-Donnacha-
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
The U2 tower (which I’m not sure I like) is still 10 times better than that Pelli building in Seville. The giant police light in a steel cage on top is horrible!
Those renders don’t inspire really. Makes the Point look like a B&Q outlet. But I’ve seen the new frame going up in the flesh and its got nice dimensions, so hopefully the real thing will look better. Incidentally, what’s with dropping the “Depot”? Always thought Point Depot was a great name. But I digress..
http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=10181&lang=ENG&loc=2260
The N25 scheme between Midleton and Carrig is moving to CPO/EIS this year also. Makes construction during 2009 unlikely though. Realistically, it should be considered as part of the Railway/Midleton Northern Ring set of projects, there will be very significant changes to the road network in the area if (when) its all done.
@Overworked wrote:
I have to admit, i like the new Point !!!
Where did you find the images? I can’t find anything about it on the architects or engineers’ websites.
@adhoc wrote:
No. I’m saying that silly comparisons shouldn’t be made to advance an argument.
Why on earth is it a silly comparison? It was drawing a reasonable conclusion from an argument that suggested we shouldn’t give a toss about how our built environment looks as long as it “does the job”. Major transport infrastructure is part of our built environment, as is housing. People may not be spending their entire lives in metro stations, but as has been pointed out, there’s a cumulative amount of usage by millions of people. Over the course of many lifetimes.
Transport projects, like housing, are part of the urban fabric and I’m sorry, but how they look IS important.I’m not sure what this means:
What nonsensical and aesthetical hysteria?
@Cute Panda wrote:
The purpose of mass transit is to move people from points A to wherever they want to go in a fast and reliable manner. They do not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who give a toss.
This has got to be one of the most depressing sentiments I have ever read. All the more depressing because it’s probably close to what an awful lot of people in this country think on the subject of public transport or even architecture and aesthetics generally.
Try this:
The purpose of public housing is to keep the rain off people’s heads while they eat and sleep. It does not exist to provide an aesthetic experience. Once the thing does the job who gives a toss.
The key issue is that the stations are clean, secure and work sufficiently well to support high levels of use. The luas stops along the canal at (say) Suir Rd or Goldenbridge are hardly laden with art or imagination, but they work just fine, despite not being in the most salubrious of neighbourhoods.
Gilding the lily in terms of appearances after the fact will undoubtedly happen – bare concrete being as easy to work with a blank canvas as they come, but getting bogged down now with the aesthetics misses the fundamental point – the critical issue is that the service works and will generate the passenger numbers, farting around with appearances can wait until the thing is either operational, or with luck, before it goes live.
The fact that it might “dull our senses and diminish our capacity for curiosity” has to be a secondary consideration to the fact that the purpose of the system is to get thousands of people to and from work (where our senses can then be dulled in much more comfortable surroundings).
Simple suggestion. A year before the system goes life, open competion held for artists or design studios for concepts for each station (maybe even reflecting the character of the area in which they’re located), to a budget. Repeat every five years.
@CC105 wrote:
Lets wait and see, far bigger cities with a lot more social problems than Dublin seem to be able to manage their undergrounds.
I’m not sure the cities you’re talking about have the same tolerance of littering, graffiti, public drunkenness etc that Dublin has. Bare concrete might look OK if it’s left bare but we all know it won’t be. And as soon as it starts deteriorating, passengers will start feeling uncomfortable and staying away from it.
I’m not talking gold leaf on the walls here. What’s wrong with plain white tiling? On a practical level, if would be a lot easier to keep clean than concrete.Jesus those drawings look grim. This is total false economy. It will send a clear signal out to the junkies and winos to move in and within months the costliest piece of infrastructure in the country will be an underground toilet. Would you spend a million euro on a new house, then not paint the walls to save a few quid?
Yup, definitely different to the one I’m talking about. There might be a reason for that too, the plans I’m looking at are very recent. Wait and see, I suppose.
You sure about the location of those 3 bridges?
I’ve seen plans with a traffic bridge crossing the river in front of the (new) railway station, with specific proviso for future use as a light rail bridge. No idea if that bridge is an opener, but I really doubt it, for obvious reasons.
@archipimp wrote:
im all in favour of the metro north going to swords but with talk of cost sutting measures due to spiralling costs wouldnt it be better to terminate the metro at the airport so the thing gets built and properly, with it then later extended to swords?
A Swords lynch mob is now on it’s way to Bray, complete with pitchforks and burning torches. It may take them a while though as the nearest DART station is in Malahide. 😀
@CC105 wrote:
Perhaps the DDDA should take a trip to Dubai to see twisting and height.
…and unsustainable vanity projects built on virtual slave labour.
Has anyone ever consider putting the Luas into a tunnel under TCD as a solution. Perhaps it would have to go too deep and the risk of cracking would prevent this?
OR doing the unthinkable and put it actually through TCD, across the back of cricket grounds and rugby pitch and possibly through some of the crap old offices that TCD are planning to redevelop, or through the relatively recently social welfare offices.
An Taisce would no doubt love that idea!!
Gaudi
@ake wrote:
anyone else have a problem with the crookedness? you can’t see the other part from practically anywhere but the east link bridge.
It’s like a picture that hasn’t been hung properly… I find myself tilting my head to one side as I look at it. And as people have said, there’s no visual counterpoint to it. Not sure if the poker-straight watchtower on the other side will make this better or worse.
Has the DDDA actually sat down with a render of how both will look alongside each other? Does such an image even exist?
I like it apart from the tilt, though. Hate the Hadid.darkman wrote:Some of the media seem to be mixing up the Clarence hotel revamp and the U2 tower. QUOTE]Weirdest twist yet…
I used that prefab on tuesday. It really is a big heap of shite. All flights will now use pier D, but since Terminal two will incorporate pier C, that will close at some stage during the construction process and a new pier will be built jutting out from the centre of pier c.
rory pier D is twice as big as pier c. and we will probably see a temp pier on the site of the new terminal.
@darkman wrote:
I wonder what names the legendary dublin wit will give this if it is built?:rolleyes:
The Tick.
