Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby rumpelstiltskin » Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:55 pm

If they're consistent with their own record and call for the top storey to be lopped off, and if they make the accurate and detailed refurbishment of facades a condition for the permission, then it could be the best possible outcome.
rumpelstiltskin
Member
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby Devin » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:34 pm

gunter wrote:yea I know where to find ye, with hutton, round at Robert O'Byrne's house, ogling his Palladian etchings!
You'd sooner find me at a Nama client fundraiser.
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:56 pm

johnglas wrote:gunter: can you live with the revisions, or is it the best of a bad (if slightly more sensitive) lot? Just how obtrusive would the 'extension' be from street level?


It's pretty much everything we asked for johnglas, total retention of all the buildings, not just some facade graft, so it would probably be a bit unfair to go looking for more, however . . .

rumpelstiltskin wrote:If they're consistent with their own record and call for the top storey to be lopped off, and if they make the accurate and detailed refurbishment of facades a condition for the permission, then it could be the best possible outcome.


I'm not even sure it needs the top storey knocked off, the office block is set back about 5m behind the rear elevation of the existing structures, I don't think it will appear in the streetscape at all, unless in the distance from the Cornmarket direction, which'd be fine.

I do agree with rumpel that they could go the extra seven yards and refurbish the street facades. It was the non-descript facades with their plate glass, proportion-killing, two pane windows that got us into this situation in the first place. Restoring the facades of 32, 33 & 36 back to the original 18th century brickwork and reinstating what would have been the original design of multi-paned windows (with or without Graham's shimmering crown glass) would do wonders for this stretch of Thomas Street and lift the setting of St. Catherine's no end.

Incidentally, one grainy photograph has emerged (through the good offices of Peter Walsh)of the Frawley's streetscape with what looks like a simple large hipped roof on no. 36, I think I'd like to see a bit more research done on that and pending the results, have the pitched roof reinstated on this significant merchant townhouse.

One other reservation I have with the scheme, an element which is unchanged from the first proposal, is the over-bearing office-block treatment of the west elevation to St. Catherine's Lane West. This is a very narrow cobblestoned laneway that I use every couple of days going to Lidl, it's rough for sure, but it has potential charm. The proposed elevation is very HKR and surely a small bit of modulation wouldn't go amiss. In fact the east elevation, which no one will ever see, looks far more subtle!

Image
Elevation to St. Catherine's Lane West, with the de Blacam+Meagher block on the right.

Image
The revised east elevation which largely addresses the back of adjoining buildings.

All in all, this revised scheme would be a massive step forward, it's only a pity that they're putting it forward so grudgingly.

The applicant's planning consultants make abundantly clear that they want their original scheme and this is just a fall-back in case Bord Pleanála take a wobble, and again they state boldly that ''. . . the individual buildings are of no historical or architectural merit in their own right.''

If they are not authoritively dissuaded from this view by Bord Pleanála and the revised scheme permitted with stringent conditions, there is every danger that they'll say ''OK we'll do this, but it will be half-ass'd''.







. . . that silence Devin, was the sound of gunter biding his time ;)
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby aj » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:31 pm

here is the submission on DCC site

http://www.dublincity.ie/AnitePublicDocs/00276360.pdf

surely they would not have gone to the expense unless they expected ABP to through out the original proposal

it would be great if they reinstated the facades and the roof on fades mansion but if we can preserve these building even as they are its a good start!
aj
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby lostexpectation » Sun Aug 09, 2009 1:07 pm

Twin ‘Dutch Billy’ listing rescues department store http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6788877.ece
lostexpectation
Senior Member
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:46 pm

ImageImage

That proposed demolition of no. 88 Thomas St. (reg. no. 2483/08), at the corner of John St. opposite John's Lane Church, is turning interesting.

An Taisce objected on the grounds that the existing 'late Georgian' house was a valuable part of the streetscape and should be retained and the Planning Office duly sought additional information in the form of an 'assessment' of the existing structure and a 'justification' for it's demolition.

The applicants wheeled out David Slattery, a 'Fellow' of the RIAI and a conservation heavyweight.

Slattery and An Taisce must have history because Slattery's report, lodged on 3 July, takes every opportunity to side-swipe An T. at the expense of actually reporting on the existing buildings in the level of detail that would demonstrate that they've been explored in depth and understood.

For some reason (not explained by any attempted dating) Slattery takes particular issue with An T's casual reference to the property as 'late Georgian' which, on the face of it, seems perfectly justifable.

His 'assessment' starts off with the phrase: ''Architecturally the building has very limited significance'' and then goes down hill from there. ''The two facades themselves are of no architectural interest as compositions''. ''The south facade to Thomas St. . . . . has undergone substantial alteration with the removal of window joinery and the addition of a new shopfront. Because of this, the facade could not be considered to be of architectural significance''.

