ESB Headquarters Fitzwilliam Street

Sam Stephonsen won’t be impressed!

Swear alert…. what the fuck are they thinking….

Just thinking again, maybe it’s a temp fix before a major facade overhaul?

That does look weird. I hope they don’t change the facade of that building (apart from removing the paint!).

The ESB are out of there fairly soon for Leopardstown; I doubt that current facade would attract a grade A tenant

Pull the lot down!

Particularly the back on James’ Place East

@GregF wrote:

Pull the lot down!

That is probably a fair enough view if the ESB move out. I would just worry that some mock georgian facade might be plonked on to the front of it, with very little change to the structure itself.

It will go,

it is a complex designed for a single tenant with no real seperation between zones let alone floors; it will certainly go and be redeveloped into a more user freindly format to accomodate a number of users; in this era of decentralisation there isn’t tenant large enough remaining to take it on that hasn’t already lease obligations elsewhere.

If I was going to paint it, I would have went for a colour not some strain of beige….

That’s a tough choice, but I think I would go with the blue/purple myself 😉

I don’t think they painted it – twas under scaffolding for ages so prob just got a steam clean – think of that house on Stephen’s Green (Dawson St side) restored in the past few years…

please take we take this thread down from the website. The building is so frightfully awfull that just thinking about it, and what the powers that be did to georgian dublin upsets me !

I think court proceedings should be implemented and the architects prosecuted. This building is an atrocious and unforgiveable crime of epic proportions. The black hat should be the out come for the architects.

I actually think it’s a reasonable enough building as well, the mount st. facade anyway, or at least it was before the bloody paint job – I just noticed it the other day and it really is unbelievable – the most sickly beigey pink and it completely jarrs with the bronze windows…

At least the previous finish had a somewhat natural look with tonal variations and visible aggregates etc. – and it blended in much better into the streetscape. Now it really does scream for attention…

Obviously the building is a disaster that it caused the destruction of an important piece of Dublin’s historic fabric. However it is quite well proportioned and about as sensitive to it’s surroundings as any modernist building in the location could be. The current roofscape is atrocious though as is the completely dead and dismal ground floor area. A bit of a revamp could have solved these problems. Instead they completely destroy the building with a totally unsuitable paint finish – The mind boggles as to who thought this was a good idea.

And since theres no going back now I’d tend to agree with previous posts – Get the bulldozers in or do something radical like painting it a crazy colour. I actually really like the purply blue image above!

If the building were to be replaced, I would favour high quality pastiche infill but I guess there is no chance because the new building has an extra floor and nobody’s going to give that away.

God doesn’t this city have enough bloody Georgian pastiche…

I reckon come redeveliopment, the facade will be stripped off and the building simply stripped back to the structure and a new modern facade installed.

God!! 🙁 That’s like refacing Hawkins House – you just get a new building in the shape of what was a ’60s timepiece – the blandest outcome of all!

I thought the impact of the building (pre-painting) on the Georgian Mile was surprisingly low for all the fuss there was at the time about how wrong it was to demolish the original buildings & put a modern building there.
It may not be too late though – you can get proprietary paint solvents that remove paint without damaging finishes. If this was done & the cluttered roofscape improved I’d be happy.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

If I was going to paint it, I would have went for a colour not some strain of beige….

any of which are an improvement 😮

I know… I really like the bluish one myself..

As this is a material change of the facade it would require planning permission. If it does not have planning permission it is an illegal development. You can join the rest of the dots…….

OMG – So you’re sure it’s been painted… not just cleaned???

Words defy me

@d_d_dallas wrote:

OMG – So you’re sure it’s been painted… not just cleaned???

Words defy me

Definitely. You can see where some of the paint has splashed in one of Graham’s first pictures. I happened to be passing it the other day and had a look. It seems to definitely be paint.

ESB to announce design competition to replace HQ?

http://www.etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAR116146

TITLE ATTRIBUTED TO THE CONTRACT BY THE CONTRACTING ENTITY: Design Contest
(Architectural).
ESB intends to publish an Design Contest (Architectural) notice in the
coming days relating to the development of a key site of approximately 1
hectare (2.5 acres) in the city centre of Dublin which is currently
occupied by the existing ESB Headquarters.
Interested parties should monitor the Official Journal of the European
Union ( see http://ted.europa.eu ) and Irish Government Public Sector
Procurement opportunities portal (http://www.etenders.gov.ie for this design
contest only), over the coming days to ensure that they do not miss this
opportunity.
CPV: 71000000.

Surely, if there was ever a case for detailed reconstruction of what was there before, this is it!

I’m with paulC here; paint it vermilion until it’s replaced or at least refaced. Actually, the whole building is a metaphor for the ESB – absolutely no sense of place or townscape whatsoever; the number of major Irish towns blighted by the ugliest transmission poles in Western Europe constantly amazes me. What has the ESB been doing for the last 15 years?

can someone post all the info… the site next door already has plans

@tommyt wrote:

ESB to announce design competition to replace HQ?

Haha, April Fools’, very funny.

it would appear not!!!!

ESB competition for world-class redesign of HQ

THE ESB intends to use the opportunity provided by the redevelopment of its head office in Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin, which it announced last week, to create a “world-class example of sustainable and innovative headquarters”.

According to documentation issued last Friday by the ESB, one of the key criteria for a design contest for the new complex will be “the participants’ proposals for a solution to the aspect of the Lower Fitzwilliam Street facade”.

This facade was the most controversial element of the existing headquarters built in 1970 – following an earlier architectural competition won by the late Arthur Gibney and Sam Stephenson – because it meant demolishing 16 Georgian houses.

At the time, conservationists were appalled that Dublin’s longest Georgian facade, from Mount Street to Leeson Street, was to be broken by a modern building fronted by precast concrete window panels and set on a podium.

The ESB brought in Sir John Summerson, a leading English architectural historian, to give his opinion on the merit of the houses to be demolished.

Notoriously, he condemned them as “simply one damned house after another”.

Ten years ago, the ESB gave serious consideration to a plan by Sam Stephenson that would have involved refronting the office block with a Georgian facade as a Millennium project.

However, this proposal was deemed to be problematic due to the floor levels.

In the latest competition, architects are being told to assume that all existing buildings – except protected structures, including No 12 Lower Fitzwilliam Street – “will be demolished to allow the entire site to become available for redevelopment”.

Participants who are shortlisted following the initial qualification stage will be requested to present detailed design proposals for an exemplar sustainable headquarters in the centre of Dublin.

It will comprise a floor area of between 35,000 and 45,000sq metres.

“The proposed designs should demonstrate respect for the surrounding Georgian streetscape and protected structures,” states the contest documentation.

Three winning designs are to be selected.

The competition, which is being held independently of the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland (RIAI), is to be judged by a panel headed by ESB chairman Lochlann Quinn.

It will also include John Redmond, the company secretary and head of corporate affairs.

Others on the jury are Joe Maher, retired ESB director and former chief financial officer; Prof Owen Lewis, an architect and engineer who now heads Sustainable Energy Ireland; and an “international architect/urban designer” yet to be appointed.

The jury’s assessment of submissions will be assisted by a technical panel.

The weightings to be given to different aspects of each submission are 40 per cent for “commerciality and buildability”, including value for money; 40 per cent for “design and aesthetic qualities”; and 20 per cent for “compatibility . . . with [the] receiving environment”.

The top three competition entries will each be awarded a prize of €30,000, and the final decision on the award of “any follow-up contract” is be made by the ESB’s board on the recommendation of the jury.

This will follow negotiations with the shortlisted entrants.

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times

if ever there was a case for pastiche then this is it… surely the entire fitzwilliam street facade must be reinstated or else we risk repeating the orginal mistake!

This is gonna be a seriously interesting decision actually. It’ll be very interesing to see how most of the entrants approach it too.

I propose it be named “Apology House”

I have already seen some mock ups floating around its time to cul green:D

@aj wrote:

if ever there was a case for pastiche then this is it… surely the entire fitzwilliam street facade must be reinstated or else we risk repeating the orginal mistake!

Unless they go for a Henrietta Street-style modern interpretation!

@jdivision wrote:

Unless they go for a Henrietta Street-style modern interpretation!

dont even get me started about the conservation of Dublins Most importatn set piece!

Architects are being told to assume that all the existing buildings, except the protected structures will be demolished to make way for the redevelopment. The competition will be held by the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and will be judged by a panel headed by ESB Chairman Lochlann Quinn.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

Architects are being told to assume that all the existing buildings, except the protected structures will be demolished to make way for the redevelopment.

Which is precisely the opposite of what they were telling the media three weeks ago!

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

Architects are being told to assume that all the existing buildings, except the protected structures will be demolished to make way for the redevelopment. The competition will be held by the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and will be judged by a panel headed by ESB Chairman Lochlann Quinn.

It’s not an RIAI competition…

Some able minded person should pull the original georgian plans, redraw them and submit it!!!

. . . and send a servant around with a bill for five guineas!

A glass neon tower of 40 storeys or more with a pylon or windmill on the roof would be very apt here. Blacam Meagher & Co are no doubt drawing up the plans.

No doubt with a project of this size there will be a tough pre-qualification stage. Probably eliminate 80-90% of the firms in the country with it…! ;):mad: I’d be fairly confident from reading the above that there will be a big entry from overseas big firm architects…. the likes of Rogers, Fosters and maybe if we where lucky enough Herzog and De Meuron…! It’d be nice to see a HDM building built in Ireland.

Rats

please when and where can we round up all of the people responsible for the current hq and throw rotten fruit at them

@lostexpectation wrote:

please when and where can we round up all of the people responsible for the current hq and throw rotten fruit at them

CJH and Big Sam? Both no longer with us

@ratsam wrote:

It’d be nice to see a HDM building built in Ireland.

I’m sure the DDDA is working on it as we speak. :rolleyes:

@alonso wrote:

CJH and Big Sam? Both no longer with us

You have my full support if you wanna go piss on Neil Blaney’s grave as well if you’ve got the inkling for such behaviour.

what about the big shots in esb, are those involved in the present hq still around

@tommyt wrote:

You have my full support if you wanna go piss on Neil Blaney’s grave as well if you’ve got the inkling for such behaviour.

if I can manage it after leaving 6 pints worth on Charlie’s

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0602/1224247880872.html

Anyone know what the brief is?

I imagine item no. 1 may be:

The laugh is that this will probably end up in the bin with Sean Dunne’s ‘architectural’ competition winner for the Ballsbridge site, after Bord Pleanála have held it up to the light:)

. . . although mightn’t be so humorous if we all end up forking out a few more quid on our electric bills to pay for it!

I published the brief in this mornings newsletter…… maybe you should register….

http://ireland.archiseek.com/news/2009/000123.pdf

95% government…

It is also envisaged that an hourly rate applicable to the different architectural professional
grades will be submitted as part of the indicative fee proposal to allow for other services
that may arise during the course of the design process such as attendance at any oral
hearing.

a rate for life would be good! I’m not sure about Ireland but there is a minimum architects salary in other parts of the world that is different to the minimum wage? There is no architects union and architects don’t protest they listen to teachers;) good luck to who ever fills in those forms!

Thanks for posting the . . . ‘Strictly Private and Confidential’ . . . . brief :), I hadn’t spotted that!

Note that section C; Final Pass/Fail Criterion states:

”Provision of satisfactory references attesting to the applicant having previously delivered comparable design and development projects successfully and the manner in which the services were delivered”

A bit like the Sydney authorities precluding Jorn Utzon because he hadn’t done any other opera houses!

If I’m reading this right the competition is intended to produce three winners, is that the way others read it?

. . . but it’s not a proper two-stage competition, the picking of the chosed architect from this ”winning” three doesn’t seem to involve any further design consideration!!!

Presumably costs, including fees, are intended to be the suject of the final battle to the death. I notice that enclosed (and sealed) fee submissions are not intended to impact on the initial choice of the ”winning” three designs, but I didn’t see anything precluding a Dutch auction after that.

. . . not that architect fees should even enter this equation, this should be about righting a wrong, not about creating another opportunity to out-do the wrong already done.

I don’t know, I think archiseek is going to have to host it’s own parallel virtual competition, for those of us whose turn-over dips slightly under the €2.5 million 🙂

Alternative Ideas Competition for the ESB HQ

Due to the overly restrictive nature of the ESB-run competition to design a new headquarters for their Fitzwilliam Street site, Archiseek.com is inviting all architects (and not just those with huge financial resources) to demonstrate their ideas for the site.

Ideas can be presented as a quick sketch, or a finished rendering, and all submissions will be published online at Archiseek.com. Unfortunately there is no prize fund, and we can categorically state that there is no chance of it being built. Just back in the adulation of your peers.

This is a chance for all firms to demonstrate the creativity that the ESB has chosen to ignore.

Send your entries to
pclerkin@archiseek.com

No rules! . . . . I like that 🙂

Can re re-use the official site map?

Note: the few Georgian houses that the ESB didn’t manage to knock down the first time round are shaded in brown, just in case anyone wants to do a Sam Stephenson on them!

theres goes riai’s revenue stream, they’ll want a charge a fee for your comp too

So what are we looking at here ….. really? Reinstatement of the facade and roof profile, and aatrium behind linking to new building?

It’s the one everyone talks about when justification for replica is mentioned ..

@Devin wrote:

Reinstatement of the facade and roof profile, and aatrium behind linking to new building?

It’s the one everyone talks about when justification for replica is mentioned

Can’t see scope for anything less to fitzwilliam street …

Anyone listen to Sean O’Laoire on Radio One this morning? Spoke well on why the competition is unfair.

