North Lotts and Grand Canal Dock SDZ

Gumbo

http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/OtherDevelopmentPlans/LocalAreaPlans/Pages/NorthLottsGrandGanalDockSDZPlanningScheme.aspx

Submissions being invited until 10th May 2013.

SDZ Document can be downloaded from here (Part 1) and here (Part 2)

Carnegie

could someone give me the gist of those documents

Peregrine

Ridiculous height restrictions are mentioned in that draft.

The proposed hub at Britain Quay is
designed....height component could best
be achieved if it was integrated into the
block structure, rather than stand as an
isolated landmark on the Campshire.
In order to meet the height objective,
a range of 40-60 metres is considered
appropriate.

In the Boland’s Mills hub, it is important
that new development fits comfortably
into the complex historic composition
along the waterfront. In order to
achieve this, new development should
not extend above a line linking the top
of the Millennium Tower to the Monte
Vetro.

At that part of the the city, buildings should be at least 80 - 100m, not forced to be scaled down to 60m like the Montevetro, George's Quay Plaza and the proposed Tara Street tower is. We have churches that are over 80 meters tall for Christ sake..

liffeylite

Are any of these developments imminent?

I know NAMA are expecting to spend in the region of a billion euros developing the docklands further. but does anyone know of any project under construction or about to enter this phase?

I believe the units outside o2 headquarters on the south quays are being turned into restaurants, the older buildings just next to the calatrava bridge

Gumbo

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

Ridiculous height restrictions are mentioned in that draft.

+1
I agree. But will enough people voice that concern and lodge a submission?

liffeylite wrote: »

Are any of these developments imminent?

I know NAMA are expecting to spend in the region of a billion euros developing the docklands further. but does anyone know of any project under construction or about to enter this phase?

I believe the units outside o2 headquarters on the south quays are being turned into restaurants, the older buildings just next to the calatrava bridge

Not at the moment no, I think these developments are guidelines for the developers or land owners there.

Peregrine

kceire wrote: »

+1
I agree. But will enough people voice that concern and lodge a submission?

Hopefully they will. I'm lodging one this week, I know a few others who did. I urge you to do so too if you haven't

Carnegie

How do you lodge a submission and what type of numbers would it take for them to start listening to them?

Mr Whirly

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

At that part of the the city, buildings should be at least 80 - 100m, not forced to be scaled down to 60m like the Montevetro, George's Quay Plaza and the proposed Tara Street tower is. We have churches that are over 80 meters tall for Christ sake..

I live down there and walk around it daily and rather they didn't. The Millenium Tower is an ugly enough addition to the area.

Peregrine

Mr Whirly wrote: »

I live down there and walk around it daily and rather they didn't. The Millenium Tower is an ugly enough addition to the area.

Yeah Millenium Tower isn't exactly anything significant. It's an apartment from the 90s but calling it ugly is a bit too far. Bolands Mill, now that's ugly and it was meant to be demolished and a more aesthetic 80m tower was meant to be built on the site.

What are your views on the theatre, Marker Hotel, Montevetro and Altovetro?

Mr Whirly

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

Yeah Millenium Tower isn't exactly anything significant. It's an apartment from the 90s but calling it ugly is a bit too far. Bolands Mill, now that's ugly and it was meant to be demolished and a more aesthetic 80m tower was meant to be built on the site.

What are your views on the theatre, Marker Hotel, Montevetro and Altovetro?

The Atovetro is actually what I though the Millenium Tower was called. But both them buildings are horrible, particularly the Altovetro. The Marker Hotel is ok but nothing special. Lashing up loads of glass buildings is horrible. The area has history.

I like Bolands Mill and hope they do a good job of it's restoration. I certainly do not want to see it knocked.

Peregrine

Mr Whirly wrote: »

The Atovetro is actually what I though the Millenium Tower was called. But both them buildings are horrible, particularly the Altovetro. The Marker Hotel is ok but nothing special. Lashing up loads of glass buildings is horrible. The area has history.

I like Bolands Mill and hope they do a good job of it's restoration. I certainly do not want to see it knocked.

