Devin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
1999 – Nice but in need of some TLC.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2000 – Painted for the Millenium – & refurbishment work has begun on the east side.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2003 – Ok that’s grand…just leave it like that now and everything’ll be fine……and there’ll be enough room for everyone…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2005 – Nnoooooo!!
As the one who raised the subject of having more than one identity on the forum, let me say that I think it is a relatively rare occurrence and that one identity is more than enough for most of us (though there will always be someone who will take the mick).
And I think I can state with some certainty that the case of one person posting under five different identities (tries to withhold laughter) is most definitely a one off. Now let’s have no more of this!
I read the post at the top of the page by blue and thought it was talking about NOW…..then I saw the 2003 date!
How much longer til this is finished??
Another pic of the balustrade.
It has a beautiful deep roll-moulding at the base of the balustrade on the the inside wall – seen here.They didn’t do things by halves back then!
@Graham Hickey wrote:
When does the Four Courts stretch of balustrading date from does anyone know? Always assumed around 1810-30 due to its Regencyish appearance….
Yeah, it would seem to: The two almost identical stone bridges to the east and west of the Four Courts were built at about the same time (circa 1815), and as the balustrade on Inns Quay links the balustrade of these two bridges, it must date from that time also. The bridges and balustrade make a setpiece with the Four Courts.
I’m nearly sure the balusters are of cast iron.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
It’s a great pity more of the quays weren’t fitted with these
I have say I like the way the balustrade appears only along the quay in front of Four Courts.
And wasn’t that the main reason the new Custom House was built further downstream, because ships kept hitting a huge rock outside the old Custom House at Grattan (Essex) Bridge?
I wonder will the weir ever come about? On the one hand you would be upsetting the natural flow and beauty of the river; on the other, the area around Heuston looks (and smells) particularly disgusting at low tide and something needs to be done about it.
This boardwalk really has gone to their heads, hasn’t it?
Dick Gleeson is generally very clued in, so I’m disappointed he’s mooting it.
As said already, you absolutely couldn’t put a boardwalk on Inns Quay (Four Courts quay).
That whole area – with the Four Courts and its flanking classical stone bridges – is the essence of Dublin.Not only could you not put a boardwalk between those bridges, but you couldn’t put one leading up to them from the other side either. So no boardwalk west of Grattan Bridge then. And no boardwalk between the Four Courts’ west bridge and the next bridge down, Mellowes (aka Queen Maev) Bridge, which is the most drop dead beautiful of all the Liffey’s old stone bridges. Then the next two stretches of quay are probably too short for a boardwalk, thanks to the Calatrava bridge being stupidly shoved in between two existing bridges, destroying the regular spacing of bridges on the Liffey 😡 (but that’s another story).
So that just leaves the long stretch outside Collins Barracks Museum. A boardwalk might be ok here. This quay is so long that the boardwalk wouldn’t even have to come near the bridges – thereby obviating the boardwalk’s fundamental design flaw: that it crashes into bridges.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mellowes (Queen Maev) Bridge – you absolutely couldn’t put a boardwalk anywhere near this gem.
Passing through Dun Laoghaire the other day, I was a little sad to see that this terrace (of about 1850) has just been demolished. These pics were taken a few weeks ago when they were being readied for the chop.
I always knew they weren’t long for this world, being single-storied and being right beside the Town Hall and Dart Station – redevelopment pressure would get them sooner or later. They were quaint, with their cement-rendered backs right up against the street, and a high-up sash window. And the fronts facing into what would normally be a rear access lane. Remarkably, the whole terrace retained its original slate roof, brick chimneys and sash windows.
@jimg wrote:
The river park idea ‘though reminds me of a photomontage in one of the Sunday newspapers recently (in the last few months) where they showed what it would look like if Burgh Quay were covered in grass. It was startlingly attractive and oddly enough didn’t look at all unnatural.
Didn’t want to post this too soon after the stunning photographs of the O’Connell Monument and other O’C St. statues.
jimg, this is prob the pic you’re referring to, which appeared in the I.T. weekend supplement a few months ago, from the An Taisce report mentioned.
I know the image is a bit ‘photoshoppy’, the way the grass is just plonked on the road, but it was just to get the idea accross of creating non-traffic space on the Quays. I think it is very deeply ingrained in Dubliner’s minds that the Quays are for traffic only. We need to reverse that psychology. In comparison, some parts of the Cork Quays have heavy traffic, but they’re not an artery from one end to the other like Dublin, so you’ve got some very pleasant sections of quayside, particularly Pope’s Quay / North Mall.Funnily, the Temple Bar 2004 report (by Howley Harrington architects) which came out at around the same time as our one, said the same thing; that once the Port Tunnel was open, most of the traffic could be removed from the Temple Bar Quays and the area could be planted with appropriate trees and used for pleasant riverside walks.
Nice building – the hood mouldings over the windows are cute. They should have done the decent thing and reinstated correct windows along with the other work.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
What a shame – especially as two-over-twos are quite rare in such quantities and are more elegant (I think) than one-over-ones.
Yes, they were lovely. The (Leonard’s Cnr) pub seems to date to about 1870. Like the Connolly Station windows, these two-over-twos seem to be in the transition between multi-pane Georgian sashes and later single-pane sashes. While major buildings like Connolly availed of larger panes as soon as they were available (mid-19th cen.), it seems the change to larger panes was more gradual in less important buildings (like the pub); – apparently it was still cheaper to make the small panes of glass & use ‘Georgian’ sashes (I imagine the opposite is true today).
The attractive handcut brickwork of the pub soon gave way to the sharp machine cut orange brick ( 🙁 ) which was so ubiquitous right up to the start of the Second World War.
Speaking of the Connolly area, another glaring example of PVC in a prominent building is the fine stucco front of the North Star Hotel directly facing the station. It’s a Protected Structure, so sashes will have to go back sooner or later 🙂 (& a few survive in the ground floor).
A similar view to the 1860s pic above, but about 20 years later (WSC shopfront on Fleet St. cnr. is visible this time 🙂 ).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This must have been taken in the late ’40s (as the trams stopped in 1949, didn’t they?).
Trinity’s grounds look so different without the Arts Block….
Re: This thread
Bitasean, glad you like the stuff that’s being posted; – there’s more where that came from.
Re: Connolly Entrance
Graham, although I remember going up that escalator entrance off the street many times, I don’t remember noting the lamps or stair railings.
Have to say I always found that entrance to Connolly a bit depressing, and overall I find the new arrangement better, esp. the way it interconnects the areas east and west of the Station. Though, true, the underpass walkway is a bit bleak.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is not a ‘Before & After’ but an ‘In Progress’ – The building is a well known pub at Leonard’s Corner (from which the pub takes its name), at Clanbrassil Street Upr. / SCR. Some of you may remember, about 4 or 5 years ago, the pub had a makeover as a ‘Café Bar’. It was quite a tasteful job, with a simple interior and pubfront. The sash windows, quoins and parapet were painted cream, and I think the brickwork was carefully repointed too. All in all a nice job, maintaining the architectural character of the building (doesn’t happen too often with pub makeovers!).
But suddenly, about a year ago, this happened. The original sashes were replaced by double-glazed timber swing-open mock-sashes. The remaining real sashes you can see here had about another hour to go in the building 🙁 . I think the upstairs was being fitted out as apartments at the time. Again, an inner, insulating window, or the draghtproofing of the originals should have been the option.And, as before, the building was not listed, so nothing could be done.
What about this? – Wonderful Georgian house at No 9 Merchant’s Quay – restored with much effort and care a few years back and looks great, but ehhh………..
Ok, but the thread is primarily about the visual effects of PVC in older buildings, and I think we have a right to bang on about that here, given the easy ride PVC has had here for 2 decades now. By contrast, you can walk for for miles through the historic areas of Edinburgh or London without passing a PVC window.
Anyway, regarding windows generally, PVC still has a massive share of the market, so I don’t think you’ll be short of work.
@who_me wrote:
And if the height differs, is that a problem either? I think a contrast in heights between new and old side-by-side can be quite striking.
Provided they can integrate and co-exist happily…….which is not the case on Lavitt’s Quay in my opinion.
