GrahamH
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Where lostexpectation?
@jimg wrote:
Why? I really dislike the aesthetics and even the idea of ‘landmark’ standalone towers which dominate entire areas of the city. Someone in the other thread posted a series of photos of European cities which have tall buildings. The ones which adopted a “clustered” approach to tall buildings – Frankfurt, Paris, etc. – are far more appealling than having individual towers dispersed around a generally low rise city. I’d rather have this, the Point “tower”, Heuston Gate, the Barrow St./Thomas St./Tara St./etc. proposals all bunched together somewhere down the docks instead of ending up with having the low rise historic bits of the city compromised by “landmark” towers.
Fully agreed with you jimg – Frankfurt in particular looks fantastic. What you quoted above referred to the fact that we’re never going to get such a cluster in Dublin, not in the medium term anyway, so the best we can hope for is a number of ‘landmark’ towers sited relatively coherently and as closely together as possible in the Docklands, preferably standing guard close to the river, in and around the Grand Canal Dock area.
My advocating of such buildings must certainly did not refer to a scattergun approach across the city! – alas precisely what we seem to be getting 🙁You mean you can tolerate looking at the same bathroom every day of the week?!
And here was me thinking I was slumming it with one for every slash.How the lower half live indeed – you’ve certainly opened my eyes Stephen.
Just remembered this – Trinity’s carriage arch (;)) lamp. As mentioned before, it is one of the 1930s concrete lamps!
(albeit cleaned up)
Now how did they get hold of it?! 😡
Anyone have a picture of an older lamp here to give us an indication of when they installed it?
Could not agree with you more – amongst the finest lampposts in the city, they’re one of my favourites too 🙂
Early electric, though maybe a bit later than most at 1910-20 (?), they can be found along many of the major arterial routes of the north and south inner suburbs, Harrington Street being a classic example.They’re so wonderfully elegant: slim profile, streamlined components, and attractive detailing: they unobtrusively fit into any streetscape. And strangely, the later ugly sodium lamps kinda add to their thin profile! Love to know what the original ones were like though.
But yes it would seem DCC are actively going about cleansing the capital of concrete posts – as mentioned all of Richmond Street was being wiped of them a few months ago and being replaced with the usual tacky silver repro rubbish. (Had a pic but seems to have gone missing). The fact that the Lighting Division can’t even be arsed to come up with decent replacements speaks volumes as to their attitude to the city’s lighting stock. It’s unfortunate to have to say it, but really much of the city’s 20thC lighting is in grave danger of disappearing if not watched closely – it might as well be 1973 in terms of what’s going on, and that extends to ‘modern’ standards going in which are so often the usual skinny repro trash, or simply galvanised motorway stock. There seems to be no grand plan or coordinated approach, particularly as the the future of concrete – this should have been researched and sorted years ago! And yet only now when the city’s stock is crumbling away are they finally being investigated, and even then many are simply being replaced before any chance is made to assess them!
The curved c.1950 ones pictured above by CM00 are an integral part of Dublin’s subrbs and are very much worthy of conservation.Agreed about the new posts in Phibsboro too DFG – not very attractive at all either, though saying that the new black posts going in on the East Wall Road beside the Point and Dublin Port entrance are quite striking if anyone has a pic.
The new posts at Clontarf seem to be identical to the black posts erected a few years ago in Sandymount as Stephen says:
They do look rather odd alright beside the modernist shelters and wall (lovely things btw), but certainly are suited to the Sandymount Strand Road setting (above) anyway with the Victorian villas opposite – don’t know Clontarf very well.
Yep – it came down last week in fact, so Enforcement were on the ball. One would hope that the speed of its removal is an indication of the ‘threat’ level, so to speak.
Though they still have giant posters pasted to the windows, forbidden by the SAPC. Indeed these are still on virtually every premises on the street.
However not all is well on the street once more, and yet again it is convenience stores and the depths to which they will plummet in question.
Spar on Upper O’Connell St west, housed in the gracious and well maintained Lynam’s Hotel building, have seen fit to erect this banner across their facade.
Another notorious ‘temporary sign’ one may think, but oh no – as anyone who knows the street well can tell that this particular Spar premises had a relatively decent, unobtrusive, chromed sign foisted on them by DCC, to respect both this protected building and the broader environment of O’Connell Street. And here it is, still lurking underneath!
