian bricks has been replaced with a pink colourwash more suited to dodgy Georgian townhouse restorations in the Midlands. Personally I find this a growing problem with Victorian brick – it’s one thing to clean it, but to colourwash it and thus lose its original character is not on. Going by their appearance you could now date these buildings more accurately to 1997 than 1887.

There are however some other decent jobs going on on Talbot Street. If ever there was an example of the transformation that can be effected on a city just by getting modest facades and fenestration right, this is it. It really cannot be said enough.

Beautiful job (whatever of the old shopfront). And the ever-increasing scourge of cumbersome double-glazed sashes has been resisted here. In fact I’d say this is now a rarity relative to the popularity of factory-churned clunky tmber sashes flooding the market now.

What a difference. And look at the elegant simplicity of the lightly cleaned orangey brick.

Another recent decent job further down – the colour’s a tad dodgy, but passable.

And again the retention of original sashes (if not quite a restoration of them).

Great to see good solid improving jobs like these on a secondary street like Talbot Street.

@GrahamH wrote:

Some pictures of the new development – to be titled ‘Joyce’s Walk’.

Jaysus the imagination would bowl you over. (The major Joyce connection around here that causes this and another street to be named after him is that the former ‘Nighttown’ off Talbot Street is mentioned in Ullyses.)

The official name for the street which is now universally known as the Italian Quarter is the stunningly inspired and poetic “Millenium Walkway”.

Of course, the correct thing is to call it Corporation Walk.

Guineys look to demolish their store

Guineys looks to build new city store
City News Home
Herald.ie

By Cormac Murphy

Monday November 17 2008

FAMOUS Dublin retailers Guineys are seeking a drastic makeover for their city centre store.

The clothes and homewear specialists are seeking to demolish their four-storey premises on Talbot Street in Dublin 1. They want to replace it with a seven-storey building with a new-look Guineys store and offices.

The owners have applied for planning permission to Dublin City Council for the development at 79/80 Talbot Street, which backs on to Beresford Lane.

Recession

If approval is granted, the 3,039sqm scheme will have retail in the basement, ground and first floors. It will have offices on the second to sixth floor.

The scheme provides for three new pedestrian entry points off Talbot Street, as well as a new access point off Beresford lane.

Guineys has always been associated with good value and it is one business which could see an upturn in fortunes through the recession.

Michael Guineys opened its doors for business in April 1971, at 93 Talbot Street.

Within months, a second shop was opened in Parliament Street. In the second store, the retailers entered into a new area of business, namely carpets and furniture.

A further store was opened in October 1973, this time on Thomas Street.

In 1977, the Thomas Street and Parliament Street stores were closed down and an outlet on North Earl Street was opened.

Here was that proposal ….. a lesson in maintaining the scale of the streetscape. It’s been refused – <a href="http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=5101/08&theTabNo=2&backURL=Search%20Criteria%20>%205101/08

Jesus what a shocker – rightly refused imo

Oh look! Set back glass top stories! What an innovative idea…

Where abouts was that Mal Mart on Talbot St? I took a photo of it about 10 years ago, and spent a few very entertaining minutes walking around inside, but can’t remember where exactly it was. Is it where Supervalue is now?

As for Guiney’s: why didn’t they just submit a realistic planning application in the first place… instead of chancing their arm and wasting everybody’s time. While they’re at it, they should give the next-door telephone exchange (on the corner of Gardiner St) a good lick of paint.

The refusal of the Guineys building has been appealed, lol! – http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/232655.htm

Edit: Actually just noticed on the ABP page that the application was withdrawn .. so the appeal falls too.

What has come over Dublin City Council?? Planning application at North Star Hotel opposite Connolly Stn. for 8-storey new hotel building on current surface parking area to rear of hotel. In decision to grant permission newly out, they lobbed three storeys off (Ref. 3931/09).

Also whacked three floors off recent 10-storey proposal for M&S Mary Street loading bay area – 2121/09 (eventually got refused on appeal)

But WTF? They just rubber-stamped every ridiculous proposal that came into them during Celtic Tiger. Such changes like these were unheard of ……. maybe they’re finally sick of seeing their decisions savaged on appeal ….

@Devin wrote:

What has come over Dublin City Council?? Planning application at North Star Hotel opposite Connolly Stn. for 8-storey new hotel building on current surface parking area to rear of hotel. In decision to grant permission newly out, they lobbed three storeys off (Ref. 3931/09).

