Opera Centre seems to be going ahead......

Berty

It's not on the block(s) of O'Connell St though.

source

Beer Baron wrote: »

It's not on the block(s) of O'Connell St though.

Nor is it on Arthur's Quay. The streets around the development are:

Patrick Street, Rutland Street, Bank Place/Charlotte Quay, Michael Street and Ellen Street

ongarboy

http://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/150m-plan-for-limerick-site-has-14storey-tower-35876711.html
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/donal-odonovan-city-centre-needs-people-not-window-dressing-to-revive-its-fortunes-35876715.html
I thought it might be worth resurrecting this thread seeing the major announcement this week of a formal planning application being submitted to the council for this development.
What do folks think of the second article attached that suggests the development is too office based with not enough retail, social or cultural facilities to keep people in the city centre after 6pm during the week or at weekends?  I feel they could have incorporated more shopping units, restaurants, bars and maybe an arthouse cinema/theatre to give more diversity to the project for after hours.  Still an impressive proposal.

zulutango

The lack of a residential aspect is a glaring omission. The key to reviving the city centre is to get people living in it in high numbers. Office space is very important but that last thing we want is thousands of workers jamming into the city in the mornings and fleeing at 6pm. It's pretty much the current situation and it doesn't do much for the city centre.

Cookiemunster

zulutango wrote: »

The lack of a residential aspect is a glaring omission. The key to reviving the city centre is to get people living in it in high numbers. Office space is very important but that last thing we want is thousands of workers jamming into the city in the mornings and fleeing at 6pm. It's pretty much the current situation and it doesn't do much for the city centre.

I know it's a large presumption to me made with the record of LCCC, but maybe they have residential plans for the Cleaves site? Limerick 2030 have already said that it's the next one that they'll announce plans for.

dominatinMC

zulutango wrote: »

The lack of a residential aspect is a glaring omission. The key to reviving the city centre is to get people living in it in high numbers. Office space is very important but that last thing we want is thousands of workers jamming into the city in the mornings and fleeing at 6pm. It's pretty much the current situation and it doesn't do much for the city centre.

Fully agreed and, from what I've seen on social networking sites, plenty of other people seem to be expressing this exact same opinion. If the council won't directly provide residences, one would have to hope that private developers will see all this development as an opportunity to develop new sites/renovate existing premises to provide accommodation for all the new employees.

zulutango

Cookiemunster wrote:

I know it's a large presumption to me made with the record of LCCC, but maybe they have residential plans for the Cleaves site? Limerick 2030 have already said that it's the next one that they'll announce plans for.

That isn't good enough though. If you want to regenerate the heart of the city centre then you have to have large numbers of people living in the heart of the city centre. Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if Cleeve's had a residential element and that will be good for the city but it would be even better if the Opera site had residential also. This is what was intended originally of course. I wonder what changed in the meantime.

Jofspring

One of the excuses on the radio yesterday morning was they aren't looking at residential there yet because it doesn't look great having people living with clothes outside apartments etc... in a place that they are looking for companies to set up offices.

Exeggcute

Our elected morons hard at work FFS

zulutango

Jofspring wrote:

One of the excuses on the radio yesterday morning was they aren't looking at residential there yet because it doesn't look great having people living with clothes outside apartments etc... in a place that they are looking for companies to set up offices.

Who said that?! I've never seen people hang clothes out on the balconies of the Strand apartments or the windows of Riverpoint.

johnmolloy554

zulutango wrote: »

Who said that?! I've never seen people hang clothes out on the balconies of the Strand apartments or the windows of Riverpoint.

The Strand apartments no, but there's always clothes horses and other shi*e in the windows of Riverpoint.

pigtown

Can you imagine the uproar if the city council were to build apartments to be sold for profit while the housing list is as long as it is? Accommodation is certainly going to be a major issue should all of these office blocks be occupied but I'm not sure the council is the best way to provide it, certainly not with their current housing model anyway.

dominatinMC

pigtown wrote: »

Can you imagine the uproar if the city council were to build apartments to be sold for profit while the housing list is as long as it is? Accommodation is certainly going to be a major issue should all of these office blocks be occupied but I'm not sure the council is the best way to provide it, certainly not with their current housing model anyway.

That's a good point actually. Maybe that's the underlying reason for their decision to remove the residential aspect from the proposal, and they can't publicly state it.

pigtown

I'd assume that's the case. I don't want to sound elitist but I don't think many people would fancy social housing as part of the city's flagship commercial development. I don't think the likes of Facebook or their equivalent would consider located their offices in such a location.