Thank god he didn’t go off on some hideous tangent and start talking about rabbit populations in Westmeath or the guatamalan sugar crisis of ’78 as he is prone to doing.

what show as that?

Blind replication of the facades would be a massive step back for architecture in Ireland. The replicated Georgian facades on lower pembroke road are offensive.

There is no doubt Fitzwilliam St. facade requires more a more subtle rhythmic/ textural treatment than the purely oblique formal interpretation that’s there now, but replication however tempting is not the long term solution.

@what? wrote:

Blind replication of the facades would be a massive step back for architecture in Ireland. The replicated Georgian facades on lower pembroke road are offensive.

Offensive to the 0.1% of the population who are architects, and pleasing to the 99.9% who aren’t.

@what? wrote:

Blind replication of the facades would be a massive step back for architecture in Ireland. The replicated Georgian facades on lower pembroke road are offensive.

There is no doubt Fitzwilliam St. facade requires more a more subtle rhythmic/ textural treatment than the purely oblique formal interpretation that’s there now, but replication however tempting is not the long term solution.

I think we will get a varied material pallet based on the old lots for fitzy.
Georgian facade in wood, georgian facade in brick vertical bond ect

The old blocko could come into play behind but with ellipse or hexagon roofs sections…

The building might even look a mutant plant… edouard-francois would be nice

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=426&storycode=3142031&channel=783&c=2&encCode=00000000019a8195

@what wrote:

but replication however tempting is not the long term solution.

yes it is, otherwise we’ll be having the same discussion / competition in 50 years when whatever ‘form’ is inserted meets the scorn of the next generation wearing their 2060 tinted goggles.

Replication is fundamentally wrong.

Instead of adding to history, it undermines it.

The 99.9% of people who believe the replicas are real, believe a lie.

Truth is beauty, however ugly it may be.

@what? wrote:

Replication is fundamentally wrong.

Instead of adding to history, it undermines it.

The 99.9% of people who believe the replicas are real, believe a lie.

Truth is beauty, however ugly it may be.

Well if you believe that the original streetscape had an aesthetic unity which will never be recreated by modern infill, then our dedication to beauty ought to lead us to recreating it. Even if the buildings aren’t original, they serve an aesthetic purpose as part of an integrated whole. I know contemporary architecture may, to the detriment of the city, focus on heterogeneous streetscapes as a reflection of modern times. But to apply this to every situation, regardless of context, is ideological extremism and in this situation unquestionably wrong.

@Peter Fitz wrote:

yes it is, otherwise we’ll be having the same discussion / competition in 50 years when whatever ‘form’ is inserted meets the scorn of the next generation wearing their 2060 tinted goggles.

Fully endorsed. What has stood the test of time better post-WW II bombardment; the continental or British approach to rebuilding? Simplistic litmus test but one which stands up imo.

I am not advocating a jarring ‘signature’ building here.

I am saying that a visually sensitive response is needed.

I am also saying that historical recreations anywhere, equate to a distortion of history more deeply disturbing than any facile disunity created by a modern building in a historical setting.

@what? wrote:

I am not advocating a jarring ‘signature’ building here.

I am saying that a visually sensitive response is needed.

I am also saying that historical recreations anywhere, equate to a distortion of history more deeply disturbing than any facile disunity created by a modern building in a historical setting.

Architecture has and will continue to distort history regardless of style because it is a reflection of people… what ever happened to chain mail it got lost in transport and declared damaged goods return to sender? Expect triangle shaped roofs?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomcosgrave/141626225/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vanneste/3252013768/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/360berlin/3030249473/sizes/o/

@what? wrote:

Replication is fundamentally wrong.

Instead of adding to history, it undermines it.

I would normally agree. In this case however, it is Fitzwilliam street that has been fundamentally undermined, making reinstatement, fundamentally right.

@GrahamH wrote:

It depends what is meant by ‘historical recreation’. Personally I would be in favour of rebuilding all 16 houses, but critically as just that, houses. Frankly I think this has much integrity as any piece of clever contemporary infill, and in the longer term would prove to be the more gratifying option. These residences could take the form of a mixture of full-on townhouses and purpose-designed apartments in the Continental tradition.

This would also be my preferred option & really represents the optimum that could be achieved under the circumstances, unfortunately unlikely though & reaching for my pragmatic hat, exact facade & roofline reinstatement is probably the best that can be hoped for.

@GrahamH wrote:

(even if Dublin is another female, though I often suspect sexless myself – it’s hard to know where to look to confirm these things),

Poolbeg? …

sorry 😮

did the esb not consider leaving the site?

@lostexpectation wrote:

did the esb not consider leaving the site?

omp? but why would you leave a site like this it makes no long term sense

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0608/1224248284045.html

I admire some of the ESB concepts such as the mixing the best elements of the 3 designs if done correctly. Will it be caixaforumish? Large for plates or existing old blocko plates!
We need paddy power to bet on a number of outcomes…

Will It End up in the EU court?
Will It be best building in Ireland for a long time?
Will it have large floor plates?
Will it go quite?
How many awards will it win?

i shudder to think that anyone in this thread advocating the replication of the original houses is in any way involved professionally with architecture/planning

I agree with rebuilding the 16 houses. It’s a simple case of repairing the vandalism and damage that has been done. And this treatment should be applied to what’s left of all the historical areas throughout the city…. ie the Quays etc… and Thomas and James Street as dealt with on another thread.

A simple matter of approach to historical areas is of applying the basics of uniformity, symmetry, sensitivity, respect, maintenance, etc….(infill that is sensitive whether it’s contemporary or a recreation)…. and then we’d have a city that’s visually better with all those looses ends fixed up and no jarring eyesores.

Plenty of employment too as there is a plethora of fixing to be done.

In the long run it makes sense.

(BTW….Anyone see the area of the quays where the Brazen Head pub is…….very bad case of the butchers and botchers at work. And then there’s the awful Gardiner Street, etc….)

We should rebuild the houses, it isn’t about reproducing whats lost but restoring what has been damaged, the streetscape.

It would be silly to paint an old masters painting, John Currin excepted, but if someone tore a Vermeer, it would be repaired.

@mp wrote:

i shudder to think that anyone in this thread advocating the replication of the original houses is in any way involved professionally with architecture/planning

I would be surprised if reinstatement would not be the preference of most of the general public and those not involved in architecture/planning. Ordinary people are not going to care about ideology, and as regards respecting historical integrity, would probably consider something that “looks” like the rest of the street to be a better idea than things remaining as is. That would certainly be my attitude though I’d prefer the existing situation to a poorly executed reproduction or fake facade. I can understand the perspective of many architects and so on though. The existing ESB building is a distinctive style.

I guess it’s a bit like the scenario with that “carbuncle” shopping centre in England (Tricorn centre or something?)

@GrahamH wrote:

I think it is a rather good building, ground floor aside, were it not for the location.

@Devin wrote:

I thought the impact of the building (pre-painting) on the Georgian Mile was surprisingly low for all the fuss there was at the time about how wrong it was to demolish the original buildings & put a modern building there.

