Poolbeg Framework Development Plan
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Dublin South Bank Strategic Development Frame work fi nal report for Dublin City Council November 2002 DCDU007.2906.206 PROJECT HISTORY Document History Issue No. Issue date Summary A June 2001 Current Tenancy Issues / Stakeholder Consultation B June 27 2002 Draft Final Report submitted to City Council C Nov 14 2002 Final report submitted to City Council Presentation History Presentation No. Date Summary 1 22.08.01 First Client Steering Group presentation 2 26.07.01 Second Client Steering Group presentation 3 17.10.01 Presentation to City Managers and Client Group 4 08.07.02 Presentation material to D Gleeson for Councillor mtg DCDU007 Dublin South Bank Development Strategy 2002 i CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary 5.0 Design Framework The case for the Poolbeg Peninsula 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Character Area Approach 5.3 Landscape and View Structure 2.0 Introduction 5.4 Movement & Access 2.1 Background to the Project 5.5 Land Use Pattern 2.2 Study Integration 5.6 Amenity Provision 2.3 Repositioning the Project 5.7 Volumetric Expression 5.8 Potential Capacity 5.9 Phasing 3.0 Evaluation of a Unique Site 3.1 Physical Characteristics 3.2 Stakeholder Current Needs Appendices 3.3 Open Space 1 Statutory Planning context 3.4 Statutory Constraints and Environment 2 Waterfront development scenarios 3 Design Options 3 Trip generation and defi cit calulation 4.0 Drivers for Change 4 Development Capacities 4.1 Identifying Drivers for Change 4.2 Location & Site Character Signifi cance 4.3 Demand Context 4.4 Consolidation of Utilities 4.5 Service Capacity of the Site DCDU007 Dublin South Bank Development Strategy 2002 ii 1.0 executive sum ma ry 1 DCDU007 Dublin South Bank Development Strategy 2002 The Case for the Poolbeg Peninsula ar gu ments relate to: tu ni ties’ as well as the short and long term • Statutory designation at this point as a In March 2001 the Dublin City Council • The signifi cance of the ge o graph ic imposed ‘constraints’. Fur ther more in the tool for moderating speculation on (formerly Dublin Corporation) issued location of the South Bank site in the context of the City of Dublin, the peninsu- sites. briefs calling for Urban Design and Land context of the overall pe nin su lar as a lar (other than potentially the operational Use Studies for three specifi c areas in gateway location with potential for harbour area to the north of the Liffey in 2. Role of the ‘Plan’ within a context of Dublin City; Heuston Station and En- establishing a new image and charac the long run) is the only large undevelop- uncertainties vi rons, City Markets Area and the South ter; able tract of land open to unique concepts The second major challenge for the Bank Road Environs. All three areas • The relationship of de vel op ment for large scale city wide amenity close the proposal for an overall plan deals with either responded to pressure from current sites to the large scale top o graph i cal city centre, which Dublin lacks in relation the level and number of uncertainties for planning applications, or had a particular features running across the peninsu- to other European cities. The relatively the future development of large parts of potential for regeneration. A com pre - lar; large scale and semi-in sti tu tion al land the site. On the peninsula these prima- hen sive detail framework opens the op- • The wider scale impact of the future of own er ship pattern of the area renders rily relate to the future of the utilities and tion for a comparative review of proposals the utilities and harbour, and such an opportunity more ‘realistic’ in the associated in fra struc ture plans as well as well as pro vid ing the criteria for the • The lack of strong character of the long term than other parts of the city. as the city wide transport plans currently assessment of individual applications. immediate physical built context. under review. The key challenge here is how a de vel - All three areas were identifi ed within The study bound a ry has been extended op ment framework can capitalise on the Whilst the long term view (based on the Dublin building Heights strategy to include the entire Poolbeg peninsular. unique character of the site by fulfi lling in ter na tion al practice and technological - ‘Man ag ing Intensifi cation and Change’ short-term de vel op ment objectives while de vel op ment of city services provision) (DEGW, 2000) as areas with high poten- From the very early stages of initial area in parallel preserving the long-term op por - suggests the retraction or relocation of tial for change and in need of consoli- evaluations the study recognised three tu ni ties for ‘a unique place’ for Dublin