Devin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Yes, the copper with raised seams is so often dragged out for a bit of “visual interest” – but, as with so many things, all depends on how it’s used. The deBlacam & Meagher mews on Waterloo Lane, D4 is a great example of its use.
Better give the designers of the above building (with copper section) a mention – Lafferty Design.
Coombe area:
Although it had already lost a lot of its older fabric, the area was still reeking with character and history before the road went through & all the apartments went up. I took photos around the area in 2000, and the change in its appearance even since then is remarkable.Every effort should be made to integrate in a sympathetic fashion the older houses of the area into new development, which is why it’s such a pity about the above monster facing that brown-stocked Georgian.
As part of the planned development at the southeast corner – where the brown-stocked Georgian is – an interesting glass and stone link will resolve the problem of the butchered gable of the Georgian, and connect to more buildings fronting the relief road. The link is built to parapet height of the Georgian…a bit of care has been taken…But that 7-storey yoke has really done its worst 🙁 .
All four corners of the Ardee Street / Coombe Relief Road crossroads are currently having new development. Two of the corners are complete (the northeast and southwest), one is under construction (the northwest), and the last one (the southeast) has just had local authority planning approval.
This building (above and below) is one of the two completed corners (northeast). I actually like it. It’s broken up well and creates a bit of visual interest. It’s not going to win any awards, but something has to fill these large development sites in the city.
It incorporates refurbishment of a couple of Georgian-house stragglers on Ardee Street, which you can see below. Although the new building is two stories taller than these Georgians, it is ok in this instance because you are moving from a narrow street onto a very broad street, and the new building maintains the rhythm of the older buildings.
[align=center:12dmzl5a]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[/align:12dmzl5a]
I’ve seen the plans for the two corners not yet completed and, to a greater or lesser extent, they achieve a reasonable standard of urban regeneration development. The real problem is this thing (above and below), on the southwest corner. It is a BLOATED MONSTROUS LUMP OF DEVELOPER RUBBISH. Is stuff like this not coming before senior planners in the council, you have to ask?
Just look at the way it ignorantly hangs its seven stories right in front of the fine 3-storey Georgian brewer’s house on Ardee Street. No effort at all to integrate…
You see this in the papers from time to time; when people who normally write about something else write write about environment or architecture & come across twat-ish. Liam Fay of the Sunday Times would be another example for me.
I know that Paul Lawrence and Karl Crowe are reputable. In terms of the whole list, I imagine that, by virtue of being listed in a register of conservation practicioners, there won’t be many chancers there.
Bolgers fit the Ventrolla system; strips of draught/noise proofing inserted between the sash and its case – It has a good name.
Re: Double glazed sashes. I’ve seen it done quite well and I’ve seen it done very badly. But it always tends to look a bit ‘clunky’.
@manstein wrote:
Serioulsy though the absence of a dedicated bicycle lane on O’Connell Street is a disaster.
Totally true. Here was the chance to show the way and create a proper separated cycling lane for the centre of Dublin, like the ones you see on the Continent. God knows there was enough space to do it (an excuse you often hear when separated cycle lanes are suggested is that it would mean losing too much road space).
What’s the story Mitchell & Associates / Dublin City Council Architect’s Division? The cycling situation on O’Connell Street is a sham. It is actually more dangerous cycling on that lane on the inside than it is cycling on other city centre streets, which are pretty dangerous anyway. Obviously they put the cycling lane on the inside so as it would be away from the buses, which have to stop along the street; but buses drive on the inside as well anyway.
What should be done now is a separated cycle lane created on the upper end which is currently under construction (on the outside or inside, it doesn’t matter) – it wouldn’t require that much design modification – and on the lower end after that, because the current situation is untenable. It just continues the tradition of a dirty, noisy, dangerous and stressful cycling experience in Dublin.
It’s been well aired on this site and elsewhere in the media for a few years now that the river frontage of the ‘IFSC extension’ – particularly Jury’s and Citibank – is flat looking and could have been a bit taller. But what about the stuff that’s being built at the moment on the other side of the river? (above) It looks like docklands architecture anywhere, but the average heights are a bit taller than the older stuff on the other side.
@Thomond Park wrote:
Rough text
Enforcement Officer
Dublin 1 section
Enforcement Section
Floor 2 Block 4
Civic Officesw
Wood Quay
Dublin 815th Septemeber 2005
Dear Sir,
I wish to complain on breaches of planning permission 4215/04 as granted by Dublin City Council and as qualified by condition 1 of the permission
‘ There is a discrepancy between the conclusion of the conservation report submitted with the application and the report of the City Council’s Conservation Officer, dated 18/01/05, following the recent opening up works. In light of the third party objection to the demolition of the existing building, it is considered that the architectural and historic significance of the extant eighteenth-century fabric be fully assessed at this juncture. The applicant is asked to submit a revised Conservation Statement, which should be informed by the nature and extent of original fabric uncovered as a result of the opening up works viewed on the 13/01/05 as part of the submitted additional information request. It is noted that the applicant’s conservation consultant is asked to contact the area planner before the submission of this clarification to facilitate a joint detailed site inspection in conjunction with the City Conservation Officer.’
