ctesiphon
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Can’t answer your question- just here to say that you might want to look at the lights around the lake in UCD too (if you’re in Dublin). They were recently replaced with something similar to your proposal, though I don’t know who designed them.
So the minister wants a Preservation Order placed on the house by DCC. It’s not DCC’s job, it’s the minister’s, following an Oireachtas debate. Which begs the question, will they come back early from their summer break to debate this? And the further questions, has he read the relevant legislation and does he know the duties of his office?
The following is cut-and-pasted from my post to a previous thread on Protected Structures:
FROM NAT MONS ACT 1930 (courtesy of our good friends at the Statute Book site)-
8.—(1) Where it appears to the Minister, on a report made by the Advisory Council or otherwise, that a monument which in his opinion is a national monument is in danger of being or is actually being destroyed, injured, or removed, or is falling into decay through neglect, the Minister may by order (in this Act referred to as a preservation order) entrust the preservation of such monument to the Commissioners.
(2) The Minister may at any time, by order made after consultation with the Advisory Council, revoke a preservation order.
(3) Every preservation order and every order revoking a preservation order shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas as soon as may he after it is made, and if a resolution is passed by either House of the Oireachtas within the next twenty-one days on which such House has sat annulling such order, such order shall be annulled accordingly but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder.
@Devin wrote:
They’re on Sheare’s Street. Fenn’s Quay was an old name from when the street was a water course. It was resurrected as the restored terrace were originally quay-houses.
Aah come now, Devin. I never disputed that they were on Sheare’s Street. But the group is known as Fenn’s Quay, particularly since the completion of the conservation job. Maybe if I’d written: ‘That’s “Fenn’s Quay”…’
The reason I mentioned the name in my previous post was to correct my previous error- not to correct your post.Am I forgiven? ]was[/I] seven years ago that they were finished, despite what the RIAI site says. I have memories of seeing the work ongoing in 2000(ish?).
@Graham Hickey wrote:
These Georgians here altuistic near the Court House?
Some lovely stuff, and a bizarrely large roof to boot!You can just make out the swirls of crown glass in some of the panes – really fantastic that these most unusual pane-arranged sashes were preserved. Saying that, they could do with another lick of paint at this stage…
That’s Fenn’s Quay (which is what I meant when I said Lapp’s Quay in an earlier post above 😮 – I’m sure the natives were scratching their heads). Lovely job, it’s true. And yes, Devin, it won an RIAI medal for conservation.
@Devin wrote:
But more recently the baby blue vitrolite panels were replaced with stainless steel :confused: (it was the only one I know of in this colour in the country).
Is there a chance that the vitrolite is still under the stainless steel? The pics are inconclusive- the window trim seems to be from the previous incarnation, at any rate. I do hope so.
@Paul Clerkin wrote:
Upper Leeson Street
(forgot I had this – will look through the rest tonight as I’m sure I must have more from around the country)Used to be a sports shop until a few years ago. At least Spar kept the front when they took over the space for their off licence.
This stretch of Leeson Street has changed much recently- narrower range of shops and less of a community feel, unfortunately. (I used to live across the road.)And the house featured in that ‘Count of Monte Cristo’ movie on tv last night, moonlighting as the Count’s residence (I think- I didn’t watch it all). Interesting to see the amazing gardens lit up and performing as they might have in their prime, replete with fancy ladies and dandy gents.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
The site the picture is linked from says Cork’s courthouse was originally planned for Carlow but they go mixed up. Sounds credible considering their similarities in the portico department.
Though the Cork building occupies a city block, whereas Carlow has a much more ‘in the round’ feel befitting its prominent corner site in the town.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
The famous Three of course have to feature:
[swoon]
@Graham Hickey wrote:
Yes the Washington St Court House is spectacular – are there only two octastyles in Ireland?! I knew there was less than 5 or so, but 2? What’s the other ctesiphon?
Is that Graham doing his contemporary ‘little match girl’ routine on the steps? “Spare the price of a blank cd, guv?”
I think there are only two, but I could be wrong. (If so, I’d be grateful to be corrected.)
