GrahamH
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
This aside, the new shopfront is a welcome insertion, with the original polished granite pilasters as found still lurking beneath the 70s cladding carefully retained and repaired. New limestone capitals were also commissioned.
Again weak relief, and indeed a bizarre concoction generally. These seemingly makey-uppy Corinthian wannabes accord with no precedent I’ve ever encountered, and do not sit well in the wider composition of the shopfront. This is primarily because the granite fascia is equally poorly detailed, failing to even fall in line with the height of capitals, and features crude exposed profiles at either end. The art of the skilled master mason is very clearly lacking in this mechanised age. And above all, the fascia should very clearly not be of granite at all. It’s far too top heavy, and gives the same status to the fascia as it does the more important supporting pilasters. Poorly thought out.
And for what it’s worth, the shopfront glazing should also be of carved timber, not grubby early 1990s-style brown aluminium.
Oh dear, this has turned into something of a rant. It’s unintended, as generally this restoration has been extremely accomplished – just in some places more in aspiration that actual execution.
The windows counter this trend. Beautifully restored. Slender glazing bars, smooth lines of putty, single glazed, horn details retained. Perfection.
Some windows such as this one below had their glazing bars chopped out, probably in the 1950s or so. Their reinstatement restores uniformity and classical form to the facade.
Just a shame they’re not a sultry black. Lovely carved detail below.
All of the stonework has been beautifully cleaned. The building now makes for a suitably grandiose foil to O’Connell Monument.
Before
After
Rather than damaging the stone, some heavy soiling has been correctly left.
The portico is sparkling.
Column capitals.
What a transformation.
To indulge in some comparison, overall the reproduction has been very accurate.
The proportions of the central window are a little off, but relying purely on the distorting characteristics of photographs is never advisable. What matters is that the window created works in its own right, and it does.
Alas, the surrounding channelling is too shallow, picked up especially in the splayed and stepped detailing around the arch which has a watery, cladding-like appearance.
Sadly what do not work on any level are the doorcases. While beautifully executed in buttery Portland stone, the lintels sitting atop are laughably weak and positively cartoon-like in contrast to the vigorous heavy statement of the originals.
As Stephen mentioned earlier, the frieze carving is similarly half-hearted and appliqué in appearance, with none of the enthusiasm of the previous models.
An acceptable attempt.
The masonry of the upper window insert is more confident.
Alas the columns and friezes again fall foul of the absence of an innate understanding of architectural masonry carving – the weak capitals, banding and dentil courses more typical of headstone and monument carving than an ebullient 1920s bank. Clumsy joints with the granite to the sides also.
Even more frustratingly, for what was a brand new, purpose-designed architectural insert, LED strip lighting was tacked on as an afterthought, completely compromising the carved masonry. It is this sort of skewed logic that so frustrates me with architects and lighting engineers. Why in the name of all that is sane were four single flush downlighters and uplighters not installed in the masonry at construction stage? This sort of thinking just baffles me, and planners most certainly should not have allowed this.
Likewise, the reinstated shopfront of No. 2 is scarred with the most ridiculous day-glo white plastic cameras, attached with even greater pride and prominence than the carved capitals above them.
Seconded. This requires no ‘innovation’ in respect of the entrance. Ditch the gimmickery of the ‘reinterpreted portico’ (which’ll be gone in 20 years anyway) and focus on a well crafted contemporary street corner. That block bookending the Carlton also looks completely incontextual and has no justification in height terms either. Saying that, the overall design of the scheme has at least become less chaotic, but as I’m yet to familiarise myself with the other changes, cannot really comment beyond that.
Without meaning to hijack, the restoration of the Ulster Bank building at No. 3-4 Lower O’Connell Street and the adjacent ground floor of No. 2 is complete.
First and foremost, what strikes one about this project is the extent to which architectural thinking can change within the space of thirty years – reverting from a ‘modernising’ approach in the 1970s, to the more considerate philosophy of today which (increasingly) respects the design integrity of historic structures. This restoration also demonstrates just how pointless so many ‘progressive’ butchering jobs were in the mid to late 20th century – in this case the architectural profession literally crawling back on its hands and knees to meekly reinstate what was removed only within recent memory. Street furniture around the corner on Eden Quay has lasted longer than the replacement shopfront.
Going by their record to date, it is clear that Ulster Bank are not exactly the most liberal minded of financial institutions when it comes to architecture. Alternately however, one may view their conservative approach as a considerate and constructive one in the face of the often sensitive sites their branches inhabit in traditional streetscapes.
This is their Dorset Street branch in Dublin, so convincing a reproduction of the neighbouring Victorian gabled pair that it has fooled at least one inventory recorder of the street that I’ve encountered.
Whether this was a lazy solution is a matter of taste; what all could agree on is that the site could have accepted a number of options.
Similarly, their previously mentioned Dundalk branch was also extended in a mirror-image fashion, with the central part and the entire left-hand side dating to the late 1990s. This is probably one of the most accomplished reproduction buildings anywhere in the State in terms of quality of execution. Arguably the omission of chimneys to lend animation to the hefty roof massing was unfortunate.
And then we come to Ulster Bank O’Connell Street. Unlike the above examples, this project has precedent on its side to somewhat ease the concerns of the honesty-first camp. As charted earlier, this handsome neoclassical building of 1919-1923 was designed by Belfast architect James A. Hanna in the wake of the destruction of 1916, and was the last building to be completed in the reconstructions. This was his original design, which was largely executed.
In the 1970s, its original cut stone shopfront and that of No. 2 to the right were almost entirely removed and replaced with a curious historicist-cum-brutalist whatever-you’re-having-yourself number, with channelled granite cladding, twee broad infilled archways and thoroughly bizarre cast concrete inserts below first floor level.
The reinstatement of the original shopfront design commenced over the summer in what must be noted as a remarkable turnaround from planning stage to completion. Clearly there’s still ample liquidity in Ulster Bank’s coffers…
The transformation has been remarkable.
Alas Ulster Bank to not appear to own/occupy the upper floors of No. 2, so only its ground floor has been given improving treatment.
It’s a shame I cannot host a dissolving sequence here, as it works to dramatic effect in Picture Viewer and Powerpoint. Still you get the idea from above.
The original shopfront of the main building has been beautifully reinstated, with expertly selected materials and construction techniques. Portland stone was acquired for dressing as was originally the case, while an excellent coarsely grained granite was sourced for the principal facing material.
Thin stone tile joints are thankfully a think of the past in reproduction, as the corner pieces of granite cladding have been cleverly hewn to imitate full blocks, as this example of sandstone below demonstrates.
The Ulster Bank in Dundalk was afflicted with this tile-effect problem.
I know! They’re both culpable! Where were the planners in this? There should also be an addition in the upcoming review of the Development Plan to promote the best standards in retail design.
Well the newly revamped Gaiety Centre (is it even called that anymore?) has just opened, with Warehouse, Zara and H&M occupying the retail units at ground and first floor levels. It is clear that this structure marks a new departure in the history of building typologies in Dublin – namely the first large scale example of a building designed to be refaced and/or entirely disassembled as fashion dictates. Perhaps not consciously drafted as such, but certainly built with that longer term intention behind it all. It is difficult to imagine this building standing in its current form in 20 years time, never mind 200 years time. The trendy facade can be replaced at will and the substructure entirely dismantled like a giant jigsaw puzzle when required. Indeed, even the prospect of the flimsy highly polished shopfront trims surviving to the next recession is distinctly unlikely.
Nonetheless, this building (whose form cannot yet be properly assessed until expansive letting hoardings come down) does introduce a new concept to the capital – the idea of a shopfront on an intimate pedestrian scale. The shopfront heights are remarkably diminutive, and surprisingly effective in humbly bending a knee to the passerby. In this regard they are both sophisticated and respectful of a street that heretofore has not been a major retail destination, and thus offer to the potential for a happy coexistence of a number of uses on this street by not brashly dominating. They look especially well at night when an intimate and familiar connection with the public realm is always desirable.
Regarding the design of the building itself, it speaks volumes of the vacuousness of some trends in contemporary architecture, namely style before function, that a structure which has been entirely faced in glass is almost completely blacked out at first floor level to accommodate retail fitouts. It’s nothing short of preposterous. And this is starkly evident once you enter the building; one expects light-filled spacious floorplates yet everything is boxed in, and in most cases devoid of a connection with the outside world. Of course this is what retailers want, but it’s not what should be accepted by planners. The blanked out first floor with giant lettering referencing the store inside as a desperate exercise in damage limitation is as ridiculous as it is embarrassing.
While no fault of the building’s architects, the fitouts of the stores for what is a purpose-designed retail and commercial building are nothing short of dismal. I genuinely wonder where we have gone wrong since the early 20th century, and indeed since as recently as the 1960s, that retailing has on the one hand never had so much resources and effort poured into it, yet so spectacularly fails to articulate itself through either well chosen dramatic interiors of converted buildings, or in purpose designed architectural spaces.
Perhaps it was foolish of me to expect more of a speculative build, but I find it shameful that such a high profile structure in a prime infill site in the city can fail so miserably to confidently articulate itself in its interior design and its connection with the wider form of the building.
As any Zara whore can tell you, the company promotes some of the very best in retail design right across Europe. In many continental cities they occupy prestige premises in heritage buildings or host themselves in crisp and contemporary premises that conform to their wider image. I find it very difficult to believe that the outstanding opportunity to establish a purpose-designed flagship store just off a capital’s leading retail thoroughfare would be treated to such a dank, boxy, cramped, insular, poorly navigable fitout in Berlin or Barcelona or Prague, which in Dublin – like the one-off house in the countryside – is expressed through a paper thin veneer of fashionable shades of paint, luxurious material finishes and the random focal trinklet to guide attention resolutely away from the dismal lack of wider architectural expression. There isn’t even so much as a balcony, light well, mezzanine level, dramatic escalator shaft or even central displays to lend imagination to this supposed purpose-designed commercial building.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the finishes and wider decorative schemes employed to all the stores in this development are elegant and effective in their own right – especially Zara naturally – but the architect’s touch has been firmly kept outside the front door. Not so much as an opportunity lost, as a poor indictment of what we deem as being of importance when investing in our city.
It probably does yes. Don’t get me wrong, I think you’re doing a fantastic job with your windows, and I’ve been reading your posts with satisfaction at your following best conservation practice, including refraining from painting the putty until a later date. Similarly, I despise plastic parting beads with a passion and am shocked at the number of quite high profile buildings where these have been installed. Your past experience says it all really. Indeed a picture or two of what you’re now doing wouldn’t go amiss 😉
However I really do take issue with replicating historic glass. Doing this is quite different to replicating authentic colour schemes or historic building materials – these are design considerations, architectural elements which are integral to the character of a building, as important to its appearance in the present day as in times past. By contrast, crown and cylinder glass in original windows direcly relates to contemporaneous manufacturing techniques. Their presence in a building is important principally because of their survival, not as an aesthetic entity (though yes it can of course be pretty). Indeed I would argue that far from contributing to an historic building, the replication of old glass vastly diminishes the status of original glass in a window, as its integrity as surviving testament to former manufacturing techniques and indeed social hierarchy, is lost amid the array of deceiving reproductions. Essentially, for me, it’s akin to replication exhibits in a museum case. They lack all the impact of the real thing, while an over abundance of such exhibits – as I’m sure everyone has encountered at one point or another – just makes the entire experience meaningless when you have to check every second caption card for authenticity.
cheezypuf, can I ask why you are going about commissioning new cylinder glass for your windows? Surely the entire charm of original glass is that it is original – its flaws and imperfections the result of contemporary manufacturing limitations. Why would you want to falsely recreate that? Similarly, if I wanted to ‘read’ your building and be charmed by the integrity of its flashing panes of 19th century glass amongst the modern inserts, I would be sorely disappointed.
I’ve never quite understood why people would go to such effort to deceive in the installation of fake old glass. It’s akin to eschewing modern transportation and bringing all the building materials to your house on a horse and cart.
Spot on. Indeed such is the level of aesthetic/decorative/atmospheric lighting being installed in every public and private project going now, it’s getting to a stage where policy needs to be drafted to ensure that the integrity of these schemes is maintained after installation. Publically, there ought to be a commitment to doing this on the part of the Lighting Division, while for the private sector, a condition of planning applications should ensure that such schemes are to be maintained if permission is to be granted for them. In ACAs and SPACs it’s simpler still and should be enforced as a basic standard. Inevitably areas such as these also feature high profile buildings.
In spite of constant developments in lighting technology and confident claims of extra long lives, lighting schemes remain as maintenance intensive as ever for issues that go beyond the lamp itself. Already the GPO scheme is showing the first signs of decay, with some units moving out of alignment, while countless LED uplighters on the median of O’Connell Street are either blown, smashed or an entire section taken out as a result of a dodgy fuse. The bridges are nothing short of a joke at this stage in terms of maintenance, while even high profile cases such as Government Buildings cannot even sustain basic upkeep. I cannot remember the last time its dome was illuminated as intended – indeed at all for that matter. As for the Fourt Courts and other key buildings – heck, even City Hall barely manages to keep itself together, with its haphazard pediment illumination a particular embarrassment. What standard do flagship cases such as these set for the private sector?! The government’s upcoming policy on architecture should incorporate objectives on lighting given its crtitcal role in essentially sustaining, and indeed adding a new dminsion to, good architecture after nightfall.
Just as this thread is raised, it ought to be noted that the pair of 1930s concrete lampposts outside the former Irish Times terrace on D’Olier Street have just been taken out. What’s the likelihood of them being restored and reinstated? There are now four left in the entire city.
The surface car parking, hoopy industrial railings and general air of ‘normality’ in this scene of devastation is typical of the nonchalant northside of the late 1980s. The doorcases are characteristic of the second phase of the Gardiners in and around Parnell Square. The trees are annoying me. I’ll make a stab at Dominick Street…
Lovely sets of horns and sticky-backed glazing bars on the new windows there. I wouldn’t have expected that at all.
This is good news and no real surprise. One would have imagined they had the finance secured long before the current mess, while this is also the best possible time to be building with construction costs at record lows for the past decade. Added to that is reduced consumer spending generally in the medium term, making it the ideal opportunity to literally demolish your on-street presence!
Simply another example of Luas holding up matters. But now that Metro is also in the works, there”s no way anything is going to be done with the bridge in the short term. It’s a shame that the simple moving out of the kerbstones and the pouring of a coloured asphalt isn’t even on the cards as an interim measure. It could have been done years ago.
Incidentally the taxi brigade are clearly not satisfied with occupying both the bridge and the median of the Upper street. I have now been solicited for trade – alas of the transport variety – along here no less than four times in as many weeks. The fact that I may look utterly bewildered on my travels through the city is entirely irrelevant – it’s bad enough having the median commandeered by taxis without being hailed by chaps lying against their car doors as an additional statement of their presence here.
Yep the Portland looks especially well in real life. Very creamy. Concerns about the level of soiling still evident on the pediment. The Custom House had industrial activity swarming around it for 200 years and they got every scrap of dirt off.
The concealed lighting thus far is also, well concealed – hurrah! I had reservations about all these LED strips scattered about the facade drawings.Alas the windows have not been returned to their 1920s appearance. This is a growing issue on O’Connell Street: in spite of all its designations and various plans, there are no design guidelines, recommended palettes of materials or specified decorative finishes drawn up for the thoroughfare other than shopfront guidelines. Whereas the white windows in this instance are perfectly pleasant, it would have given the building an extra touch of elegance to have charcoal or grey painted fenestration as was originally the case. There seems to be little appreciation for the 1920s ensemble of Lower O’Connell Street and part of the Upper street – not least as as evidenced in the recent Penneys decision – that while derivative, makes for a coherent and attractive streetscape that exudes a sense of civic pride and importance beyond that of pretty much every other street in the city.
ahhh South Frederick Street. The first doorway gave it away, as did the railings to the right of the corner house (Protected Structure) which has just has the most appalling double-glazed beaded tmber sashes installed. These yokes are spreading like wildfire through protected buildings in the city and there’s absolutely no enforcement.
Those oriel windows are an extraordinary phenomenon. There’s nothing like them in the city save houses on Earlsfort Terrace and the odd yoke up off Gardiner Street. I wonder what caused them here.
28/9/2008
Lovely little video here with audio of the reinstatement of the newly restored Irish Times clock. Beautiful photographs.
http://www.irishtimes.com/indepth/slideshows/irishtimes-clock/
In relation to the enormous restoration and conversion scheme going on in respect of the former offices, I think it spectacularly unambitious that the reinstatement of all the Wide Streets Commission shopfronts – i.e. a meagre three narrow plots in this scheme – wasn’t insisted on by planners. This is the sole large-scale surviving ensemble of the WSC in the city, indeed arguably the last surviving scheme that is even recognisably by the WSC, and uniquely complete with many original shopfronts, and yet the matter of fully restoring the streetscape was extraordinarily customarily glossed over when the case was dealt with. Indeed from what I can read of the final report, the submission by An Taisce about restoring the missing original shopfronts and quoting DCC Shopfront Guidelines doesn’t even appear to have been understood:
“In terms of the proposed shopfronts, the concerns of An Taisce are noted. It would appear however that these concerns are largely met in the proposed development which proposes the refurbishment of the existing shopfronts. Details of signage will be required when end users of the units are identified and details of this aspect should be made the subject of compliance.”
How can the needs of reinstating by met by not reinstating? Either they are or they are not. The existing shopfronts are entirely irrelevant. This scheme proposes extensive glazing for a “higher profile on D’Olier Street” in place of the modern granite and tiled shopfronts. Even on its own merits, there is absolutely nothing in the report that addresses the critical issue of the missing shopfronts independent of the An Taisce submission, a matter which has implications on a city-wide level in terms of understanding the architectural development of Dublin. Quite extraordinary.
100% agreed. And to be a little more specific about what it reflects, we now have a delightful array of air conditioning plant pasted across the entire facade in delicate undulating waves. This was pointed out to be by one of the first people who saw the glazing go up, and I have noticed nothing else every since. Sorry to ruin it for everyone!
And believe me, it will.
The glazed cube is a theme carried throughout the scheme.
The railed frontage to York Street carries through the concept from precedent, and is well detailed.
The new address plaques being erected on the piers are particularly elegant and subtly back-lit. The ground floor elevation behind the railings however is not as successful: overly harsh and clinical, it has a budget render appearance and poorly detailed window sills that do not do justice to the upper floors. Also picking up on detail, my pet hate of ignorant fenestration is by no means limited to pre-1900 – this is simply ugly stuff up here.
Depending so heavily on framed glazing and opting for a factory engineered solution inevitably produces such results. The new St. Luke’s Avenue building by Anthiny Reddy Associates is another recent high-profile building so compromised by cumbersome fenestration that has had little or no design input saving the choice of material and its colour. A real shame in this case too.
The as yet unfinished basement well, most of which is deeper than this and provides ventilation to basement storage and/or car parking. Lovely curved detail.
The rear courtyard makes elegant and fitting use of brick which draws strong references to the history of the site and generates a suitably welcoming domestic atmosphere. The elevation to Upper Mercer Street features very well designed animating commercial/retail units, as does the main corner frontage.
The scheme will make use of five gas-powered district heating systems, each serving approximately 13 apartments with a central condensing gas boiler. Domestic hot water will be provided by five solar thermal panels with back up from highly efficient gas boilers at peak load. Because of the volume of gas to be consumed, it can be purchased at commercial rates, further lowering costs, while the efficiency of the scheme as a whole means each unit will consume half that of a typical apartment. A water management system has also been incorporated.
Overall an average/good scheme – if it has an attractive face it has to be to York Street – and seemingly more informed by environmental credentials than architectural swagger. O’Donnell & Twomey’s new Cork Street social housing is a heart-warming delight by comparison. This leaves me a little cold.
(Incidentally an excellent series of giant paper maps were recently erected between the bays of the ground floor showing the progression of development on the site from the earliest of times to the present day. It was a great idea, and a shame it came down so quickly. We need more of this type of thing from the public sector)
Next door the site DCC sold to the Royal College of Surgeons is under extreme excavation. If I recall they applied for a four storey basement, and is surely one of the deepest excavations ever conducted in Dublin. It’s an incredible drop on location.
Difficult to make out if this is Calp bedrock or in fact a former quarry site.
14/9/2008
Well here is the new Dublin City Council York Street housing scheme designed by Sean Harrington Architects as now reaching completion, comprising 66 apartments surrounding a central courtyard.
Still a few pointers for the snag list…
Perhaps a little busy to the western elevation facing towards Upper Mercer Street, the above York Street frontage is more pleasing in its simplicity and dynamic use of materials.
The use of stack-bonded brickwork encased within a galvanised border is eye-catching and ‘efficient’.
If perhaps overly so in its shouting from the rooftops ‘SOCIAL HOUSING’. Whereas in the early-mid 20th century public housing was defined almost singularly by being of a modern idiom and apartment format, today the four pre-requisite elements are: a) the use of galvanised steel as a cutting-edge-modern-but-between-ourselves-cheap-and-maintainable material, b) mean fenestration, c) a patronisingly quirky use of bright colour, and d) an appearance of over-design. Essentially four elements one would rarely if ever encounter in the private sector.
None of which might I remark are negatives – they’re simply observations from the trends I’ve noted. When they are to be criticised is their employment in an inappropriate manner, nothing of which it has to be said is evident in this scheme, save perhaps a somewhat overly engineered western elevation.
This development is probably the most environmentally sustainable social housing scheme ever built in Dublin, and clearly informs the design through the use of minimal glazing to the narrow north-facing York Street and contrasting expansive frontage facing south. The powder-coated aluminium windows with internal timber facings are extremely well built and insulated (the specification of the glazing is unclear).
The use of colour to the side lights of the projecting cube windows injects much vigour to the perennially gloomy York Street.
