Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:22 pm

So I said I'd be back with all guns blazing, but I didn't honestly expect the DDDA to hand me this one on a plate. It's all starting to feel a bit Truman Show for my liking.

*checks for cameras*

I worried when this was discussed before that Paul's comment re 'thesis proposal' was too good to be true. I don't like doubting you, P, but this is the DDDA, remember? And guess what- yup. The DDDA- Where Nightmares Become Reality.

The canal could be a nice feature (or it could become another dustbin- Portobello College, anyone?), but why introduce one here? Is there a history of canals along this stretch? Not that I know of. (Except for the existing one, obviously. But that's OLD! And this is NEW!)

And yes, it counts as open space of a sort, but open water is the least flexible/usable space there is. Not only that, it creates a barrier wherever it's not bridged. What's so wrong with the idea of a linear park? Too boring? Too dependable? Not avant-garde enough?

But as Peter said, the issue of the quay wall breach / quay line interruption is of another mangitude altogether, if not remotely surprising from the Agency that brought you the infilling of George's Dock, the heneghan.peng.timber.jetties.proposal, the Martha! Schwartz! Red! Thing! With! The! Poles!, and many more misadventures. It just seems incapable of understanding that, as the responsible agency, it is supposed to be guardian of the bodies of water. Isn't it? *checks website* Oh hang on. I see what's going on. It's got the word Development in it's title, but not the word Protection, or even Planning.

But this previous lack of understanding of water makes this canal all the more baffling. If it gets the go-ahead (please no!), how long before they propose to pave over it for security reasons?

A (reiterated) message to the DDDA- LEAVE THE RIVER ALONE. Please?

This presumably has to be discussed in public, and the relevant planning scheme amended? Or is it like the U2 tower, where the argument will be along the lines that the proposal is close enough to the existing scheme, and anyway, it's Shiny! And New! And Dynamic! And Progressive!

Please reconsider this nonsense, DDDA.

PS Can anyone confirm / deny if this is the one West 8 is involved in?

EDIT: 'magnitude'. I'd change it, but 'mangitude' has a certain ring to it in this context, no?
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby Rusty Cogs » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:24 pm

There was meant to be a visual presentation to the local residents last night by the DDDA in the NCI but some 'community integration' individual turned up who essentially didn't know anything about it. The residents were not best pleased and didn't appreciate the lack of perceived respect the DDDA were showing them. If tender to completion on the Macken St bridge takes 6 years you can only imagine how long the local community will be dealing with this.
Rusty Cogs
Member
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 5:10 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:51 pm

Sounds about right for an organisation where the Marketing Dept is three times the size of the Planning Dept.*

A colleague who lives nearby got that image through his lettterbox too, but that's all for now. Keep us posted if you hear any more, thanks.

*These figures have not been audited.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Liffey Island

Postby cgcsb » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:22 pm

um what is the point of this? Am I correct in assuming that the DDDA plans to tear down all those buildings and streets, buil a canal around and bridges to the new island, all for what? why not just develope the land that is already there? I'm having a hard time getting my head around this one as it seems to be a pointless exercise
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby GrahamH » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:26 pm

So they're infilling one body of water and creating another?!

Maybe they want a better use for the granite facings of the soon to be destroyed George's Dock.

A destructive and entirely unnecessary scheme that will have the added bonus of being enormously expensive to create.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:07 pm

GrahamH wrote:A destructive and entirely unnecessary scheme that will have the added bonus of being enormously expensive to create.


Exactly! How else are they going to spend their money? It is not enough to make progress, we must be seen to make progress! Lots of big, unnecessary, visible progress.

(Progress is the right word here, yes?)
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby Peter Fitz » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:40 pm

ctesiphon wrote:we must be seen to make progress! Lots of big, unnecessary, visible progress.

(Progress is the right word here, yes?)


think i'd opt for regress ;)
Peter Fitz
 

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby alonso » Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:40 pm

IS anyone else disappointed when ctesiphon holds back like he did above? C'mon lay it on the table! Tell us what you really think ;)

Anyway I can't but agree with every point made here. I mean, what the hell is the point of all this? Are DDDA constantly looking for that prestige project that they think will display how innovative they are, when in reality it will expose their meddlesome silly ways for the world to see? Here's an idea lads.. Build for the people! Human scale spaces, variety, legibility and permeability, not daft nonsense like this! We have a river. We have canals/. Use them, don't molest them.

This hits the nail on the head - "It is not enough to make progress, we must be seen to make progress! Lots of big, unnecessary, visible progress"

None of that hippy crap like social cohesion or a sense of place. Sure how would that look in a brochure or on the hoardings!!!
alonso
Senior Member
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:33 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby Paul Clerkin » Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:57 pm

Now the DDDA is going to give us "venice", when can we expect their version of 'paris"
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
 
Posts: 5427
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby johnglas » Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:39 pm

Guys: I can't see why you're all getting so excited about this pile of j*****s. It is some demented adman's 'vision' (as oppoosed to Vision). The canal -great!- why haven't they done it already? Building out on stilts? Possible but pointless. I agree that the prospect of the Liffey broadening out to the sea is magical. They'll waste enough energy fretting about U2's Tower (of Babel) to have any time to 'plan' this.
johnglas
Senior Member
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby theman » Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:15 pm

ctesiphon wrote:PS Can anyone confirm / deny if this is the one West 8 is involved in?


West 8 were involved in the master planning, this looks like their work ok. It is based on the model they did a whiloe back.

If you think this is mad, West 8 were also looking atr filling in the grand canal basin and creating a similar feature, with an island in the middle linked by numerous bridges.

The DDDA have totally lost the plot here, it is being driven by egos rather than the need to build quality facilities. You only have to look at other similar dockland redevelopment in Europe to see that our regeneration is built upon big egotistical projects.
theman
Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:11 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby tommyt » Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:42 pm

I've had about all I can take from this shower of wasters. DDDA-FOAD:mad::mad:
tommyt
Member
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: D5

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby joanlemmon » Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:35 am

tommyt wrote:I've had about all I can take from this shower of wasters. DDDA-FOAD:mad::mad:


doubt you'd be very popular with them either if they ever heard of you
joanlemmon
Member
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby paul h » Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:40 am

This is a great idea - in theory,
Something different , even a little daring, but of course it would depend on the quality of design and maintenance.

Nothing surprising from the usual serial objectors on this forum to absolutely anything different proposed , how dull, bordering on embarrassing .
I am truly baffled by it.


Is the sacred River Liffey our holy Ganges or something?
Or is it the slight re-routing? Last tried by probably the Vikings and the Normans
I would hope it is just disdain for the DDDA, but our bland docklands are a direct result to this serial objection to anything other than the mundane.

theman - you actually think our docklands is filled with big egotistical projects:confused:
I would have thought the exact opposite
paul h
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:52 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby notjim » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:19 am

I think you misunderstood paul h: the anger against the ddda is based on the idea that they are trying to compensate for the mess they have made, the blandness etc, with grandiose and ill-thought out gestures which lack a sense of place, in this case, a lack of respect for the line of the campshire, a grandness which distinguishes Dublin's river landscape. I would certainly welcome something bold from the ddda, but I think they could do this without damaging what has been entrusted to them: the docks, the river landscape, the remanents of the industrial heritage.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby tommyt » Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:14 am

joanlemmon wrote:doubt you'd be very popular with them either if they ever heard of you


Joan- I've professional first hand dealings with sections of this organisation. I thought the tide would be turning now they have appointed Dutch and Danish built envirnment companies recently, but this proposal is just beneath contempt. I can barely even think of a glib 'credit where it's due' comment to pass on their record down through the years. It's getting beyond a joke at this stage, I've said enough in previous docklands threads of substance but this proposal is the final straw. Gloves off-it's a pile of wank not worthy of serious discussion.
tommyt
Member
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: D5

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby ctesiphon » Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:20 pm

alonso wrote:IS anyone else disappointed when ctesiphon holds back like he did above? C'mon lay it on the table! Tell us what you really think ;)


What can I say? I'm a little rusty after the holiday.

theman wrote:West 8 were involved in the master planning, this looks like their work ok. It is based on the model they did a whiloe back.


Thanks. I had high hopes when I heard they were getting involved, sadly now not justified.

notjim wrote:the anger against the ddda is based on the idea that they are trying to compensate for the mess they have made, the blandness etc, with grandiose and ill-thought out gestures which lack a sense of place, in this case, a lack of respect for the line of the campshire, a grandness which distinguishes Dublin's river landscape. I would certainly welcome something bold from the ddda, but I think they could do this without damaging what has been entrusted to them: the docks, the river landscape, the remanents of the industrial heritage.


Precisely.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby GrahamH » Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:21 pm

paul h wrote:our bland docklands are a direct result to this serial objection to anything other than the mundane.


Examples please.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby JoePublic » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:48 pm

GrahamH wrote:Examples please.


Examples of slightly more interesting docklands projects that people moan about incessantly?

The U2 Tower.
Gormley's statue.
Schwartz's plaza.
Liebskind's theatre.
Calatrava's bridge.
Everything else that isn't a 5-7 storey square box.
JoePublic
Member
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 4:26 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby johnglas » Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:21 pm

Not built;
not built;
built;
not built;
not built.
johnglas
Senior Member
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby JoePublic » Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:40 pm

johnglas wrote:Not built;
not built;
built;
not built;
not built.


Actually -

not built
not built
built
under construction
under construction

Not sure what your point is though?
JoePublic
Member
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 4:26 pm

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby johnglas » Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:20 pm

Well - it's all very well going on about 'iconic' buildings in amongst the dross, but actually the South Docklands - from what I can remember of it - is much better than the north. It's the large footprint of modern developments and the overweaning need to be trendy (e.g. the flavour of the month is glass frontages) that renders these developments monotonous. Equally, bldgs by starchitects are neither here nor there until they're built (and been in use for a while). Liebeskind and Calatrava are uber-trendy, but are their structures any good? Only time will tell and the problem now is that you will get the product of the studio, with the 'great man' merely supervising. It was always thus, but the absolute craving for these people does not necessarily justify the end-product.
johnglas
Senior Member
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby fergalr » Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:48 pm

With regards to Mr Calatrava, does anyone else get the feeling that he's pootling around natural history museums, ticking off designs? That said, his second bridge for the Liffey will be nice, albeit in a "look! it's a harp! in Ireland! clever!!" kind of way :p
fergalr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Howth, Co. Dublin

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby jimg » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:40 am

I would hope it is just disdain for the DDDA, but our bland docklands are a direct result to this serial objection to anything other than the mundane.

Proposed developments in the area under the remit of the DDDA are generally not subject to planning objections. Almost everything that has been built there has been directly and completely guided by the DDDA and they bear full responsibility for the result. A couple of developers have tried to bypass the DDDA by appealing to the council for planning but in the vast majority of cases objection is impossible. You'd appear less like an idiot if you stopped blaming "serial objecters" and actually learned something about the planning system before commenting on what has caused the docklands mess.
jimg
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:07 pm
Location: Zürich

Re: Buildings on stilts in the Liffey

Postby Peter Fitz » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:47 am

JoePublic wrote:Schwartz's plaza.
Liebskind's theatre.
Calatrava's bridge.


Fairly sparse negative comment on these 3 i'd suggest.
Peter Fitz
 

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron