Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Should the Clarence Hotel redevelopment get permission?

Yes
66
29%
No
163
71%
 
Total votes : 229

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby ctesiphon » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:47 pm

Aah yes. A man renowned for his 'good, reasoned argument[s]'.:)
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby StephenC » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:49 pm

The picture above (804) gives a good example of what will be done.
1. Draw a line slicing through the top of the adjoining redbrick just under those 4 windows, continue along to the end of the current Clarence.
2. Remove roofs and unwanted masonry.
3. Stick a glass box on top including over adjoining 4 storey properties.
4. Stick a huge oblong saucer on that.

Sympathetic and sensitive indeed

Anyone seriously considering defending this proposal should stand on the Millennium Bridge and actually imagine what the new Clarence would look like.... Imgaine it in relation to the rest of the quays and the river.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby hutton » Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:02 pm

StephenC wrote:The picture above (804) gives a good example of what will be done.
1. Draw a line slicing through the top of the adjoining redbrick just under those 4 windows, continue along to the end of the current Clarence.
2. Remove roofs and unwanted masonry.
3. Stick a glass box on top including over adjoining 4 storey properties.
4. Stick a huge oblong saucer on that.

Sympathetic and sensitive indeed

Anyone seriously considering defending this proposal should stand on the Millennium Bridge and actually imagine what the new Clarence would look like.... Imgaine it in relation to the rest of the quays and the river.


Rofl :D
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby shadow » Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:21 pm

Maybe its Fosters........
shadow
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2001 1:00 am

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby manifesta » Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:43 pm

GrahamH wrote:Image

What's this about? Is a daylight image not beyond the bounds of possibility?



Aha, but that seductive little nighttime image (not to mention all the focus on facade facade facade while who cares about the rest) has illuminated an important truth about this proposal. How telling that the rest of the quays lies in its shadow. This hotel is not about context at all. It is really nothing more than a Narcissus gazing adoringly at its own reflection. Any token statements as to its 'sensitivity' and 'sympathy' are absurd and dishonest. This is a building that loves only itself. But worse than that, it demands that you do, too.

I agree that it could be an interesting feature elsewhere, where it doesn't have to elbow out so much of the city's existing character.

Here's a solution that should appeal to all: we get a giant projector to project the 'floating hotel facade' in the river at night. We leave everything else alone.

(Bono, floatin through town at night with his tinted wraparound goggles, won't even be able to tell the difference.)
manifesta
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: in transit

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby ctesiphon » Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:59 pm

Image

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

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby GrahamH » Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:44 pm

:D

I'm not sure which is worse - your posting of the images, or my admitting to knowing what they are and refer to...

Perhaps it's Bono's intention to use the flying saucer as a stage of epic proportions, only this time with the U2 Tower as a backdrop instead of the Central Bank?

Image

I'm not sure if I'm joking...

The Clarence as currently stands is quite an odd building with regards height - it'd remind you of the 19th century fashion on Sackville Street to build tall awkward buildings on narrow plot widths. Saying that, I cannot imagine much of the rooftop storeys to be orginal, especially given they're all clad in modern pre-patinated copper, and the angular portholed sides are reminicent of an 80s apartment complex (like at the Swan Centre to tie in nicely with above :)).

Image

Was there ever a penthouse storey up here before the 90s renovation? Again probably unlikely given that great chimney there to the side... Any pics? Indeed the more you look at it, it seems likely the mellow slates were simply salvaged from a former pitched roof on the site.

That's not to say it still doesn't have a certain character; if anything the upper floors are quite elegant in a quirky way, but as often the case with such buildings, the upper side elevations are cumbersone and ugly, treated as secondary elevations even though they're just as visible as the principal. Needless to say, the air-con conduiting also does them no favours.

In this respect, I'd imagine none of the rooftop is protected, so they could sweep it clean off quite legitimately.

Here's their website, with a few insights as to interiors - the foyer, Study and basic structure of the Tea Room seem to be intact.

http://www.theclarence.ie
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby hutton » Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:20 am

Seeing as the thread has gone a bit surreal, whats the difference between God and Bono - God doesnt walk around Dublin thinking hes Bono :o

Devan wrote:i don't like the green cladding on the current building at all. the roof on the redevelopment proposal is what i like. i also like the shape.


:D

Oh yer such a shit stirrer]a[/U]n" is "Devin"s evil twin / alter-ego... wherever you see a posting by Devan, you can be damn sure its the opposite of what Devin thinks

... Anyway back on topic, I was looking at the site today from the Millenium Bridge; I had deliberately held back on taking a position until I viewed it on site. Imo the only thing by which it would be comparible to in terms of impact on the Quays is the disasterous O' Connell Bridge House. Scale, mass + bulk of the proposed UFO pad would be totally unsuitable. Thumbs down from me.

I am now offering odds that one way or the other, this is destined for appeal to An Bored Stampalla; any takers ;)
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby ctesiphon » Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:09 am

shadow wrote:Maybe its Fosters........

XXXX, more likely.

I'm not sure which is worse - your posting of the images, or my admitting to knowing what they are and refer to...

