After canvassing Siptu members, the response to the union’s plan was that we should build a structure of which the State could be proud
FRANK McDONALD (Decision on Liberty Hall demolition will shape city skyline, July 19th) has once again raised questions about Siptu’s proposal to redevelop Liberty Hall.
He and I had a discussion on these matters prior to the publication of his recent article, but unfortunately very little of what we discussed is reflected in the piece. Given the significance of this development it’s important that the record is put straight.
The main reason why Siptu is proposing to build a new Liberty Hall – not simply demolish the existing building as the article’s headline suggests – is because a number of expert studies concluded that the current building is no longer fit for purpose.
The fundamental problem is that the size and location of its circulation and services core – which accounts for about 40 per cent of the building’s floorplate and includes toilets, stairs and lifts – allows only for a necklace of narrow offices running around three sides of its perimeter. This type of space is totally inappropriate for a modern open-plan, team-orientated workplace.
An assessment of the existing building was carried out by Arup consulting engineers to discern whether refurbishment was a viable option. While Arup found that its ventilation and temperature control problems could be ameliorated, they also concluded that the present Liberty Hall’s form and shape could not be altered to produce the type of office space Siptu needs.
The main stairwell and lift shaft are core to its stability so there is an unbreakable structural constraint on increasing the current building’s useable floor area.
Having come to the view that the existing building wasn’t fit for purpose, Siptu did look at relocating. We canvassed the views of our members and they responded strongly that Siptu should continue on the current site, given its historic links to the 1913 Lockout and 1916 Easter Rising, and put in place a building of which the country could be proud.
The union’s floorspace needs were referred to in the article. At the recent oral hearing, Siptu confirmed that while our current needs would be 10 or 11 floors of the redeveloped building, this does not include the four floors proposed for visitor/heritage activity.
Our requirements are changing due to the fact that we are in the middle of a five-year process restructuring Siptu into an organising union. What does this mean? Siptu is now engaging with thousands of workplace representatives with a view to organising the hundreds of thousands of workers who are not union members and do not enjoy the benefits of union support on issues such as job protection/preservation, pay and conditions of employment.
In addition, the union has moved from the old geographic branch structure to a divisional one focused on different economic sectors which requires more space for interaction among our staff and activists. Indeed, the wider trade union movement is also reviewing its operations and the net result of this is that Siptu’s space need is likely to be greater than it now is. If the union is to prudently prepare for the future it cannot simply restrict itself to 10 or 11 floors.
However, it’s important to counteract any notion that Siptu is involved in speculative office development. Any excess space in the new building would be offered to like-minded organisations to occupy, as we have done in the past. Indeed, suggestions of speculative development have no credibility when one considers that the most lucrative aspect of the building from a rental perspective, namely the top four floors, have been designated for public use through the proposed skydeck, heritage and visitor centre.
McDonald quotes one of the four appellants against Dublin City Council’s decision to grant permission for the proposed redevelopment, Valerin O’Shea, as stating that “three separate assessments of its visual impact commissioned by the union offered widely divergent conclusions”.
This comment is wholly unfounded as there was only one landscape and visual impact assessment carried out and that was by Mitchell + Associates in accordance with the standard Environmental Protection Agency methodology. The other assessments referred to by O’Shea related to impact on historic character and urban structure.
Clearly, the results of these assessments would vary as the purpose and methodology of all three were different.
It’s important that the public knows that Siptu’s ambition for the new Liberty Hall goes beyond providing yet another office building. We have worked with our design team to create a building where environmental sustainability is integral to all of its aspects from inception through to final operation.
Our aspiration is to minimise the new Liberty Hall’s energy requirements, create a building that is primarily naturally ventilated and will meet or exceed target energy and carbon emission equivalent to a Building Energy Rating A3.
The proposed development has the potential to provide employment at a time when this is badly needed and, as a workers’ organisation, Siptu is extremely conscious of this. Indeed, the existing Liberty Hall was conceived of and built at a time of economic depression in the State – not dissimilar to the times we’re in now – and it gave a much-needed boost to the country, as this project will if it gets the go-ahead.
It is anticipated that the redevelopment of Liberty Hall will generate about 200 direct construction jobs and, once completed, will create significant employment.
The new building will provide heritage and visitor resources, including the “skydeck”, which will offer panoramic views of the city and Dublin Bay. This new facility has the potential to be a significant contributor to the tourism sector. In this regard, Siptu commissioned an independent study which indicated that a minimum of 250,000 people per annum could be attracted to this highly accessible site, greatly benefiting Dublin’s retail and hospitality sectors.
Ultimately, the reason Siptu wants to redevelop Liberty Hall is because we are passionate about engaging more effectively with our members and the public. Moreover, we want to create a space that will give expression to the rich history and connection with the local community, the city and our place as a national union representing members in every part of the island of Ireland.
To enable us to achieve these aims, we need a new Liberty Hall, creating a confident future and a place for workers’ voices to be heard.
Joe O’Flynn is general secretary of Siptu