Dorset St (Upper)

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:41 am

The analysis by Graham is as per usual spot on :( . This snap is from a few months ago. The owner has since carried out works, as evident when one passes today, such as corrogated steel etc... Which throws up the question as to works carried out on a listed building. Hmmmm....

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

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby manifesta » Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:29 pm

A look at the corrugated, er, improvements on the Sheridan building. Who is responsible?

Image

Image

Back to the news coverage:

hutton wrote:Developer makes play for Sheridan's birthplace

From The Irish Independent Sat, Feb 10 07

A DEVELOPER plans to demolish the birthplace of 18th century playwright Richard Brinsley Sheridan and replace it with an apartment block.

Planning permission has been sought from Dublin City Council by Shane Murphy, with an address at Malahide in Dublin, to demolish the playwright and Whig MP's former home at 12 Upper Dorset Street. Mr Murphy wants to build nine apartments, including a luxury penthouse suite.

A listed building, the house is currently in a dilapidated condition and two of the upper floors have been demolished. A conservation report attached to the planning application calls it an "eyesore".



I'm disturbed by the suggestion in the article that it's okay to demolish a building because, after all, a conservation report dubbed it an 'eyesore'. I'm sure the conservation report had more to say on the subject, and perhaps it even bothered to list some of the architectural merits of the building... not the least of which is that this is on the Record of Protected Structures. But alas, such limited space in the Irish Times!

You have to wonder if such 'improvements' as the corrugated steel were made to make this building even more of an eyesore. Because apparently, it's an appropriate conservation practice to just tear something down the worse it looks.
manifesta
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: in transit

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby phil » Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:09 pm

Good points Manifesta. I was also worried by the mention of facade retention by Senator Norris. I don't want to harp on about this too much as my views on it have been expressed again and again so are probably boring people to death, but the more people concede on only retaining the facade of buildings of note, the more we will actually lose in the long run.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby DJM » Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:48 pm

In my opinion, facade retention is acceptable in only very few cases, and in this instance it would be somewhat futile. It´s often carried out by greedy developers aided by the ignorance of planning officials. In this case however there may be arguements for facade retention, and possibly full demolition.

Perhaps the idea of facade retention was mentioned in light of the fact that little or nothing remains within the shell? If that´s the case then, is it to be restored? (which given the current condition would be economically unrealistic) Rebuilding a new structure behind the facade may be the only realistic proposal in this case, whereby facade retention becomes an option.

But given the limited amount of original material that would be retained, and considering the necessary rebuilding of a substantial part of the facade and the addition of a new roof, doors and fenestration, facade retention is of questionable merit in this case and a valid arguement for full demolition could in theory be made.
DJM
Member
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:32 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby GrahamH » Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:22 am

Indeed it could, but it must be noted that should a retention be made, it would involve much more than the meagre substance that the term 'facade retention' implies - in this case, from what can be gathered, all four walls of the building still stand, not just a remnant of the front elevation. We also don't know the extent of original fabric to interior, but it's fair to assume that given it's roofed over, there's at least something of merit inside.

There are quite a few examples of attic storey rebuilds about the city (I can't think of them offhand), a method that has saved many townhouses from demolition or at best from botched restoration jobs. Whilst a 1.5 storey rebuild is probably in order in this case, it's largely fair to assume these upper floors to be the least architecturally and historically significant parts of the house. Indeed even if the building had been habitable, one would have to question just how much original fabric would have been retained organically up there as bedsits or studio flats; the reality is that even most of the houses of Merrion Square have virtually nothing of interest or indeed probably of original fabric in their uppermost floors. Please feel free to pick holes in this strain of argument.

This is also not a case of a low-rise rebuild preventing the 'densifying' of the inner city: a four storey over basement house of substantial floorplates along with neighbouring new-build infill is more than an acceptable outcome.

I genuinely agree that if little other than a low front elevation remains, in most cases it ought not impede on the wider improvement of an area, but with the substantial fabric still intact here, along with the strong historical and literary connections, a valid case can be made for structural retention - a more apt term I think.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Bye-bye more historic Dublin

Postby hutton » Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:37 pm

Looks as if Goldhawk/ Phoenix was on the money about O'Toole afterall. But where was he when objections were being lodged; permission has already been granted (on the 8th) to whack the house. The scheme is a monstrosity and will be comparable to that other close-by delightful development on Henrietta St which DCC was so enlightened in giving the go ahead to.