It is clear that the conservation report was flawed as indicated by the photos enclosed with this letter. We request that enforcement procedings be commenced with the greatest of urgency given the gravity of this matter.
Yours Sincerely
Concerned Citizen
Enclosures
1. Planning Condition 1
2. Images (2-5)Do not forget to put your full name and address as it will be invalidated if you do not.
That’s a request for clarification of further information you’ve quoted, not a grant of planning permission.
An Taisce and the Irish Georgian Society had made third party submissions to the original planning application, expressing concern that the remaining extent of the classical stone building underneath the ‘60s skin needed to be established – and to ask whether there was a possibility of saving the building – before proceeding with redevelopment plans. When it became clear that the building was beyond saving (i.e. after opening up works described in a Further Information report had shown incompleteness in the remains of the building – the portico had been mostly removed and sections of wall to Dorset Street had been replaced in render – and also because, were the shell of what remained of the building to be kept at that point, who would have taken on the immense task of restoring it?), a meeting was held to discuss a Salvage Plan for the building as it survived. It was agreed that a section of wall would be salvaged and reconstructed either within the new hotel, or somewhere else in the vicinity. Other good stonework would also be salvaged.
The demolition of the building has to be carried out in accordance with this Salvage Plan (which is available at the public planning counter).
The (3-storey!) bike park at Centraal Station….now where did I leave it?
Damrak – divided into roughly equal parts pedestrian path, cycle lane, bus/tram way, and then other vehicles. Cough, dame street.
Crossing point, with ‘little green bike’.
Cycling is even pleasant in the rain!
The one outside Centraal Station is gas. I have a picture of it, which I’ll post it if I can.
Graham, I agree that there are maverick, irresponsible cyclists, who will tear along pedestrian-priority areas with seemingly no awareness of the danger they are constituting. While I don’t approve, it is an inevitable by-product of dire cycling conditions. If there were proper cycling conditions, such behaviour would be a lot more ‘unacceptable’.
With all the talk of the hundreds of € millions that traffic congestion is costing us in lost efficiency and contribution to carbon-emission fines, it reflects very badly on our government and local authorities to have done so little to provide for such an efficient and environmentally-friendly form of transport as cycling, and one which would do so much to improve amenity and general quality of life in urban areas.
With regard to crossing roads in the city as a pedestrian – yes, it’s getting more dangerous all the time, but I think the “common law†still operates to some extent, whereby if you decide to cross the road at a random point, the traffic will tend to slow up a bit (though obviously it depends on the street). Whereas if you try something like that in, say, London, you have to be prepared to burst into a sprint!
@ctesiphon wrote:
I’m not yet converted to the guerilla cause.
I was hoping it wouldn’t come across like that – it really isn’t! Everybody will respond differently to cycling conditions here. I am probably very little less law-abibing than you, ctesiphon. But a major factor for me is that I cannot cycle behind traffic for very long before the fumes do me in. So I’m always looking for minimally-trafficked or traffic-free routes. This doesn’t mean I resent car drivers as irjudge assumed. The streets are gorged with traffic, but I am philosophical about it. We can’t shut them out of the centre just yet because it would damage the economy and they have (for the most part) no other way of getting in.
Amsterdam is a dream. All the lanes are separate, and the sheer volume of people cycling makes it as ordinary as walking. It also helps that the city centre must have about 2% of the traffic volume Dublin has! But of course it’s also compact; so nobody would have to cycle the distance equivalent of say Dame Street to Tallaght to get home.
I would love to see the continental European type of cycling environment created in Irish cities. But some claim the system is not transferable to this part of the world…
Sorry, I should have named it – it’s the one marked ‘Morelli’s Take Away’ with the Coca-Cola sign – that’s the only one which will be demolished.
There is not a “lack of respect” for road users by other road users, only a response to an environment. There is an environment in Irish cities where cyclists are expected to use a system – the motorised traffic system – designed for a totally different form of transport. The result of this is that, like water taking the channel of least resistance, the cyclist is sqeezed onto pavements, into pedestrian streets and into the spaces beyond red lights where traffic is stopped. I don’t do these things out of a “lack of respect” for other road users (or because I am lawless), but because the system dictates to a large extent that I do.
Lots of interesting comments.
I’m afraid I fall into the same category as jimg (And I speak as a cyclist and ex-motorcyclist).
I think in Dublin we are long past the point of a possible co-existent relationship between motorists and cyclists, or one where good relations should be maintained. As everyone knows, prosperity, the surge in car ownership / car use and continued sprawl means the city streets are swamped with traffic all day every day. There is no system to speak of for the cyclist. Once you get on that bike, it’s “f*** or be f****d”.
