Smithfield, Dublin
- This topic has 331 replies, 84 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Re: the two ‘early’ buildings:
Yes they were the two earliest structures remaining on Smithfield slightly older than our own building which was built in 1730.
Originally they were a single house four bays wide, with a pair of gables to the third floorwhich were removed during 19th century alterations which also split the original building into two.
No they did’nt burn down. The rear wall of one of the two buildings was mysteriously ‘pulled out’ one weekend which weakened both buildings to such an extent that they became structurally unstable thereby necessitating the demolition and facade retention works carried out by Dublin Corporation.
As to the second building no 80 – on the night of the fire two weeks ago I was informed by the fire officer present that the fire had been set ‘professionally’.
As to investigation – the Corporation does not regard it as their responsibility and as none of these buildings was insured no forensics investigation has followed.
Regards
JK
JK, the fired building, I live in the apartments nearby and was watching the fire from the roof, long before the Fire Brigade turned up there was flames on different levels, flames that seemed like smalle seperate fire… it seemed to me that the fire had been set deliberately….
Paul
You are almost certainly right about the cause of the fire in no 80 being malicious. My only caveat is that on very rare occassions it is possible for a fire at a lower – say – ground level to cause a series of smaller fires at higher level as a result of hot gases rising and upon being trapped under soffits, furniture and horizontal surfaces, to spontaneously erupt. However if yo uare certain that you witnessed a number of spontaneous fires at the same time I would suggest that you contact the fire officer in Phibsboro Fire Station, Dublin Corporations Conservation Officer and the Gardai in the Bridewell as this information would be of use to them.
JK
Admittedly I was a bit scant on details, but the coincidence was too much for my stomach to bare. I would love to see the perpetrators prosecuted, for criminal damage/arson and endangering life, and whatever is appropriate.
In my dreams,
ShaneI agree with mr. carr on the law society building – and looking at it, i believe it will wear very badly….
this is the building planned for the duffy site on smithfield….
thanks Paul for the picture of the Duffy site. I notice the artists impression tells
a few lies about the shadows cast onto
Smithfield. The lamp standards themselves cast shadows half way up the Smithfield village before sunset so imagination what these 6-8 storey blocks might do???I’d say its intended to be morning or early afternoon, the eastern faces are lit by sunlight in the drawing…..
Mr Jim Keogan, project manager for the HARP (Historic Area Rejuvenation Project) IAP, said an events manager had just been appointed to arrange a series of “compatible events” in Smithfield, including major concerts from next spring. He said 12 events had already been booked for the new civic space and the corporation was also hoping to develop a market there. The traditional monthly Smithfield horse fair had been accommodated, with much improved management.
Hi,
Anybody know what firm designed the new(er) Smithfield market development. Contact details would be a bonus 😉
Pedro.
The development’s webpage is at:-
http://www.smithfield-market.comi think it’s Horan Keoghan Ryan, who are working with a danish urban design firm, and an english architecture practise. i can’t remember the names of the foreign offices though :confused
This development is all but complete now.
A particularly interesting feature after they topped out the tower is an almost Byzantine style mosaic around the top floor. Well worth taking a picture if anyone has a camera.that mosaic is terrible. not a big fan of the central tower. it looks like a brick wearing a discoloured graduation hat.
The tower couldn’t really be called a tower it is only 2 or 3 storeys taller than the other buildings, I am dissapointed by this development it looks ok but you would have hoped for something a little better. I’ll post a photo tomorrow if no-one else does in the meantime.
It is a tower: ie a structure whose height is taller than its diameter. But then again most buildings are.
There’s not much point in speaking of disappointment because it looks exactly like the plans that appeared in all the newspapers and on the developer’s website.
Considering the many developments have managed to look far worse than the architect’s drawings over the years, this is an improvement of sorts.It may not be a “tower” when viewed from Smithfield, but from the top of Stoneybatter/Prussia St it dominates. The development as a whole screams high quality and money, but in a corporate “good taste” kind of way. Certainly far worse has gone into far more affluent areas.
I see what you are saying and I agree that much worse has gone in to more valuable sites that is why I said it was ok, the one detail in it that annoys me is the copper element at the top it is like sw101 said the top of a graduation hat and I think it has an unfinished appearance.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