I understand the longing for some kind of restoration of the original streetscape, and I share that longing, and I also believe that ‘restoration’ should be one of the options available to every city, damaged by catastrophe, neglect or regrettable intervention, but actually deciding to put the clock back forty years! . . . I can’t see that being the right decision.

Then there’s the existing building! . . . the Stephenson/Gibney (wasn’t Garvey also involved) building is a sophisticated piece of work, for 1962, (ground floor, recent pink paint and perhaps some issues of unreleaved repetition aside).

Who’s to say that a future generation won’t want to ‘restore’ that facade to represent all that brash confidence and uncontrolled energy of developers’ Dublin of the 1960s!

page from Frank McDonald’s ‘The Destruction of Dublin’

I know, I know: it is hard not to be conflicted, I admit my post above was a troll intended to trick people into googling John Currin at work, but half of me agrees, it is _such_ a street scape, something else, incredible, the photograph you attached attest to it, and the original facades are well documented and photographed. It seems wrong to rebuild these long lost buildings, silly, sentimental, but wrong not to too.

@GrahamH wrote:

🙂
. . . . whatever fills this site, above and beyond all other contentious cases over the years, shall stand as a monument to this generation’s outlook on the built environment.

One option would be to not fill the space!

Create a square on this side of the street, corresponding to Merrion Sq. and Fitzwilliam Sq. on the other side.

Complete the Georgian streetscape by omission!

. . Yea, I can see the ESB going for that one :rolleyes:

I am a little shocked to be reading these posts to be honest. I’ve been checking Archiseek once or twice a week now ever since I started college a few years back (it’s somewhat addictive!) and having read thread, after thread, after thread, you get an idea of who knows what, and peoples general opinion on things and i’m a bit miffed at this one.

I would have been certain that the opportunity to correct what I thought was one of the numerous bad planning decisions of the 60’s would have been jumped upon by most, but everyone seems to be fairly hesistant about the idea of putting back what was originally there. (Well to tell the honest truth, i’d prefer Gunter’s suggestion but I think the only way that would happen is if every single one of us took The Big Switch!)

Anyway there has to be something I’m missing here because I would love to see it returned to its former glory and on top of that, I wouldn’t view it as a step back achitecturally either due its sensitive surroundings. You could look at it in the same context as the restoration of a building, except the building in this case is all of Lower Fitzwilliam Street and not just the ESB building.

A few years ago they “restored” the Sistine Chapel, which involved not only cleaning the ceiling but also repainting many areas where the paint had flaked off. They still call it Michelangelo’s work even though some of it isn’t. It seems to me the arguments here (less obviously absurd because it’s part of the wearisome architectural orthodoxy) are tantamount to suggesting that Willem de Kooning should have been brought in to fill in the blanks in the ceiling in his own style.

im glad you brought up that analogy rumpelstiltzkin, because this argument petains to much more than fitzwilliam st. stretching out to all areas of life/ art.

I would disagree with the described restoration (see: recreation) of the sistine chapel for similar reasons of falsity and a loss of reality.

We need to have a less simplistic attitude towards history and the built fabric of our cities.

See link here for another route towards re-occupation of historical fabric, one that recognises that history is a series of intertwined continuities rather than a single, exclusive, idealised stage (set) of the buildings life.

By calling for recreation you are calling for falsity and advocting a distortion of reality, and whether the vast majority of the public notice or not is not the point.

@what? wrote:

I would disagree with the described restoration (see: recreation) of the sistine chapel for similar reasons of falsity and a loss of reality.

How does this relate to people? If someone is sick do you not treat them…
If someone has an accident and loses half there face is face reconstruction wrong?
Is it a loss of reality is that person not a person anymore?
Is this person now false because they have a false leg or someone else’s heart?
At the same time if a building needs upgrading do you not upgrade/recreate it?
falsity and loss of reality has its place its called intent…
Ideas and religion can be more powerful than reality and falsity is what drives the world.
There is never any reality just perceived reality in the built environment…

I would either be happy with an acknowledgement of the old intent/grid it can be a reconstruction or recreation. What goes on behind could be a meal deal… that makes everyone happy:) one of them must be the ugly duckling

http://www.flickr.com/photos/neesam/2097021679/sizes/o/

changing hands still people in control… and history has not changed iconoclasts are not allowed to practice

Whether recreation is justified depends to a degree on whether you value what will have to be destroyed to accommodate it. It is easier to argue the case for recreations to be built on a site currently being used as a surface car park for example than for one containing some genuinely interesting building.

I’ve never admired the current facade. It is repetitive suggesting a weak attempt to respect the rhythm of the Georgian Terrace but missing the point entirely without any vital variation. It’s boring and bland – neither rudely functional nor brashly modern. It’s all staid semi-state comfort; it looks like the sort of place that is going to have carpet tiles covering everything. The frontage onto the lane behind is far better and worth a look. Across the lane, you have the great Bank of Ireland block – an exciting expression of modern architecture. In comparison, the ESB frontage onto Fitzwilliam Street feels to me like a badly executed compromise probably as a result of well-meaning objections to developing on this site.

Because of this I’d have no problem seeing it ripped down and replaced with something better whether reproductions or something overtly modern. The problem for me while there is a small chance that an overtly modern replacement could work – particularly in the long term, the likelyhood is that the replacement would be similar or worse. The public understandably see this as a high risk strategy given past experience and are a bit jaundiced of being told by the professionals that this option is the only one which has “integrity” and “honesty”.

In contrast, the risk with reproductions is much less, assuming both were executed with the same attention to materials and detail. There may be some theological bickering initially about integrity and honesty but in 50 years time, you know that most observers will not give a damn and it will be seen as irrelevant that a section of the terrace had been missing for a few decades in the 20th century. At that stage, the terrace can be considered restored. And hopefully the main Bank of Ireland block will be still standing behind it as an example of Irish international modern architecture which has integrity and excitement.

@what? wrote:

im glad you brought up that analogy rumpelstiltzkin, because this argument petains to much more than fitzwilliam st. stretching out to all areas of life/ art.

I would disagree with the described restoration (see: recreation) of the sistine chapel for similar reasons of falsity and a loss of reality.

We need to have a less simplistic attitude towards history and the built fabric of our cities.

See link here for another route towards re-occupation of historical fabric, one that recognises that history is a series of intertwined continuities rather than a single, exclusive, idealised stage (set) of the buildings life.

By calling for recreation you are calling for falsity and advocting a distortion of reality, and whether the vast majority of the public notice or not is not the point.

In one paragraph you decry an over-simplistic attitude to architectural history, and in the next you make the most absolute simplification of all: between true and false architecture. Did it ever occur to you that nostalgia for a particular form of architecture – and the consequent desire to replace a relatively minor section of a huge streetscape in order to restore a sense of completeness – might be a perfectly valid intertwined element in your complex manifold of history? And that what is perceived as truth and falsity may be a lot more complex than you suggest? In relation to what exactly, other than your own gut instincts, are you positing true architecture only as that which is undertaken in the styles particular to the age, and false architecture as that which is in the style of a previous age?

