New Student Residences Building, Broadstone
December 28, 2005 at 2:36 am #708324
New building at the corner of Constitution Hill and Western Way, opposite disused Broadstone Railway Station. It commands the corner quite well.
In relation to the station building.
The facade to Constitution Hill though is quite dull – small punched-hole windows in a stretcher-bond brick facade … very dull.
December 28, 2005 at 2:51 am #764692
Indeed – no surprises there.
What’s the purple material of the main front – painted render?
The multitude of materials and different design concepts clashes quite badly on that first gable viewpoint – looks like three different buildings tacked together, with the bricked elevation a gesture to the seemingly residential road to the rear, almost completely cancelling out any innovation or eccentric qualities the purple part has.
Bit of a mess I think – and dull.
December 28, 2005 at 3:15 am #764693
I thought the colour might be one of these self-coloured renders. The images don’t reproduce it very well but in reality the colour is more cherry than purple – not bad looking.
This image (below) maybe shows the building a bit better (but a lot of clutter in front). It’s worth a visit – the junction there is quite complex, with a number of roads rising and falling and twisting and turning away – the imgs. don’t really convey that.
December 28, 2005 at 3:47 pm #764694AnonymousParticipant
the facade to constitution hill is really dreadful, the building would be very poor indeed without its gable.
December 28, 2005 at 5:05 pm #764695kefuParticipant
I saw it the other day whilst driving but didn’t get to see the Constitution Hill facade.
It actually looks great coming up past the King’s Inn and although the pictures are nice, it doesn’t do it justice.
They’ve also done a lovely job on the railings and pavings at the corner.
December 28, 2005 at 5:30 pm #764696MaskhadovParticipant
The facade to Constitution Hill is very disapointing
December 28, 2005 at 11:24 pm #764697
December 29, 2005 at 12:30 am #764698
Pardon me, I’ve corrected that now.
December 29, 2005 at 1:28 am #764699
Some great architect-speak in that link…
E.g. : “Critically [the site] also mediates a pivotal urban condition between Constitution Hill, Broadstone Park…” 😀
December 29, 2005 at 4:02 am #764700MTParticipant
My views on the building are mixed. I think I’d have to see it in person to fully appreciate it.
What I do wan’t to comment on is the finish of the pedestrian areas at the junction in the foreground. Why oh why do the authorities in the Republic continue to use concrete to surface footpaths. It looks so agricultural – do the councils there really view the sidewalks of Dublin as no better than the average farm yard?
From what I’ve read, roads in the Republic are now built according to British specifications. If this is so why is concrete still used to surface footpaths? Pedestrian areas up here in NI are always finished in hard-wearing tarmac, flag stones or brick but never in bog standard concrete!! Why have councils down there deviated from UK specifications for pedestrian areas.
Given that the Republic has now overtaken the UK in the European wealth league surely such a cheapo finish is unacceptable. How can you have civic pride if the city’s sidewalks are paved in grimy concrete?
December 29, 2005 at 3:14 pm #764701murphaphParticipant
I like concrete. It’s hardwearing, provides excellent grip when laid properly, does not allow weeds to take hold, easy to repair so that the repair matches perfectly (after an initial weathering period), cheap and I actually like the material itself. Concrete is thousands of years old with a great history, why clad every pavement in cobblelock? I would not like Asphalt pavements as there is little contrast between pavement and roadway as provided with other materials. Badly laid concrete footpaths of course look dreadful. I think coblelock has it’s uses, especially in important civic spaces and so on, but this is just a standard road junction in a fairly nondescript part of town.
December 29, 2005 at 6:24 pm #764702Paul ClerkinKeymaster
Cannot say that I’m particularly impressed by this – the Constitution Hill facade is incredibly heavyhanded. The Western Way facade is simply purple, not architecture, seemingly designed by a painter-decorator who normally does Irish coastal towns, and the gable end would be better served without the glazing which seems out of proportion.
Basically I don’t think its is anything special on quite a nice site.
December 29, 2005 at 7:59 pm #764703PepsiParticipant
I’m not that impressed with it either. It’s not my cup of tea.
December 29, 2005 at 8:15 pm #764704
The colour in Murray O’Laoire’s pictures is remarkably different – is it an undercoat?
Yes the ‘simply purple’ description sums up that part well, couldn’t quite put my finger on it before – the ‘radical’ colour merely helps detract from the fact that there’s little architecture in the elevation its pasted onto.
It’d remind you of the tin can of the Montrose Hotel with all those monsterous silver panels tacked onto it – these are just purple ones. And again the bricked part doesn’t gel in the slightest with it.
A bit shallow I know to be critical of a building when I can’t think of much to better address this site, but it’s a wasted opportunity for such an important location.
“96 student beds” explains a lot.
December 30, 2005 at 1:11 am #764705J. SeerskiParticipant
Horrendous new building. It looks incredibly out of date – the finished side view looks like half of its panels have fallen off, and is reminiscent of Park House on the NCR – another disaster. It has an East Berlin look about it…
The only redeeming feature is that it re-emphasises, through its poor design, the majesty and splendour of Broadstone Station. Never has the saying ‘they dont build them like they used to’ been more appropriate at this junction. It could have been a good opportunity to build higher given the open space surrounding the site.
It is a shame that this wonderful site has been wasted with such a poor building. Its finish also seems suspect – it is lived in at the moment yet parts of the render/reconstituted stone cladding on the Phibsboro road side are missing with gaps noticeable near the entrance string course.
Hendron’s building nearby -if thats what it can be called – presents an enormous opportunity for development – will be interesting to see if this is ever re-developed.
December 30, 2005 at 11:04 pm #764706
At the risk of sounding like Iâ€™m talking this building up (Iâ€™m really not â€“ I can take murray oâ€™laoire or leave them), you really do have to see it within its setting to judge – i.e. the uphill approaches from Conststitution Hill and Upper Dominick Street, the elevated Broadstone Station and its amazing side colonnade, the Kingâ€™s Inns & its park, stone boundary walls & railings, the 19th century stock brick terraces of Constitution Hill/Phibsborough Road, the curving Western Way & its stone boundary walls, and the manner in which the building overlooks the junction – It does strike a chord in the viewer. If you’re still not impressed, fine, but do have a look.
@J. Seerski wrote:
It could have been a good opportunity to build higher given the open space surrounding the site.
No, you definitely could not have gone any higher here (imo) without undermining the surrounds. I think they have shown a conscience and responsibility to the surrounds and to the city generally with the scale of the building, which is more than can be said for some recent development in Dublin.
December 31, 2005 at 2:46 am #764707Paul ClerkinKeymaster
Don’t need to see it, as I can imagine, I lived in the grounds of the Inns for two years, and drank in Comiskys across from this site.
December 31, 2005 at 3:41 am #764708
The area has a nice ambience, doesn’t it?
January 2, 2006 at 2:14 pm #764709shaunParticipant
Nice photos devin, you know, that building is not half bad, it’s certaintly a departure from glass/marble/wood 90’s structures that have flourished unchecked all over town. It’s got it’s own identiy and the colours are good. The brickwork on the Constitution hill facade with those windows is also good. No way is it out of date…..
January 5, 2006 at 4:11 pm #764710jdivisionParticipant
I’ve passed it a number of times and think it’s horrendous. The brick facade to Constitution Hill looks like either a bad 1980s attempt at faux Georgian offices or something Liam Carroll would have thrown up in the early 1990s.
January 5, 2006 at 8:56 pm #764711munstermanParticipantGraham Hickey wrote:The colour in Murray O’Laoire’s pictures is remarkably different – is it an undercoat?
Yes the ‘simply purple’ description sums up that part well, couldn’t quite put my finger on it before – the ‘radical’ colour merely helps detract from the fact that there’s little architecture in the elevation its pasted onto.Quote:little architecture in the elevation? does that mean architecture is the stuff stuck onto a building rather than the building itself? nothing wrong with a bit of austerity, makes a change from the brick soldier courses and timber/copper/zinc bits stuck on to buildings all over the city.
January 6, 2006 at 12:39 am #764712
With that latter point I would fully concur. And indeed what a ridiculous thing to say that there’s ‘little architecture’ in a structure when it is an inherent quality – but you get the gist of what I mean; there appears to be liitle thought put into this elevation’s design.
Far from it not being a typical clad building; for me its the very worst kind – large panels literally glued to the facade that are unashamedly ‘attached’, cloaking over an underlying structure. Not that there’s not a beauty in ‘honesty’, far from it, but this just looks cheap to me, like the cladding of a motorway superstore.
Or the Jurys Montrose:
January 7, 2006 at 11:15 am #764713shaunParticipant
The contrast between the cladding and the brickwork seems good, haven’t seen the thing in the flesh, will have to wait a few weeks, but it looks nothing like that Jurys Montrose monstrosity….
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.