Also whacked three floors off recent 10-storey proposal for M&S Mary Street loading bay area – 2121/09 (eventually got refused on appeal)

But WTF? They just rubber-stamped every ridiculous proposal that came into them during Celtic Tiger. Such changes like these were unheard of ……. maybe they’re finally sick of seeing their decisions savaged on appeal ….

Devin, its the same old rubbish they always engage in. Lopping off floors plays well with the typically conservative Irish person/voter who generally don’t like anything different or daring. DCC have been doing this for years.

Naturally, its lost on councilors, council pen pushers and alot of the public that effectively cutting buildings in half destroys any architectural integrity they have. Either approve or reject them in entireity rather then trying to fit a 10 storey square peg into a 5 storey round hole!!

@thebig C wrote:

Devin, its the same old rubbish they always engage in. Lopping off floors plays well with the typically conservative Irish person/voter who generally don’t like anything different or daring. DCC have been doing this for years.

Naturally, its lost on councilors, council pen pushers and alot of the public that effectively cutting buildings in half destroys any architectural integrity they have. Either approve or reject them in entireity rather then trying to fit a 10 storey square peg into a 5 storey round hole!!

what exactly is the point in the consultation process? If DCC advised this developer that 5 floors would be the likely max then the developer’s a fool for lodging 8. If they didn’t, however, then DCC have led them up an ultimately very expensive path. To lose one floor may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose 3 looks like carelessness (he paraphrased Earnestly)

@Devin wrote:

What has come over Dublin City Council?? Planning application at North Star Hotel opposite Connolly Stn. for 8-storey new hotel building on current surface parking area to rear of hotel. In decision to grant permission newly out, they lobbed three storeys off (Ref. 3931/09).

Also whacked three floors off recent 10-storey proposal for M&S Mary Street loading bay area – 2121/09 (eventually got refused on appeal)

But WTF? They just rubber-stamped every ridiculous proposal that came into them during Celtic Tiger. Such changes like these were unheard of ……. maybe they’re finally sick of seeing their decisions savaged on appeal ….

Ciaran Cuffe often spoke of this scenario as being the worst of both Worlds as the developer has their development numbers savaged and the City gets lumbered with a building that is out of scale i.e. possibly attractive at 10 but not designed to be in proportion at 7.

I am of the opinion that the system needs to change to one where the planning fees are not forfeited when a building consent is refused but that similarly to F.I. requests that the design team be afforded an opportunity to re-submit within the parameters of the building lines that would be acceptable.

However why go to refusal in the first instance?

To stop developers doing a graduated reduction and clogging the system I see a great merit in all applications for over 5 storeys having to procure via a council nominated source a montage from selected angles in advance of the initial application to set the boundaries. Given the scale of planning fees is it too much to ask that pre planning consultation phase move from a lottery based on sketches and often only a short meeting to a valuable source of guidance to developers before they pay for detailed designs which may take multiple meetings. I can appreciate that Devin is no fan of looking at a very wasteful multi-application game being played out either; in the current climate it makes perfect sense for developers to have access to planners in minuted meetings (on the record/subsequent application) once they pay hourly rates that reflect the costs of the planners involved.

@George_Kaplan wrote:

they should give the next-door telephone exchange (on the corner of Gardiner St) a good lick of paint.

Careful what you wish for. It’s now lovely custard yellow colour.

@thebig C wrote:

its the same old rubbish they always engage in. Lopping off floors ……… DCC have been doing this for years.

Em, helllleau, where have you been for the last five years? .. not in Dublin, I take it. Modifying development went off DCC’s radar sometime back in 2004. Make hay while the sun shines was it. If you can think of a major scheme DCC truncated / curtailed / redesigned since then, please let me know. Scenario almost without exception went as follows: applicant comes in with ridiculous OTT overdense proposal in spirit of the times→ DCC does dance with rubber stamp→scheme gets hammered on appeal.

@Devin wrote:

Em, helllleau, where have you been for the last five years? .. not in Dublin, I take it. Modifying development went off DCC’s radar sometime back in 2004. Make hay while the sun shines was it. If you can think of a major scheme DCC truncated / curtailed / redesigned since then, please let me know. Scenario almost without exception went as follows: applicant comes in with ridiculous OTT overdense proposal in spirit of the times→ DCC does dance with rubber stamp→scheme gets hammered on appeal.

Helleau yourself!:) DCC might have been on a hiatus for a few years but from the 1960s-2000s, they lopped floors off pretty much every development.

In the spirit of the Celtic Tiger they began to rubber-stamp, but, now that everybody is anti-developer they are simply reverting to type to vainly show that they are being tough!