The brazen cheek of them – you really have to admire their gall. If this out of all the cases we’ve come across doesn’t spell out in black and white convenience stores’ single aim of increasing visibility at all costs, well nothing does.
But yet again, this premises clearly deems the authorities to be a soft touch – why else would they possibly do this? And O’Connell Street of all places! This banner has been up for a good while now – haven’t had a chance to get on to Enforcemnt about it as yet.
Though the same cannot be said of Londis on Lower east, as personally I’ve been leaving it as long as possible to see when the authorites will get the finger out. Here is their hideous ‘temporary sign’, up for over a year now, having been erected c.May/June 2005.
Look at the contrast with the elegant granite cornice above, and the rubbishy decaying floodlights tacked on. Again, as long as DCC do nothing, they’ll do nothing.
Lovely stuff. This premises also played a proud role in forming a prominent backdrop to the 1916 Commemoration in April – it’d bring a tear to your eye.
Horace O’Rourke must be rolling in his grave.By contrast, just a little further up is the newly converted Bank of Ireland premises, into a (cough) ‘Dental Spa’.
I kid you not, complete with very smart roll-out green carpet. How long will that stay I wonder…
Not quite the tenant one suspects DCC had in mind for the premises, but an interesting service nonetheless. They don’t quite appear to be the snooty upmarket establishment that one might suspect from the outside – from The Sunday Business Post, June 18, 2006:
Smiles Dental Spa to open on O’Connell St
By Tina-Marie O’NeillThe €1 million venture follows the opening of Smiles clinics on South Anne Street in Dublin and on Oliver Plunkett Street in Cork over the past two years. Business partners Emmet O’Neill and orthodontist Hugh Bradley are the principals behind the dental practice, which will open in the former Bank of Ireland building at 58 Lower O’Connell Street. ‘‘Cosmetic dentistry is popular in the clinics and all clients have a dental exam prior to any treatments,” said O’Neill. ‘‘We found ourselves sending people away to get fillings or have crowns repaired and were often asked to recommend dentists. ‘‘So we decided to focus on general dental treatments at affordable prices for adults and children at the spa. ‘‘That will include fillings, checkups, crowns, veneers, straightening and tooth implants. Where getting a crown usually requires two visits to a dentist, we have the equipment to make a crown in one hour.”
The spa will be open seven days a week from 7am to 9pm. ‘‘If someone cracks a tooth on a Saturday night, they usually have to wait until Monday to phone their dentist and until maybe Tuesday or Wednesday to see a dentist. At Smiles, they can drop in on Sunday morning and have the problem treated,” he said.
The practice has eight dental chairs, five dentists, a supervised children’s area, specialist dentists and fluent Spanish, Chinese and Polish speakers.Ends.
Rather appropriate interior all considering, with faience lined walls similar to The Grand Central 🙂
They’ve also been very responsible in erecting elegant sensitive signage on the columns and over the door, and even applied for permission to erect those temporary flag banner yokes. The cleaning of the lower facade has been a half-hearted job however, and some decent floodlighting wouldn’t go amiss either.That is one colourful post hutton 🙂
B is so very difficult alright. So we know it’s a hotel, we know it’s on the northside, it’s probably south facing given the bright sky and sun, and appears to be very late Victorian, though with a rebuilt 1920s attic storey?
Thought it might be Beresford Place, but no.
Talbot St by any chance, in the middle or near the BoI outside Connolly?
Or Parnell St perhaps?A is tricky too – feel like I pass it every day, but can’t place it! Those projecting bays look very distinctive.
D looks huge, like the base of Connolly’s tower…
…but is in fact the little clocktower of the former Mercer’s Hospital 🙂
Yup – absolutely.
Literally thown this together (clearly!), but gives a good idea as to the disaster zone College Green has become:
What a mess! 😮
Though there are a great many mature trees already along the northern quays at least.
It’s an interesting idea to extend the inner pavement alright, but is there demand for it? On Eden Quay yes, but moving westwards fewer and fewer people use it – at the end of the day everyone wants to walk along the river where possible. Unless they’ve a destination on the inner quay, and let’s face it there’s very few of them, people will migrate towards the water.From an architectural/aesthethic perspective it’d be more desirable to develop the river side with regular planting and paving – remembering that the Boardalk only comprises a section of one side of the Liffey. As pleasant an amenity the Boardwalk is, I wouldn’t want its localised presence to spoil the chances of developing the existing quays for the majority of the city. As such, if this means duplicating the role of the Boardwalk where it exists on the other side of its quay wall, then maybe this should be done.
