Has anyone a picture of the George’s Quay tower?
July 23, 2002 at 6:38 pm #705620
Does anyone have a decent picture of the pointy tower on George’s Quay scanned in (even low-res) to save me going into the city?Also, does anyone know the height of it?
Thanks in advance.
July 23, 2002 at 9:53 pm #720285
July 25, 2002 at 10:37 am #720286
Ah…… post them on the site as well ………give us a look too!
July 25, 2002 at 10:49 am #720287
I only wanted it to use in a list of dublin’s buildings – I’m not press.
July 27, 2002 at 5:54 pm #720288
Fresh off the smart card after a little trip through photoshop
(notice the half lampost across the road).
July 29, 2002 at 10:11 am #720289
Thanks for the pic. It fits in quite well with the Ulster Bank in front of it; but it does look more like London than Dublin.
July 29, 2002 at 11:01 am #720290
It’s rubbish, isn’t it?
If you look from the quays through the gates between the blocks it looks like the worst of corporate america.
July 29, 2002 at 11:16 am #720291
I kind of like it. It’s not that much taller than the grotesque Hawkins House behind it (which it helps to hide) or the similarly clad and much older O’Connell Bridge House, but it seems to have provoked a lot of ill feeling due to being opposite the Customs House. Liberty Hall is beside the Customs House and looks much worse.
July 29, 2002 at 1:46 pm #720292
I think its OK too, better anyway than a continuation of the 4-5 storey crap thats in front of it. I’d be interested to see what the Tara Street development looks like beside it when its built. By the way, is that still with an bord Pleanala or what? It seems like its been ages since that was first proposed, no doubt they’ll turn it down for some invented reason or other and force the construction of more 4-5 storey lego-block blandness.
July 29, 2002 at 2:51 pm #720293
July 29, 2002 at 4:39 pm #720294ro_GParticipant
did you also clean the pavement in photoshop fjp? lookes awful dapper!
July 30, 2002 at 3:33 am #720295
Had to remove a section of railing from the left hand side, hence the cloning marks (lazy me). And there was one slab that was a totally different colour than all the rest, so it got fixed too.
Walking around to take these shots (there were a number, and I covered a 360 of the site) I couldn’t help but feel that the buildings looked nice from nearly all angles. When you’re close up, the towers aren’t too domineering, and when you back away they nestle together to give quite a pleasant effect. As Blain said, they’re certainly better than just more of the same old same old five storey blocks.
The strangest view is with the corner of Tara Street and the Quays viewed at the same time (below). With this view the new simply outshines the old….
July 30, 2002 at 9:49 am #720296
ugly but better than a standard 4 and 5 storey effort, should have been less bulky and taller though. i think the mass of the buildings appears ‘too much’, especially viewing the first photo on this thread.
July 30, 2002 at 10:30 am #720297
Another good photo fjp.
I see you got the river access point for HGVs in the foreground!
August 6, 2002 at 11:15 pm #720298farazarchiParticipant
what is the function of this tower?
has anyone any plan?
I am out of the picture!!!!???????
August 7, 2002 at 10:00 am #720299
Although depite not being ground breaking in it’s design…….I think however this complex fits in quite well on Georges Quay…..The new Tara street train station proposal which is very striking will add to a lot to the appearance of this area………and lets hope they’ll change that loopline bridge too.
August 7, 2002 at 10:21 am #720300doozerParticipant
Your not meant to be in the picture- that’s what Photoshop is for.
August 7, 2002 at 3:57 pm #720301PaulCParticipant
Is there a picture (or a link to a webpage) of the new Tara Street station proposal??
August 7, 2002 at 4:02 pm #720302
The permission was revised to be a pair of stories shorter, but I’m not sure if the models and height given take this into account.
August 7, 2002 at 5:16 pm #720303
This is the original
The link of Andrew’s is the revised design.
August 7, 2002 at 6:05 pm #720304
Is the height of 60.8 meters (i.e., taller than liberty hall) the original height or the revised height?
There is such a ridiculous desire by the corporation to chop stories off buildings before granting permission. I suspect that if permission were sought for a 30 storey tower in the docks it would be granted eventually for a 28 storey one – even though the reduction in impact would be next to nothing. The central bank is an old example of the futility of this; it has a huge visual impact on its neighbourhood, and if it had been built to its original 180 feet instead of the 140-odd it is it would have had just the same impact, and probably would have looked better to boot.
August 8, 2002 at 1:31 am #720305
Ahhhh the Central Bank…..
It also suffers from the odd position of being just above a “hill”, so it looks taller from the north than it does from the south. Oddly taller again if you look at it from the upper storey of another building.
But on a more serius note – let’s think perspective. The Tara Street project really looks quite big when viewed from the more “western” touristy areas (liffey, keys etc). Perhaps there’s an argument that buildings further down the docks could be built much much taller, using the “it doesn’t look that much bigger than the Tara Street Building” (because it’s farther away)….
Perspective – this is small, this is far away.
The new weapon against nasty planning people….
August 10, 2002 at 4:00 pm #720306emfParticipant
The towers look quite well when driving down Amiens St, framed between Busaras and the IFSC!
August 12, 2002 at 11:16 am #720307
I noticed that view this morning walking down the ramp from Connolly station. If Busaras were a bit cleaner that would make a nice postcard – “Modern Dublin Without Anything Really Ugly”. Unfortunately as soon as you turn the corner the Houses Hawkins and Apollo come into view, with Liberty Hall and the Irish Life centre (not as badly) spoiling the view to the right.
August 12, 2002 at 11:24 am #720308
Poor auld Liberty Hall needs a make over……..it is a landmark for Dublin afterall. This area could look really well and ‘modern’……with the inclusion of the new Tara Street train station proposal…..a revamp for Liberty Hall and a contemporary re-modelling (Calatravesque) of the Loopline Bridge……….it would all look just wonderful!
August 16, 2002 at 2:31 am #720309
Was up Liberty Hall today taking photos (over 300!!!). The Georges Quay Towers looked fantastic all the time, and I’ve really really taken to them at this stage. They’re just interesting from virtually all angles, and the night lights are a nice touch.
Liberty Hall is a little forlorn, but still very, very, very impressive. The main stairwell is a beauty, as are the little tiles on the roof. View is fantastic!!!! Sadly the observation deck is used for (wait for it) storage!!! Panoramic photos were taken from all angles covering the full 360, and the preliminaries look excellent.
Here are the towers!!!
August 16, 2002 at 11:15 am #720310
Great shot FJP…….they are not really that bad
…..I think they are better than the SOM proposal and fit better in the space.
August 16, 2002 at 11:26 am #720311
Well done fjp – I look forward to the rest of the photos. Did you get any of the interior? Liberty Hall is one of my favorite Dublin buildings. Do you know why the observation deck is not used – seems like it could be a nice little earner.
August 16, 2002 at 12:26 pm #720312notjimParticipant
fjp, lovely photos. Have you seen them from Alfie Byrne road, if you pick your spot they form a perfect pyramid and you have the hills in the background.
August 16, 2002 at 1:05 pm #720313
Very few interior Liberty shots I’m afraid. It’s a little bit tight inside, and some of it is just (narrow) corridor. The areas outside the elevators had nice wood floors, but generally it was too tight to really give a proper impression.
The observation deck closure was partially attributed to jumpers by our guide. Seems like it could be time to reconsider this idea, although I’m sure tourist traffic might punish the escalator waiting times a little. Beautiful view though.
Alfie Byrne Road will need some map examining, and I also want to have a look at that view from Connolly Station that was mentioned. Of course, I have to now photoshop and upload all the images taken yesterday, so it might be best I take it easy on the extra shots.
August 16, 2002 at 1:23 pm #720314
Your very good FJP to get into these places so as to take these snaps……It’s not as if the CIA is around etc….but buildings in Dublin should be made available more to the public…..especially those of a significant, considerable, height or function….well then again………there is a lack of them is’nt there……..and the DDDA has seen an end to that ………no more buildings of a considerable height in our capital city………….no such thing as a restaurent with splendid views of the cityscape etc…..and when you look at the joy and entertainment it has brought to people.
August 16, 2002 at 1:43 pm #720315
Part of the Spencer Dock plan that just got approved is a tower with a viewing gallery.
Have a look at page 49:
“A tall building, up to a height of 100 metres … If exceeding the 60m minimum height it shall incorporate a public viewing area at the top floor”
Now 100m isn’t that tall, but the intention is pretty clear.
Does the tower with permission at John Rogersons Quay have a viewing deck?
I just remembered that the Tara Street Station proposal incorporates a restaurant floor, but I’m not sure where in the building, or if it survived the beheading it got when the height was reduced by two stories.
August 16, 2002 at 4:28 pm #720316notjimParticipant
Alfie Byrne road goes from East Wall road to Clontarf prom, by one end of the port tunnel. It has a little memorial to Alfie Byrne at the Clontarf prom end and an awful wind sculture that hardly moves even in a gale, by, I think, the same guy as the floozy of late memory.
August 16, 2002 at 11:50 pm #720317
You’re dead right Greg. I was up Liberty with an assisting friend (running 12 optical zoom footage of the entire horizon) and we were far too excited for our own good. Available tall buildings: one of the things that I find most disappointing about the spike on O’Connell Street was that you can’t climb it. In a city where exposure to height is so rare, it would be great if the few buildings we have would really pander to it. People like being up high….
Wow, I’m having a bad grammar night….
Alfie Byrne road sadly sounds a little off my beaten track. I’m a no car person, which rules out a lot of nipping about. But’s it’s logged in my brain now, and I’m getting good at saying “hey let’s go down this road” to people I drive with.
August 18, 2002 at 12:01 pm #720318vitruviusParticipant
There is a great view of these towers on Georges Quay from, of all places, the bridge over the DART line at Grand Canal Dock.
They appear quite bulky and sculptural in the distance. Sorry I have no pics but it would make a lovely Sunday afternoon stroll for somebody (else).
The smoked glass roofs – what’s that about? A hybrid between the original and resubmitted plans, maybe?
August 18, 2002 at 5:45 pm #720319
The rooves appear to be a metal horizontal gridding over glass, though it’s hard to make out (looking at a high zoom 35mm photo).
August 19, 2002 at 4:54 pm #720320AnonymousInactive
I’m finding it a little hard to believe that so many people seem to like this (in my view) sad little cluster of towers. Is nobody bothered, for instance, by the view of them from the south across Trinity playing field?
August 19, 2002 at 5:05 pm #720321
I think the reason most people are so enthusiastic about them is becuase they’re one of the very few buildings that are actually noticable above the utter disaster that is the Dublin “skyline”. At the very least they’re a focal point, making a change from all the 5 storey rubbish that the planners in this country seem to think are so great.
I often think I’m missing something here – have tall buildings been declared evil by the supreme court or something? Why do the planners think 5 storey blandness is so much better? I can’t believe that they actually think that all these unnoticable 5 storey boxes are better than something that would actually stand out and be something to look at.
August 19, 2002 at 7:00 pm #720322AnonymousInactive
I take the point about the need for more distinction on the Dublin skyline. I certainly agree with Blain about the numbing awfulness of the 5-storey box syndrome, and with others in this thread about the idiocy of lopping a few floors off tall building proposals just for the sake of it.
I’m glad the banal SOM scheme here was not built, but then that let in this project (which is older, isn’t it?). I suppose my dislike of the George’s Quay buildings is that they seem to be in a 1980s sub-Cesar Pelli timewarp. Not absolutely awful, but not quite the real thing, and not quite 21st century either.