If there’s a significant groundswell of support for the restoration of Georgian architecture in certain areas, an architecture which is bound up totally with most people’s sense of Dublin in the 20th and 21st centuries (not just the 18th century), then surely that sentiment is a “true” one which permits of expression by architectural means. Strangely enough, I think that nothing is more of a falsification than ideological adherence to one strand of architectural thinking when what characterises our age more than any other is the sheer multitude of strands of every conceivable stripe.

@rumpelstiltskin wrote:

A few years ago they “restored” the Sistine Chapel, which involved not only cleaning the ceiling but also repainting many areas where the paint had flaked off. They still call it Michelangelo’s work even though some of it isn’t. It seems to me the arguments here (less obviously absurd because it’s part of the wearisome architectural orthodoxy) are tantamount to suggesting that Willem de Kooning should have been brought in to fill in the blanks in the ceiling in his own style.

very good analogy!

@notjim wrote:

We should rebuild the houses, it isn’t about reproducing whats lost but restoring what has been damaged, the streetscape.

It would be silly to paint an old masters painting, John Currin excepted, but if someone tore a Vermeer, it would be repaired.

…and this one too!

After WWII the Poles recreated many medieval squares that were bombed to bits by the Nazi’s. Today, they are seamless and folk don’t bat an eyelid.

Gas how big business in swinging 1960’s Ireland thought that it would add some high prestige to their business profile when they moved to addresses on the likes of Fitzwillian Sq, Merrion Square etc…
However and ironically they then proceeded to tear the architectural fabric and balls outta these historical areas. What a bog minded bunch.

Isn’t modernism now an historical style? (Discuss.)

I think so but doesn’t it depend on the capitalisation?

I generally find you can’t lose an argument after peppering its expression with terms like “modernism”, “post-modernism” or even more effectively, the likes of “constructivism”, “realism”, etc.

@jimg wrote:

I Generally Find You Can’t Lose An Argument After Peppering Its Expression With Terms Like “modernism”, “post-modernism” Or Even More Effectively, The Likes Of “constructivism”, “realism”, Etc.

:d

@jimg wrote:

Whether recreation is justified depends to a degree on whether you value what will have to be destroyed to accommodate it.

That is a crucial point. There is the issue of the ethics of reconstruction in the first place, and then there is the seperate issue of whether you can justify the demolition of what’s there now to create the reconstruction opportunity.

@jimg wrote:

I’ve never admired the current facade. It is repetitive suggesting a weak attempt to respect the rhythm of the Georgian Terrace but missing the point entirely without any vital variation. It’s boring and bland – neither rudely functional nor brashly modern. It’s all staid semi-state comfort; it looks like the sort of place that is going to have carpet tiles covering everything.

I don’t know if I’d entirely agree with that. I think for the ESB block to have been a really great building, something in the rhythm of the facade needed to vary, but it has a certain power, and it doesn’t actually overwhelm the surrounding Georgian context, which, in fairness to Stephenson/Gibney, can’t have been an easy thing to do.

Nobody now disputes that the original ESB decision was wrong! . . . . It was an urban crime of the highest order, but despite some later attempts by Bord na Móna on Pembroke Street, that model, (the tearing down of Georgian houses to build corporate office blocks), wasn’t permitted again on this scale and the coherence of the ‘South Georgian Core’ at least, largely survives.

@jimg wrote:

Across the lane, you have the great Bank of Ireland block – an exciting expression of modern architecture.

OK, we’ll agree to disagree on that, whatever about the actual architectural merits of the ESB block, at least it was an ‘original’ work and not a scale model, but to take up your point on proximity, there is a case to be made that these two corporate blocks together, (the ESB and the Bank of Ireland), create (or could if they tried) the nucleus of a modern/contemporary cluster here, right in the heart of the ‘South Georgian Core’.

Perhaps in this case, instead of looking to what we’ve lost, and justifyably seeking restitution, there is a case to be made for looking at this modernist cluster as a work in progress and see whether one or two more interventions might make the whole thing work on a really urban level.

Punctuating that monotony in the ESB facade with a laneway terminating in the vista of the narrow facade of the tallest Bank of Ireland block would be one idea that comes to mind. Such a new pedestrian route could open into some kind of shared plaza on James’s Street East, defined by the Miesian Bank blocks on one side and some contemporay towers on the backlands of the ESB site on the other.

I don’t know, maybe we should just put back the 16 Georgian houses;)

pics of whats behind etc ftw

Don’t get your hopes up too high – I may have overstated the case for the back lane in my excitement. The birdseye view on maps.live.com is useful when you’re stuck:
[ATTACH]9748[/ATTACH]

I know it’s me just going off on a tangent as usual, but isn’t it amazing how all those Georgian back-gardens have tarmac from all those years ago. Oh, that has been laid later. I see. And they all applied for planning permission in what is surely a conservation area. Isn’t it?

Pertinent as usual, GrahamH; I didn’t mention the awfulness of those ‘mews’ offices, but I suppose it’s all remediable in the future. I can remember the tree-lined expanse of Baggot St (Upper/Lower?) – as civilised a streetscape as you’ll get anywhere – but I just can’t picture LM’s; any pics of it?
Incidentally, I think the part of Baggot St on the ‘far’ side of the canal is a great example of an urban village, which should be used as a template for, for example, Thomas St. (I mean,forget the densification and the drive to oblterate any trace of the street’s architectural history; restore what can be restored and insert sensitive infill where you cannot.
What makes areas like this ‘work’ is the number, range and variety of commercial outlets and institutional uses, with the upper floors intact and also in use. It’s not that difficult.)

Good view here of what GrahamH is talking about:
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=swpkxhggcc8t&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&scene=29507846&encType=1

ESB Head Office Design Competition

ESB has selected a shortlist of architectural submissions to proceed to the detailed design stage of the competition for the redevelopment of ESB’s Head Office at Lower Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2, ESB received a total of 44 submissions from over 60 Irish and International firms of architects, including a number of joint submissions, as part of the initial phase of the competition.

The following firms have now been selected with a view to submitting detailed designs:

List of Shortlisted Contestants

3XN Architects & OMS Architects Ltd
Aedas Architects Ltd & Hodder & Associates
Building Design Partnership (BDP) & Dixon Jones Ltd
Fletcher Priest Architects
Grafton Architects Ltd & O’Mahony Pike Architects Ltd,
DEGW UK Ltd & BDSP Ltd
Henry J Lyons & Partners Architects with Gilroy McMahon Architects
Rafael Vinóly Architects PC
Scott Tallon Walker Architects
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Inc.

Detailed submissions from the shortlisted firms are due to be received in November 2009. It is anticipated that the three design winners will be announced in early 2010.

