Landmark Irish Building Projects since 1990
- This topic has 20 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 9 months ago by garethace.
August 19, 2003 at 3:10 pm #706388MK O FlanaganParticipant
i am a journalist and I am commissioned to write a piece about landmark building projects since 1990 in Ireland (one for each year).
I would welcome suggestions from members of this forum; projects you have worked on or projects you admire. I would like to include infrastructure projects as well as buildings.
Please write here or send e-mails to firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you all.
August 25, 2003 at 12:19 pm #735099d_d_dallasParticipant
From an infrastructure point of view – the Jack Lynch tunnel in Cork and the soon to be completed (in 2045…) Port Tunnel. The Jack Lynch is probably a better one as it’s already finished and was the first, plus I don’t think anyone in Marino complained about de noizzze.
Landmark buildings? Well how about the refurbishment of Collins Barracks – not a new building but a great restoration and change of use…
August 25, 2003 at 1:20 pm #735100
There have been no landmark buildings whatsoever …..hence the poor response!
August 25, 2003 at 1:23 pm #735101sw101Participant
tearing down the floozy in da jacuzzi. that was a landmark i’m fond of. might have been early this millenium though. all in all the 90’s was a bit of a disappointment.
August 25, 2003 at 1:35 pm #735102sw101Participant
damn architecture, making me so bitter. and i’m o so young
on reflection i’d highly recommend the green building in temple bar as a landmark building. raising awareness and acceptability of sustainable design. tis a bit of a flop what with all its fancy bits broken but it was experimental and temperamental technology at the time.
also, the bookend building by arthur gibney and partners is nice, not entirely to my taste but does make a positive impact in that area of temple bar. may have been 2000 though.
the gate cinema in cork(derek tynan), and also the opera house are worth a mention.
the museum of modern art addition by shay cleary, isoldes tower maybe, the gallery of photography by group 91 and someone i cant think of.
a bunch of building in ucd, ucc, dcu and other colleges around the country. i’d ask the riai and the aai for info and recommendations
August 25, 2003 at 1:59 pm #735103AnonymousInactive
No landmark projects…really?
Technical College, Bishopton
De Blacam Meagher
Photography Centre Buildings
Irish Film Centre
1 Castle Street
De Blacam Meagher
Civic Offices Wood Quay
Scott Tallon Walker
Shane O’Toole and Michael Kelly
Allies and Morrison
Temple Bar Square and Building
Beckett Theatre, Trinity College
De Blacam Meagher
Are you guys actually in Ireland?
Paul my eyes are starting to bleed, think it’s time you banned me from the site
August 25, 2003 at 2:54 pm #735104
……mere infill as opposed to outstanding standalone landmarks
August 25, 2003 at 3:01 pm #735105d_d_dallasParticipant
Which is why I decided to avoid buildings and mention infrastructure! There’s alot of Temple Bar mentioned up there – great design, but are they really “landmarks”???
August 25, 2003 at 3:21 pm #735106NiallParticipant
Waterfront Hall, Belfast. Civic Offices Dublin, Galway and Tullamore. Georges Quay Dublin………………….
August 25, 2003 at 3:59 pm #735107AnonymousInactive
………”mere infill” ?
Sorry, did I say take your head out from up your a*** lads, some are gonna need a flashlight and ball of string to find it and a crowbar.
Temple bar has influenced architects everywhere, and the Ark and Filmhouse Buildings are landmarks, not only distinguished as buildings but supportive of one another in a way that is little recognised. Meeting House Square is a great urban space.
De Blacam Meagher’s Library in Cork is an excellent building as is Ronald Tallon’s Civic Offices
August 25, 2003 at 4:52 pm #735108cajualParticipant
‘mere infill’ !!
i’m afraid the problem with modern architecture is this scorn of ‘mere infill’ resulting in everyone trying to show off but nothing relating to each other- gehry as prime example. the sooner architecture returns to mere infill the better our cities will be- more temple bar and less spencer dock…
i would suggest nomination the entire temple bar project as a landmark building project, along with the M50 which has had a huge architectural impact on the citys hinterland (not necessaily for the best however…)
August 25, 2003 at 5:08 pm #735109
What are you on about……what’s in Spencer Dock at the moment that’s so showy………Nothing! Is there any new building in Dublin that is used to represent the city on a postcard other than the timeworn regulars such as the Custom House and Four Courts…..No!…. but the Oliver St. John Gogarty pub with all it’s larger louts and co. Did we get here in Dublin during our building boom anything to match modern landmarks abroad ……..eh no! Temple Bar was mere infill in that it repaired in some sense a part of the city that was badly scarred. It’s merits however have not been physically echoed.
August 25, 2003 at 5:16 pm #735110doozerParticipant
Eh-hem…I have 2 words for you….Croke Park
August 25, 2003 at 5:24 pm #735111
….great to see such optimism!
August 25, 2003 at 5:34 pm #735112AnonymousInactive
Hey how stupid of me, the posting asks for projects since 1990, mine are all during 1990’s so now there’s
Niland Gallery, Sligo
Fingal County Hall
There ye are MK OFlanagan….done your job for you.
Greg F hope your not a teacher.
August 25, 2003 at 5:41 pm #735113
August 25, 2003 at 5:52 pm #735114AnonymousInactive
Well I’m gutted, frankly and not just a little surprised.
A train driver, eh who’d have thought it?
August 25, 2003 at 8:21 pm #735115cajualParticipant
ok, i should clarify my position… landmarks buildings are not inherently bad, but when a city is composed of them then the residual space (ie the city we experiences on the street) becomes a left over space between competing architects…
and the power of somewhere like croke park comes from the combination of ‘infill’ and the fantastical landmark…
The desire for landmark architecture is something that has ravaged postwar european cities, and it’s only now that architects are beginning to realise that infill is the way forward, and temple bar represents a role model for cities everywhere… originally the plan was to knock it all down and build ‘landmarks’…
However…. in one sense i agree with you greg f- the last great, heroic landmark building in dublin centre i can immediately recall is the central bank… (excluding the spike)… too long…
August 25, 2003 at 8:28 pm #735116GrahamHParticipant
I agree that most major projects in the country have been infill over the past 10 years, not that its a bad thing, most of it was either filling in the holes in Dublin from the 70s and 80s, or sticking bits on to expanding businesses and institutions around the country during the boom years.
Of course there have been major ‘stand alone’ developments, but not that many.
I’d include the IFSC if thats not going back to far – late 80s/early 90s, its facade flanking the quays and the rear of the Custom House is worthy of acclaim, not to mention how it echos Busaras, even if some are bored of it now.
And of course how it rejuvinated a whole area of the city at the instigation of Charlie Haughey (and others)
September 12, 2003 at 12:49 pm #735117MK O FlanaganParticipant
Thank you all for your thoughts (and for doing my job for me). I had thought of a few of these but the professional view is always good to have.
September 13, 2003 at 12:25 pm #735118garethaceParticipant
Good idea for a thread i think actually. I did come across an interesting link today, dealing with the idea of landmarks in the middle of other urban functions, like urban housing etc.
Rarely do football stadiums look or function like baseball parks. Football does not have a tradition and history as deep as baseballâ€™s. Football stadiums are bigger, they generate more automobile traffic on game days, and the team plays there only a few days a year (whereas major-league baseball teams play at least 81 homes games a year). Since football stadiums sit empty most of the time and generally have mammoth parking requirements, they donâ€™t make promising urban building blocks.
Eisenmanâ€™s design for the Arizona Cardinals, though praised in The Times, is downright anti-urban â€” surrounded by parking lots. Such big, isolated structures naturally tend to be designed as â€œobject buildingsâ€ or â€œiconsâ€ rather than as contributors to lively, mixed-use urban districts. Photographers conspire with the architects, the team owners, and whatever companies bought the stadium naming rights to show how dramatic these venues look like from the air, as opposed to documenting how they look from the poor pedestrianâ€™s perspective. â€œTheyâ€™re designed for the blimp shot,â€ Sandy Sorlien, a Philadelphia photographer, complained on the Tradarch e-mail discussion list affiliated with the Institute for Traditional Architecture. Not uncommonly, architectural writers glorify such stadiums if they look novel and striking, even though their design and siting are unneighborly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.