August 20, 2002 at 10:24 am #720323
…indeed they are. The planning permission was granted in 1990 wasn’t it?
The original plan had darker glass and looked a bit like a Las Vegas hotel.
August 20, 2002 at 7:41 pm #720324RBParticipant
The Seven Canary Dwarves
Whilst I do not object to the height of the tallest tower, the overall visual mass or agglomeration of towers seems so removed from Dublin’s urban context.
The towers’ pyramidal roof structure immediately refers to London’s Canary Wharf, called Canada One if my memory serves me right. Even that scheme was a reference to the American prototypes of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, characterised by the deep plan, impermeable facade, and an over emphasis on artificial lighting and mechanical ventilation. The Hierarchy of staff is expressed with management in cellular offices next to the windows and ordinary staff working in a open plan core areas with no windows.
George’s Quay seem’s to have all these features with the exception of a far shallower plan. Despite this improvement to the scheme it still conveys the Global Omnipotence of Multi-National Corporations and their $ influence on Urban Planning regardless of any context to Site, City, Countryand Culture.
Hooray for the Seven Canary Dwarves
Any chance of a Mc D’s sign on top
August 20, 2002 at 11:35 pm #720325
Global Omnipotence of Multi-National Corporations and their $ influence on Urban Planning regardless of any context to Site, City, Countryand Culture
Guh??? Sounds like more multi-national bashing. Whilst this might be a fair hobby to have, my interpretation is that all great buildings are generally created by the richest of the rich (big corporations/companies/governments/armies/dictators). So should we really be giving out about this???
But yes, the plan isn’t as big/deep as other countries. But I think the point that has stuck so far is that it’s a hell of a lot better than nothing. And I still like it. Even though it’s a little small.
August 21, 2002 at 11:03 am #720326
The point about reliance on artificial lighting and mechanical ventilation is a valid one though. Has anyone been in the building? It must be a dreary place to work unless you luck out and get the window seat.
Don’t forget the churches in your list of great building patrons fjp.
It looks like the Square in Tallaght from a distance. That can’t be a good thing.
August 21, 2002 at 11:22 am #720327emfParticipant
Each floor actually combines the floorspace from all the blocks with floor to ceiling glass walls. Quite a nice place to work! I suppose you could use that phrase ‘3rd generation offices’…..
August 21, 2002 at 12:24 pm #720328
All this talk of money, capitalism, corporations, etc……….but money IS the driving force of successful societies and indeed civilization itself ………since the dawn of time …….and it is how we have so many wonderful structures today from times past and the present around the world. We are only new to a proliferation of Money here in Ireland thanks to our boom ….which has since disappeared….well according to some sorts…..but we are much more affluent however overall as compared to before.
Ok we get a cheap copy of corporate America down the docks (aka Georges Quay) but it is better than what was there …..and here’s to Kevin Roche’s Spencer Dock’s original plan, which would have acted as a great anchor for a wealth of money for the IFC, Dublin City and the rest of the country…..Alas not the case…. I remember the detractors were out in force…..and when you think now, it had better potential than what is happening down the docks at the moment……which is one big Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz in regards to spectacular architecture……… I knew this would happen……..and we are a lot poorer architecturally, and materially.
August 21, 2002 at 1:05 pm #720329AnonymousInactive
Always a tricky one, this. “Better than what was there” – well, I don’t know what was was there before, but in general terms this usually means that any new building is better than dereliction. I’m not sure that’s the case. Dereliction has its plus points. Scrap merchants rather than bankers can earn a living. It has a poignancy.
Indeed it is the “any building is better than none” attitude that has blighted so many British and Irish cities in the past. Like the early phases of London Docklands, which George’s Quay so much resembles. At least the later Canary Wharf has a scale and presence to it. But in their derelict state, the upstream London docks were magnificent.
And yet, and yet – assuming all empty parts of all cities will eventually be built on, planning controversy can be fatal, since this can lead to steadily worse and worse schemes being proposed rather than – as protestors always fondly hope – steadily better and better ones.