To be honest I’m not sure – just a bit irritated at the Boardwalk pulling people out of the city when the quays could be developed in the longer term; it just stifles that notion really, pushing it way down the line. The Boardwalk is ssentially a temporary measure, chopping the foliage off the weed but leaving the root in the ground to be dealt with another day. A practical and on the whole probably good solution to the city’s current needs, but it shouldn’t be used as an excuse to leave the quays as giant car parks indefinitely. Burgh, Aston and Wellington Quays in particular have great riverside potential
On a vaguely related topic, does anyone know where this water is coming from pouring out from Bachelor’s Walk?
It can’t be a storm as it hasn’t rained in weeks, and there’s no underground streams round here – I think…
Side by side:
Combined with the sweeping railings and gracious West Front, they make for one of the most striking set pieces in the city.
The birdies approve of the new look too 🙂
22/7/2006
John Henry Foley’s handsome statues of Edmund Burke and Oliver Goldsmith outside the West Front on College Green have been beautifully restored over the past number of weeks.
Both figures of bronze mounted on granite plinths, Goldsmith to the right was erected in 1864, while Burke a little later in 1868.It has been an impressively fast project, if clumsily taking place in high tourist season. The transformation, as with O’Connell Street, has been remarkable.
Here is Burke before and after:
And the plinth:
Indeed the granite is now so bone white that it has assumed a new decorative role: now accenting the Portland stone dressings of the West Front! The plinths no longer disappear into their backdrop of heavy granite rustication.
The bronze is once again smooth, silky and jet black – what a transformation!
Alas I’ve no direct ‘before’ image of Goldsmith, but you can still see the extraordinary change with this:
Foley’s stunning detailing has come to life again:
Just look at the execution of that necktie!
And other clothing:
Very recent photo indeed, as Trinity’s new building is exactly at that stage of construction.
Also shows what a meandering, long-winded route the Loop Line is:
Thanks for that hutton – some pictures to put the building in context on Killarney Street:
With the new convent? development going up behind – it’s actually not bad:
…as part of this project:
Though the juxtaposing is still hideous:
The facade is needless to say in dismal condition – the main entrance:
One of the delightful flanking doorcases – tiny little things (this is taken from the ground!)
The columns and steps – a few tests have been made in cleaning them in places, not really evident here though:
The stunning Greek sculptures adorning the pediment, one of the most impressive parts of the building:
A rather eroded granite capital and entab:
All in all, the most charming little building; its appeal stemming from a completely unassuming character, and minute but perfect proportions.
I don’t like the notion of moving it one little bit, but on balance it shamefully does need to be done – it’s completely overpowered by its new neighbour. It’s such a pity, as it fitted into that miniature streetscape so well, with the tiny little Victorians also alongside – a classic Dublin street scene. However if it is to be moved (and yes it should stay in the general area), it would be nice for it to address the street in its new home. It’s not until you walk past it and stand underneath its portico that you realise what a shame it would be to have it so stunted in a public park.
Just a pity the law didn’t intervene 20 years ago.
Looks like you had a lovely evening all in all Conor 🙂
Stunning light in your pictures – in Docklands too.Glad to see the wall is still intact – suffice to say I know Grand Canal St very little!
But isn’t it a shadow of its former self – the lettering used to reinforce the curve of the wall, whilst the bone white capstones added emphasis to its shape, including the detail to the top left: this could all do with cleaning.According to Liddy, the building was built in 1948 to the designs of S. Stephenson and Son of Belfast, which might help explain the similarity to many such buildings in the UK – the design is rather alien to here. It was constructed by who else other than Crampton.
That late tower is still very odd!Both the commemorative plaque and street sign look decidedly daft in those positions, and flanked by a delightful array of clutter. What is that sign serving facing the wall?!
Interesting to see the modern lamppost has replaced the earlier one on precisely the same spot 🙂😀 No disagreement on that front considering what the building once was – especially irritating in the context of just how few modernist buildings we have from the period. But to be honest, what we now have looks like it was pretty much designed from scratch as a pomo building, as alarming as it may be!
Just looking at those pictures, where is the tall left-hand tower/pavilion depicted in the first image in the second one? Or does the second photo show the building under construction, so it has yet to be built?
Even so, to leave such a major part out of the build to the final stages is rather strange…Plucked from Pat Liddy’s Dublin 🙂 (was going to post them too ;))
Agreed CM00, esp regarding the curved wall – an absolute shame it was removed, including the lettering – and the tinkering with the windows.
Yes the pomo stuff is dated, but it’s a decent quality build and still stands up well on that front at least.
@a boyle wrote:
One would certainly make a very cool nightclub.
I don’t think you’re aware of the size of these buildings a boyle – they’re pretty small, although a boutique nightclub could be spot on alright ]must[/b] be addressed either way. But even to open up the gables as spacious ‘tunnel’ walkways could be an interesting idea if they proved to be unviable as commercial entities, with the door spaces to the river and road also left open. Just as industrial curiosities if nothing else – reductionist perhaps, but better than demolition.
If in ten or twenty years time Docklands is nearly as thriving as the inner city, it may be regretted that these strutures weren’t retained because they weren’t commercially viable at the time.Yup – indeed they started taking it down about a month ago I think. Saw a wonderful elevated view of it from the railway bridge on East Road the other day – it really stands out in so many parts of the north city.
The current scene on Hardwicke Street:
There’s a long way to go yet; the lower building hasn’t been touched at all, externally at least.
The spire:
Looking in great condition. It’ll be interesting to see what the lower sections are like when unveiled, as these were quite badly weathered.
And the view from O’Connell Street 🙂
Floodlighting is going to be spectacular, as the bone coloured Portland stone will stand out dazzlingly bright on the night sky.
@jdivision wrote:
I think that between where Princes Street meets red and green block it will turn right (completely my opinion). I have heard from a retail source who’s not involved that Arnotts will eventually only occupy the bottom left hand corner of that picture. That’s not been confirmed by the principles however.
Agreed about what you say about capturing the footfall of eastern O’Connell Street before it reaches Henry St, but to make a right turn where Princes St ends below as you seem to suggest (may be wrong), is simply not possible given the fine terrace of protected buildings that would have to be swept away in part to allow the new street to break through:
..unless of course Arnotts propose demolition regardless…
Alternatively, emerging through the 60s frontage on Henry St still brings the pedestrian out opposite the main doors of Roches, so that’s still an option.
Dunnes Stores would not be pleased with that proposal though, with the potential for this new street to cut the footfall of eastern Henry St substantially, right outside their massive new store. Suppose it’s only a 30 second back-track though.Don’t think so – it has a nasty pinky red dirty brick, whereas that orangey brickwork and detailing almost looks Victorian…
South Great George’s St perhaps? That cornice is tricky.E is the entrance to the Seamen’s Institute on Eden Quay.
D is a fantastic one Morlan – deceptive in its impression of size.
I’d recognise that dodgy floodlight anywhere :). Won’t give it away, other than it’s a view from a certain car park…@ctesiphon wrote:
We’ll try, but the challenge is to get ones that’ll stump you in particular- might have to initiate a rule that you’re not allowed guess until someone else has tried first!.
Quite the opposite in fact – think I’ve proved to be quite useless at this game, hence my staying firmly behind the scenes of late 😀
I too was most impressed by the new galleries – though one point about circulation is that you don’t know whether to avail of the link from the existing right-hand ante-room of one of the old gallery rooms to the extension, or continue on in the traditional fashion to the far end of the old galleries and up through Bacon etc. Though in any event, there is still only one entrance to the extension so it’s easy enough.
There’s a fantastic string installation at the moment that I’d imagine some Archiseek engineers would like to have a gawp at 🙂 – very accurately executed if you look closely. The current-day artists’ work outside this room is equally stunning.
The stairwell is pretty simple: fresh, crisp, white. Just pleasant, nothing to write home about.The older galleries have also had a nice lick of paint, with the entrance hall being especially nice. But massively scarred by the most astonishingly bad conservation practice – giant garish white PVC security windows with big moulded plastic handles adorn the inside of the sashes of the main hall! What the heck were they thinking? 😮
The views of the Square from the extension were rather disappointing – I expected to be a bit higher up.
You’re also right up aginst the Ballroom wall, so that blocks out a chunk of the city too.