Wow! a building with new windows and a dodgy shopfront! . . . . . welcome to Dublin.

Slattery's Assessment Report doesn't note that the original building has one of those 'open' shop corners formed by a square granite column, now hidden behind the dodgy shopfront. This feature was visable until quite recently (three or four years ago at most) is valuable in it's own right, and links the structure to the slightly later Wide Streets Commissioners building near by on the corner of Thomas St. and Meath St.

For once, the Planning Dept. are having none of half-assed drivel that is passing itself off as conservation assessments, and on 4 August, they filed a new report calling for 'Clarification of Additional Information'.

The new report is caustic on Slattery's assessment:
some extracts:

[INDENT]4. The mapping accompanying the Conservation Report confirms the survival of the
original foot print of the building, comprising of a residential unit orientated away
from the primary commercial street, accessed by a fine classical doorcase. The
unusual plan arrangement of this structure has been overlooked by the Conservation
report and not properly recorded or noted as being of particular architectural
interest. The justification for the retention of this structure on the basis of its rarity
value in terms of it’s plan form alone should be considered.

5. The poor compilation of the conservation report makes the assessment and location
of the primary fabric of import hard to ascertain. Architectural features such as
substantial chimney breasts, room proportions, possible location of staircases etc
have not been addressed or recorded in the accompanying drawings of the
structure. Opening-up works are not referred to or have not been carried out. It has not
been adequately demonstrated that all historic fabric has been removed and it is
quite possible that information could be gleaned from thorough investigation of the
remaining fabric that would inform its appropriate repair. On the face of it this
structure appears sound and could be readily repaired and reused if there was a
willingness to consider a conservation-lead sustainable approach to development
allia the well received Daintree Building on Camden Street.

Conservation Officer’s Observations if the decision to Grant is made;

1. The proposal did not have the benefit of a positive conservation evaluation at the
outset of the design process. A less advantageous report to the historic fabric has
been proposed on request of further information. The potential for reuse has never
been considered as a result, yet how the proposed plan organises itself within the
existing site suggests that the historic fabric could be re-utilised and could co-exist
with an element of new build appropriate to the historic setting.[/INDENT]


Good work from a Planning Office and good work from a Conservation Officer, . . . . . what's goin' on?
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby GrahamH » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:59 pm

gunter, there are shall we say, new people in town...

Superb report. The word 'exemplar' was not even correctly understood or applied in the original report. There is much else to be said, but I'll leave that to others.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby hutton » Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:04 pm

Interesting stuff there gunter, as an architect Mr. Slattery must be very busy at the mo' that his report "overlooked" key matters such as unusual layout etc :rolleyes:

A welcome direction by DCC indeed. I wonder whether they're looking at the recently created gaping holes on Redmond's Hill - "Better Built By McNamara" - and also Chalemont Street on way to Rathmines, and thinking 'we don't want any more of those sites to emerge, that will just sit derelict'? If so, this direction by DCC, detering vacancy setting in, is most welcome :)
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby GrahamH » Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:14 pm

Also, to soften the blow of the impending spectacle, readers are forewarned to brace themselves for the soon-to-be-unveiled new infill building across the road. The tantalising glimpses of lemon paint and aluminium fenestration have punters salivating.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby aj » Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:38 am

GrahamH wrote:gunter, there are shall we say, new people in town...

Superb report. The word 'exemplar' was not even correctly understood or applied in the original report. There is much else to be said, but I'll leave that to others.


a planner that actualy gives a shit about the city strange but welcome times indeed:)
aj
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:48 am

GrahamH wrote:Also, to soften the blow of the impending spectacle, readers are forewarned to brace themselves for the soon-to-be-unveiled new infill building across the road. The tantalising glimpses of lemon paint and aluminium fenestration have punters salivating.


It's the kitchen extension on the roof that's ringing my alarm bell.

One other worrying thing is that they seem to be carrying out deep excavations to the rear.
They were at it at half eight this morning with an orange digger, and they shifted a good couple of truck loads of material that seemed to include a fair amount of building stone.

This site is just four meters away from that substantial medieval wall in the Chadwicks yard and I didn't see any obvious archaeological supervision. Usually you can tell by the presence of a sturdy female in a florescent jacket nearby.

Image

Image
the medieval wall is marked in red.
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:07 am

There was a DCC Public Notice in the paper yesterday to the effect that the Thomas Street & Environs Architectural Conservation Area designation has been 'adopted' as a variation to the Dublin City Development Plan 2005 - 2011. There's some good stuff about the 'Billy' heritage of the area in the accompanying report, authored by the Civic Trust :)

Image

Image

Whether it should, more properly, be called the ''Half of Thomas Street ACA'' is another matter.