There isn't even a set of photos of no 12 in the "conservation" report - and yet there are 2 red-herring sets of the Moy bar; FFS. For anybody wanting a textbook lesson in ruthless development, this is it.

Well done DCC you have outdone yourselves in letting the north inner city get shat on - again :mad:


The Irish Times Saturday 16th February 2007

Build them up and knock them down
Fintan O'Toole

Culture Shock: We use our great writers as a unique selling point, but we can't even be bothered to preserve the houses they lived in.

Recently, when the Abbey Theatre staged Richard Brinsley Sheridan's great comedy The School for Scandal, even its management was taken aback by the popularity of the production. Over the last 20 years, only around half a dozen Abbey productions have managed to sell 550 seats or more every night of their run. The School for Scandal, along with such huge hits as The Shaughraun and Dancing at Lughnasa, was one of them. This success, though, was not, on a long view, all that surprising. The School, along with Sheridan's first play The Rivals, are the only 18th-century plays that still hold a place in the international English-language repertoire. Given any kind of decent production (and the Abbey's was more than decent), their energy, their vividness, their linguistic invention and their rich characterisations still get through to audiences.

It says something about the fecklessness of Irish cultural memory, however, that just as the Abbey was putting Sheridan back in an Irish context, permission has been granted to demolish the house, 10 minutes walk from the theatre, where Sheridan was born in 1751. That house, 12 Dorset Street, is saturated with Irish theatrical and literary history. Sheridan's father, Thomas, was one of the greatest Irish actors of his age and, as manager of Smock Alley theatre, a revolutionary figure in the development of theatre here. It was Thomas who, at the cost of riots and ultimate ruin, insisted on the professional dignity of actors by removing audience members from the stage and refusing to repeat speeches on demand in the course of a performance. Sheridan's mother, Frances, is easily the most important Irish woman writer of the 18th century, a pioneer of the epistolary novel and a considerable playwright whose A Trip to Bath was a huge influence on her son's work.

Sheridan himself, though he left Ireland at the age of 11 and never returned, was a self-consciously, even insistently, Irish figure. In the course of his long political career, he campaigned for Irish independence, developed ties with the United Irishmen, devoted himself to the cause of Catholic emancipation, spoke out against the abuse of Irish political prisoners, and conceived an idea that would have a huge bearing on Irish history after his death - the notion of an Irish party in the Westminster parliament. He was regarded in his time as a great adornment to Irish national pride, not least for his sensational speeches against the governor of India, Warren Hastings, which are milestones in the development of international human rights law.

The idea that Sheridan's birthplace should be preserved has been around for at least 50 years now. In 1956, for example, the Longford-Westmeath deputy, Frank Carter, raised the issue in the Dáil, citing "certain houses . . . which could and should be preserved". He listed three in particular: the homes of the 1916 Rising leader Thomas Clarke, the 19th-century nationalist John Mitchel, and Sheridan's birthplace. "A move should be made, preferably voluntary, if people were sufficiently civic-minded, to preserve those buildings, but if a move is not made voluntarily, then steps should be taken by the State, even in a small way, to preserve these famous buildings."

Some small moves were eventually made. The house was listed for preservation. A blue plaque was erected on the front wall in the early 1970s by Dublin Tourism. Bizarrely, however, the plaque was removed soon afterwards. While blue plaques adorn numerous buildings where Sheridan lived in London and Bath, Dublin has the unique distinction of having actually removed one. The obliteration of the house's historical significance seems to have been a deliberate prelude to its eventual destruction.

For many years now, it has been nothing more than a semi-derelict shell with bricked-up windows and no roof. In another bizarre twist, number 12 and number 13 Dorset Street came to be distinguished, not as landmarks, but as eyesores. A Bord Pleanála inspection report on proposals to demolish number 13 noted of the two houses that "they stand out in the streetscape. In their current state, they detract from the amenity of the area." In 50 years, Sheridan's house had gone, in official discourse, from a "famous building" to an infamous one.

Does any of this matter? At an economic level, it probably does. Dublin is sold to visitors as a literary and theatrical city, and the authorities are busily attaching literary associations even to structures which have no previous connection to James Joyce, Sean O'Casey or Samuel Beckett, all of whom have new Liffey bridges named after them. Yet Dorset Street, on which two of the greatest dramatists in the English language, O'Casey and Sheridan, were born within a few hundred metres of each other, makes less than nothing of its genuine historical associations. This seems perversely wasteful.

More importantly, though, the likely demolition of Sheridan's birthplace implies a neurotic disconnection from the lived reality of our cultural heritage. Writers can be fetishised in the streetscape by sticking their resonant names on bridges, pubs, hotels or industrial estates. But their actual lives, the things that locate them in time and place, are not worth remembering.

© 2007 The Irish Times
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Bye-bye more historic Dublin

Postby aj » Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:34 pm

hutton wrote:Looks as if Goldhawk/ Phoenix was on the money about O'Toole afterall. But where was he when objections were being lodged]There isn't even a set of photos of no 12 in the "conservation" report - and yet there are 2 red-herring sets of the Moy bar; FFS. For anybody wanting a textbook lesson in ruthless development, this is it.[/B]

Well done DCC you have outdone yourselves in letting the north inner city get shat on - again :mad:


The Irish Times Saturday 16th February 2007

Build them up and knock them down
Fintan O'Toole

Culture Shock: We use our great writers as a unique selling point, but we can't even be bothered to preserve the houses they lived in.

Recently, when the Abbey Theatre staged Richard Brinsley Sheridan's great comedy The School for Scandal, even its management was taken aback by the popularity of the production. Over the last 20 years, only around half a dozen Abbey productions have managed to sell 550 seats or more every night of their run. The School for Scandal, along with such huge hits as The Shaughraun and Dancing at Lughnasa, was one of them. This success, though, was not, on a long view, all that surprising. The School, along with Sheridan's first play The Rivals, are the only 18th-century plays that still hold a place in the international English-language repertoire. Given any kind of decent production (and the Abbey's was more than decent), their energy, their vividness, their linguistic invention and their rich characterisations still get through to audiences.

It says something about the fecklessness of Irish cultural memory, however, that just as the Abbey was putting Sheridan back in an Irish context, permission has been granted to demolish the house, 10 minutes walk from the theatre, where Sheridan was born in 1751. That house, 12 Dorset Street, is saturated with Irish theatrical and literary history. Sheridan's father, Thomas, was one of the greatest Irish actors of his age and, as manager of Smock Alley theatre, a revolutionary figure in the development of theatre here. It was Thomas who, at the cost of riots and ultimate ruin, insisted on the professional dignity of actors by removing audience members from the stage and refusing to repeat speeches on demand in the course of a performance. Sheridan's mother, Frances, is easily the most important Irish woman writer of the 18th century, a pioneer of the epistolary novel and a considerable playwright whose A Trip to Bath was a huge influence on her son's work.

Sheridan himself, though he left Ireland at the age of 11 and never returned, was a self-consciously, even insistently, Irish figure. In the course of his long political career, he campaigned for Irish independence, developed ties with the United Irishmen, devoted himself to the cause of Catholic emancipation, spoke out against the abuse of Irish political prisoners, and conceived an idea that would have a huge bearing on Irish history after his death - the notion of an Irish party in the Westminster parliament. He was regarded in his time as a great adornment to Irish national pride, not least for his sensational speeches against the governor of India, Warren Hastings, which are milestones in the development of international human rights law.

The idea that Sheridan's birthplace should be preserved has been around for at least 50 years now. In 1956, for example, the Longford-Westmeath deputy, Frank Carter, raised the issue in the Dáil, citing "certain houses . . . which could and should be preserved". He listed three in particular: the homes of the 1916 Rising leader Thomas Clarke, the 19th-century nationalist John Mitchel, and Sheridan's birthplace. "A move should be made, preferably voluntary, if people were sufficiently civic-minded, to preserve those buildings, but if a move is not made voluntarily, then steps should be taken by the State, even in a small way, to preserve these famous buildings."

Some small moves were eventually made. The house was listed for preservation. A blue plaque was erected on the front wall in the early 1970s by Dublin Tourism. Bizarrely, however, the plaque was removed soon afterwards. While blue plaques adorn numerous buildings where Sheridan lived in London and Bath, Dublin has the unique distinction of having actually removed one. The obliteration of the house's historical significance seems to have been a deliberate prelude to its eventual destruction.

For many years now, it has been nothing more than a semi-derelict shell with bricked-up windows and no roof. In another bizarre twist, number 12 and number 13 Dorset Street came to be distinguished, not as landmarks, but as eyesores. A Bord Pleanála inspection report on proposals to demolish number 13 noted of the two houses that "they stand out in the streetscape. In their current state, they detract from the amenity of the area." In 50 years, Sheridan's house had gone, in official discourse, from a "famous building" to an infamous one.

Does any of this matter? At an economic level, it probably does. Dublin is sold to visitors as a literary and theatrical city, and the authorities are busily attaching literary associations even to structures which have no previous connection to James Joyce, Sean O'Casey or Samuel Beckett, all of whom have new Liffey bridges named after them. Yet Dorset Street, on which two of the greatest dramatists in the English language, O'Casey and Sheridan, were born within a few hundred metres of each other, makes less than nothing of its genuine historical associations. This seems perversely wasteful.

More importantly, though, the likely demolition of Sheridan's birthplace implies a neurotic disconnection from the lived reality of our cultural heritage. Writers can be fetishised in the streetscape by sticking their resonant names on bridges, pubs, hotels or industrial estates. But their actual lives, the things that locate them in time and place, are not worth remembering.

© 2007 The Irish Times



Its is sad to see yet another demolition of whatis potentailly a fine Georgian mansion on the northside... it becomes heartbreaking given its significance. I was walking around North Georgian Dublin last week and not was genuinely amazed at the quality of some of the buildings.... i was even more surprised as to the state of most of them..

is there any chance that someone in Government will have the balls to take on the developers and landlords who let magnificent buildings rot?
aj
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Bye-bye more historic Dublin

Postby manifesta » Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:06 pm

[quote="hutton"]Looks as if Goldhawk/ Phoenix was on the money about O'Toole afterall. But where was he when objections were being lodged]

Thanks for posting this, hutton. Agreed. O'Toole's article on the Sheridan house makes for a nice eulogy, but it would have made a better protest song.

So the Record of Protected Structures: legally binding or just a polite suggestion? It seems easy enough, as we've all seen, to steamroll right over it. Why is this so?

It raises the question-- on perhaps a grander scale-- of what the role of public protest is over buildings and space, whether protected or unprotected. Why the formal fee to object? The implication that money buys influence is certainly in keeping with the way most of the world works, but it doesn't make it right. Though on the bright side, it does make corruption easier to spot (we can all think of those infamous projects that lodge dozens of planning applications, hoping to make it completely cost-prohibitive to object). But really, why?

And in terms of forums (like newspapers, like this discussion board) that encourage the so-called free exchange of opinion, one has to wonder. Does whistle-blowing without the proper authority to enforce ever have an impact? If so, what are some of the success stories and more importantly, why do we think they worked? And whether an earlier O'Toole article would actually have had influence over the DCC's decision-- I'd like to think this is the case, however idealistic. It's the least a writer can do in the world.
manifesta
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: in transit

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby GrahamH » Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:26 am

Also, how is it that permission can be granted by a LA for the demolition of a Protected Structure without it being formally delisted? Whatever about alterations to a PS being included in a general application, surely the wholescale demolition of such a structure ought to be subject to a separate delisting application, and not merely a throwaway element of a broader development proposal?

Some of the conditions to the demolition include:

12. A copy of the survey drawings of the existing building and Conservation Report shall be submitted to the Irish Architectural Archive, prior to the commencement of development. Reason: In the interest of historical recording and research. [what about photographs?]

7. A plaque, of appropriate size and design, shall be erected on the front elevation of the proposed structure at ground floor level, reflecting the historical significance of the site as the birthplace of Richard Sheridan, dramatist. The applicants shall consult with the Conservation Officer in this regard, prior to the commencement of any works on site. Reason: In the interests of historical recording.

Presumably this is going to be appealed.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby J. Seerski » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:06 pm

Amid all the doom and gloom there are glimmers of enlightened enterprise. No. 1 Synnott Place was painted red for the past 20 years or more and was horribly defaced by advertising hoardings as well as being in a state of neglect. The recent restoration of this building has brought some hope to an area that, while improving, seemed to have lost its heritage in its quest to tidy itself up.

This building is a beacon in an area that has such beauties as George Cosgrave Car Sales building (horriffic is the word!) and the emasculation of some fine georgian palaces near the Nth Fredrick Street end (there is one fine five-bay mansion that merits investigation, given its size and bulk it must have been a notable address - it is beside the shx coffe shop).

I do agree with facades being preserved and or re-instated, if only for reference sake to how the area once was. Moreso, it would re-inforce the importance of the existing housing stock that is already extant.

J.
J. Seerski
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 2:48 pm
Location: Glasnevin, Dublin

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby lunasa » Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:24 am

About a year ago I posted a query aboutr "An Stad", a very run down 'B&B' on North Frederick Street. It didn't whet anyone's quodlibet. Seeing as you're discussing 'up the street', I'd be really glad to know more of the background of this large Georgian with dim dangling lightbulbs, tatty faux lace curtains and the pain of shattered panes
lunasa
Member
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:09 pm
Location: Milano

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby notjim » Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:49 am

J. Seerski, the formerly pink/red georgian looks very fine, two other georgians on Synott place are being renovated. Wonder what effect the changes to the big tree will have on the look of this area, the pub itself is being reduced in size back to the georgian building and, I think, an extra story added, or restored, as is claimed.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:07 am

lunasa wrote:About a year ago I posted a query aboutr "An Stad", a very run down 'B&B' on North Frederick Street. It didn't whet anyone's quodlibet. Seeing as you're discussing 'up the street', I'd be really glad to know more of the background of this large Georgian with dim dangling lightbulbs, tatty faux lace curtains and the pain of shattered panes


Might it this be the one (with the broken window) -

Image

If so, you are in luck in so far as I understand that the owners might be willing to consider offers. ;)

Shame about its current state - its probably worthy of inclusion in the "Endangered Georgian Dublin" thread :(

Somewhat undestated entrance - a Georgian townhouse with the doorway with only a hint of the brackets that would fully trumpet in the Regency era. And a little bit of the house's history as well...
No 20 – “An Stad” – Used by Michael Collins (1890 – 1922); Irish Freedom Fighter and Signatory to the 1921 Anglo – Irish Treaty as a “safe house” during The War of Independence. See also Mountjoy Street, Mountjoy Square and Great Denmark Street for further connections with Collins.

Hope thats of help :)

Im sure DCC can revisit here to stick in some more unsuitable poles and visual shitage :rolleyes:
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby GrahamH » Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:13 am

A closer shot of the medallion/frieze detail:

Image

The brickwork looks like it was all replaced in the 70s along with those dodgy windows - yet the brickwork has an oddly old quality to it too... Clearly something was done given only part of the frieze has been cleaned. It's probably just the contrast of this uncleaned old brick with the cleaned house next door.

And just as a minor aside, the lamppost across the road at the entrance to Hardwicke Street has the original green paint exposing itself :)

Image


Yes fantastic news about No. 1 Synnott Place, or perhaps more commmonly known as the red 'Golf Corner'. Saw it there a few weeks ago and the newly exposed stock brick looks great; it changes the entire tone of this part of Dorset Street and junction here. The brickwork's a bit patchy, but hey it adds to the charm. I hope to get pics soon.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby lunasa » Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:49 pm

Re: An Stad
Thanks Hutton. Any hint as to who this Hibernian Rackman might be.
lunasa
Member
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:09 pm
Location: Milano

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:44 pm

lunasa wrote:Re: An Stad
Thanks Hutton. Any hint as to who this Hibernian Rackman might be.


Your welcome :)

Its not quite a rackman situation - its more a sorry story about the house belonging to a number in a family who havent been able to agree what to do with it (apart from sale of rere 2-3 years ago). Although one of the family has been living there, there is little money, and none of the siblings were willing or able to spend money on it. Was run as a guest house, but all things considered, I get the impression that times have been tough...So not quite a Rackman story. Anyhow it is my understanding that agreement has been reached to release the house onto the open market - so hopefully it'll all work out.

Thats good new about Synott Place - and there is also another Georgian on that row also undergoing what would appear to be a good quality restoration :)

However...

Apologies for pissing on the parade, but just behind the Synott Place houses is 422 North Circular Road, where the author and playwright, Sean O’ Casey (1880 -1964) lived until 1926 after having moved here from 35 Mountjoy Square in 1918. The house is being let fall into a desperate state - broken windows etc; there is a real and definate danger that it could become another Sheridan house fiasco; it becomes run down, corrugated metal gets tacked on - and an application goes in to replace the "eyesore":rolleyes: :(
Among the plays O' Casey wrote in 422 was “The Plough and the Stars”, while his other works “The Shadow of a Gunman”, is based on 35 Mountjoy Square. Subsequently he emigrated to London; for more connections on O' Casey in the area see Dorset Street (building replaced), Innisfallen Parade, and the West house at 20 Dominick Street Lower (well-known for rococco plaster work), and 35 Mountjoy Square (replica facade).
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby notjim » Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:06 pm

I pass this house every day, it is a crying shame. The problem is it is so big, one of the biggest houses in the area and clearly anyone who could afford to buy and renovate it isn't interested in living around here. Also, there is no garden, obviously the only thing that could happen is that someone turn it into high end apartments and, again, this area isn't up enough to support that. It isn't a bad area, just not a posh one. Something needs to be done soon though for 422, it is deterioating by the day.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby ConK » Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:13 pm

I was surprised by the quality of the conservation report recently conducted for a 3 storey over basement house on Sherrard Street, just off Belvedere Road, near Dorset Street. But the house had been burnt so I guess it was safe enough to do a good conservation report. It is too big to attach. You can nagivate to it, 20 pages with pictures conservation report of the Dublin City website. Planning number : 4154/05

The question above about the photos for the Brinsley Sheridan Birthplace; in this application number 4154/05 (also a geo. house north inner City); one of the conditions was
"
Note: The applicant is advised that this is an application for proposed development to a Protected Structure (within the of the Planning and Development Act, 2000). The planning application must be accompanied - by such photographs, plans and other particulars as are necessary to show how the development would affect the character of the structure, - as required under Article 23 (2) of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001. A Conservation Method Statement/written report must be submitted which gives a brief description of the proposal and outlines the rationale and justification of the development and also state how it has been designed to have regard to the character of the main dwelling which is a protected structure.
"
Also there has bee a great renovation of a 3 bay Geo. house at 9 Buckingham Street, Dublin 1. Converted into multiple residential units - as nothing else would work here.
ConK
Member
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 3:05 pm

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby GregF » Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:48 pm

manifesta wrote:A look at the corrugated, er, improvements on the Sheridan building. Who is responsible?

Image

Image

Back to the news coverage:



I'm disturbed by the suggestion in the article that it's okay to demolish a building because, after all, a conservation report dubbed it an 'eyesore'. I'm sure the conservation report had more to say on the subject, and perhaps it even bothered to list some of the architectural merits of the building... not the least of which is that this is on the Record of Protected Structures. But alas, such limited space in the Irish Times!

You have to wonder if such 'improvements' as the corrugated steel were made to make this building even more of an eyesore. Because apparently, it's an appropriate conservation practice to just tear something down the worse it looks.


Gas how 'Developers' are just generally culturally ignorant bastards. This building stood here without even a placque to signify Sheridan's association. The Council has to be blamed too. Another part of the old city and history lost.
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby GregF » Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:07 pm

I remember someone posted photos of this area and how great it once looked years ago prior to the vandalism. Its streetscapes were intact with the red brick houses and the doric or ionic columned classical building standing on the corner which was to be replaced in time by the awful concrete block cinema (later, the waxwoks museum). It is really a nightmare the way this whole area has turned out. The waxworks is now gone with the replacement appartment block soon to be revealed. Refering to the recent photo above, look how bad the toytown appartments are to Sheridans terraced house. There was no effort to continue the uniform line of the street.

