GrahamH
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@Thomond Park wrote:
and certainly never used gaudy and garish materials that scream attention
Meet Jeremy Irons:
He might just want to correct you on that one.
An interesting idea – would the GAA want to play away though?
Saw the other week the Ladies final in Croke Park had but a scattering of people on the lower tiers – then again they wouldn’t want to host a final at least anywhere else which is understandable…Just on a point mentioned on the Aer Lingus HQ thread by murphaph – what is to happen to the (surely this time ;)) fondly held tudor-syled house nestling in the corner of the ground? Yet another presumably protected house getting in the way. It’ll have to be swept away outright, but I wonder if there are plans to ‘keep’ it for use elsewhere?
Well judging by the amount of people now standing at bus stops on the street hopefully so 😉
When you look at O’Rourke’s unified terrace of Upper O’Connell Street, it will come as no surprise that there was strong legislative clout behind it to get it to look as it does.
Similar to an Act that was introduced post-1916, the ‘Dublin Reconstruction (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1924′ makes for a fascinating read. In the days long before planning permissions this was quite an ambitious Act, introduced with the aim of giving Dublin Corporation powers to rebuild Upper O’Connell St after the Civil War (what is described as ‘recent disturbances’ :)) in a coherent fashion, essentially according to the City Architect’s own vision and taste.
It’s available in its entirety online on the Statute Book’s website , but a couple of key design extracts include:
“Where…the Corporation require to purchase land…for the purpose of widening, opening, enlarging, extending or otherwise improving streets in the City of Dublin in connection with the reconstruction of areas, streets, houses or buildings destroyed or damaged in the course of the recent disturbances, they may be authorised to purchase the land compulsorily by means of an order submitted to the Minister.â€
“If in the opinion of the Corporation and the Minister the site or sites of one or more buildings which were destroyed in the recent disturbances is or are, by reason of narrowness of frontage or inconvenient arrangement, incapable of being built upon so as to harmonise with the general scheme for the reconstruction of the area, the Corporation may be authorised to purchase such site or sites compulsorily…â€
Most importantly for the City Architect Horace O’Rourke, and what led to the palatial façades we have today:
“If it appears to the city architect, having regard to the nature and situation of the site of the proposed new building, or of the building proposed to be restored or altered, or the external design of any buildings erected or in the course of erection in the neighbourhood of that site, that the character of the proposed new building, restoration, or alteration is such as would be injurious to the amenity of the street which the front of the proposed new building or the building proposed to be restored or altered faces, whether on account of the proposed external design, the proposed line of frontage, or the materials proposed to be used in the external walls facing that street or in any portion of the building which will be visible from that street, he may require such reasonable alterations to be made as respects the design, line of frontage, and materials as he thinks proper, and may require the plans, sections and elevations to be amended accordingly.â€
Compensation to building owners was paid directly to them by the Minister for Finance with funds allocated by the Oireachtas via the ‘Damage to Property (Compensation) Act, 1923’. From what I can gather Dublin Corporation provided mortgages to some owners who wished to avail of one to reconstruct their buildings which was also sufficient to cover legal bills etc, and this was then paid back by the owner presumably using the State compensation funds that were perhaps issued upon completion?
It’s fascinating to note how the street was literally frozen in time by the authorities:
“No… building or house destroyed, nor any such building or house when rebuilt, shall be liable to be valued under the Irish Valuation Acts at a sum larger than the valuation in force on the first day of April, 1922, in any valuation coming into force before the thirty-first day of March, 1930.â€
“No building or house destroyed, nor the land on which the same stood, shall be assessed or liable to any local rate before the 31st day of March, 1926, except such rates as shall be imposed upon temporary buildings…â€
“In the case of any public-house, hotel, or other licensed premises in the City of Dublin, which have been destroyed or damaged in the recent disturbances, and in which business has in consequence been suspended during the period of rebuilding or restoration, the licence…shall be deemed to continue in force up to the time of the completion of such rebuilding or restoration…â€
Also an interesting little sign of the times:
“Upper Sackville Street or Lower Sackville Street (commonly known as “Upper O’Connell Street” and “Lower O’Connell Street” respectively).†😉
In its current context I think it ‘works’ just fine, i.e. it’s pleasantly sited and does not come across as building preserved as a token piece of heritage. It has ample breathing space as it were and is frankly the first and last pleasant, if not necessarily worthy, piece of architecture you’re likely to see at Dublin Airport, assuming you don’t see the original terminal from the plane window.
