oooh you'd miss the archiseek sarcasm if you haven't been on in a few wks.!wearnicehats wrote:leaving aside your rapier wit for a second -
(tho admit guilty also)
Bago wrote:cash converters on the corner of Thomas and Meath street's gotten a lick of paint, bring sunglasses and a sick bucket. Leagues ahead in the shopfront race to the bottom.
thebig C wrote:Was the building rendered or faced in brick? I always think its a crime when somebody paints over the brick frontages of Georgian/Victorian buildings.......for which they should be punished by being beaten to death with a shovel! JK. Seriously, nothing spoils a buildings context and appearance more then a dodgy paint job.
GrahamH wrote:The biggest and most important investment Thomas Street is ever likely to see for at least a decade is being planned right now, with works potentially beginning as early as a few months' time. Yet there is what must be bordering on zero public awareness of it. It is the construction of the Thomas Street - James's Street Quality Bus Corridor, currently at public consultation stage.
Some plans can be viewed here.
Great aerial pic, showing the 19th-century type density that survived in backlands of the city behind streets up to the '60s, before so much clearing out for surface parking. As an example of a backland structure alone, the national school is worth keeping. I hope something can be done with it eventually.GrahamH wrote:An aerial view of the Meath Street school from about 1960, with its roof and chimneys intact. What a fine building it was.
gunter wrote:from today's Irish Times commercial property section:
Some questions immediately spring to mind:
Why would Digital Hub, a state agency tasked with creating a physical nucleus for the nebulous notion of a 'knowledge economy', want to dispose of the key central section of their flagship property holding on the south side of Thomas Street, . . . . . and advertise it as nothing more than a ''Prime Development Site'' ?
Why would an outfit [presumably with access to professional advice] attempt to flog 'a prime development site' at this particular juncture, just as we seem to be in sight of the floor of the deepest property slump in history?
How and when exactly did Dublin City Council become partners in the Digital Hub?
They'll probably try and present this as an opportunity for 'development partners' to come and share in the on-going dynamic success of Digital Hub, but it looks a lot more like the first quiet step in an exit strategy, a sign that the whole concept of a 'Digital Hub' is effectively over and that the agency itself is essentially folding it's tent and slumping away. In the circumstances, is it appropriate to ask ourselves, what is the legacy of the 'Digital Hub'?
Well I suppose we did accumulated a series of bizarre, grandiose and utterly inappropriate development schemes that will amuse and entertain architecture buffs for years to come, but at the same time we've witnessed the shameful deterioration [in state hands] of virtually all but one of the Digital Hub Thomas Street properties [several of them supposedly 'Protected Structures'] that together make up this wonderfully varied and hugely valuable streetscape. Arguably, no street in Dublin is better placed than Thomas Street to illustrate the whole complex heritage of this city, the depth in the record of our built heritage, the drama and tragedy in our history.
Not working with the grain is where this all went wrong in the first instance. That has to be the lesson we take from this. Digital Hub could have been magnificent, it could have been a master class in urban regeneration injecting high-tech energy into a historic location with each gaining from the other in a synergy of renewal, but that wouldn't have left room for all the blundering clueless gobshites that always seem to pop up at the controls in situations like this when golden opportunities seemed to be just about to present themselves.