Re the second one- I’m tempted to make this into a quiz, but I can’t think what prize to offer.
It’s Carlow Court House by W.V. Morrison.Graham Hickey wrote:And perhaps not what you’d exactly describe as beautiful, and one of the oldest ones in the book I know, but Roches is a fine block of a building to quote ctesiphon ]I was misquoted / you took my comments out of context / what I meant to say was… 😉
I find it hard to pick a favourite building, but the whole harbour area- bonded warehouses, R&H Hall- has a very special character.
Maybe the Court House on Washington Street? One of only two octastyle buildings in the whole of the RoI, a rare example of a building occupying an entire city block, and a glorious interior too.
Or Lapp’s Quay?
Or the group of terraces on the road in from the Fermoy (Dublin) roundabout, each of which has its own bridge over the railway line?Sometimes it’s a bit like playing favourites with one’s children (I imagine).
EDIT: I forgot Skiddy’s Alms House in Shandon.
Looks like he and Victor Emmanuel have been scheming in the wings.
Best that can be said is that those trees should hide most of it; though obviously that depends on them being planted…Real, I presume, as someone (probably the same lady mentioned above) was on the (ugh) Ryan Tubridy show this morning talking about it.
Stephen-
This raises the question of whether the public’s opinions of architectural styles tallies with those of architects or planners- and if they don’t, who’s right? I often think that if we had the chance to ‘educate’ the public, then more interesting, innovative design would follow, but the strong possibility remains that lay-people actually do like the attenuated classicism of a plastic portico stuck to the front of a three-bed semi.
An interesting study was done a few years ago (1998 or so) by the contemporary classical architect Robert Adam, in which it was discovered that ‘modern’ design fared badly with the English house-buying public who favoured traditional or pastiche English styles. This reminded me of a comment my ex-girlfriend’s father made a few years ago- upon seeing a new ‘classical’ house with PVC windows and door, and suburban-style lawn in the countryside outside Midleton, he said admiringly “That’s a fine block of a house”.
Perhaps contemporary architecture is alright for apartments and contemporary civic buildings but not for people’s own houses?Some years ago while surveying a county town, I debated with some locals whether the nearby children’s home/orphanage, which had been recently in the news for the sadly usual story of abuse, should be demolished, protected, sold, redeveloped, etc. Some felt that it was a blot on the landscape and wanted to see it removed, while others thought it served a useful purpose in reminding them of the depths to which humanity had sunk. Those who wanted it gone were also those who were slowest to acknowledge originally that such a thing could have happened in their town. (I’m not accusing you of same, TP.)
When I was in Berlin a year ago, I felt that the remaining stretch of the wall gave added impact to a knowledge I already had, i.e. I was aware of the wall, the reasons for its existence, the horror stories of those who tried to cross etc., but seeing the actual wall made it all more immediate.
An interpretive centre mediates the experience of a place, often in ways that remove our experiences to a safe distance. I think there is value in retaining at least some vestiges of the original structure. (I’d quote Joni Mitchell here, but that’s Devin’s job. 😉 )I don’t understand what the date of my chosen quote has to do with its validity.
Why do you disagree with the comparison with the Berlin Wall?@architect_ryan wrote:
Why must we feel the need to make a Legacy of the worst period of our History? Lets move forward. 🙂
While I understand your desire to see Northern Ireland move on, I can’t help recalling this:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
[George Santayana, Life of Reason, “Reason in Common Sense,†ch. 12 (1905-6).]An analogy with the Berlin wall would also be germane to this discussion.
@StephenC wrote:
I think most planning students probably leave college without the ability to even communicate with an architect.
I agree- the pity being that they will then defer to architects in matters of design.
You say that planners must ‘be able to appreciate the good elements of a building and to recognise the bad elements’- but would you agree that objectivity in this regard is nigh on impossible? Whether architects like to admit it or not, style and taste DO feature in their profession. They might claim otherwise, but they’re wrong. :pThere’s a great quote from Robert Maxwell (architectural critic, not dead newspaper tycoon) on this subject- I’ll try to dig it out of the library later today if I have time.