The jury that will select the three design winners comprises:
Lochlann Quinn (Jury Chairman)Chairman of ESB
Professor Owen LewisArchitect and CEO Sustainable EnergyIreland
John RedmondESB Company Secretary
David Prichard Architect and Director Metropolitan Workshop UK
Joe MaherFormer Finance Director ESB
A.N.OtherInternational Architect TBA

Given one of the jury owns a building designed by one of the architects shortlisted afaik one would hope they will be ruled out. But to be honest I think we all know their version of blandness will likely win.

Ooh Rafael Vinóly, I’d love to see his entry.

Given the controversy around the minimum requirements for consideration I wonder how this list came about.

3XN Architects & OMS Architects Ltd
Irish sort

Aedas Architects Ltd & Hodder & Associates
Enormous firm.

Building Design Partnership (BDP) & Dixon Jones Ltd
Business and Art.

Fletcher Priest Architects
I am surpised these had the turnover required.

Grafton Architects Ltd & O’Mahony Pike Architects Ltd,
I am also surprised they have the turnover these days.

DEGW UK Ltd & BDSP Ltd
DEGW was liquidated and shortly afterwards bought out by Davies Langdon and I quote “we won’t be doing architecture it does not fit our business model” see http://www.itmps.co.uk/digitaleditions/buildingDesign140809etvq03.html DEGW are gogin to concentrate on space planning and office research……

Henry J Lyons & Partners Architects with Gilroy McMahon Architects
why other than turnover…….?

Rafael Vinóly Architects PC – Agressively expanded into the UK with oversized arts centre in Colchester.

Corporate no brainers shortlisting,

Scott Tallon Walker Architects

Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Inc.

Interesting that no clear heritage package regarding possible reintroduction of georgian terrace.

I thought BMCEA might be involved in some form…
Just as long as there are no triangle facades I have had enough of them.
How many staff does OMP have at the moment? or HJL? STW?
Hope they publish all of the designs…

I seem to recall that Sean O’Laoire specifically mentioned that Grafton would be unable to compete given their lowish turnover. Even with O’Mahony Pike it’s a bit of a stretch

Frank McDonald reporting on this today:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0820/1224252949855.html

old article on protest from IT printed archives from 1964 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1007/1224256097766.html

View of the ESB terrace. Views of it are hard enough to come by.

See the old Gasometer on John Rogerson’s Quay looming in the background. Doesn’t pretty much every tall building now have to prove in planning that it won’t be visible in the same way?

Friday’s IT

THREE GROUPS of architects, comprising mainly Irish practices, have been chosen to go on to the final stage of the competition to redesign the ESB’s headquarters on Lower Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin.

Key practices in the consortiums have weathered the recession well. Scott Tallon Walker is working on the Lansdowne Road stadium (with international practice Populous); Henry J Lyons has just finished the Criminal Court in Dublin; Gilroy McMahon is due to redevelop Liberty Hall and Grafton Architects recently won a competition to design a building for the University of Toulouse

suggests local knowledge of a sensitive site won through?

STW are moving into the pastiche market I hope:D.

maybe they go back to there roots one day…

http://www.vimeo.com/8621430

@Andrew Duffy wrote:

See the old Gasometer on John Rogerson’s Quay looming in the background. Doesn’t pretty much every tall building now have to prove in planning that it won’t be visible in the same way?

Correct. It would have been one of the reasons that Treasury’s 35 storey try-on at the National Conference Centre would not have been on – it would have seriously impacted on the closure of this vista, being somewhat off-centre.

@tommyt wrote:

STW are moving into the pastiche market I hope:D.

LOL. I love it 😀

I tell you one thing, if their attempt is anything like the grunt ugly two floor top-up they proposed for the houses adjacent to the Shelbourne Hotel, well… 😉

@ESB spokeswoman wrote:

A final decision on the winning design will be made by the board of the ESB in the summer.

Still nothing yet, or have I missed something? I really want to see these designs.

prices only go up mega what?

http://www.tribune.ie/business/news/article/2010/sep/12/neil-callanan-council-backs-faux-georgian-esb-buil/

google would support this? 12m wide floor plates the best?

if faux georgians are going in here hopefully they won’t be as ugly as the ones on the north quays near four courts.
they’re pointless and stand out a mile

given this,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1016/1224281254585.html

and the takeover of NIE, along with debts incurred by defaulters and the massive cost overrun of the network upgrade I fear this baby is flowing down the drain with the bathwater

@wearnicehats wrote:

given this,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1016/1224281254585.html

and the takeover of NIE, along with debts incurred by defaulters and the massive cost overrun of the network upgrade I fear this baby is flowing down the drain with the bathwater

I don’t fear nothing – this project was conceived in a totally different environment.

While Irish consumers pay the highest price per kilowatt to this greedy monopoly company, ESB’s CEO Padraig is paid an outrageous 750K per annum; at the same time ESB are charging €86 disconnection fee to households who are unable to pay their bills in these straightened times – in my opinion this is simply scum corporate standards 😡

There are vast amounts of empty idle office space nearby to ESB HQ if space is needed – not least of all the soon-to-be-empty Bank of Ireland HQ which is adjacent on Baggot St.

If in such circumstances ESB were to proceed with what is a vanity project, they would become the focal point for public rage at out-of-control unaccountable state owned companies – and I for one would be leading the charge

http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/aug/01/esb-bosss-salary-surged-to-750k-in-2009-despite-cu/

@tomredwest wrote:

if faux georgians are going in here hopefully they won’t be as ugly as the ones on the north quays near four courts.

There´s a good Georgian reproduction on Parnell Square somewhere. I think Graham posted pics of it ages ago. Can´t find it.

Do the right thing, ESB.. give us back our Georgians. You can retain a bit of your horrendous HQ facade and turn it into a museum. :rolleyes:

@Morlan wrote:

Do the right thing, ESB.. give us back our Georgians

Yeah but that’s not their plan from what I am hearing… if they proceed, expect the application to be ‘contemporary’ and ‘iconic’ – i.e. again out of character, but this time much greedier in terms of blowing the parapet height skywards… and if they do file such an application, I’ll have all the more fun planting the proverbial bombs in the system – ‘terrorism through paperwork’ as it were 🙂

12/09/2010

@ESB wrote:

The ESB has told the council “that it is essential that the plan include a height range of up to eight storeys for commercial use if the final adopted policies in support of major employment and economic growth in the city centre are to be realised”.

They cannot be serious.:confused:

@Morlan wrote:

12/09/2010

The ESB has told the council “that it is essential that the plan include a height range of up to eight storeys for commercial use if the final adopted policies in support of major employment and economic growth in the city centre are to be realised”.

They cannot be serious.:confused:

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

*hutton begins to prepare a few mortars*

Mark my words – if ESB proceed with such a vanity project, which no matter what way you want to put it, effectively takes cash away from the exchequer, citizens will take to the streets and ESB CEO Padraig McManus will be as popular as Marie Antoinette in 1789.