I'm going to take the apparent slipping in of Z5 zoning ('to consolidate and facilitate the development of the central area') to the street surface between Bridgefoot Street and Crane Street as a graphic error!
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby Smithfield Resi » Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:36 pm

:confused:

I thought half of the western end of Thomas Street had been included????

Did they print the wrong map?

There's some bonkers exclusions there.
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby StephenC » Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:04 pm

And I see ACAs proposed for Fitzwilliam Square and Chapelizod village. On display at present in DCC atrium.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:30 am

Did I see all the Buddleias gone this morning?
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby GrahamH » Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:55 am

Yep. We learned on the Open House tour that the Digital Hub ordered a clearing of all of Buddleia on their properties last week, directly on foot of the Liberties Buddleia Walking Tour!

In many ways their actions made it interesting, as like any good Dutch Billy hunt, it was all the more engaging trying to pinpoint the straggling remains of once-great urban forests hanging out of crumbling brickwork.

We also learned that the opportunity wasn't even taken to clear gutters, valleys or downpipes, or reinstate missing slates. Purely superficial.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby GregF » Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:04 pm

"Yep. We learned on the Open House tour that the Digital Hub ordered a clearing of all of Buddleia on their properties last week, directly on foot of the Liberties Buddleia Walking Tour! "




Mmmmm.........I wonder will the Green Party object...given their track record, and inane ideology, they should!


Ah... I remember when they objected to the cutting down of the trees on O' Connell St. after they had voted for the revelopment of the street and knew too well that the old trees were to go.
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby Devin » Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:02 pm

Image

Just when it seemed Thomas Street was finally starting to acquire a bit of sophistication and some improved uses - stylish conversions of former bank buildings to cafes and bespoke design shops - looks like it's wasting no time heading back to the fluorescent dumper of Morelli's takeaway and Vincenzo's Fries: the Living Quarters interiors shop on Cornmarket is "relocating" and there's a planning application for change of use of it to a takeaway restaurant. The council have requested further information - Ref. 3536/09
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby photopol » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:40 am

I noticed some pictures of 22a & 23 James's St. on this thread. Thought you might like to see this one.
There is a larger non-optimised version here
Attachments
P7010021_adj.jpg
P7010021_adj.jpg (14.49 KiB) Viewed 5543 times
photopol
Member
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:40 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:00 pm

photopol, it's interesting to note that no. 23 James St. [the green door] went from a inhabited and maintained state, in your photograph, to this state in the space of about three, or four years.

Image

This a very fine, modest, Georgian house which probably dates to the 1770s. It has some early features, corner fireplaces/central chimney stack, and some later features, the Wyatt window on the ground floor.

The door surround is a characteristic transitional Dublin-Georgian door, common in secondary locations at this time with examples popping up on Cuffe Street and around Dorset St./Eccles St. The block and moulding uprights [from earlier Gibbsian design] is combined with a thin stone arch moulding to provide the largest possible fanlight in conformity to emerging trends.

The hipped roof is a particularly tidy exercise in symmetry, to both front and back.

Image

. . . . and yes, this is a Protected Structure.
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby photopol » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:13 pm

I should have said that my shot was taken on 1/7/2006.
photopol
Member
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:40 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby gunter » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:51 pm

a shocking level of deterioration in less than three and a half years.

I don't know if I mentioned that this house is a . . . . . 'Protected Structure'
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby StephenC » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:03 pm

What does that mean?
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby Paul Clerkin » Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:57 pm

Just looking at the roof - wonder if slates were removed to hasten its demise
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Re: Thomas Street & James Street, Dublin!

Postby GrahamH » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:34 pm

Part IV, Planning and Development Act, 2000

Section 58
(1) Each owner and each occupier shall, to the extent consistent with the rights and obligations arising out of their respective interests in a protected structure or a proposed protected structure, ensure that the structure, or any element of it which contributes to its special architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest, is not endangered.

Section 59
(1) Where, in the opinion of the planning authority, it is necessary to do so in order to prevent a protected structure situated within its functional area from becoming or continuing to be endangered, the authority shall serve on each person who is the owner or occupier of the protected structure a notice—

(a) specifying the works which the planning authority considers necessary in order to prevent the protected structure from becoming or continuing to be endangered, and

(b) requiring the person on whom the notice is being served to carry out those works within a specified period of not less than 8 weeks from the date the notice comes into effect under section 62 .

(2) After serving notice under subsection (1) on a person, a planning authority may—

(a) at its discretion, assist the person in carrying out the works required under the notice, and

(b) provide such assistance in any form it considers appropriate, including advice, financial aid, materials, equipment and the services of the authority's staff.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland