daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Irish Architecture Forum > Republic of Ireland

Republic of Ireland For projects and construction in Dublin and the South



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old May 18th, 2016, 01:16 PM   #1
Dublin84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 594
Likes (Received): 581

DUBLIN | Former Irish Glass Bottle site | Proposed

Just came across the below article. It says the site can take 3000 homes. I am assuming nothing other than apartments will be built on it? Nothing other than apartments should be built on it! If ever there was a scheme to promote apartment living for families and also for long term living in general, this should be it! It will be very interesting to see what happens on this site... Hopefully we get a top quality scheme here, similar to the big development on north quays at the moment...

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/c...site-1.2649950

Last edited by Dublin84; May 18th, 2016 at 03:25 PM.
Dublin84 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 18th, 2016, 01:46 PM   #2
Fred_Johnson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,363
Likes (Received): 1318

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dublin84 View Post
Just came across the below article. It says the site can take 3000 homes. I am assuming nothing other than apartments will be built on it? Nothing other than apartments should be built on it! If ever there was a scheme to promote apartment living for families and also for long term living in general, this should be it! It will be very interesting to see what happens on this site... Hopefully we get a top quality scheme here, similar to the big development on north quays at the moment...

Edit can a mod please correct title? Thanks!
I notice in the latest development plan that up to 16 storeys residential is allowed along certain parts of the site. Hopefully the site gets built out to the maximum density. Nothing would be more infuriating than building more semi-d's with a garden in the middle of the city.
__________________

Catmalojin, Sukino, Wilderbeast liked this post
Fred_Johnson está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2016, 03:26 PM   #3
Dublin84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 594
Likes (Received): 581

Quote:
I notice in the latest development plan that up to 16 storeys residential is allowed along certain parts of the site. Hopefully the site gets built out to the maximum density. Nothing would be more infuriating than building more semi-d's with a garden in the middle of the city.
this bloody 16 storey limit, it just looks so dull having this stupid limit. All block in the docks are 7-8 storey, all "towers" 16, could they not throw in some 18-20 floor etc, to vary it up a bit?!
Dublin84 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2016, 08:18 PM   #4
PeteC
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,313
Likes (Received): 689

I see the usual suspects are calling for the site to be used for social housing, and I assume they mean specifically houses and not the wider definition of housing (because apartments are bad as proven by Bullymun). This most be one of the longest play election strategies in history, create an area exclusively of social housing with no social mix, gheotoisation sets in and the loony lefties are guaranteed lots of votes by blaming everyone else for the problems in the area.

Worth noting that the current transport strategy contains a red line extension from the Point this site, obviously hoping this will push up the price of the site to recoup some of the money DDDA blew on it.
__________________
PeteC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2016, 10:39 PM   #5
Sukino
Registered User
 
Sukino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,285
Likes (Received): 1596

The last thing the centre needs is more social housing.
__________________
Bratislava | Dublin
Sukino no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2016, 11:55 PM   #6
daveydonnelly
Registered User
 
daveydonnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
Likes (Received): 851

Irish glass bottle site

Indeed, there should be no more social housing in the city centre. It's already the biggest problem the city has in my opinion. A percentage in large developments sure, but that's it. Which loonies are calling for it? They'd have to be mad to hand it over for social. I hate how this country works sometimes.
__________________

Sukino liked this post
daveydonnelly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 12:28 AM   #7
Wilderbeast
Registered User
 
Wilderbeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3,167
Likes (Received): 2279

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveydonnelly View Post
Indeed, there should be no more social housing in the city centre. It's already the biggest problem the city has in my opinion. A percentage in large developments sure, but that's it. Which loonies are calling for it? They'd have to be mad to hand it over for social. I hate how this country works sometimes.
Not going to get drawn on location issues, but we need a splurge of social housing in the GDA to address

(1) House/apartment prices
(2) High rental costs
(3) "Homelessness" - even if it merely means families/people forced to live in overcrowded homes.
Wilderbeast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 12:36 AM   #8
daveydonnelly
Registered User
 
daveydonnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
Likes (Received): 851

We need to sort out out all of these things but we don't need concentrations of social housing estates in town. It's not exactly worked out well...
daveydonnelly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 12:39 AM   #9
Wilderbeast
Registered User
 
Wilderbeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3,167
Likes (Received): 2279

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveydonnelly View Post
We need to sort out out all of these things but we don't need concentrations of social housing estates in town. It's not exactly worked out well...
Perhaps...but if not in the city centre, where?
Wilderbeast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 01:05 AM   #10
Jimble
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 375
Likes (Received): 399

