Loop Line Bridge – specifically the ads…
- This topic has 166 replies, 51 voices, and was last updated 19 years ago by
.
- Posts
Would it be possible to place an official planning objection against the Loop Line Bridge adverts??? There’s no way they’d be granted permission today, and it’s not like they’re a permanent fixture.
Who actually owns the Bridge anyway??
Just in case this was the easy way of making it look a lot less tacky. I know some people object to it being there at all, but even they must admit that it could only look better as a railway bridge than the City’s longest and most visible bill-board.
Could this actually be accomplished?? Come on Paul, think of the publicity your site would get if archiseek and co managed to get them taken down. It would be nice to make serious enquiries about this one (as opposed to just bitching).
FIGHT THE POWER!!! et cetera.
fjp
Count me in fjp. Lets make a list of people to write to and then divide it up and see where we get. I guess we should just start by writing to CIE and the DDDA and DubCC asking what plans they have for improving the appearance of the bridge and take it from there. Is there any society or body interested in Victorian industrial architecture?
I would imagine CIE Holding own the bridge… or rather maintain it on behalf of their one shareholder, the Minister for Transport, who controls that share in the interests of the company’s owner the State! Anyway…count me in too. Shall we include the Amiens Street and Talbot Street sections as well
Maybe those behind the design of the new Tara Street station should tackle the loopline bridge aswell. The obvious problem with doing anything with the bridge is the interuption to this critical transport route. If, however, the proposed new dart line further down the river goes ahead (ddda plans), couldnt something serious then be done with the loopline bridge. ie Remove it or replace it
I don’t see any real reason to replace the bridge as it is now – it got its own character and particular function and i especially think it shouldn;t be replaced just becuase its not new or fashionable i.e. i’d thnik it’d be even more boring to replace it with another (modern/ fasionable) white, concrete or metal – cable-stay or not bridge – a la ‘LUAS’ bridge, either of the calatrava bridges, the motor way one up in Drogheda and others around Europe etc etc.
As for removing the signs – in a peverse way i kind of like them ‘changing with the city’!? And as they have been existing advertsing structures for years i seriously dougt anybody other than CIE can remove them. Seeing that the govt. has always made them impoverished and play second fiddle to roads i wouldn’t want to deny them a handy money earner.Well, in my opinion the best results might cascade in this order:
1. No ads. Nice bridge with cool night lighting. But some people do like the ads, and they make lots of money – so on to number 2.
2. Removal of small crappy side ads (Tilestyle, Pepsi etc), but the retention of the Guinness ad (and Heinekan ad on east side) and the substantial revenue derived. Contact Guinness/Heinekan and ask them to design ads that are created specifically to complement the bridge. This design would have to reduce the area of the centre span covered, and perhaps give the impression of being on the “real” surface of the bridge as opposed to being on giant boxes stuck to the side. Guinness etc might like this kind of thing, and it could probably get them on the news (again). Cool night lighting.
3. There is no 3.Re replacing the Bridge – that’s way off in the future. This is something that could be done much, much faster, and still have a very good effect on the Bridge. I don’t want to wait four years because they might be taking the Bridge down (completely different discussion) and then find that it never happens.
By the way – the size of the side ads (Tilestyle) has actually increased in the last year or two.
If what I’ve said above interests people, the information that might be handy would be:
1. Who owns the Bridge – exactly who.
2. The chain of responsibility for the adverts (where the buck starts and ends)
3. The revenue from the ads/the ad rates.
4. DCC’s pov on the matter?? Is there a current strategy for this structure.
5. When did advertising begin??
6. The advertisers ideas on the matter (Guinness, Heinekan, Tilestyle, Pepsi, etc)fjp
(ps – the Tilestyle ads would have to moved somewhere very local, as I reckon they’re the only ads that are geographically relevant)
It’s an awful looking thing is’nt it ……..I used to give it credit as an example of Victorian railway engineering……but it is mediocre, purely functional and visually awful. I’m not going on about not being able to see the Custom House that shell of a building because of the obtrusiveness of the bridge but because the bridge is just bloody awful in itself as it spans the Liffey. A makeover is required ……aka wallpaper, something that will benefit the views from O’Connell bridge, an arch stretching into the sky or something, rather than that drab horizontal featueless feature. It is now nearly 2003 AD not quaint dear auld imperial Dublin.
Well then is there anyway that the ads could be used to better effect??? I’ll readily admit that it’s very “criss-crossy”, but what’s on it now still needs improvement.
fjp
Remove the ads, they’re tacky. I’m all for adverts….neon signs and the lot in a city scape, adds life and colour….but this bridge as bad as it is, is done no justice either by the cluttered effect hoardings. Remove them and remodel the bridge………..and light up the new bridge’s profile/outline as like what has been done abroad in other cities. Pure wallpaper, but effective and far more aesthetic.
Don’t these look good ………could be Dublin, if planners, thinkers, developers and politicians got their fingers out.
No way should the ads remain, all ads are naff regardless of their scale or whereabouts, The painting of the bridge alone, in a light grey/ white colour, or the same off-white as the
Ha’ penny bridge would make for a major improvement and lessen its impact substantially. Its illumination at nightime would make for a dramatic feature, in what is a very dark and dingy area after 5 o’ clock, around Tara Street Station. However white light is needed, none of that crappy orange light that destroys every other building after dark, and illumination of the whole structure is needed with large beams of light, no miserable little uplighters lined along its base, half of which will be blown before the electrician gets off his ladder.This bridge was overlooked was’nt it when all the bridges were supposedly illuminated as part of the Millennnium celebrations 2 years ago. What a disasterous and unsuccessful project…..moreso a waste of taxpayers and European money.
To think that this bridge has the most impact on the city too.It was very unsucessful. I’ve never come across anything more tacky than the use of gaudy green light to illuminate the arches and piers, and orange light for the balustrades. O’ Connell Bridge has been destroyed with cabling, connection boxes, brackets and clips. Are we supposed to see the cut stone features but not notice the crap tacked onto bridge? Look at the state of it the next time you pass. All of the city’s bridges should be lit in pure brilliant white light from the quay walls, and the balustrades lit with those discrete white strip lights, instead of the current orange. Dublin & the Liffey is very compact & intimate, with many bridges. Imagine how spectacular it could be at night, esp enhanced with lanterns at regular intervals the whole way along the quaysides, from the Custom House to James’s Gate, like along the Thames in London.
Hmm. I thought the green lights looked ok, but I suppose the other ones could have looked better.
Anyhow, the space is auctioned off by Irish Rail in three year leases to an independant Advertising company (that I know the name of). The course of action (it would seem) would be to contact any of a number of persons recommended to me in Irish Rail and find out whether or not they would be willing to attempt a change on their policies on this bridge from within the organisation.
Unless there are other suggestions, but I’m thinking of the open and non-sneaky “hey there” approach. Currently I’m also thinking about the soft sell “sensible” reduction in adverts, with the retention but improvement of the center span money makers. I just think this is a more attainable goal than no adverts (which has been discussed in Irish Rail in the past, and obviously didn’t happened).
fjp
The “no-adverts” thiong would probably involve getting some much more heavy guns in. Somehow the Government/Council woud have to over-rule Irish Rail’s authority on this matter, and then perhaps be forced to compensate them for the loss in revenue. Unless Irish Rail just decided to take them all off…
Advice welcomed.
fjp
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
