Stop this nonsense!

@Devin wrote:

Note also that the mansard windows don’t even relate to the main elevation windows.

DCC are not going to permit that surely? Come on, that is so substandard in terms appreciation of the spatial rhythm of such a strategically placed building, that that cannot go ahead – may I suggest a new terminology to any planner who happens to see this; “Modular Ignorance” would be a suitable assessment…

This application must get shot down as lacking body or substance necessary to proceed in a sympathetic manner in keeping with the established character of this prominent structure. As one who has in the past has argued for the permitting of “top ups”, it seems clear to me that in this instance it is unlikely that the respective parties would be capable of achieving the incredibly high standards and specifications that this building at this juncture requires.

To permit the bungalow-standard mansard currently proposed, with its ill-informed spacing of opes, would be a repeat of the disaster that occurred with the Burton Building on Dame St/ George’s St corner. There the newish Sony shop glass facade utterly subverted the great volumes of rhythm created by the vertical pilasters – thus destroying one of the few truly great one-off commercial buildings in Dublin dating from circa 1930.

Down with this sort of thing, or as this thread is titled – Stop this nonsense!

@hutton wrote:

ill-informed spacing of opes

A bit like my gob on occasion 😮

Read “An BP” rather than “DCC” for the start of that – and I would add to clarify, a most welcome decision by DCC in shooting it down in the first instance (see henno’s post above) 🙂

More nonsense – abomination would be more apt – has just reared its ugly head in the heart of the ceremoninal government district. As if poor Molesworth Street hadn’t already suffered enough.

You couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried.

Quite frankly, it is cases like these that can cause one to feel little sympathy for the architectural profession in these troubled times, when one observes the extent to which so many architects whored themselves out – and by association our architectural heritage and streetscapes – for greedy, money-grabbing, and thoroughly ignorant developments such as these. How the RIAI can issue membership to practices who reduce the profession to this gutter level is nothing short of baffling.

The same applies to planning. To think professional persons appointed as custodians of our city consider it appropriate that an elegantly designed, exquistely detailed 1930s neo-Georgian building, forming part of the vista approaching Leinster House, can comfortably accommodate a milk carton clad in retail park coated metal panels, factory-churned aluminium windows and a sticky-on brise soleil, borders on frightening.

Without question, this one of the worst developments ever to take place in Dublin over the course of the grubby, gluttonous, credit-fuelled, selfish, culturally bereft era of the mid-2000s.

At least it fits in neatly with all the other dross tossed up in Dublin’s landfill in the sky.

One genuinely wonders how the architectural profession, which ought now to be at its most refined, can have plummeted to such a degree that a building designed in the depths of depression in the 1930s, with no hint of a planning system, so beautifully designed and crafted, featuring handsome proportions, elegant detailing, and amongst the most accomplished brickwork seen in Dublin since the material was introduced over 300 years previous, can be mauled by a few clicks of a CAD mouse and a willing planner. How has this happened?

Shame on the persons involved and the system they inhabit. The planning file alas does not feature the authors of this work.

Whatever the (de)merits of this crude addition, the original building shows a great sensitivity to Georgian form and proportion, while being unmistakably ‘modern(e)’. Isn’t that the real lesson for the architectural profession? That and banning CAD.
(It also looks as though they’ve cleaned half the brickwork and left the other half! I think we need to know who’s responsible!)

I’d broadly agree with you on that alonso, though to tweak it slightly, it’s equally likely that inexperienced graduates (in both professions) are given these files, which are then signed off by those at a more senior level. In that case, I don’t know if you can blame such inexperience over the system that allows these people to be involved at that level of decision-making. Either way it results in a mess!

I was particularly annoyed at this development, as this building is the most beautiful example of the modernist neo-Georgian style in the city centre. Furthermore, it’s almost the sole survivor of a whole grouping of similar elegant buildings which were whacked next door to form Sun Alliance House, and had been tastefully refurbished only a short while ago. Suffice to say, it is not a Protected Structure either :rolleyes:

(the top-up loomed over an interviewee’s head on the news tonight, for added insult!)

@GrahamH wrote:

I’d broadly agree with you on that alonso, though to tweak it slightly, it’s equally likely that inexperienced graduates (in both professions) are given these files, which are then signed off by those at a more senior level. In that case, I don’t know if you can blame such inexperience over the system that allows these people to be involved at that level of decision-making. Either way it results in a mess!

I agree that it’s the system that allows this and it is up to those with experience to guide those without. There is a vacuum there. Where do we look for for good practice? We’ve been looking to the continent for decades yet seem intent on always aping failed anglo American models – maybe not in architecture itself but in our entire approach to the built environment and how we move through it. My point was mainly related to the lack of sympathy for the profession – I agree that in total there can be no sympathy for the planning profession and architecture. There is no excuse for what’s gone on. If we built absolute shit pre-boom, worse shit during the boom, what the hell are we gonna do in the recession?

However i do have sympathy for all involved who are being pushed to the dole queue or the Airport – most of who i’ll wager are under 35, even 30

Pity they havent made names here…

no mention on their website – http://www.comma.ie, not that it would be at the top of anyone’s portfolio list.

they are however responsible for the new ‘costa’ & associated signage next door, which oddly enough only went in on march 16th, with a decision still pending …

Shock!

If ever there were two cases that demonstrate how the precedent of lax planning informs future development.

It is this sort of accumluation of ignorant design concepts that has compromised so much of the appearance of the city centre – firms acting exclusively in the interests of their clients, and a planning system which assists them in their aims.

So make a bad building even worse? I couldn’t give two hoots about the effect it has on the building – it is the streetscape impact, which is vulgar and unduly cluttering. Yeah I agree it’s nothing major, but it is symptomatic of how these places go unregulated, and often aided and abetted – as in this case – by architectural practices who wouldn’t know anything of a sense of streetscape if it hit them in the face; as their other masterstroke around the corner has further proved.

So what next for these guys – a Heineken smoking canopy outside Buswells?