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dublin84 View Post
this bloody 16 storey limit, it just looks so dull having this stupid limit. All block in the docks are 7-8 storey, all "towers" 16, could they not throw in some 18-20 floor etc, to vary it up a bit?!
Between the toffs in Sandymount and the old Dubs in Ringsend I'm not at all surprised. It's another compromise plan. At this stage that shamrock in the middle of the bay joke from a few years ago is starting to seem less like a joke and more like a necessity.
Jimble no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 09:36 AM   #11
Sukino
Registered User
 
Sukino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,285
Likes (Received): 1596

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilderbeast View Post
Not going to get drawn on location issues, but we need a splurge of social housing in the GDA to address

(1) House/apartment prices
(2) High rental costs
(3) "Homelessness" - even if it merely means families/people forced to live in overcrowded homes.
The main problem is that people working full time can't afford a home, not that people who can't be bothered to look for a job are not given a free dwelling in the capital.
In Dublin, about 22% of the cost of a new dwelling goes to the government. Affordable housing for working people should also be supported.
__________________
Bratislava | Dublin

Jimble liked this post
Sukino no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 01:18 PM   #12
daveydonnelly
Registered User
 
daveydonnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
Likes (Received): 851

Oh absolutely agree with that. Affordable homes should be a massive priority and I have no problem with concentrations of affordable homes, I'd be lining up myself to get one!
daveydonnelly no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 01:58 PM   #13
Fred_Johnson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,363
Likes (Received): 1318

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sukino View Post
The main problem is that people working full time can't afford a home, not that people who can't be bothered to look for a job are not given a free dwelling in the capital.
In Dublin, about 22% of the cost of a new dwelling goes to the government. Affordable housing for working people should also be supported.
There seems to be a paradox in this country that residential dwellings are only built en masse when prices get completely out of control as they did during the boom. When prices are more reasonable (as they are at the moment everywhere outside South Dublin), then nothing gets built. It seems that as a country we only build when there's massive profits to be made, otherwise we don't bother - even if demographic trends require more housing. Something is not right with the industry, incentives are wrong or something, and perhaps costs are too high. Everyone is price gouging everyone else all along the supply chain. I suppose the massive deposits required by banks for developers are not helping either. The banks still act like they are in crisis mode both in terms of financing development and with their outrageous variable rates.
Fred_Johnson está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 03:12 PM   #14
Dublin84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 594
Likes (Received): 581

Quote:
There seems to be a paradox in this country that residential dwellings are only built en masse when prices get completely out of control as they did during the boom. When prices are more reasonable (as they are at the moment everywhere outside South Dublin), then nothing gets built. It seems that as a country we only build when there's massive profits to be made, otherwise we don't bother - even if demographic trends require more housing. Something is not right with the industry, incentives are wrong or something, and perhaps costs are too high. Everyone is price gouging everyone else all along the supply chain. I suppose the massive deposits required by banks for developers are not helping either. The banks still act like they are in crisis mode both in terms of financing development and with their outrageous variable rates.
they are built en masse when prices get out of control for a few reasons. It doesnt make sense to build for no or very little return, why would you?

then site prices rise, there is an expectation they will keep rising. Land value soars, then the density has to massively rise to make development viable...

I agree its typical Ireland, we need to move to a position, where everyone can make a REASONABLE amount from housing, the banks, developers (to make it worth their while to build and not sit on land) and people who sell lands... Whether this is populism from FF and SF etc, with giving the central bank power to cap mortgage interest rates, I couldnt care less. The cost of housing now is insane, if banks that we bailed out, have to take a hit, great, you cant simply say, "hey you work, pay for your own private accommodation, pay through the nose. When you go to borrow, the 500k, throw on another few hundred k for interest, then work out what that costs you AFTER income tax. To me this now seems outrageous, anyone getting a free house in Dublin, is winning the lottery"

I dont think its reasonable this vacant site levy and expect them to build, unless government make it economically viable for them to do so... Id put all of the blame on the government door.

Developers are only doing what makes sense to them, the way we all do...

Last edited by Dublin84; May 19th, 2016 at 03:27 PM.
Dublin84 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 04:06 PM   #15
Al_Guy_80
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 114
Likes (Received): 105

Truth be told THE GSB Site is an awful site, within sight and smell of a power plant, a sewage plant and now the incinerator... not forgetting the container port too with its associated noise.
Al_Guy_80 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 04:23 PM   #16
Dublin84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 594
Likes (Received): 581

Quote:
Truth be told THE GSB Site is an awful site, within sight and smell of a power plant, a sewage plant and now the incinerator... not forgetting the container port too with its associated noise.
To an extent I agree. I dont think the incinerator should have went in there, the sewage plant is there quite some time. That said, is living near the incinerator any worse than the hundreds of thousands of diesel car fumes we breathe in, in Dublin every day? I think the plan should have been to relocate the port and maybe only have a terminal there for ferry and cruise traffic...

