New tallest building in Dublin to form part of Hammond Lane development (2)

Home › Forums › Ireland › New tallest building in Dublin to form part of Hammond Lane development (2)

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 30 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #705177
    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    #717843
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Well – the road I would hardly term a civic space. In actual fact the model seems to indicate a new bridge across the canal entrance – is this the case? Are we going to turn this quiet corner of the quays into a dual carriageway?

    I must say that the job that has been done with the campshires thus far has been marvellous. Are they lighted at night time? The problem I noted in my last posting is that this series of building seems largely closed to the quays. Oh for an open minded space as against the closed minded single purpose building and developments the are the norm in Dublin. (I have been reading Richard Roger’s excellent ‘Cities for a Small Planet’).

    #717844
    MG
    Participant

    They’re doing a magnificent job on the campshires and for that the Corpo should take a bow. That definitely looks like a new bridge because there’s a set of locks just near there and no bridge as far as I remember.

    #717845
    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    What I was going to say (before the thread blew up) was that there’s very little opportunity for the development to access the river and canal side as an amenity area because of the way it is surrounded by road from the campshires. It is howver a quiet enough area of the docklands as its on the road to nowhere.

    I sincerely hope that they will not build a new bridge there, as its nice and quiet with the lock access.

    #717846
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    What is a / what are campshire(s)?… not in my dictionary!

    #717847
    Jas
    Participant

    Thje campshires are the area between the roadway and the water… they’re the actual quayside where in the past all the dock cranes were on rails.

    #717848
    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    I see that this development has got permission.

    #717849
    GregF
    Participant

    …..Good!

    #717850
    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    Damn I cannot find the picture of the model anymore on the Indo site…. anyone got one?

    #717851
    urbanisto
    Participant

    The Campshires are looking good. Its just a pity it all ends at Matt Talbot Bridge. Has anyone noticed the mess of the pavement and roadway there. Georges Quay and the area in front of Tara St Station are a bit a of a disgrace as well.

    #717852
    Rory W
    Participant

    I seem to remember the bridge being for public transport use only when originally mooted. Hope that they go ahead and build the thing as the momementum that was around last year seems to have slowed consideribly. Has anyone else noticed that?

    Paul can you fix that picture?

    #717853
    iuxta
    Participant

    Paul,
    the picture seems to have dissappeared. Is this the O’Muire Smyth tower scheme with the curved facade towards the river?

    #717854
    Paul Clerkin
    Keymaster

    The picture was on the Indo website and now its gone…. looking for an alternate….

    #717855
    GregF
    Participant

    …I’ve been to Dubai lately…….impressive towers blocks to see ….all sort of shapes and forms against the skyline, oozing wealth and flamboyant style…….The one proposed for the Dublin Docks evokes somewhat the same. I wish we could have a lot more.

    #717856
    LOB
    Participant

    here is the Burj Al Arab hotel by WS Atkins-the interior is a little on the opulant side but the overall feel of the building is quite exciting http://www.geocities.com/big_buildings5/baa.html

    #717857
    GregF
    Participant

    Thats somewhat of a coincidence …the photo of the hotel in Dubai is a bit similar to the proposed design by O’ Muire Smyth Architects for the former Hammond Lane works, Sir John Rogersons Quay

    #717858
    LOB
    Participant

    In the absence of any images of the proposed development I am posting a couple of sketches of Elevations I copied at the time of the planning application

    #717859
    MG
    Participant

    It’s going to be quite bulky looking from one direction isn’t it?

    #717860
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I blame Frank Gehry for this. All new buildings have to look “interesting”, whether or not this has any relevance to their function or their surroundings.

    How quaintly old-fashioned rectilinear buidlings now seem. As the critic Rowan Moore observed in London recently, even Norman Foster buildings now wear “I’m Interesting” T-shirts.

    Maybe this is why I rather like such architects as David Chipperfield, who resolutely refuses to do billowing buildings, and sticks to immaculately detailed shoeboxes.

    It takes a Gehry, or a Piano, to do this kind of swoopy architecture thing well. But we don’t want too much trickle-down effect.

    Incidentally, did you know that you’re going to get a Danny Libeskind building down in the Dublin docks?

    #717861
    GregF
    Participant

    Ah come on ……Dublin is about to get something a bit different …well in comparison to the plethora of existing dross and we are to critisize it…..hurray for Gehry and Co for inspiring the ‘minnows’ and ‘also rans’. It is 2001 please remember and according to A.C.Clarke and Kubrick we should be living in big wheels in space by now…..We in Ireland have barely touched on the vein of the emblems of 20th century architecture. Poor auld K.Roche had a master plan for part of the docks too and his plain auld ‘Cubic’ piles got the push.

    To add there is a good image of the proposed building for Hammond Lane in Frank McDonalds book …’The Construction of Dublin’

    The Dublin docks may have been somewhat interesting…well in comparison to the rest of the city had all the original plans gone ahead…pre the curb on height etc…..

    [This message has been edited by GregF (edited 24 July 2001).]

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 30 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.