Joyce's house of 'The Dead' on the quays was rightfully restored and so should this, else we will have fuck all left of cultural and historical note in certain parts of the city.
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby StephenC » Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:47 pm

The new scheme at the corner of Dorset and Granby Row is actually an hotel. I havent seen any images of it but my guess is the standard design coming through with new builds in the city recently. I think I remember the initial proposals were shot down by DCC due to the sensitive nature of the site as a key part of the north Georgian core and the emerging cutural quarter around Parnell Square.

I must further down Dorset Street the new streetworks look great. It really gives the whole street a lift.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2497
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:24 pm

GregF wrote:It is really a nightmare the way this whole area has turned out. The waxworks is now gone with the replacement appartment block soon to be revealed....Joyce's house of 'The Dead' on the quays was rightfully restored and so should this, else we will have fuck all left of cultural and historical note in certain parts of the city.


Spot on.

Here's the proposed development - wholly inappropriate imo given the proximity of the "protected" structure opposite, and also dwarfing the "protected" ecclesiastical structures adjacent - which are part of a conservation area. Bulk and scale is remarkable - a full three floors above the parapet level of the adjacent LA terrace, ie twice as high]http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w108/hutton001/Dorsetproposeddev2.jpg[/IMG]

And again - this time the frontal elevation with the dotted line indicating the existing structures, with the area centre-right (no 12) still listed as a "protected" structure:

Image

So the application has no interior photos of no. 12 in the "conservation" report, would demolish one listed structure, significantly and detrimentally impact 2 others, and its only in the last few months that the current owner has barricaded the front door with corrugated metal. Yet applied for during Christmas week, DCC had permission granted by Valentines Day - thats efficiency for you :rolleyes:

So DCC remind me again just WTF "Protected Structure" actually means :mad:
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:29 pm

And just to remind people - not that most need or want it - of that other recent "regeneration" permitted by DCC, not 200 yards away - the Henrietta Hag

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

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby manifesta » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:46 pm

Is the Sheridan house going to be demolished tomorrow? Wasn't the 8th the day of the chopping block or has some angel of infinite mercy and reason swooped down overnight and convinced the DCC to halt this?

I'd say it'd be worth going in overnight and doing a salvage job the way they saved the door of 7 Eccles Street (from Ulysses fame) back before it was wrecked to make way for the hospital, only what's left to salvage-- a hunk of corrugated metal? They couldn't even bother to keep the plaque.

Regarding the proposed development for 12-13 Dorset Street, it's nice to see the DCC's henchmen, Insult and Injury getting on so well. Apparently they decided to come out of hiding from their HQ in the Henrietta Hag and this was their sick idea for a follow-upper. Hate to see what's next on the hit list. Probably another Protected Structure.
manifesta
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: in transit

Re: Dorset St (Upper)

Postby hutton » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:43 pm

manifesta wrote:Is the Sheridan house going to be demolished tomorrow? Wasn't the 8th the day of the chopping block or has some angel of infinite mercy and reason swooped down overnight and convinced the DCC to halt this?

I'd say it'd be worth going in overnight and doing a salvage job the way they saved the door of 7 Eccles Street (from Ulysses fame) back before it was wrecked to make way for the hospital, only what's left to salvage-- a hunk of corrugated metal? They couldn't even bother to keep the plaque.

Regarding the proposed development for 12-13 Dorset Street, it's nice to see the DCC's henchmen, Insult and Injury getting on so well. Apparently they decided to come out of hiding from their HQ in the Henrietta Hag and this was their sick idea for a follow-upper. Hate to see what's next on the hit list. Probably another Protected Structure.


Where did you hear it was to be demolished???

Appeals have already been lodged with the bord on this - so surely any such move would be contempt of BP and wholly illegal.

*watching space with interest*...
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland