D’Olier & Westmoreland St.
- This topic has 237 replies, 54 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
“Claires” a couple of dorrs down the street probably provides a better example of what shold be achieved here. I also think the actual Guinness facade is of much lower quality that the proposed. It looks temporary.
http://www.etenders.gov.ie/search/search_show.aspx?ID=OCT092993
The jacks is back:o
Will these new toilets be underground: I hope we don’t get those terrible kiosk things like they had on the quays in the old days?
This junction could be so grand if the trees and yes the toilet were removed.
I thought this project would be parked until the Luas route was clarified because lets face it everything else seems to be! The planning for this was for an above ground kiosk and for the filling in of the exsiting toilets. It was also planned to repave the median.
Im not sure if this toilet is one of the 4 being funded by the JC Decaux billboard scheme.
Elsewhere on Westmoreland St…great to see another quality shop appear. The former Barnies Coffee shop (god I miss those muffins) has been reopened as a Supermacs “Family Restuarant”. And there I was thinking that the number of fast food places had been capped within the IAP area.
@StephenC wrote:
Elsewhere on Westmoreland St…great to see another quality shop appear. The former Barnies Coffee shop (god I miss those muffins)
Apparently there’s one in Clery’s. Best coffee and muffins in the ciry. It was too good value to last.
🙂
The emergence of Supermacs here is naturally of great surprise, and would appear to be warranted given the apparent lack of planning permission – there’s no record of a change of use application on DCC’s site, nor for alterations to the shopfront. I also saw no site notice to this effect.
The Special Planning Control Scheme which covers Westmoreland Street states: “The conversion of a restaurant/café or part of a restaurant/café to a fast food outlet will constitute a change of use and will require planning permission.” It also specially notes: “There are no locations in the Area of Special Planning Control that are considered suitable for additional fast food outlets or outlets for the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises (take-aways).” Can a take-away/sit-in coffee outlet (i.e. Barnie’s) be considered the same as a full-blown fast food restaurant? Perhaps Beshoff’s takeaway designation beforehand swung it, with Barnie’s continuing to trade under the banner.
Even use aside, the previous Barnie’s signage which was average but at least muted was completely altered by Supermacs painting the cheap, applied timber facia day-glo white. It is cheap and nasty, and a tacky scar on this imposing building.
Also more holes drilled in the granite for security camera fittings and nasty cabling, and yet more brash floodlighting with exposed junction boxes and cabling overhanging the street.
While yet more doorcases and window frames have been taken out in favour of expansive glazing exposing all of the interior to the street. And already they have illegal postering tacked about their new glazing.
The only positive move was the cleaning of the stonework and removal of menus. Here’s Barnie’s before.
Did DCC have so much as a look-in on this case? Even if they did, it thoroughly stinks.
Another slap in the face towards improving Westmoreland Street.
Such a gorgeous building, no real surprises though.
Can only begin to imagine how much more pleasant Westmoreland Street is going to be at 3am in the morning.
In the space of the 200 metres from Westmoreland Street to O’Connell Street (Abbey St junction), we now have McDonalds x 1, Burger King x 1, Supermacs x 2, Eddie Rockets x 1, Carrolls x 1, Spar x 2. What a wonderful city we live in. Small wonder the papers are saying this morning that it is one of the most heavily littered in the world.
I’ve dragged this topic to here from the O’Connell Street thread, given it’s a bit more apt.
Does it frustrate anybody else how poor the existing Ballast House is (as reproduced by Scott Tallon Walker in the late 1970s)? In spite of its classical character, at the end of the day it’s a heap of junk from a specification perspective, with cladding, dressings and fenestration possessing all the finesse of a steamroller. The window surrounds in particular look like they’ve been cut out of a slab of concrete with a scissors and applied to the facade with Pritt Stick, whilst the brickwork is sullen and prosaic.
Given the office interior is thoroughly dated, the entrance arrangements dismal, and the structural form a concrete frame clad in brickwork, what would people think of the likelihood of a redevelopment, and more specifically the design idiom – and its desirability – of a potential new building/facade? I’d imagine the economics probably don’t stack up, but either way I’d prefer an improving on the detailing and better ground floor treatment to the river front.. Indeed a return to the original WSC design. i.e. minus the dressings, would surely be an improvement.
It’s a wallpaper building we all pass by with little heed, but as things stand is a clunky addition to the most important intersection in the city.
@Devin wrote:
The Ballast-Carlisle scene before changes:
[align=center:293t8o1i]~~~[/align:293t8o1i]
Sadly these little ‘improvements’ that might be made to the city seem less likely as time goes on. Today no one will invest in an existing building unless they can add 2 extra floors, and no one will redevelop unless they can get 7 or 8 storeys in place of 4. It’s sad.