It all depends on the proposed terminal and how it impacts on the house. I wouldn’t be up for its moving elsewhere because then it certainly would be a silly piece of heritagism – might as well be another cardboard-cut out thrown up along with all the other 80s Christmas decorations.
The fact that it is standing intact on its original site is what makes it interesting, not so much the architecture (aside from those magnificent 15-light sashes of course – ah yes, the real reason’s coming out now :)).
Perhaps that is suggestive of an aim to preserve the park as is.
I remember an interview with City Manager John Fitzgerald I think, who pointed to the fact that the park itself needs little work, but rather the approaches to it and how it integrates with the rest of the city could do with some attention – and that the Gardens are somewhat detached and forgotton about out there on their own.There was also an article in the Sunday Times a while back which featured some sort of innovative ‘lighting wall’, the first of its kind in Ireland that would dramatically highlight the boundary of what I think was the Memorial Gardens from the road.
Open to correction on that, not least as there’s no mention of it on the above link…Interesting. Will they wait till 2011 when Eircom’s lease expires before revamping I wonder?
Whatever about the design, it is in poor condition too at this stage, especially the ground floor.
There are no signs of life whatever regarding Musgraves’ plans for a supermarket here – the ground floor has been dismally derelict for a long time now, maybe even running into a few years.
Is that mansard yoke what they call a ‘penthouse suite’ nowadays? :rolleyes:
Indeed, it’s strange to walk off the bustling main streets here and suddenly find yourself on quiet little residential roads, all of warm mellowed brick and little green lampposts 🙂
That looks like part of a railway bridge tacked on to that shop! The owner would probably have a great story of intrigue and scandal to tell about it if you asked nicely Punchbowl.
Lovely terrace of shops and display windows – pity about those upstairs.Designed by Michael Collins Associates I see – wasn’t it Stack A in its decrepit days that was used in the film of the same name?!
I don’t know if this correct or not, but one gets the impression sometimes that the two options available to people building in the countryside are to build a typical red brick/garish/all round inappropriate house, or to go in the opposite direction and build something that cannot be seen by building in a fashion that is hidden from view, with grass on the roof and the use natural stone etc on exposed parts – i.e. bad architecture in the countryside is that we have all around us, and good architecture is that that cannot be seen!
Why can we not see decent architectuire in the countryside – in full view, that makes a statement, albeit sensitively sited?
This is just the impression I get at times: that acceptable architecture in rural areas must disappear into the landscape, as if there’s no other option to the self-build bungalow.Great pictures – and to think you can even see those damn motorcycles from space :rolleyes: 😀
Still have to disagree about the granite Peter; even when viewed from above it still unnecessary even if more palatable that at street level. But it is street level that counts, not the view from space, a helicopter, traffic cameras or whatever – and at street level I think it dilutes the effect that the other elements like pavements, trees and median are trying to generate.
There is a certain logic alright in addressing the Spire side of the Plaza given the prominence of it (though it could more than survive without special treatment), but certainly not the southern side.CC workers were out today digging more holes in the Plaza paving – more bus stops or signs going in it would seem…
I’d tend to agree, but surely there’s a comparitively unobtrusive way to do this if necessary.
Yes mimimun clearance sounds like that was the problem here – whether 7cm makes all the difference as adhoc describes I don’t know.
Then again think of how tight it already is on Beresford Place…It was raised on P11 – whereas I don’t have the measurements, this was noted as quite a problem for the Westland Row route, it being especially lower than other bridges or something along those lines…
Stop that nonsense!
Though yes I too noticed the new lines on College Green on my way out to Montrose this morning 🙂
And agreed, the crossing is ridiculously narrow – indeed when the lines were missing pedestrians splayed out along the entire kerb length of the Green such is the amount of people here, and yet the lines were just put back in in their original narrow format…Indeed most of the city centre has been relined and resurfaced in the past few weeks which is very welcome; Kildare St looking particularly resplendent in its new sporting stripes :), and not before time.
The GPO’s scaffolding is coming down now – the north wing is completely unveiled and the portico should be revealed by Monday, while the south wing is just being covered up now to be cleaned.
As expected there’s no major difference in the granite, though some interesting things have been revealed like how warm and rust coloured it is in places, and post-1916 inserted blocks being very apparent.Maybe it’s best not to post any wides of the building till it’s complete so here’s just a taster of the north wing :).
The portico should look fantastic when unveiled – the windows as above, newly painted an almost black shade of brown look exceptionally well.
But on the Westland Row route, while I fully welcome the idea if the ‘rumour’ proves to be correct, how is the equally difficult planning problem of the height of Pearse Station bridge to be overcome?
Is half of Westland Row to be dropped by a metre?Thanks for those pics – it’s always good to get a broader perspective on things with older but nonetheless recent photographs.
The problem is that because new pictures are by definition new, they tend to be deleted or prints disposed of once their original purpose has been fulfilled, with sometimes the only record of a place disappearing.Could not agree more about the buildings further down Georges St being knocked; their tall and elegant proportions and use of red brick helped make this street what it is. There is no question that these should have been preserved. Wish these pics hadn’t been posted now!
Whereas I’d generally be conservation-minded, I’d be in two minds though about retaining the corner building and those two-storeys in Stephen St in light of what seems to be a very striking structure going up now, along with a new street to the Castle. It’s quite innovative, and seems to breathing a new life into the street, creating an eye-catching building for the area in the process.
If the corner building could’ve been properly restored to its former what seems to be Georgian glory, things would be quite different, not least as that in itself would have been quite stunning at this junction – but if faced with the option of having the current structure going up, or a repainted mediocre rendered box on the corner, I’d have to admit to going for the former…
It’s a difficult one, not least as I’m always fascinated with the amount of similar Georgian remnants scattered all along George’s St, Aungier St and Camden St – lots of original windows peeking out from horribly rendered and uncared for facades.
If there is such a thing as ‘the greater good’, it feels like it is being achieved with this new corner street and building…
What do others think?Yes, in light of the wiping away of what very simply is York St, the very least the City Council can do is come up with an imaginative, lasting scheme. I wonder do they propose an in-house job (indeed do the CC even design their developments any more?), or are they tendering it out?
Forgot this pic from yesterday – it’s very interesting in that it shows the difficulties the Coporation faced in retaining some Georgian elements of the original terrace:
The new inner frame clearly had to be adapted to align with the Georgian fenestration. If this doesn’t show how intent they were in keeping some of the original fabric of the street, nothing does. Surely it would have been so much easier to sweep it all away, as is happening today.
Some views of the rear – an even stranger mixture of bricks here!
The only explantion I can think of for the orangey brick is that the architect decided to reflect the central Georgian part to the front by using an equally different modern brick to the rear, to contrast with the plum coloured parts either side?
The terrace apparently has the most wonderfully sunny south facing gardens:
This little leafy corner of the city behind Ardilaun House always looks so well in summer – especially with all the warm brick about the place, including Mercer House.
And the doorcases again:
Well there’s been no arguements that have spilt over onto the street yet – well not that I know of anyway 🙂
Yes there’s something very pretentious about sticking dates onto buildings, but it’s a practice that completely mellows with age.
I think it’s always acceptable on public buildings – from ceremonial State headquarters down to the local school, but private developments always seem that bit full of themselves in using the idea.
Particularly private houses, and especially those of ‘lesser’ shall we say merit, or developments like the Gardiner St boxes hinted at at by kefu.
I know of a red brick multi-gable house, PVC bells and whistles etc, that has a granite block erected high up on a gable with ‘1997’ carved into it – a significant moment in the development of mankind I’m sure :rolleyes:
You see these quite often in ‘executive’ housing estates, or one-off mega-piles.I wonder in the post 1916 and 1922 reconstructions of O’Connell St, Henry St and North Earl St were the builders conscious of how significant the Rising events would be held into the future, and that they weren’t just erecting a building or two but a ‘master plan’ that would be scrutinised in years to come? So they dated their buildings to make them stand out as being of the ‘rebuilding era’ of the early 20th century?
Yes dates must be very handy for the NIAH, esp school buildings etc. I find them so even just from a casual perspective such as the terraced housing around the Synge St area in Dublin: hmmm are they 1820s or later, or maye even a bit earlier… and then bing! a granite date block appears at the end of the terrace – 1832 – and you fool yourself: but of course it’s 1832, knew that all along, like I need a lump of stone to tell me – and then wander off in a huff 🙂
They’re also handy for setting a definite line down to which neighbouring buildings can be more accurately compared – even on O’Connell St this works quite well.
