The real import of An Bord Pleanala's decision on George's Quay this week is that Dublin Corporation needs to devise, sooner rather than later, a credible strategy for the city's skyline. Had the appeals board decided to sanction the high-rise scheme designed by international architects Skidmore Owings and Merrill (SOM), it would almost certainly have been interpreted by developers as the signal for a free-for-all. That the board has firmly rejected SOM's "towers of light", using words that leave no room for equivocation, sends out quite the opposite message; it also lays down a clear marker on the acceptability, in urban design terms, of high-rise schemes in close proximity to the city's historic core.
Apart from the likes of Hawkins House, Liberty Hall, O'Connell Bridge House and, indeed, the Central Bank, Dublin is characterised by its low-rise skyline. The current city plan, adopted last April, loosened the planning guidelines on high buildings, on the basis that there were some parts of the city that could accommodate a tower block or two. However, it singularly failed to specify any particular locations - an unfortunate gap in policy which will no doubt be filled by a strategic skyline study now in the process of being commissioned by the corporation. This study, which should involve wide public consultation, is expected to be completed early next year.
It is obvious that the Docklands area could take some high-rise buildings, not least because of the broad expanse of its waterbodies. A 17-storey apartment tower has already been erected at Charlotte Quay, in the Grand Canal Docks, with no damaging impact to its immediate surroundings or to critical long-distance views. Designed by Dublin architects O'Mahony and Pike for Zoe Developments, it is slender, elegant and well-proportioned. The same could not be said, however, of the massed Pittsburgh-style skyline proposed for Spencer Dock. Thus, the bulk of buildings must be considered in tandem with their height.
The basic problem with the George's Quay scheme was its height and bulk in that particular location, so close to the city centre and to historic buildings and precincts - notably the Custom House and Trinity College - as well as to the established community of City Quay parish; these were the factors that led to its rejection by An Bord Pleanala. The Cosgrave Property Group, which invested heavily in this misconceived plan, now needs to consider carefully its options, rather than simply proceeding with an inferior and dated cluster of office blocks - one higher than Liberty Hall - for which a still-valid planning permission was granted by the appeals board in 1991.
Dublin has much to learn from other cities with experience of high-rise development. Few visitors to Paris are not impressed by the manner in which it has retained its 19th-century skyline; after making one disastrous mistake with the Tour Montparnasse, office towers were consigned to its perimeter. By contrast, London adopted an ad hoc approach, allowing skyscrapers to spring up in the West End, the City and Canary Wharf, not to mention East Croydon. A more judicious planning strategy is clearly required to avoid a repetition in Dublin of monstrous errors that cannot easily be undone, while not closing our minds to the idea that well-designed high-rise buildings have their place in an increasingly complex urban hierarchy.