Hideous in Harold’s Cross

To continue your point about hyped journalists, that got a huge push from the Sunday Indo I think,
gushing themes like only ten minutes from Stephens Green and neglecting to say that it is closer to Heroin Supermarkets than Georgian Dublin.

it may surprise you (it did me) that this building was designed by the darlings of irish architecture de blacam and meagher. shock horror. when it was going up i thought it was a cheap rip off. maybe they are letting the standards slip?

Heh, I knew what this thread was about as soon as I saw the subject. I have the misfortune of passing this everyday.

What’s with the naff balconies the length of the building and car parking on street level. It looks like a cheap & sleazy American motel.

I quite like it, the apartments actually look like enjoyable places to live for once. I’ll post a picture later.

The problem is that you can view it all the way from Mount Jerome Cemetery

A good example of why we have so little interesting modern architecture in this country. It would be hard to find a building anywhere that isn’t visible from some cemetary, church, councillor’s back garden, etc. At least mackers gave some valid criticism of the building.

i think the street level car parking that makers is refering to is actually the carshowrooms that run the lenght of the ground floor.
the balconies (the strip facing onto the canal)to me are one of the better things about the scheme. the piece i have a problem with is th corner piece which is too massive and overbearing on the street & bridge.
this corner is like a poor cousin of the one on their scheme opposite christchurch, which has its power because it is suspended high in space, not crushed against the side of a bridge. plus the interior spaces of this wooden box seem to be handled very clumsily with protruding celings etc.
the problem is not that it is highly visible it is that it is’nt beautiful. de blacam and meagher are more than capable of creating a fitting and contextual corner piece as they have shown many times. i just think that they havnt paid enough attention to this one.

There is another tiny housing development tucked behind Rathmines Church on a small laneway, right nextdoor to a Grafton Architects small corner building.

On a similar theme, has anyone noticed how much activity seems to be happening in little laneways like Strand Street Great over the last couple of years, and it still continues. That street does feature a small Grafton Architects scheme too.

Another small development I like, by Opperman and Assoc I think is down at the bottom of Smithfield in another small laneway. All of these developments really fall under the same heading of small developments. But you have a point, the location of the Harold’s Cross bridge scheme does elevate it more.

I must get a pic from coming from Dolphin’s Barn direction – that is an interesting view to take a pic from too. Post it tomorrow hopefully.

My above criticisms aside, I agree that it is the context of this building that is so offensive.

The building would sit a lot happier if the builders’ yard opposite and the adjoining “Tara’s Dancing Pumps” / “Sauna’s Adult Shop” strip of sheds were developed on and built to a similar elevation.

It’s “Laura Jane’s” sex shop, by the way. I’ve attached a pretty poor photo of the building.

i totally agree mackers. shaunas adult shop should be built up to the same level. 4 stories of trenchcoat heaven!

I think it looks OK. A lot better than what was there

There is always a trade off between an under used site and the extra new building area required to justify the risks of development.

The sad thing about this development is that they didn’t build enough, by using the example of an American Motel the right theme is being sounded.

The key mistake was the attempt to retain a car salesroom and develop a residential project at one site.
It is one retail garages left outside industrial areas

Five stories modelled on the new Apartments on Adelaide Road (The Old Synagougue) would have been a lot better.

There is always a trade off between an under used site and the extra new building area required to justify the risks of development.

The sad thing about this development is that they didn’t build enough, by using the example of an American Motel the right theme is being sounded.

The key mistake was the attempt to retain a car salesroom and develop a residential project at one site.
It is one of the few retail garages left outside industrial areas

Five stories modelled on the new Apartments on Adelaide Road (The Old Synagougue) would have been a lot better.

Originally posted by Andrew Duffy
It’s “Laura Jane’s” sex shop, by the way.

Very keen to share that with us, aren’t you Andrew 🙂

This view.

Sorry Steve-o, must have got your system here in DIT.

THis.

This too.

Here.

Apologises for the mess in attaching the above images. But I think it is important to understand the context of this building, in relation to the canal, Parnell Road etc, etc. Places, which at the moment are rather ‘lost to the city’.

Bear in mind that this development is the first thing around that place for yonks! I remember I bought my first bike there too, still using it. So maybe some happy motorists will benefit too!