Re: Re: The Building Boom Is Over!
I found the Rose article offensive, it seemed to equate a bent for preservation and conservation with homophobia.
I hate this false dichotomy between a taste for radical change and a desire to preserve what is valuable about the past; mediocrity is often the result of trying to privilege one of these over the other.
Very well put. I wonder what David Norris’s opinion was of the piece…
Devins snap of Venice is a hoot and most appropriate.
While grandstanding as a progressive agenda, imo in reality Rose’s “vision” is restricted and dangerous. It is narrowed by what to me seems an ideologically-driven pseudo-modernist dogma. He doesnt seem to get the basics regarding the need to keep worthwhile period buildings – while also encouraging good quality new development where appropriate. Imo his outlook of new-and-shiny-is-good-while-old-is-bad is a type of world view that is allowing significant decay to occur on Thomas, James, and other Streets.
I find it depressing that it is not only Rose, but also Glic Dick Gleeson that seem to be focused only on The Big, New, and Shiny – see https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=5804 – meanwhile key city centre streets, such as Westmorland, are dying in front of our eyes. Rather than moving on protecting essential urban fabric, I would argue, that the lads are by way of flag-waving on much higher projects, rendering site values far more profitable than existing building values – and thus, are in effect encouraging dereliction and blight. 🙁
Back on topic; tbh we have had a boom unprecedented since the 18th century – London has got the Gerkin in the same time; do we have a similar land mark? Perhaps not. But on the other hand, we have been fortunate to get some good quality regeneration where previously we had rot. To get the ball rolling, a few examples I’d propose:
The Harcourt Building:
Mick Wallaces “Little Italy”:
Dunnes Stores on Sth Gt Georges Street (though not it’s mimic on Henry St :mad:)
Also the developments at Grand Canal Dock (with the exception of the ghastly 60’s-style tower on the bridge) seem to be reasonably good quality – and, despite some problems, I’d also throw in Paddy Kellys other development on the west side of Smithfield.
And for fun – while also noting a job well done in retrofitting carbuncles, the Marlborough Street Car-park, and the Drury Street Car-park: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=1269