Macken St Bridge – Santiago Calatrava
- This topic has 348 replies, 89 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 8 months ago by
Service charge.
- AuthorPosts
- June 20, 2007 at 10:52 am #744367
tommyt
ParticipantIsn’t this what the victorian cast Iron contraption on Jon Rog Quay was designed for?riverbed investigation?- Should be pressed back into commission to save a few quid:)
June 20, 2007 at 12:17 pm #744368SeamusOG
ParticipantA nice idea tommyt.:) Though today’s health and safety regulations might not allow it.:(
June 25, 2007 at 9:18 am #744369CM00
ParticipantJune 25, 2007 at 11:22 am #744370Anonymous
InactiveYep, just curve the cable stay pylon slightly and bingo, its his Dublin proposal.
Sure there’s a replica of the james joyce job floating around too …June 25, 2007 at 1:09 pm #744371mackers
Participant@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:
Sure there’s a replica of the james joyce job floating around too …
An earlier version is here in Valencia. Albeit with one span.
July 4, 2007 at 12:10 pm #744372Rusty Cogs
ParticipantThere’s a piece in the IT today which states the bridge should be completed withing 18 months. That’s far better than the 30 month guide the DDDA gave me a couple of months back. There’s a fair bit of activity going on at the moment anyway.
July 4, 2007 at 12:58 pm #744373GregF
ParticipantHurray!
……..about time too!
July 6, 2007 at 10:33 am #744374Rory W
ParticipantJuly 6, 2007 at 10:38 am #744375Anonymous
Inactivegood one 😀
July 6, 2007 at 2:25 pm #744376manifesta
ParticipantCALATRAVA: Well? Shall we build?
DCC: Yes, let’s build.
They do not build.
January 31, 2008 at 8:20 am #744377GregF
ParticipantAnyone see the condition of the James Joyce Bridge. The lights have been out for the last several months and the whole thing looks neglected. It also took a couple of years to replace 2 broken glass panels. This is really bad maintenance. The Council cannot blame underfunding now, with the revenues it has from the bin tax, etc….
January 31, 2008 at 9:32 am #744378Blisterman
ParticipantHow’s construction on this coming along?
January 31, 2008 at 1:55 pm #744379fergalr
ParticipantForgive my use of less than technical language but there’s two stumpy things in the Liffey where the bridge is due to go. That aside, I dunno 😀
January 31, 2008 at 3:40 pm #744380ctesiphon
Participant

the Liffey’s probably too good for them, but it’s a start.
February 13, 2008 at 7:58 am #744381GregF
Participant@GregF wrote:
Anyone see the condition of the James Joyce Bridge. The lights have been out for the last several months and the whole thing looks neglected. It also took a couple of years to replace 2 broken glass panels. This is really bad maintenance. The Council cannot blame underfunding now, with the revenues it has from the bin tax, etc….
I see that the lights on the James Joyce bridge are fully working again. Looks good all lit up again at night.
February 18, 2008 at 8:38 pm #744382cantalach
ParticipantWho Moved the Samuel Beckett Bridge 70m west? When? And Why?
See http://dublin.iwai.ie/docs/news.html#Macken
The Samuel Beckett bridge was originally referred to as the Macken St. bridge since it connected Cardiff Lane (a continuation of Macken St.) on the south quays to Guild St. on the north.
Posters on this forum have referred to the on-going work which started in Autumn 2007 to construct the pier on which the bridge will swing.Nobody seems to have referred to the fact that the bridge has moved!
It originally crossed the river at an angle linking Guild St. to Cardiff Lane/Macken St ., (think junction at the Ferryman pub).
Now it takes a direct line across the river terminating at the warehouse beside O2’s building on Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, approximately 70m west of the Ferryman.On the surface, this doesn’t make sense.
From an aesthetic perspective, one wonders what the impact on Calatrava’s original design will be, since the bridge will now be significantly shorter.
What will be the impact from a traffic perspective?
The Docklands website and all documents I can find still claims the bridge as linking Macken St. to Guild St.
February 19, 2008 at 8:58 am #744383Andrew Duffy
ParticipantThe bridge was always intended to cross the river perpendicular to the quay walls. This article from 2000 describes it in exactly the position it is currently being built:
http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2000/07/02/story864745928.asp
“The bridge will span the 120 metres between the north and south quays at right angles from Guild Street on the northern side to 70 metres west of Cardiff Lane on Sir John Rogerson’s Quay.”
February 19, 2008 at 10:01 am #744384notjim
ParticipantIn fact, the council asked Calatrava to design a bridge at a slant to the river; he rejected this on aesthetic grounds and they were persuaded it would look dumb.
February 19, 2008 at 2:43 pm #744385cantalach
ParticipantThanks for the correction Andrew. All I can conclude is that the DDDA documents are entirely misleading.
February 19, 2008 at 7:15 pm #744386jimg
ParticipantI don’t get the Calatrava hero worship. At this stage, Calatrava bridges are as ubiquitous as McDonalds and about as interesting; for some reason I’m reminded of the golden arches everytime I see a Calatrava bridge :p
Yet they still seem to feature on every urban-renewal shopping list in the world. You can see “a Calatrava” anywhere in the world. So why bother with a second one in Dublin? (I don’t even like the first one – it’s been poorly maintained and provides neither contrast nor sympathy for its setting). Does anyone think anyone anywhere outside of Dublin will notice or be interested in another Calatrava bridge?
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


