Dublin skyline
- This topic has 644 replies, 86 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by
.
- Posts
Apart from the left side I quite like it. Much much better than the victoria mills crap we got, at least it has a few interesting features
@Morlan wrote:
The third is the point village tower: http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2006/000266.html
SWEET!!! that looks really cool,its going to be amazing having point village tower on one side of the liffey and u2 tower on the other.also huseuston gat looks real cool 5 years tho thats just stupid.burj dubai in dubai is only taking 3 years and just look at it http://www.infocast.dk/jp/jp.php?id=788&offset=&category=ALL&q=
@paul h wrote:
Is there any work actually started on heuston gate? when is it due to be complete?
Also alto/monto vetro? whats the status, any pictures?!here paul
montevetro: http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/thumbs/1343Montevetro_pic1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php%3Fid%3D1343&h=111&w=100&sz=5&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=D-YXVJ78gHsFFM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=77&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmontevetro%2Bdublin%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG
alto vetro:http://www.homanobrien.ie/img/housing02s.jpg
nothing amazing but its somethingthanks rob mc, but i was wondering if work has actually started on them??
I’m not architect but i cant find anything offensive with that buiding in the pictures:confused:
One of the first people to change the skyline in Dublin, Sam Stephenson.
https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=5606
Brian O’ Hanlon.
@paul h wrote:
thanks rob mc, but i was wondering if work has actually started on them??
I’m not architect but i cant find anything offensive with that buiding in the pictures:confused:
dont think so no but everything is ready for them to start.just a matter of time,probably early next year
Does this count as false advertising?
That’s Morlan’s photoshopped picture, first posted on page 11 of this thread.
@jackwade wrote:
Does this count as false advertising?
That’s Morlan’s photoshopped picture, first posted on page 11 of this thread.
ha, that’s nice of them 🙂
At least they left his watermark on it
@jackwade wrote:
Does this count as false advertising?
That’s Morlan’s photoshopped picture, first posted on page 11 of this thread.
Thanks for the heads up. Just doing up an invoice now.
i saw a clip on the news the other day about clongriffin, dublin. i was amazed to see a rather nice plush looking highrise here so i checked out their wesite http://www.clongriffin.ie to see what it’s all about. the larger image on the right hand side of the page shows what i saw on the news but it also shows further highrise buildings. are the “red” buildings under constuction at present? does anyone know? looks good.
57 metres?
The Riverpoint Tower and the Clarion Hotel Tower in Limerick City are both taller than that! How is it that in the nation’s capital in one of the most expensive areas the only buildings that can be built fall behind buildings already built in Limerick?
I know tallness isn’t everything, but seriously at least one decent actual skyscraper would be nice.I must warn you that you’re just asking for a barrage of idiotic arguments against high rise: from the (false) claim that they would be out of place in what is essentially a low rise city, to the (equally false) argument that high rise buildings will not increase density in Dublin, as if that were even the point.
I totally agree that Dublin needs some high rise buildings. Such buildings are a crucial way for a capital city to express its openness to thinking big and remaining dynamic into the future. From a purely architectural perspective, skyscrapers create contrasts and shadows and sculptural effects undreamed of by those who are limited to a view of vast planes of five storey retail park fodder. I mean, was Georgian Dublin constructed at the same height, block after block? No. Variation was key to its success. The modern equivalent is a more substantial varying of heights – and nothing could be more contextual to Dublin than that. Anybody who surveyed Ireland’s account books for the last twenty years and then went to look at the docklands would be drawn to the inevitable conclusion that some kind of pathology is in effect here – a simple primeval fear preventing Dublin from getting it up like normal cities.
barrage of idiotic arguments against high rise: from the (false) claim that they would be out of place in what is essentially a low rise city, to the (equally false) argument that high rise buildings will not increase density in Dublin, as if that were even the point.
Nice starting point for reasonable debate…calling holders of the opposite view idiotic.
I could equally express it as….
barrage of idiotic arguments for high rise: from the (false) claim that they would make Dublin a ‘modern city’, to the (equally false) argument that high rise buildings will increase density in Dublin, as if that were even the point.
“crucial way for a capital city to express its openness to thinking big and remaining dynamic into the future”
How exactly is a low/medium rise city less open-minded?