So you hate this:


and this:


You don't think this is anything special:


And wants to see more of this..?


The stone buildings are protected but the silos aren't, I for one would like to see the ugly silos knocked down from what is meant to be Dublin's docklands business district and something to be built on the site, it has planning permission for office/retail I think. The stone buildings can be restorated and I hope it does because it's really letting down the area.

To avoid any confusion this isn't the Bolands Mill from 1916.

Gumbo

Carnegie wrote: »

How do you lodge a submission and what type of numbers would it take for them to start listening to them?

There's a public display in the civic offices, the DDDA offices, ring send library and few other places. You can fill out a form there and put it in one of the comment boxes.

Or you can fill out this form http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/OtherDevelopmentPlans/LocalAreaPlans/Documents/Comment%20Sheet_Dublin_Docklands.doc

And post it to the address on the bottom.

Carnegie

kceire wrote: »

There's a public display in the civic offices, the DDDA offices, ring send library and few other places. You can fill out a form there and put it in one of the comment boxes.

Or you can fill out this form http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/OtherDevelopmentPlans/LocalAreaPlans/Documents/Comment%20Sheet_Dublin_Docklands.doc

And post it to the address on the bottom.

just looked at the sheet, you can email it too.

Mr Whirly

I'd like to see if they can do something with the whole thing. Like below.

Idbatterim

thought I would bump this seeing the following has been in the media...

http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2014/0522/618969-dublin-docklands-sdz/

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/bord-plean%C3%A1la-approves-fast-track-planning-for-dublin-docklands-1.1805715

subpar

This has to be good news for the north docklands area

Idbatterim

another article below on it. Two x 22 story towers to be permitted, not exactly high rise, but better than the bloody 15-16 story building we have had to date. What happened to the 30 odd story tower U2 wanted to build and Harrys Crosbies one, are they totally off the agenda? The architecture is so bland, unadventurous and boring in the docklands for the most part...

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/green-light-for-massive-docklands-development-will-ease-office-crisis-30297452.html

hfallada

Idbatterim wrote: »

another article below on it. Two x 22 story towers to be permitted, not exactly high rise, but better than the bloody 15-16 story building we have had to date. What happened to the 30 odd story tower U2 wanted to build and Harrys Crosbies one, are they totally off the agenda? The architecture is so bland, unadventurous and boring in the docklands for the most part...

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/green-light-for-massive-docklands-development-will-ease-office-crisis-30297452.html

As far as I can remember. The U2 tower was practically on the docks of Dublin port and was totally out of place. I personally think a nice 45 storey plus building would look great in Dublin. All we have is generic 5/6 storey buildings, that will be knocked down for high rise in a few years.

But thankfully An Bord Planala were side lined. The last thing Dublin, needs is more BS from a group of individuals who would like Dublin 3/4 storeys high to "protect the skyline".

Idbatterim

As far as I can remember. The U2 tower was practically on the docks of Dublin port and was totally out of place. I personally think a nice 45 storey plus building would look great in Dublin. All we have is generic 5/6 storey buildings, that will be knocked down for high rise in a few years.

But thankfully An Bord Planala were side lined. The last thing Dublin, needs is more BS from a group of individuals who would like Dublin 3/4 storeys high to "protect the skyline".

Werent an bord pleanala the ones that approved the SDZ? Also what sky line are they trying to protect? its pathetic, look at London how fantastic the old and new looks. They should allow a proper downtown area that can house a serious amount of residents and workers...

carlmango11

hfallada wrote: »

to "protect the non-existant skyline".

FTFY

The lads over at Bord Pleanala seem to be the only ones who thinks Dublin's "skyline" is something worth protecting. Especially in the newer docklands area. But no no, form over function. Let's just keep building our horrible housing estates miles out from the real city and have people drive in and drive out.

Idbatterim

http://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/docklands-projects-may-start-quickly-as-planning-laws-change-30312904.html

Docklands projects may start quickly as planning laws change

DONAL BUCKLEY – PUBLISHED 29 MAY 2014 02:30 AM

DEVELOPERS with some of the more valuable sites in Dublin's Docklands may come under pressure to bring forward developments within the next six months. Otherwise they may face delays or they may have the potential of their projects curtailed.