Quote:
not forgetting the container port too with its associated noise.
yeah I heard residents were complaining about that recently, all windows going in should be triple glazed etc...

Build an entire new city quarter there...
Dublin84 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 04:37 PM   #17
Fred_Johnson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,363
Likes (Received): 1318

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_Guy_80 View Post
Truth be told THE GSB Site is an awful site, within sight and smell of a power plant, a sewage plant and now the incinerator... not forgetting the container port too with its associated noise.
If you look at the zoning, i think most of the site facing the power plant is zoned commercial/mixed use. The other 80% of the site facing south and west is residential. But indeed there's no way to get rid of a smell...
Fred_Johnson está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2016, 11:40 PM   #18
Jimble
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 375
Likes (Received): 399

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dublin84 View Post
they are built en masse when prices get out of control for a few reasons. It doesnt make sense to build for no or very little return, why would you?

then site prices rise, there is an expectation they will keep rising. Land value soars, then the density has to massively rise to make development viable...

I agree its typical Ireland, we need to move to a position, where everyone can make a REASONABLE amount from housing, the banks, developers (to make it worth their while to build and not sit on land) and people who sell lands... Whether this is populism from FF and SF etc, with giving the central bank power to cap mortgage interest rates, I couldnt care less. The cost of housing now is insane, if banks that we bailed out, have to take a hit, great, you cant simply say, "hey you work, pay for your own private accommodation, pay through the nose. When you go to borrow, the 500k, throw on another few hundred k for interest, then work out what that costs you AFTER income tax. To me this now seems outrageous, anyone getting a free house in Dublin, is winning the lottery"

I dont think its reasonable this vacant site levy and expect them to build, unless government make it economically viable for them to do so... Id put all of the blame on the government door.

Developers are only doing what makes sense to them, the way we all do...
I agree. We let the government and ourselves off when we blame developers for high costs. They're being driven by market costs right now, not pure greed. If it was up to me we'd retain all of the tax increases from the past 8 years permanently and invest in a real society. One that can subsidise housing properly and provide all of the services we're gonna need to keep up in the future. Right now we have a remarkably progressive tax system given our culture --we lag only the Nordic countries in terms of tax progressivity. The top 1% earn about 10% of the income in the country and pay 30% of the total tax. The top 5% earn about 23% of the income and pay 55% of the tax. There are small discrepancies at the bottom that should rightly be addressed but if we maintain this current system, budget surpluses will be a regular occurrence, not an anomaly. Plus the stability of the system over time will mean we can make longer term investments that deliver better value for the government and we can get out of this boom-bust-pay-a-premium-for-a-quickly-thrown-together-emergency-plan syndrome we've had since 1922. This current government may be a bit of a shambles but the left-right divide the election created will change the tone of debate here forever to come.
Jimble no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2016, 12:26 AM   #19
Fred_Johnson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,363
Likes (Received): 1318

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimble View Post
I agree. We let the government and ourselves off when we blame developers for high costs. They're being driven by market costs right now, not pure greed. If it was up to me we'd retain all of the tax increases from the past 8 years permanently and invest in a real society. One that can subsidise housing properly and provide all of the services we're gonna need to keep up in the future. Right now we have a remarkably progressive tax system given our culture --we lag only the Nordic countries in terms of tax progressivity. The top 1% earn about 10% of the income in the country and pay 30% of the total tax. The top 5% earn about 23% of the income and pay 55% of the tax. There are small discrepancies at the bottom that should rightly be addressed but if we maintain this current system, budget surpluses will be a regular occurrence, not an anomaly. Plus the stability of the system over time will mean we can make longer term investments that deliver better value for the government and we can get out of this boom-bust-pay-a-premium-for-a-quickly-thrown-together-emergency-plan syndrome we've had since 1922. This current government may be a bit of a shambles but the left-right divide the election created will change the tone of debate here forever to come.
The top 5% pay 55% of the tax....Jesus Christ. We're basically dependent on a handful of people to keep the whole show on the road. You basically seem to be advocating for someone else to pay for the society that you want. Won't get into a political argument with you but that sounds dangerously unbalanced and unhealthy for democracy.
__________________

Markpb liked this post
Fred_Johnson está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2016, 03:28 AM   #20
Catmalojin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dublin, Galway & New York
Posts: 3,915
Likes (Received): 850

Looks like they're very keen to get moving with this project!

The Irish Times - Dublin regeneration project to be ‘fast-tracked’

A few quotes from the article:
Quote:
The peninsula lands will be used predominantly for housing, with about 30 per cent commercial and retail development.

The commercial areas will be used as a “buffer zone” between the Dublin Port lands and the residential areas. New schools will also be included.

Building heights will be mostly under 28m, with some “mid-rise” buildings – up to a max of 50m at a limited number of locations in the vicinity of South Bank Road.
Catmalojin no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium