GrahamH
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@hutton wrote:
before the planners directed Sam
And what about the first time round – the opposite was the case!
What a pity – passed this not too long ago too and wondered about it. Unlike many such scrappy older derelict buildings, this was of good quality with the shopfront and cornerstones being particularly eye-catching. The stock brick was also very elegant.
It was not a building that was just ‘left-over’, it was self-contained, able to stand on its own feet with the cornerstones on both sides, cornice on top, and a proportioned facade – it could easily have integrrated into any well-designed scheme.
I remember the wine sign now that you mention it ConK 🙁Agreed about the arches – a more linear link with the upper floors would have worked better.
Passed this building the other day on Adelaide Road – I think a good example of how a decent older building can be quite successfully reinvented. It is quite similar to Goldsmith House on a few levels (not that that building should have recieved this treatment). Sorry for failing light – again…
😀
Often wondered what the Tomb of the Unknown Gurrier was – why was it given that name?
It’s funny about An Tostal, neither people today or of the 1950s seem to have the faintest idea what it was all about – was talking to some people of ‘the era’ about it recently and between all of them they couldn’t figure out what it was about 😀Yes O’Cll Bridge definitely needs improving on a host of levels. Regarding the telephone kiosks on Eden Quay – there’s always been a row of them there since at least the 50s if not earlier, so they’ve always just been replaced regardless of the changes in ped traffic at that corner. It is also exceptionally tight at the Bachelors Walk crossing; most times you can’t even get onto the quay with the crowd at the junction.
As for the balustrading, it really goes to show doesn’t it just how simple it can be to improve the street environment. It took a couple of hours on two early mornings to clean both sides of the bridge and yet they were left filthy for years on end. Likewise with the GPO column bases and countless other pieces of street furniture – just left filthy. By contrast the BoI, in the private sector, have their portico column bases washed down every couple of months on Westmoreland St, indeed so much so there’ll probably be impliations for the stonework…
Here’s the bridge now in all its glory (where you can also make out that the bridge is still slightly humpbacked):
And the side wall facing Ballast House:
Unfortunately the cleaning has revealed a number of problems (not that the one below and on Burgh Quay weren’t obvious anyway) that require attention when the bridge is finally tackled. There’s some dodgy repointing etc that needs attention elsewhere:
Another pic from the olden days- the WSC corner just after the Rising.
Ironic that they sold gunpowder 🙂
You can see the arched WSC shopfronts too, as well as the tripartite feature window with corbels:
You can also make out the little pediments on the 3rd window in on the river front as well as on the window above the feature one. The forerunner of Burger King had emerged by then too with the minor adaption of the upper floors.
I saw ‘Mise Eire’ there recently and there’s some great archive footage of post-1916. The opposite corner to that in the picture over on Eden Quay is completely destroyed:like someone took a massive bite out of the corner – extraordinary sight, not to mention that the one here survived virtually intact.
It was just your unusual use of prefer that threw me 🙂
Well the entire length along here this side of the bridge was cleaned early this morning – it was still wet when I passed so it was very patchy. Even so you can now clearly make out the newer balusters that have been spliced in over the years and the patchiness of new and old sections. It’s also revealed quite a bit of deterioration in places.
Still, overall the difference is remarkable – the large river facades now need to be cleaned too.What was the ‘Bowl of Light’ Karen? I’ve an interesting still of the bridge from the 50s I think with spooky Christmas tree-like yokes down the centre – must post it.
Regarding the strange set of four bollards at the top end of O’Cll St opposite the Parnell Monument, it would appear that they are the bollards that originally guarded the statue of W Smith O’Brien on his island site at the O’Cll Bridge south junction. Often suspected this but it’s always been difficult to confirm.
Still can’t be 100% sure – the tops look slightly different but that could just be distortion in the original pic. Also hard to see if the originals are preferated like the current ones.
Anyone know what the modern-day trapdoor is for? Are the bollards being used for ventilation?Well that all goes without saying 🙂
You can chuck in Aviation House while you’re at it…@Thomond Park wrote:
From a climatic point of view I’d prefer the East rather than the West to be the dirtier.
What do you mean?
As mentioned before, pictures from the late 70s show these walls to be bone white so that seems to be the last time they were cleaned]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v219/Dublin1/OCllBridge-GasExplosion.jpg[/IMG]
Wow – I don’t remember that building at all! Very interesting detailing – really like the curved corner and the ground floor elevation that make it look not quite real – find of floats on it. The repeating windows are great – saying that such a feature can look terrible too in the case of ‘Oisin House’ aross the road.
The new Goldsmith is currently featuring in the Erin Hotcup ad – ‘whatever happened to the land we grew up in – we lead such hectic Celtic Tiger lives etc’. Just about sums up the building 🙂Here’s a half pic of Hugenot House – only took it though for the new Stephen’s Green lanterns – look quite nice 🙂
The new look H house is holding up well.
There’s a lot of pressure washing happening around Dublin at the minute, just can’t think of them all at the minute but here’s one, the plinths and piers of the Leinster House railings round the back on Merrion St.
So used to seeing them being old and grimey and charmingly Victorian in appearance that I don’t know what to make of their new appearance:
Very very clean – weird to see them as they would have looked when first unveiled.
Sorry I couldn’t get a pic of the pavillion round the front – didn’t have time as you can see from the failing light. Didn’t want to ask one of the intimidating Guards there anyway – the railing pic as it is was a click and run job 🙂You really do have to wonder at the shortage of retail space in Dublin city centre considering these vast tracts yet to be redeveloped. Especially regarding the amount of rubbish on O’Connell St; putting all historic reasons to one side, walking along the northern end the mind boggles at the hand-wringing of estate agents and major retailers over the past 5-10 years at the lack of space in the capital’s centre.
There is so much to be improved up there one would wonder if property owners are purposely waiting for the big guns to start sniffing around or waiting for values to go through the roof before flogging their buildings hence keeping them in poor condition.Despite what the primary aim of the IAP was – to generate the ‘knock-on effect’ rather than directly intervene for improvements, I think at this stage a greater effort should be made by the CC. It is now no less than exactly 7 years since the IAP was published and the northern end is in precisely the same state as it was way back then, save the Gresham’s and Savoy’s improvements which were executed for their own changing market conditions.
I know this is probably my fourth time mentioning the filth of the O’Cll Bridge balustrading but look at this picture of a test patch that was pressure washed the other day – WOW – even I didn’t think it was that manky 🙂
For some reason this eastern balustrade is more dirty than the west – perhaps the dirt of the traffic blowing up from the ‘tunnel’ of the quays.
It’s extraordinary how it changes from a horrible concrete appearace back to salubrious Portland stone; it’s going to look great in the evening sun that pierces up the quays, usually turns a warm golden colour.
Looks fantastic, if not perhaps a bit contrived – it’s falling over itself to be the ultimate in sheek, with the staff looking uneasily around from inside their goldfish bowl.
Overall though it works exceedingly well, the timber ceiling is fabulous as is the matching furniture and fittings beneath. And is that Connemara marble detailing? Could be melamine for all I know but it looks great 🙂Most impressive though about the design is that no matter where you view it from it is sited just below the railing/pier-line so doesn’t intrude, not so much on the historic natue of the place but just the setting in general; it reduces the clutter. The removal of a railing panel for use as an entrance is surprisingly unnoticable – the railing has been cut in two and now folds back on itself as a gate.
Is the 60s security cabin to be removed?
The tower next door hopefully being ditched is excellent news.
As for the extra height & bulk for U2, as long as the design can absorb it then fair enough – but also as long as this will be deemed one of those ubiquitous ‘landmark’ buildings and will not set the level for the area.
It’s going to look fantastic next to the water there.It’s interesting to consider the current Ballast House; whereas it’s pastiche, and not great either, I’m not sure most people would want to see it go! It’s a tricky one as the ‘historic’ nature of it does help define the character of the city centre and it is a bridge to the past of sorts. Yet having a large pastiche on one of the most prominent sites in the entire city is decidedly dubious at best.
From an objective perspective it’d be knocked in the morning, yet with its history and in the context of what happened to the city at large it does stand as something of a ‘fond’ – if that’s the word – reminder of water under the bridge, similar to O’Cll Bridge House in a way…I agree Devin that contemporary design is more than capable of complementing streetscapes and neighbouring buildings – Stephen Court being one of the best in the city to use a well worn example – not to mention rather good in its own right.
Such ‘low-key’ design can be highly effective, albeit rarely executed. Again to stress, pastiche should not be thrown all over the place – I’m constantly hearing people talking about proposed new developments next to older ones and saying ‘God I hope they use an older style – make it fit in you know’ ‘Ah yes make it nice and traditional – in the old way yknow’ etc – and you’d just cringe at the lack of interest in modern design.I always think of pastiche as being something nice that you’re not allowed have – just like the Dundalk bank you do feel a degree of moral indignation yet at the same time feel like stamping your foot like a child – ‘but look at it, it’s nice, I want it!’
It’s funny, often thought of being interested in architecture and then looking at pastiche and liking it is akin to being a child in the 50s ‘having bad thoughts’. 😀
20 Hail Marys it is then – I’m so ashamed 🙁Except that feckin great lump of a signpost frame – one of many about the place.
Yes striking image – if the res is there a close-up on cupola with the dark sky behind could be good too.There’s a great, albeit cliched shot achievable from further back on Merrion Sq with all of the lampposts piling up.
The best for that effect though is the Georgian Mile – only you will need a cherry-picker 😀Was passing early this morning and noticed something that may be of interest. Inside, the trademark cast iron pillars which presumably are Victorian, extend out beyond the original facade and into the 60s section.
How far I’m not totally sure – went in to have a look and braved a totally empty teenage girl store with suspicious staff eying every move 😮
It seems the columns only extend as far as a couple of bays into the 60s part, maybe a 1/4 or so – perhaps the width of the terminating pavilion?The pillars could be repros but it seems unlikely as they only extend a small part into the new building when they could have gone the whole way if desired.
Does nobody have a pic of Henry St from the 50s – surely someone has one!Methinks the Photoshop saturation level has fallen off the scale 🙂
Love the first O’Cll St one with the dof – very striking. Dublin looks fantastic in evening sun.
The Spire was looking great this morning in the sun too after weeks of dull days.Indeed. This has been a big issue since the beginning of time; wasn’t it highlighted by a survey that resulted in architects’ favourite buildings being the ones most hated by the public?
What the public at large like is not by any means the best gauge of architectural quality! (difficult to say that without being snobby – and as if I’m in a position to comment…)But to go back to the point about ‘respecting older forms’ – again one must differentiate between the ‘form’, i.e the architecture, and ‘the building’, i.e ‘a Georgian’, ‘a Victorian’ which are almost living embodiments of their time.
From an architectural perspective I would argue that pastiche is being totally respectful of older forms. The problem arises with the ‘truth’ of the building.
And even then there’s a blurring of lines between these two if one considers architecture as being much more than just an aesthetic art.I know! *said in an exceptionally irritating Monica-from-Friends like way*
But is what is wrong with that? How can it be acceptable to add a major classical addition to Leinster House for example (again), but not to build in an historic fashion on a street location? Again I’m just wondering. Do we attach greater significance to more everyday locations? Is there a difference because we deem street locations to be representative of how we express ourselves architecturally on a broader level and hence shouldn’t be interfered with, whilst something like Leinster House or countless other similar projects are one-off for-the-good-of-the-national image schemes?
Regarding tradition, this quote (plucked from Paul’s thesis :)) by Gropius does sum up well how buildings should be treated:
“Respect for tradition does not mean the complacent toleration of elements which have been a matter of fortuitous chance or of individual eccentricity nor does it mean the acceptation of domination by bygone aesthetic forms.”But in my view this does not mean that all previous forms of architecture in every instance must be disregarded. Indeed to be honest I’m genuinely not a fan of pastiche in most cases. The use of the form by people building houses, often quite credible historically, I find frustratingly unambitious. For the most part I cannot stand those whitewashed houses all over the West, even in locations suited to development so insisted upon by planners to be ‘in keeping’ with the area.
They are so predicable as to make you dispair. The lack of contempoary design in standard, everyday locations and situations is a crying shame.
I think if the opposite was the case regarding the current state of affairs, i.e if the majority of what was built in the country was contemporary in nature, pastiche in certain locations would be more acceptable.
We’re undergoing a heritage blitz at the moment which doesn’t help at all.But from what your’re saying Phil and what? presumably regardless of trends pastiche is just not acceptable to you by definition…
2025’s a bit optimistic don’t you think? 🙂
Yes in the short term it’ll probably have an effect alright. Then again I’ve never quite understood why Grafton St is always spoken of in terms of being an attraction in itself. From what I’ve experienced over the years, esp in the past 5 or so from walking up it every day, is that it’s used in a fashion not dissimilar to O’Cll St – simply as a route to get elsewhere, certainly at lunchtime anyway.
Suppose even if it is only used as a route, it’s still the busiest in the country and that’s largely all that matters!
But from a personal perspective I’d never in a million years buy anything on Grafton St.