Poxyshamrock

zulutango wrote: »

Jofspring wrote:

One of the excuses on the radio yesterday morning was they aren't looking at residential there yet because it doesn't look great having people living with clothes outside apartments etc... in a place that they are looking for companies to set up offices.

Who said that?! I've never seen people hang clothes out on the balconies of the Strand apartments or the windows of Riverpoint.

It's forbidden to put a clotheshorse on the balcony in The Strand afaik.

Vanquished

pigtown wrote: »

Can you imagine the uproar if the city council were to build apartments to be sold for profit while the housing list is as long as it is? Accommodation is certainly going to be a major issue should all of these office blocks be occupied but I'm not sure the council is the best way to provide it, certainly not with their current housing model anyway.

I'm actually surprised that the AAA or whatever they call themselves these days haven't been campaigning for the entire site to be devoted to social housing!

Insect Overlord

Vanquished wrote: »

I'm actually surprised that the AAA or whatever they call themselves these days haven't been campaigning for the entire site to be devoted to social housing!

They're probably too busy celebrating the Jobstown Six result to campaign this week. :pac:

RINO87

What happened to the plans to house students from LIT/UL here??

Silentcorner

Actually, what you will find is that the market will attract investors and would have more confidence investing in a large scale residential complex, you would hope anyway, you would also hope that this time round our developers show a bit more ambition and build something that actually looks good and a place where people would live for more than 12 months...

We have two things going for us, we have no problem building high, and we have a city centre with plenty of potential sites...

zulutango

dominatinMC wrote:

That's a good point actually. Maybe that's the underlying reason for their decision to remove the residential aspect from the proposal, and they can't publicly state it.

Perhaps it is. I doubt it though. If they say they're looking at residential development for other strategic sites doesn't the same argument apply?

It's worth noting that the developer behind the Bishop's Quay project originally intended to have a greater balance between apartments and offices but the Council insisted it should be mostly offices. It's as if they don't see residential as important as office space, which really is a big mistake from an urban planning point of view.

bazz26

Probably seen as an opportunity for more revenue from commercial rates than there would be from residential.

Cookiemunster

zulutango wrote: »

Perhaps it is. I doubt it though. If they say they're looking at residential development for other strategic sites doesn't the same argument apply?

It's worth noting that the developer behind the Bishop's Quay project originally intended to have a greater balance between apartments and offices but the Council insisted it should be mostly offices. It's as if they don't see residential as important as office space, which really is a big mistake from an urban planning point of view.

They did? From day one the tower was to be offices and retail only. There were to be 35 apartments in the 7 story block and 7 apartments in the refurbished Bishops Palace. None of this was changed when the council granted planning permission.

Vanquished

Cookiemunster wrote: »

They did? From day one the tower was to be offices and retail only. There were to be 35 apartments in the 7 story block and 7 apartments in the refurbished Bishops Palace. None of this was changed when the council granted planning permission.

The developers did originally plan a predominantly residential scheme at Bishop's Quay. But the council planners stated their preference for a greater level of office space and the proposals were changed.

zulutango

Cookiemunster wrote: »

They did? From day one the tower was to be offices and retail only. There were to be 35 apartments in the 7 story block and 7 apartments in the refurbished Bishops Palace. None of this was changed when the council granted planning permission.

As per Vanquished's post, the original intention was for more apartments alright. I had a look through the planning file and it showed this. The Council pushed the developer to build a more office-oriented development.

OfTheMarsWongs

Spotted this site notice on Ellen Street earlier.

Glenomra

Thanks, excellent viewing

Strettie11

Where is it possible to find the opera centre plans ? I found an application no 178007 received 29/06/2017 but there are no scanned documents

zulutango

Strettie11 wrote:

Where is it possible to find the opera centre plans ? I found an application no 178007 received 29/06/2017 but there are no scanned documents

They usually take a few weeks to scan them in!

sleepyman

How long before builders are on site?Are the council financing this?It looks great but I'd just be worried about another bump in the economy and it not having started

Cookiemunster

sleepyman wrote: »

How long before builders are on site?Are the council financing this?It looks great but I'd just be worried about another bump in the economy and it not having started

The planning process only started yesterday. It will be months (late 2017) before the go ahead is given. They've said that they want to be onsite in 2018 with a 5-6 yeard build period.

It's being developed by the councils special development vehicle Limerick 2030 rather than the council itself. They have a tender out for a private partner to actually build and run the development for them. Last I heard they'd narrowed down the interested tenderers from 7 to 2.