I’ve no idea how this impasse can be resolved, beyond proposing a new society to cherish and preserve endangered areas of urban dereliction.
August 22, 2002 at 6:20 pm #720330
But the alternative to what was actually built there would almost certainly have been more of those awful 5 storey boxes that surround the towers, rather than just leaving it derelict. At least the towers are something to look at (whether you like or dislike them), and as proven here can generate discussion. Would more 5 storey boxes generate any discussion other than declarations af how terrible thay are?
I know I’m probably preaching to the converted here, but the IFSC extension has got to be one of the most depressing additions to the city of Dublin in recent years for the reasons mentioned above. A huge opportunity to do something worthwhile was wasted. Absolutely nothing stands out there, and now they want to do the same to the rest of the docks, and no doubt similar rubbish will be inflicted on the Cork and Waterford docklands on a smaller scale. If this is the case dereliction might be the better option, because at least it means it’ll be a blank canvass for some future generation with a bit more ambition and courage.
August 26, 2002 at 11:46 am #720331
There is a lot of rubbish there alright but I can’t agree that “Absolutely nothing stands out there”….
I think the Clarion Quay Apartments stand out and are possibly the finest apartments in Dublin. (not a lot of competition – Charlotte Quay, Wooden building..?)
It’s great to have an example of apartment living in the city that is done properly. It may help people overcome their justifiable fears based on Ballymun and then Zoe.
August 27, 2002 at 10:31 am #720332Rory WParticipant
The irony being that Zoe built Charlotte Quay… amazing what people can do if they put a bit of thought into it
August 27, 2002 at 9:10 pm #720333BTHParticipant
Had my lunch in the fantastic little “Nude” cafe at the base of the towers… The quality of the Landscaping / Canopies / paving has to be seen to be believed… The claim that George’s Quay is a “Cheap” copy of a typical corporate american tower is proved to be rubbish when the building is viewed close up – In materials and workmanship it’s clear that no expense has been spared and the numerous playful details, such as the fin walls with bands of rough stone resting on a base of glass, the elegant canopies and particularly the “Nude” outlet – with its entirely opening wall of glass – reflect the high quality of design and execution.
Overall the form of the building creates a strong visual image for Dublin. The latest carlsberg billboard ad “bus route” has the George’s quay tower in the background and not only is it immediately recognisable but it also looks fantastic. To compare the building to Cesar Peili’s Canary Wharf (much derided as being a dwarf itself in it’s day) is to completely misread the form. It’s not a heroic prism thrusting toward the sky – it’s a cluster of deftly proportioned elements that read as a crystaline sculpture. viewing from different angles creates different impressions. As well as this the “cluster” aspect allows the height and bulk of the building to blend much more easily into the context.
It’s easy to criticise this building on a purely superficial level – as so many posting on this forum have done (it’s negative impact on Trinity College being one of the more ridiculous claims) – but familiarity (as in walking past every morning, lunchtime and evening of every working day) has led me to appreciate that there is both quality and substance embodied in the George’s Quay tower.
August 28, 2002 at 11:01 am #720334AnonymousInactive
Totting up those in favour and those against in this thread, George’s Quay is winning by a ratio of roughly 6 to 4, depending on how you interpret some people’s lukewarm comments. May even go as high as 7 to 3.
I’m amazed but interested. Obviously the style of 1980s corporate America has more going for it than I ever imagined. Clearly this stuff is popular.
August 28, 2002 at 12:07 pm #720335
BTH take your tablets 😉
August 29, 2002 at 6:51 pm #720336BTHParticipant
Ah yes… thats much better Paul – Now i realise how wrong I was….
Ah it’s too easy to take things too seriously and sure it’s all just a matter of opinion. However I do like this building – not that it’s a masterpiece by any means – and I hate to see such superficial criticism of the “1980’s corporate America” kind… There’s got to be more to debate on the subject than that…
August 29, 2002 at 8:23 pm #720337
I think we need more polls in this forum. People, when starting a thread, add the option of a poll if you think it will help….
(they’re fun too!!!)
September 22, 2004 at 10:41 pm #720338AnonymousParticipant
Has anyone a picture of this building (now 95% occupied) at night fully lit?
Is it just me or does this a building that really does look much better when lit?
Talking about occupiers this one just signed a major deal recently leasing space to UBS (Union Bank of Switzerland) who have set up a new Dublin fund. 😎
September 23, 2004 at 12:01 pm #720339
I’ve loads of nightime pics of it here but the scanner’s broken, I’ll try another way – but yes it looks fantastic when lit, esp the central tower that forms the canyon-like entrance facing the quay.
And the view from the IFSC is amazing after dark, with all the towers glowing in white light – what a contrast with the daytime scene. Towers of Darkness they’re not!
Another building that looks great at night is the old Carrolls building on the Grand Canal, it can be seen at the moment in a Kellogg’s ad on telly. It’s aged so well, and the white light and glazing make it look like it was built yesterday.
September 23, 2004 at 12:34 pm #720340AnonymousInactive
That Carrols Building is fantastic.
September 23, 2004 at 2:08 pm #720341
Love the Carroll’s Building
September 23, 2004 at 2:11 pm #720342
I always associate that building with being stuck in traffic!
September 23, 2004 at 8:17 pm #720343
I think half the city does – at least you’ve something nice to look at. My parents worked in it for years so I vagely recall the interior.
They tried to get hold of a fantastic painting of the building before the place was cleared out – alas someone else got there first 🙂
Here’s just two pics of Georges Quay taken from a couple of years ago. It looks even better now with near full-occupancy. Apologies for resolution, they’re stills taken from some VT of photo prints :p
September 23, 2004 at 8:18 pm #720344
September 23, 2004 at 8:46 pm #720345AnonymousParticipant
I think these pictures have displayed what I was trying to say.
Theres an almost white light quality to this that cameras never pick up to these buildings, a certain coldness that can’t be described. All in all I think the architects on this one did a an excellent job getting the quantum of floorspace in without it looking bulky at all.
The top two floors it would appear are only plant rooms, this dissapoints me a little, as basements can run mainframes as well.
September 23, 2004 at 8:56 pm #720346
It’s an icy white alright, something these images don’t capture with all the sodium about.
September 23, 2004 at 10:12 pm #720347IrishtownParticipant
The TV show Alias (Jennifer Garner’s) last season had an episode that took place partly in Berlin and they showed an aerial shot of a city and labeled it “Berlin” but it was Dublin! It was George’s Quay and surrounding area from a helicopter at night! It was very lovely, but I got pretty miffed that they put it as Berlin.
September 24, 2004 at 9:53 am #720348
I remember this scheme (Georges Quay) was first pilloried by all when it was announced that the developer would build it instead of a plan by SOM. They were labeled the portals of darkness if I’m not mistaken. The right decision was chosen in the end I suppose, as this scheme fits in well here. Of all the new buildings that have been developed in the docklands this one in particular, a design from the early 1990’s, has been used on numerous occasions in adverts etc. See it in the RTE promo too where slabs of the Giant’s Causway are transformed into the sparkly pryamid towers. Probably a sad reflection too on what has generally been built down the docks, when a kinda quirky design from the 1980’s/ 1990’s grabs all the attention today.
September 24, 2004 at 11:39 am #720349
September 24, 2004 at 11:40 am #720350
September 24, 2004 at 2:36 pm #720351
I think the top floors are offices; they just weren’t occupied at the time of the photos. Can you see the exit signs lit up in them in the second photo d_d_dallas posted?
September 24, 2004 at 4:32 pm #720352Ronan CParticipant
The original proposal included dark tinted glass, hence the “portals of darkness” or whatever quote. The developers realised that dark tinted glass was very 1980’s and copped on that if they didn’t put in clear glass, the scheme wouldn’t take off.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.