My routes from A to B in the city are chosen on the basis of absence of traffic. That entails all of the ‘illegal’ moves described by jimg in his first post, and other means like back lanes, parks and routes alongside Luas (always nice!).
For my part, this is the only way I can respond to cycling conditions in Dublin. I will not stand with bike at the red light of busy junction inhaling fumes for 120 seconds; I will keep moving. The law can stop me if they want, but lately I’ve noticed more and more, as they see how chronic things really are for someone trying to cycle in Dublin, the Gardai will ignore a cyclist hopping up and down off a pavement or breaking a light.
But – within reason – I will not do anything to frighten or endanger the pedestrian (I just as often am one myself). I will slow up/stop if such a likelihood is unfolding.
It is a great misfortune that such a wonderful form of city transport has become so fraught and unpleasant as it has in Dublin.
Surprisingly early removal.
Yes the Gresham should look great with the original design of steel windows reinstated – It’s costing a fortune I believe. Otherwise there’s a lot of dodgy windows in the terrace. But some lovely originals in the 1st floor of the Savoy. Graham, didn’t you have a picture of these in nice light? – you might repost it.
Alek, you’re right. The caption with the photo says: Emergency Services in O’Connell Street, 1935. The busmen were on strike from March until May and Army lorries were called into action…
@Graham Hickey wrote:
The grandeur of O’Rourke’s c1924-29 terrace is now wonderfully evident – a surprisingly symmetrical composition, you could only barely make this out before with the opposing elements like the balconies etc dropping hints. Much clearer now.
And here it is in 1935, from Fr. Browne’s Dublin. The Hammam Buildings’ urns have since gone missing. Strange about the almost-symmetry, as ctesiphon was noting. The piece to the south of the centrepiece (Savoy) is slightly longer than the piece to the north, and the Gresham is slightly longer than its corresponding piece, the Hammam Buildings.
But aside from the few variations, it must be one of the longest blocks of symmetrical street-architecture in Europe (?).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And, as the book is in my hand, here is the cleared site in 1925.
Interesting to note that everything destroyed in 1916 – i.e. from Eden Quay up to Cathedral Street – had been rebuilt by this time.
We can do our best now and try’n create high-density (for e.g. 6 to 9-storey) residential quarters in brownfield (i.e. previously used for industry) sites like the docklands. But that won’t have any effect on the sprawl we’ve already got – nor will tall 20 or 30 storey buildings.
I was at a very depressing lecture a while ago by an economist, Colm McCarthy. He essentially said that we’re f****d. He said the preceding decade (1990s) was very important to have gotten the development of the city right. But we didn’t – we just kept on doing the same thing; building low-density, car-oriented semi-d housing estates.
And anyway there are still councillors voting to rezone land for housing in towns in Wicklow, Meath and Kildare, because they’ve been lobbied by local landowners…..making more of the car-dependent sprawl that everyone deplores. And the government won’t intervene to stop it…It’s a mad, mad country….
@A-ha wrote:
When did you last see it?
A few days ago.
@A-ha wrote:
Thanks for the picture
If you click ‘Additional Images’ in the top right of the link, there are a few more pics of it.
Or just click here: http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/niah/search.jsp?type=images&county=CO®no=20512635It’s a National Trust in name only. It doesn’t have the legislative footing that the ones in the U.K. and elsewhere have, and the associated huge funding needed to take on and run heritage properties.
Any new heritage buildings trust would as a matter of course have to include An Taisce in its make-up.
It is well past time that the government passed the relevant legislation for such a ‘full-blooded’ National Trust. For years now, important properties and their landscapes have been lost. It is savage to watch them, one by one, turn into the inevitable hotel-golf course-conference centres. – Carton in Kildare, Lough Rynn in Leitrim, Kileen Castle in Meath, Dromoland Castle in Clare, Adare estate in Limerick, Luttrelstown Castle in Dublin…the list goes on…..
Another exellent 18th century estate is just about to be wrecked for a hotel-golf course development in Carriglas, just outside Longford. Go up & see it while it’s still intact…
@A-ha wrote:
I noticed a few days back that the Queens Old Caste looked absolutley rotten. For such a beautiful building, they make it look awful. Surely some organisation can force Argos or Virgin to paint it or do something to it anyway. It spoils the area!
I don’t know what you’re talking about. The building is painted white and looks clean and well-maintained.
The problem with the building is that you have to blot out the ground floor when you look at it because some idiot (either Virgin or a tenant before them) decided to put short Greek Doric columns with plain Doric capitals at their bases ( 😀 ) in the shop entrance, to “follow” the well-executed pedimented Greek Doric feature in the 1st floor. The result is disastrous – no proportional logic between the upper & lower part of the building.
See here for a daytime pic: http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/niah/search.jsp?type=record&county=CO®no=20512635