Any architects care to comment?
@garethace wrote:
Notice how the kind of ‘human’ perceptive abilities described in the quote, far out-stretch those of the best written code, or the fastest supercomputers on the planet. What worries me about Ireland, is how a huge chunk of that human perceptive ability, is ‘locked’, within an outdated, defunct, and cosy monopoly of spatial designers, known as ‘Architecture’. I have a persistent vision of the Planning System here in Ireland, of this pure unfortunate creature attempting to feel it’s way around in the dark,… rendered immobile, and un-feeling, without a sense of touch, trying to see without a sense of vision, and trying to hear without even rundimentary eardrums.
Brian O’ Hanlon.
Brian? Is that you? Talk to me… Say something. I can’t hear you…
So I’m left with this vision of the planning system as some kind of numb white slug in a pitch-black cave. Should be an interesting night’s sleep.
But seriously: I think your characterisation of the planning system is a little harsh. We do live in the real world too, commuting, eating and playing like the real people. I agree that the profession generally could be better versed in matters of design, but it should also be remembered that design is but one of the planner’s concerns, none of which can really be dismissed as ‘everyday more mundane’ problems, as this seems to imply a belief that the concerns of architects are in some way more noble.
Also, just as different architects could devise different responses to a brief, each valid, so different planners could have different senses of the priorities under consideration in an application (I’m presuming in this thread that we’re talking about local authority development control planners).
My hope would be that, where planners intervene in matters of design, it is done on fairly objective grounds rather than matters of taste.Perhaps I misunderstood you, but y’know, my hearing isn’t what it used to be. 😉
“Are my ears on wrong?”
(Charles Ives)I hope I’m not being overly simplistic in my response, but there is a provision in the PDA 2000 for pre-planning meetings between a developer and the planning department, in which many of the issues that would otherwise arise at a later stage can be debated and (hopefully) agreed in advance. This is particularly important in the context of large scale mixed use developments.
From conversations I’ve had with some architect friends, one of their chief bugbears is the lack of design training among planners, whether through an architecture degree or art/architectural history. Is this the thrust of your post here?
From my perspective (art history BA, architectural history MA, planning masters), I find it instructive to look back, say, 30 years and see what buildings architects thought worthy of awards. Makes for very interesting reading. I think the same will probably occur 30 years from now. I would venture that very little of our current crop of buildings will have much lasting value. However, I also feel that it is inherently difficult to prioritise design quality in the context of a profit-maximising development culture. For example, since the demise of the classical tripartite division of skyscrapers (to reflect the proportions of the classical column, like), I can think of relatively few tall buildings that have serious design merit, i.e on a par with, say, the Pirelli tower or Swiss Re/St Mary Axe. Heuston Gate was passed by ABP on design grounds, which I think is nonsense. It’s just an extruded floorplate (IMHO :rolleyes: ). Another example might be the recent scheme in Sandyford (the Microsoft site, I think), with the big copper egg. So it’s a ‘feature’- so what? Gimmickry, no more no less.
Further, design is an inherently subjective area, and one man’s clay cup is another’s holy grail. I know of some architects who pray that they’ll get a certain planner in a local authority, i.e. one who is acknowledged to be sympathetic to contemporary design.
I realise this doesn’t answer your question, but then I’m not sure your question is answerable. 😉 By which I mean I don’t think design objectivity is achievable, though certain approaches such as an insistence on quality materials can help somewhat.
I do concur with you, though, that the seemingly arbitrary nature of some planners’ interventions is lamentable. Which, I guess, brings us back to pre-planning meetings… 🙂Sorry for the ramble- I’m sure this will occupy my thoughts for a while yet (maybe for my whole career?).
(“With any luck,” sez the architects!)As far as I know, this was an amendment to the Planning and Development Regulations, which means it is a Statutory Instrument. Have you checked the http://www.irishstatutebook.ie site? If the site hasn’t yet been updated, the S.I. itself should be available from Govt Publications. Don’t know what number the S.I. would be, but surely one of the most recent ones on the list.