How out of fucking touch can one state company get? :rolleyes:

It is far from out of touch that the ESB management are; such a wave of consolodation in energy companies has not been seen internationally for a long time. The ultimate poisin pill defence to a trade sale or flotation to institutional investors would be a commercial property development project in Ireland of this scale.

Pure genius in frustrating the implementation of the McCarthy review should it be decided to cash out of a very valuable utility asset; however with BoI gone to Burlington Road they could pick up the STW scheme on Baggot St to provide all the new floor space they require and convert their existing premises into a hotel which has services capacity that would be impossible to install in a comparable location today.

Do they want to rebuild a Georgian facade and add 8 stories? As a setback?

Here’re some images from the 3XN proposal. There’re a few more diagrams and images on their website. Presume this means they didn’t make it to the later stages of the competition if its in the public realm.

http://www.3xn.dk/

Mark my words – if ESB proceed with such a vanity project, which no matter what way you want to put it, effectively takes cash away from the exchequer, citizens will take to the streets and ESB CEO Padraig McManus will be as popular as Marie Antoinette in 1789.

I only wish Irish citizens were as familiar with this ‘taking to the streets’ concept as the French you reference. As a believer (and practitioner) of taking to the streets I only wish there were more joining me. Ah well, at least Jim Kennedy is answering questions.

Would you say those renders are by the architect or client?

@Frank Taylor wrote:

Do they want to rebuild a Georgian facade and add 8 stories? As a setback?

It’s already 7 stories to the rear, close to the 9 story Bank of Ireland HQ.

Jesus thats Brutal!
Put back the beautiful Georgians.

Jesus Parnell street comes to Fitzwillam St

Sweet baby jesus! I’m sure the IGS would love that one!

Obviously ESB breif for accomodation is probably/possibly more that the site can handle given it’s context.

@DOC wrote:

Sweet baby jesus! I’m sure the IGS would love that one!

Obviously ESB breif for accomodation is probably/possibly more that the site can handle given it’s context.

oh dear. here we go again

Let’s all rubbish the current ESB building while clamouring for some kind of carbon copy or limp pastiche of the past. We need to get over ourselves and accept that the georgians are gone. Georgian architecture is gone. Any attempt to fill the gap using sepia tinted spectacles will result in an infil – and a poor one at that. Just take a look at anything that Robert Adam has done – it’s a short step to Quinlan Terry

The IGS should be reponsible for the conservation and protection of existing buildings. They should in fact be totally against any attempt to copy the past and I am surprised that they have not objected to DCC’s misguided amendment to the development plan

The existing bank of ireland sets up a height profile to the rear of the site perfectly conducive to 8 storeys being adjacent to it, falling to 4 on Fitwilliam

There is a real opportunity here and this kind of lazy backward looking thinking is only going to serve the status quo. And, while we’re at it, maybe we shouldn’t be judging the potential end product by making throwaway comments on schemes that failed to make the shortlist

The ESB are a utility provider and electrical infrastructure contractor; what are they doing acting as a property company at a time when office vacancy rates are in excess of 20% in Dublin?

I agree that a pastiche infill would be wrong; but would also say this proposal should be refused on the following grounds

1. Design style, it is too brash for its setting and would detract from the unity of the Fitz/Merrion mile

2. The set backs would not protect views from Merrion Square

3. There is no need for office space in Dublin due to chronic over-supply

4. The proposal is contrary to government policy on raising revenue from semi state disposals – this would very much damage the appeal and add a lot of risk to a dividend led business model

@PVC King wrote:

The ESB are a utility provider and electrical infrastructure contractor; what are they doing acting as a property company at a time when office vacancy rates are in excess of 20% in Dublin?

I agree that a pastiche infill would be wrong; but would also say this proposal should be refused on the following grounds

1. Design style, it is too brash for its setting and would detract from the unity of the Fitz/Merrion mile

2. The set backs would not protect views from Merrion Square

3. There is no need for office space in Dublin due to chronic over-supply

4. The proposal is contrary to government policy on raising revenue from semi state disposals – this would very much damage the appeal and add a lot of risk to a dividend led business model

you’re judging design on a scheme that failed to make the shortlist.

No doubt the design posted would have reflected the brief; which if the poisin pill defence to preventing the instalation of accountability in the ownership structure is the intention will attract entries that all the points below would be relevant on.

Whatever way you look at this the STW Bank of Ireland sceme is vacant or soon to be vacant and can provide exactly what the ESB require in terms of floor space to deliver a first class energy player; if it were sold or leased to the ESB it would solve two problems. No design in line with an inappropriate brief would be acceptable directly fronting the Fitz/Merrion mile.

@wearnicehats wrote:

oh dear. here we go again

Let’s all rubbish the current ESB building while clamouring for some kind of carbon copy or limp pastiche of the past. We need to get over ourselves and accept that the georgians are gone. Georgian architecture is gone. Any attempt to fill the gap using sepia tinted spectacles will result in an infil – and a poor one at that. Just take a look at anything that Robert Adam has done – it’s a short step to Quinlan Terry

The IGS should be reponsible for the conservation and protection of existing buildings. They should in fact be totally against any attempt to copy the past and I am surprised that they have not objected to DCC’s misguided amendment to the development plan
…
There is a real opportunity here and this kind of lazy backward looking thinking is only going to serve the status quo. …

Here we go again indeed. The usual narrow provincial orthodoxy regarding reconstruction. I know of nowhere outside of the UK and Ireland where the idea of reconstruction is viewed by professional architects and planners with the sort of disgust and contempt normally reserved for pedophiles, bankers and The X-factor. All over the rest of the planet reconstruction is considered a perfectly valid option in situations like this. But what would continental Europeans, for example, know about maintaining vibrant cities? (Now where is that sarcastic/rolling eyes smiley I had my hand on…)

In this particular context, it’s an option which deserves very serious consideration in my opinion, not sneering dismissal.

Very good point there jimg,

. . . . . but the fly in the ointment here is that the ESB building is probably just about the best 1960s corporate urban in-fill building we have [ OK that may not be saying much ] so destroying it is itself a very questionable act, irrespective of what you replace it with.

@jimg wrote:

Here we go again indeed. The usual narrow provincial orthodoxy regarding reconstruction. I know of nowhere outside of the UK and Ireland where the idea of reconstruction is viewed by professional architects and planners with the sort of disgust and contempt normally reserved for pedophiles, bankers and The X-factor. All over the rest of the planet reconstruction is considered a perfectly valid option in situations like this. But what would continental Europeans, for example, know about maintaining vibrant cities? (Now where is that sarcastic/rolling eyes smiley I had my hand on…)

In this particular context, it’s an option which deserves very serious consideration in my opinion, not sneering dismissal.

it might help if you could show examples of successful reincarnations of a similar scale “on the mainland” including original scheme, misguided infil and glorious replacement so that us heathens can be enlightened

not sure the “limp pastiche of the past” would be allowed in such a sensitive setting

if it good pastiche can be done in parnell square why not Fitzwilliam street?