From a purely architectural perspective, skyscrapers create contrasts and shadows and sculptural effects undreamed of by those who are limited to a view of vast planes of five storey retail park fodder.
Are you saying that architects cannot express contrast and sculptural effects in less than 15 storeys? Really?
http://thomasmayerarchive.de/details.php?image_id=86095&l=englishI mean, was Georgian Dublin constructed at the same height, block after block? No. Variation was key to its success.
Equally, the uniformity of the rooflines of the grand Georgian terraces is part of their beauty, Without the need to ‘punctuate’ the skyline (god, I loathe that word)
The modern equivalent is a more substantial varying of heights – and nothing could be more contextual to Dublin than that.
Define substantial. That seems to be the crux of the debate….
Anybody who surveyed Ireland’s account books for the last twenty years and then went to look at the docklands would be drawn to the inevitable conclusion that some kind of pathology is in effect here – a simple primeval fear preventing Dublin from getting it up like normal cities.
Since you bring up the inevitable phallic allusion, is the frustration at the lack of high-rise expressed by the ‘we want it big and tall and now!’ brigade a primeaval fear of impotence? 😀
@Contraband wrote:
57 metres?
The Riverpoint Tower and the Clarion Hotel Tower in Limerick City are both taller than that! How is it that in the nation’s capital in one of the most expensive areas the only buildings that can be built fall behind buildings already built in Limerick?
I know tallness isn’t everything, but seriously at least one decent actual skyscraper would be nice.I thought that was strange also. I recall seeing a recent acticle listing the height as approx62 metres. I.E, 14×4 metre office floors plus a 6 metre ground floor lobby.
Maybe the planners gave it a crew cut on the basis that nothing should stand taller then Liberty Hall. I am being facecious I know….but that mindset does exist!
C
@thebig C wrote:
I thought that was strange also. I recall seeing a recent acticle listing the height as approx62 metres. I.E, 14×4 metre office floors plus a 6 metre ground floor lobby.
Maybe the planners gave it a crew cut on the basis that nothing should stand taller then Liberty Hall. I am being facecious I know….but that mindset does exist!
C
Would 5 metres really make much of a difference?
Maybe they can stick a piece of metal to the top of it,like they seem to do with most medium rise building in this country to make seem bit bigger 😀
@Contraband wrote:
57 metres?
The Riverpoint Tower and the Clarion Hotel Tower in Limerick City are both taller than that! How is it that in the nation’s capital in one of the most expensive areas the only buildings that can be built fall behind buildings already built in Limerick?
I know tallness isn’t everything, but seriously at least one decent actual skyscraper would be nice.You cant just build one massive skyscraper in the middle of low/medium rise buildings, unless you want it to end up like Manchester,which looks completely ridiculous!
At least they have something.
I know, I know, I know – height isn’t everything. Like it or not though, it is a symbol of a modern city, of progress, and of success. I recognize that in the midst of one of the deepest recessions Ireland’s ever seen, building skyscrapers isn’t really what the city should focus on.
However, what I will say, is that I really don’t understand why the city constantly fought any high rise development during the boom years, and why getting a building, which is only 57 meters high, is seen as a triumph for the Dublin high-rise movement.
Maybe now high rise should get built, simply for the fact that it is the cheapest time to build. Prepare for the future?@Contraband wrote:
At least they have something.
I know, I know, I know – height isn’t everything. Like it or not though, it is a symbol of a modern city, of progress, and of success. I recognize that in the midst of one of the deepest recessions Ireland’s ever seen, building skyscrapers isn’t really what the city should focus on.
However, what I will say, is that I really don’t understand why the city constantly fought any high rise development during the boom years, and why getting a building, which is only 57 meters high, is seen as a triumph for the Dublin high-rise movement.
Maybe now high rise should get built, simply for the fact that it is the cheapest time to build. Prepare for the future?Yea i know what you mean, and i whole heartedly agree that Dublin really needs to go higher. And its true that in todays world people believe that the higher your buildings the more rich and powerful you are.
But in relation to this development a 15 story building in an area where 6 stories is frowned upon and where people fear that buildings of this size may fall on them, this is a triumph, at last.:D
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