NAMA may be among the controllers of docklands property who are currently facing this dilemma. It arises for those who own sites which already received planning permissions, known as Section 25 certificates, from the former Docklands Development Authority (DDDA).

Now the holders of these certificates are faced with a new 'Use it or Lose' law which says that unless they can show that substantial development work has taken place on those projects, they will have to re-apply for planning permission. The Government plans to implement this new law before the end of this year.

Planning consultant Tom Phillips, director of Property Industry Ireland, says it may cause some developers to take legal action to retain existing planning permissions. However, they would need to prove they have already undertaken sufficient work to justify such retentions.

Dublin City Council (DCC) has an alternative dilemma as to whether it ought to fight such legal actions in order to protect its new vision for the development of docklands. Alternatively the council may decide to back off and encourage developers to avail of existing permissions as quicker development would generate more jobs as well as more offices and flats which are needed to meet the emerging shortages.

The new law is being introduced in order to clarify the legal position of Section 25s under the recently approved Strategic Development Zone for the North Lotts and Grand Canal Harbour areas. Effectively it will kill off Section 25 planning permissions unless substantial development has been undertaken on the sites.

NAMA and a number of receivers who control docklands sites raised the Section 25 issue with An Bord Pleanala (BP) prior to the board's recent approval of the SDZ.

NAMA has exposure to about 15 hectares of development land in docklands and chief executive Brendan McDonagh says that An Bord Pleanala's approval of the SDZ under the control of NAMA receivers and debtors "can now be accelerated over the coming years".

Chairman Frank Daly says that the SDZ gives NAMA the off after waiting for starters orders and it plans to invest about €1bn in development of residential and grade A office space in docklands. He expressed the hope that cranes would appear on the skylines next year.

The SDZ would allow about 366,000 square metres of office space and 2,600 homes to be developed across 22 hectares. It will allow two landmark buildings up to 22 storeys (88m), but most development will be eight-storeys high.

While SDZ is designed to allow fast-tracking of planning permissions, those developers with Section 25s for more lucrative developments may prefer to avail of such existing permissions rather than apply again.

Among the developments which have Section 25 approval are the U2 Tower on south docklands as well as Harry Crosbie's 42-storey Watchtower Building (above) reaching 125m high at Point Square.

Paul McCann and Steve Tennant of Grant Thornton, receivers for specific assets of Henry A Crosbie, told BP that a six storey mixed-use building adjacent to the Watchtower was also already permitted and these buildings were connected by a basement which has been substantially constructed. They also argued that there was no justification for a reduction in building heights.

Spencer Dock Development Company Ltd (SDDC) was one of the parties to use its existing Section 25 permission and convince BP to increase the height of a proposed hotel on its North Lotts site.

SDDC's receivers David Hughes and Luke Charleton had appealed certain aspects of the city council's SDZ. These included the council's restriction of the height of the hotel block to six storeys of commercial or seven storeys of residential. The receivers pointed out that in its S25, the hotel has a height of 56m "set by reference to the top of glazed drum of the convention centre (13+ commercial storeys)".

In response BP increased the permissible height of this building to 52 metres with either 11 storeys of commercial or 13 storeys of residential accommodation.

The receivers also argued that the three storey height limit on Block 2D at Spencer Dock would under-utilise scarce resources.

While at least one estate agent feels that the SDZ is a missed opportunity for higher density housing, CBRE points out that the SDZ will allow much-needed residential and office development in the very location that occupiers want to locate.

"It gives certainty to potential occupiers on the ability to secure fast-track planning if they adhere to the height, design and configurations laid out in the planning scheme – and will help address some of the supply shortages being experienced in the market at this juncture," said CBRE director Marie Hunt.

whats funny is, I note they want them to start building asap and utilizing the valuable land to satisfy the demand for residential and commercial space in this prime location. No mention of the massive under utilization of said land is.