The site can handle both old and new…
One or 2 of the old houses should be newish

The ESB may not have a choice in the matter
http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/sep/12/neil-callanan-council-backs-faux-georgian-esb-buil/?q=ESB Neil Callanan

Council backs faux-Georgian ESB building
The ESB has been working for more than 18 months on a design competition for the redevelopment of its headquarters at Fitzwilliam Square in Dublin. However the city council may be making the decision for the company.

As pointed out ,the repro facades on Parnell Sq opposite the Rotunda main entrance have been completed to a very high standard and cannot be faulted by any reasonable judgement.

There is significant scope for a contemporary block of a substantial size including a decent basement to enliven James St. East with the right roof treatment. We don’t really ‘do’ decent roofs in Irish archticetural practice though imo.

Grafton Architects Ltd & O’Mahony Pike Architects Ltd, have reportedly won this. No word if it actually will ever be built, or renderings yet.

wow – first #1 Ballsbridge, now this. OMP must have a drawing cabinet in their office with a picture of a big white elephant on it

It’s a strange state of being you win a competition but you can’t show your scheme.
Guess changes are being made or goals posts are moving.

So is everyone still against the idea of forcing the ESB to reinstate the entire terrace with high quality Georgian replicas?

I grew up fairly close to this location, most of which was built on marshy land basically reclaimed from the sea.

I remember hearing, as a child, that certain works carried out on the original buildings had put extra stress on the wooden piles which supported them. The wooden piles would have been fine under the structures which had earlier been in place, but these extra works eventually necessitated the removal of the original buildings and their replacement with the current structure. Is any of this true?

If Germany can rebuild most of its historice urban centres with a high degree of autehticity after the war to make up for the cultural destruction of that conflict surely it is possible ot reconstruct fitzwilliam street to make up for the cultural destruction of unbridled urban reconstruction.

True. IMO the best of Dublin as an identity is as a Georgian City. I’d hate to see what they are doing around the North Docks encroaching more and more into the whole city especially the relatively small Georgian spaces that are left.
I was in the ESB building offices many years ago and it a maze of small cubicles with no air – truly hideous. I’d imagine it is horrible to work in.

I had a stroll around “former” Georgian enclaves in North Dublin City recently. Its a truely depressing and dismal sight. When in a way makes a mockery of ABPOs refusal of the NCH on the grounds that it is a historic area.

I a sense though, the scale of destruction wrought in the North City makes it all the more important that what remains is consolidated and preserved. If ever there was a case for sensitive reconstruction (not pastiche a la Mount Street in the 70s/80s) this is it. A historic wrong would thus be corrected. Frankly, given how attitudes had changed, I was rather surprised that the ESB pushed ahead with this project.

C

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. Will it be a touchstone for the growing interest in Dublin’s Georgian area?

ESB to tear down Dublin block that ruined ‘Georgian Mile’
New development will not see restoration of Georgian facade – by Olivia Kelly

Almost 50 years since the demolition of 16 Georgian houses in what was described by conservationists as one of the worst acts of vandalism in the history of the State, the ESB plans to redevelop its headquarters on Dublin’s Fitzwilliam Street.
The company intends to knock the offices designed by Sam Stephenson and Arthur Gibney and apply to Dublin City Council for permission for a scheme double the capacity of the existing building.
However, it does not intend to comply with the council’s policy that it should restore the lost Georgian facades of the street.

Mansion House protest
Plans announced by the ESB in the early 1960s to break up what was Dublin’s longest Georgian facade, from Mount Street to Leeson Street, resulted in a resistance campaign which culminated in nearly 1,000 Dubliners attending a protest meeting at the Mansion House in 1962.
Dublin Corporation heeded the protests and refused permission for the demolition. But on September 30th, 1964, the day before the new Planning Act which established a national planning system came into force, Neil Blaney, then minister for local government, signed an order overturning the corporation’s decision. Protests continued but destruction of the 16 houses went ahead.
In the 1990s the ESB made an attempt at amends when it considered a plan, also by Stephenson, to re-establish the Georgian facade as a Millennium project. But this was deemed problematic and rejected.
The company, four years ago, announced its intention to rebuild its headquarters. Since that announcement a new city development plan was passed which gave councillors the opportunity to ensure the ESB would have to include restoration of the 16 facades in any new development on the site.

Restoration policy
Fianna Fáil Cllr Jim O’Callaghan, who proposed inclusion of the restoration policy in the development plan, said the company’s new scheme fails to take the council’s policy into account.
“This is the last opportunity to reinstate Fitzwilliam Street . . . Some effort should have been made by the ESB to reinstate the Georgian facade.”
The ESB conceded that its new design by Grafton Architects and O‘Mahony Pike Architects does not involve full facade reinstatement but said it “re-interprets” but “respects” the surrounding architectural heritage.

Background: Widespread opposition to ESB’s 1962 plan to demolish houses
The announcement by the ESB in 1962 that it planned to demolish 16 houses on Lower Fitzwilliam Street provoked widespread opposition from conservationists, but it also got some support from architectural students who wanted to see modernism enshrined in Dublin’s Georgian core.
Opponents included the new Irish Georgian Society, leading actor Micheál MacLiammóir and artist Seán Keating, who warned that “the next move will be to feed the books in the library of Trinity College to the boilers of the Pigeon House” – then an ESB power station.

No doubt the current design ‘re-interpreted’ and ‘respected’ the originals as well

Architecturally, you have to say, it is a clever idea;

Piss everyone off equally . . . . . and collect a big cheque.

On a first look at the renders, I can’t say I’m too impressed. It seems to repeat the mistakes of the past and even has a nod to the utterly fake Georgian pastiche facades in vogue in the 70s/80s.

I guess this is just an all or nothing case. Either restore the streetscape faithfully or leave it as is…which allows restoration to occur in the future.

In fact, I don’t see why the ESB are wedded to this site. During the boom, they were actually contemplating a move to Sandyford. There has never been a better time to aquire either a completed Office block or a zoned site. They could even opt for a move of less the 1 km and get a great site in the Docklands. Afterall, even back in the 60s many commentators urged a move to less sensitive areas.

C

Is this the original design from 2011? Or will we never see it?

Some view of the model which really shows the scale of the blocks to the rear of the site.

There is rather a lot of it – not that obvious from the carefully chosen rendered viewpoints. It’s so 70s and 80s infill at the back though.

Council pulls plug on new €150m HQ for the ESB

The ESB has been told to reduce the height of its planned new €150m headquarters if it wants the project to go ahead. – See more at: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/council-pulls-plug-on-new-150m-hq-for-the-esb-30619797.html#sthash.Jhx81Rr9.dpuf

Oh thats just the Indo’s bad subbing – we’ve had the discussion on twitter re bad electricity related pubs…. but you were probably slumming it in the south of france