Definitely your admission. Without a doubt.

I have vague memories of the building from before its last renovation. I'm pretty sure it was there I went for dinner with my fellow jurors one day in summer 1993, to a non-descript function room a couple of floors up. And I remember being in the original bar on the ground floor another time, but the details escape me (the details of the interior, that is...). Part of the problem is that my memory of the bar has become conflated with a photograph of the old bar of The Dolphin Hotel included in Sean Rothery's 'Ireland and the new architecture', but that might be because they weren't entirely unalike. Anyone know?

The building certainly became taller in the renovations, but I think there was some type of penthouse above the attic storey. As you say, the copper dates from the renovations too.

Other than that, I don't have any more specifics or pictures.

Edit: I've just remembered that a friend has a set of party photos taken in and around the lobby. It was 14 years ago (not a jury party, I should add), but I can ask anyway.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Cathal Dunne » Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:19 am

GrahamH wrote:The Clarence itself also has an elegant rear facade that I'd probably be even more concerned about disappearing. In particular though, this typically evasive image is of greatest concern:

Image



The thing that really bugs me primus inter pares about this second U2 development in the city( theit Tower being the other) is the really lumpen roofline left by the facades being left untouched while a glass space thing just drops out of the sky on top of them. I'm all for them having a crack at upping capacity at the hotel(though their assertions that it has only 34 bedrooms are a bit hard to belive, sounds like an excuse their pulling for this) but it cannot and should not be expresses through this design, if you can call it as much.

PS. What is with that wavy glass/white concrete back facade? Would it hurt them to simply smarten up the existing exterior with just a tiny bit of surgery rather tha a full blast of newness?

For the love of architecture, its time this atomic bomb was dismantled, before it goes off!!!
Cathal Dunne
Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby GrahamH » Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:18 am

Cathal Dunne wrote: their assertions that it has only 34 bedrooms are a bit hard to believe


Indeed - according to their own website the hotel has 43 bedrooms, 4 suites, and a penthouse. That's hitting 50 given what the penthouse pulls in.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Devin » Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:29 pm

hutton wrote:"Devan" is "Devin"s evil twin / alter-ego... wherever you see a posting by Devan, you can be damn sure its the opposite of what Devin thinks
Not true!!

The Clarence had extra stories & a copper roof added in the ‘]Imo the only thing by which it would be comparible to in terms of impact on the Quays is the disasterous O' Connell Bridge House. Scale, mass + bulk of the proposed UFO pad would be totally unsuitable. Thumbs down from me.[/QUOTE]There’s a danger of a smug consensus emerging here - everyone feeling safe to lay into the proposal. It would be great to hear somebody genuinely talk in favour of it. Other than the architect, of course.
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Peter Fitz » Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:26 am

It does seems like contributors with different opinions refrain from comment once a strong consensus emerges, or maybe its just that the views of others actually sway opinion ! ? or maybe its just that they don't want to be verbally battered !

I reckon in this case most are genuinely disappointed with this proposal, there was bound to be strong expectation/anticipation once you hear fosters name.

I always liked the original building & don't think that any attempt should be made to connect it visually with its neighbours, the 'sky room' addition as proposed would reduce its status to infill (IMO!) The existing penthouse additions are too bulky, but half get away with it given the brawn of the original.

This ufo thing could look cool elsewhere, i just don't think it works here... will still keep a semi open mind until i see further renders (in daylight!) showing views from down the quays, are there no other images floating around ?
Peter Fitz
 

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Devin » Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:30 am

I’ve seen views of the ufo or 'lightcatcher' from inside – it goes right down to the bottom. It’s quite impressive .. very cutting edge. Though it also has a certain resemblance to a giant toilet bowl.

(no jokes about Bono being on top, please)
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby corcaighboy » Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:05 am

Look similar? Attached photo is of the recently constructed Supreme Court in Singapore, also by Foster. The UFO like structure is somewhat similar to the Clarence proposal. For the record, I like the Clarence plans.
Attachments
image7683.jpg
image7683.jpg (73.88 KiB) Viewed 3847 times
corcaighboy
Member
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:21 am
Location: Singapore

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby PVC King » Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:33 pm

I like the Essex Street East elevation and I think that it would act as an excellent addition to the area.

I am concerned with three issues; firstly the impacts of its overall scale on the Quays where the existing Clarence is already way out of kilter and mitigated only by the appearance of deco from the roof cladding which is I think not original?

Secondly the way the design neuters the qualities of the existing buildings; it reminds me of the Opus building in Edmund St in Birmingham where essentially a glass box was thrown on top of a similar mix of 19th and early 20th century buildings.

Thirdly the rendering is designed not to give a clear impression of the impacts of the scheme and this is not the first time that renderings of night time views have been used in this way. There needs to be some guidelines to police renderings as after the South King Street scheme (which I really like) and building beside City Hall (which I also like) it is clear that such renderings are at best not a true reflection of the design intention or at worst a smoke and mirrors exercise that may have the result of giving a completely understated impression.