Ballast Hse is a dire pastiche for such a visible location. Gives the Georgian style a bad name.
Agreed, not least as it’s the reproduction of a shoddily altered building in the first instance!
As we saw earlier on this thread, Ballast House was once just comprised of two Wide Streets Commission buildings.
@Devin wrote:
It appears they were amalgamated in the late 1860s, and much embellished with an imposing balustrade and cornice, and rather mediocre window dressings, all possibly happening later in the 1880s – the sheet glass windows across all floors suggestive of such.
This fascinating view from O’Connell Bridge House c. 1973 shows very clearly the lovely patina of the 18th century brick, with stucco or Roman cement dressings applied directly on top of the Georgian fabric.
You can even see the Georgian flat arches of fanned brick behind the architraves to the left 🙂
Indeed to this day you can see the same practice on McDonald’s on O’Connell Street, where Victorian dressings sit atop the last surviving WSC brickwork on all of O’Connell Street.
This image also shows how the sheet sashes made the Ballast Office look much more ‘commercial’ and modern. along with its imposing balustrade. It’s even possible they retained the Georgian sashes, just its impossible to make out with the resolution.
This view from around 1940 demonstrates what a distinguished contributor it was to the setting of O’Connell Bridge.
And what is probably my favourite 20th century view of the city, this wonderfully evocative image – again c. 1940 – demonstrates the stunning silhouette of the Ballast Office’s truly iconic chimneys.
A similarly spine-tingly view from the 1950s.
A scandal of the highest order that this building was demolished, and insult added to injury in its replacement of such mediocrity.
Ah – but does anyone remember the plan to replace the ballast office with a mirror image pf O’Connell Bridge House…
Agreed this replica is mediocre
so eh what did those roads look like before the WSC?
I think the roads are too wide, certainly in the way they are used now., they don’t really go anywhere.
I love seeing photos of people in the black and white days walking around being people doing stuff going places its extraordinarily surprising that they did that back then too.
🙂
Yes they are certainly too wide for the function they serve today. They’re multi-lane motorways essentially.
When both streets were completed shortly after 1800, they weren’t much liked then either from what can be gathered, with criticisms of their ‘width… bleakness… gloomy and monstrous aspect’ as Christine Casey and others have noted. Indeed it appears the flagship classically-inspired WSC developments of Lower Sackville Street, Westmoreland Street and D’Olier Street never appear to have been liked by Dubliners generally. Within 40 years of being buiilt, substantial deviations from the prescribed plans were being made left right and centre, with the arrival of stucco ornament and other fashionable alterations. It’s notable that wholescale demolition takes off upon the taking over of WSC powers by Dublin Corporation.
@lostexpectation wrote:
so eh what did those roads look like before the WSC?
Well simply, they didn’t exist! They were literally bulldozed through the existing muddled street pattern, an early form of CPO. And by all accounts it appears to have been fairly and efficiently operated. Owners got market value plus compensation.
This is the area 30 years before development in the 1760s, showing Sackville Mall – what is today Upper O’Connell Street – linking into the last vestiges of the 17th century Drogheda Street and then down to the river.
A close-up view of the Westmoreland/D’Olier site, ‘thickly sown with alleys and courts’ 🙂
A redevelopment of mammoth proportions, it took about six years to demolish and build.
Incidentally, we have a perception today that things were better for pedestrians on these streets in times past. Far from it – they had the same amount of pavement, indeed probably less than we do, while vast expanses of wasteful road continued to predominate. Paving was something of a luxury in cities until later in the 19th century. Indeed you could barely cross the road on a wet day such was the mudbath they became. Crossings were laid out in paving stones or compacted gravel to make life somewhat more bearable for ladies who lunched. No wonder sedan chairs were so popular. And no wonder these new-build streets were considered barren and unforgiving!
@GrahamH wrote:
It’s even possible they retained the Georgian sashes, just its impossible to make out with the resolution.
I would hazard a guess that you’re right. there’s something about the proportions of the attic storey windows that suggests to me reglazing rather than full replacement. I don’t think I’ve ever seen new (‘new’- heh) windows with a profile like those ones.
@GrahamH wrote:
A similarly spine-tingly view from the 1950s.
This picture almost brings a tear to my eye. 😉
i’m sorry if this has been mentioned before but i can’t find the details anywhere. what is happening with this building? i only noticed it closed the other day. it looks like it has been closed for a while mind. is it being done up? is it being demolished? will someone else be moving in? i must say i am very disappointed. ebs have been there for as long as i can remember. :confused:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