city. most of the current uses, the short-term dation of character, intensifi cation and major challenges. Our recommendations This study suggests: plans suggest the expansion of some of amenity base. have taken a position towards these chal- • Full development of the peninsular will the current utilities. The danger of such lenges. considerably compromise both asset unpredictability is the tendency toward A signifi cant diversion from the original and social cultural value of the area piecemeal intervention with out the clear brief for the South Bank is the extension 1. The Poolbeg Peninsula - a unique and therefore proposes a 3- zone understanding of im pli ca tions for the to the given site boundary that in clud ed char ac ter character concept; overall future of the peninsular. In paral- The Poolbeg Peninsula is quite clearly a de vel op ment land to the south-eastern • Allowance for a signifi cant level of city lel, infrastructure plans (such as those unique site in the context of Dublin in al- corner of the peninsular and currently wide amenity and preservation of relating to potential road in fra struc ture) most every way - physical / top o graph i cal, identifi ed as ‘de vel op ment’ sites. At the sites for future facilities including a are assessed within criteria relating to ecological character, existing land use outset of the project the case was made large reserve for public open space; the needs of particular land-ownerships, for the need to review those sites in the and land ownership, cultural context and again without consideration of the implica- • Further review of ecological char ac ter context of the Poolbeg Peninsula. Such connotation and relationships to the city. tions for future options for the wider area. and concept design of existing assets; Uniqueness relies equally on the ‘op por - The key challenge here is to identify the DCDU007 Dublin South Bank Development Strategy 2002 2 remit and role of a ‘development frame- repositioning of the site; related public trans port de vel op ment. work plan’ con sid er ing the un cer tain ties • The need to Inform the South Bank Therefore identifi ed the clear need to and long term potential opportunities. planning application; establish alternative benchmarking Central to this is the ability of the plan standards with traffi c management to • The review of infrastructure servicing to consider and in cor po rate at an early give priority to brown fi eld sites close on basis of capacity need that takes stage im ple men ta tion pa ram e ters, which to the city centre; into consideration overall levels of are necessary to safeguard the incredible development not only individual sites. • Capacity to be based on good opportunities of the site. The response on practice, sustainable development this issue involved: 3. A defi nition of capacity and char- principles and area character; • The level of fl exibility of the plan. ac ter outside of an existing context • Favour low traffi c generating types of The plan fi xes only primary infra- and service plan. development and land use (eg. structure and zoning of develop Regeneration or redevelopment area housing, leisure, rec re a tion al amenity ment capacities. Flexibility is main- plans within cities are informed by the po- etc), including actively en cour ag ing; tained on all other fronts in clud ing tential of the existing context. ‘Con tex tu al experimental car-free development. different plans and designs within drivers’ may include the existing char ac ter • Establishing the principle for areas defi ned by the primary infra- and historic context, existing and po ten tial residential development on the site- structure; infrastructure capacity, market demand, on the basis of inherently insuffi cient • The proposed structure plan to allow aspirations and need for new amen i ties to service capacity; for implementation of potential service a wider context and potentially, a • Very high quality design par tic u lar ly of changes to utilities and other pro- new image. In the current case all these initial developments; posed infrastructure without compro factors as the ‘drivers’ for new character mising the integrity of the overall are either non-existent or loosely de- • Emphasis on restructuring the site to intention (assumes ‘clean’ utilities); fi ned, or char ac ter ised by uncertainties include additional public space and adding high value outdoor active (This in itself opens up the pos si bil i ty ren der ing them unsuitable as starting • ameni ties. Suggests the need for a for housing on the site); points. The chal lenge here is to identifi y and con struc tive ly justify key drivers that detailed landscape plan, and distribu • The allowance for large scale facilities will inform ca pac i ty and character.