On balance that a decision were made to lop off the upper floors and grant the remainder would be my hope.
PVC King
 

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby wearnicehats » Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:05 pm

I don't want to put a xenophobic swing on this but is anyone else just a wee bit miffed that Sir Bono gave this commission to Foster? First he runs away to amsterdam at the first sniff of having to pay tax and now he goes for the "celebrity" Laaandan architect. He should have held a competition where the deciding vote would be cast by him from a floating golden throne in the river below... Mind you, I suppose tired old Knights who's stars are waning should probably stick together.
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby phil » Fri Mar 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Here is an article from yesterday's Irish Times


[quote="Irish Times Thursday 15th March 2007"]

Objections to Foster's 'skycatcher' plan for Clarence

Fiona Tyrrell

An Taisce, the Irish Georgian Society and planning activist Michael Smith are among objectors to the €]

I have just two comments on this:

1:Surely the comment about "rock musicians (and their friends)" by Michael Smith has nothing to do with the conservation of the existing buildings, and can only do harm to the case being made by those who are opposing the proposed building?

2: Viking Ship!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D :rolleyes:
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby ctesiphon » Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:02 pm

phil wrote:1:Surely the comment about "rock musicians (and their friends)" by Michael Smith has nothing to do with the conservation of the existing buildings, and can only do harm to the case being made by those who are opposing the proposed building?

Agreed. MS has done sterling work in the past, but sometimes he gets his tone spectacularly wrong as here and, as you say, it might even do his case harm. The personal circumstances of a developer have nothing to do with the planning merits of a case - as I've said in the past to clients seeking to object/observe, rich people getting richer isn't grounds for refusal of PP and calling them greedy will only make you seem petty - and focussing on these personal circumstances can in fact detract from the real and valid arguments against granting PP. His comment could almost be interpreted as 'I wouldn't mind so much if this were a regular developer applying to gut six Protected Structures and build an over-scaled, inappropriately designed hotel, but because it's a Rock Star I have a problem with it.'

Come on, MS, you can do better than that. It's not as if the proposal doesn't have enough questions over it from a straight planning standpoint.
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Paul Clerkin » Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:21 pm

When I saw the Sindo's piece, I immediately thought "great, smith has blown the case, thanks a lot" - he's done some real damage IMO to the appeal - way too much vitriol
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
 
Posts: 5418
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby PVC King » Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:28 pm

Interesting article and for the first time a daylight image of the scheme in relation to the quays. A little full on from Michael Smith but I guess as a private individual he can say what he likes once it isn't slanderous. It was also Bono he went for and not a private individual which would have made it a million times worse; you would never hear An Taisce, IGS or myself write or say such things but Michael Smith as a magazine owner knows which buttons to press to gain attention. I furter don't think that the An Taisce line of it being fine in the docklands would have got a half page spread in the sindo. I still further don't believe that any planners will consider an individual submission when considering that from a proscribed body or DC for that matter.
PVC King
 

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby GrahamH » Mon Mar 19, 2007 11:20 pm

In fact, I'd say the only reason this got coverage is because of that very line - especially in other weekend papers that honed in specifically on that personal point. So whereas it's an inappropriate and irrelevant observation to make in a planning submission, from the point of view of publicity it has really brought the project into the public eye. Or more specifically, it has brought DCC's imminent decision into the public eye.
It will no doubt be considered carefully...
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby StephenC » Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:29 pm

The verdict came back on this

Clarence Hotel Decision
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby al_3452 » Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:06 pm

This proposal is just like the central bank , a great building in the wrong place.

It would look great flanking the pheonix park or some square in dublin but here it just screams for attention.
al_3452
Member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:54 am

Re: A new Clarence Hotel re-development with destruction on Essex St., Temple Bar

Postby Eccentrichard » Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:26 pm

I must say that, considering its Georgian provenance, the Clarence looks remarkably scruffy. I can also understand that it is too small to compete in the dog-eat-dog marketplace - but why oh why did it have to be Fostered? Has Bono never heard of Quinlan Terry?

Just in case you haven't, either, here's a few things he's done:

Waterfront development. Richmond-upon-Thames (1984-87) - incorporates two old, listed buildings:
<a href="http://img172.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-7460/loc116/72580_Richmond_Waterfront_01_122_116lo.jpg" target=_blank><img src="http://img172.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-7460/loc116/72580_Richmond_Waterfront_01_122_116lo.jpg" border="0"></a>

Baker Street development, London (2001-02)
<a href="http://img155.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-9062/loc214/72234_London_BakerStreet_01_122_214lo.jpg" target=_blank><img src="http://img155.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-9062/loc214/72234_London_BakerStreet_01_122_214lo.jpg" border="0"></a>

<a href="http://img107.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-19501/loc1196/72239_London_BakerStreet_02_122_1196lo.jpg" target=_blank><img src="http://img107.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-19501/loc1196/72239_London_BakerStreet_02_122_1196lo.jpg" border="0"></a>


Don't you agree that something in this vein would be far better than Foster's proposed monstrosity?
Eccentrichard
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:04 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland