GrahamH
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Likewise here you can see how the architect was very conscious of the Georgian character of the street, choosing to respect the varying parapet heights and plot widths that make up Georgian Dublin rather than build a faceless intimidating block:
All in all, I think it is a great shame to see a unique Dublin streetscape – which is what it is, not just a building – disappearing, only to be replaced with more flats.
Even if the terrace contained no 18th century elements, it would still be worthy of note as a very rare example of neo-Georgian in Ireland. The fact that it was included in the architectural publication from the 1950s Paul mentions, however bizarre it may be, I think highlights the significance in which the design chosen was held at the time.It not only seems to have been built on the back of the fashion of 10-15 years previous in the UK, but also perhaps the beginning of Dublin opening its eyes and appreciating its Georgian heritage. It was the 1930s when this began to happen on a number of levels, including Constantia Maxwell’s unusually glowing publication about Georgian Dublin, printed and reprinted in the 1930s, 40s and 50s. The fact that the Corporation chose to rebuild the terrace in a Georgian fashion, even ulitising many original elements is nothing short of incredible! Surely it would have been so much easier to sweep it all away and build a modern apartment block of concrete and render with steel windows?
In the context of the exclusively Georgian St Stephen’s Green around the corner, it seems they deliberately chose the right option. In the 1940s, Dublin Corportation chose to respect Georgian heritage, and not to ‘cleanse’ the area, and yet in 2005 that is exactly what the City Council are doing!
This is a streetscape that can be read, a terrace that tells a story through its materials and design. To sweep it all away for the sake of efficiency is to wipe away the past, the very history of this area.
There’s little doubt that the flats at the top end are not going to last much longer either. So instead of having contemporary apartments at the top end and the prototype, the originals that gave the area its famous name in the city, at the bottom, there will be modern development lining the whole street, and not a trace of its past left. That is a crying shame.
Well would you want to live in them you could ask – I’d gladly live in this refurbished terrace.By all accounts gut the interiors, smash them in fact, but the facades could and should have been retained.
The easy option was taken.Goodbye York Street 🙁
Here’s some detail of the original doorcases. An IT article I’ve just found says the terrace dates to 1750 so that definitely explains these corbelled doors:
And some elegantly simple granite moulding round the edges:
And here’s a column and plinth from the seemingly concrete doorcases from the 40s:
The official said that all of the 8 doorcases will be stored and probably used in another scheme rather than the York St development which is a shame – they ought to stay where they belong (whatever about on their original façade 😡 )
He was also keen to point out that ‘our architecture people’ have passed the scheme off as not being of architectural merit, and that the scheme dates from the 1940s and is not Georgian. He knew quite a lot about it when he got going – that the railing plinths are reconstituted stone rather than natural stone (that explains the non-concrete appearance anyway :)):
…and that some of the doorcases were older than others, though did seem reluctant to admit this.
Here’s the very extensive amount of what can only be Georgian brickwork in the central part of the terrace, with only the top floor rebuilt in plum brick:
The difference is clear:
…and is especially evident in this picture where even an original doorcase is sited on the old brick (though you can see it was placed here in the reconstruction given the modern brick around the pediment):
You can as good as see the original townhouse!
Well here are a few more pics of the terrace. A City Council official who happened to be on the street when I was there very kindly opened up to let me have a look inside (hope I don’t get him into trouble now :))
The interior as you might expect is very dismal indeed. The one/two houses closest to the Green are quite literally falling part internally; parts of the ceilings have collapsed and there is water pouring through the roof down through the floors below. It seems squatters got in here at some stage too.
The condition of the interiors improves the further up the street you go.The hallways are fitted out 1940s style, with a rounded dado rail embedded in the plaster about halfway up the walls. This is quite literally it decoration-wise – there is nothing to be damaged, broken or stolen from the place, with bare walls, seemingly bare concrete floors and staircases, and basic lighting facilities.
As you might imagine it was pitch black for the most part inside – here’s a main stairwell:
The window up on the half landing there lets in very little light – this is because it is in the very heart of the building. It seems the terrace was constructed with narrow light wells running vertically through the building between each ‘house’. You can see one exposed at the very end of the terrace here:
Presumably in a health-obsessed age these were installed to also provide ventilation for bathrooms and bedrooms in the centre of the building – something of a hangover from the Victorians.
Here is where the ‘York St Fire’ happened about 4 years ago, caused by a lighted candle. This is presumably when plans got underway for the terrace’s demolition.
The apartment was scorched out of it, and obviously hasn’t been touched since. Nice 1940s door there with original Bakelite black handle. Lots of these about.
And the inside of one of the 18th century doorcases:
It’s interesting to see that the fanlights are still serving the function intended 250 years ago, lighting the hallways. They’re the only source of natural light.
Another interior detail in all hallways and flats is that shudder-inducing 1940s institutional coving 🙂 – all smothered in obligatory gloss paint:
Most flats have a picture rail so it seems to have been a standard fitting.
The fundamental issue that caused the CC to propose demolition according to the man today is fire safety; the Fire Officer was not at all happy with the security of the building, as was proven on the day of the fire. Given the flat was right next to the bottom of a stairs, in order to get out it seems everyone above would have had to pass by that very flaming flat. Coupled with dodgy fire exits that the residents have been giving out about for a long time, it is no wonder the City Council want to see the back of it.
The building has no central heating – all flats are heated by traditional hearths (which makes fire safety a million times worse again), there is no insulation – heat or sound, and the communal areas are similar to that of a tenement block in Moscow.
Also as can be seen from outside, all electrics in the various flats are exposed in conduiting running up the walls to a central box that runs the length of each room.
Even the ceiling pendant wiring is exposed!
This all perhaps suggests that the entire building is a bomb-proof solid concrete frame just like the Corporation housing then going up in the new suburbs, hence all services had to be surface mounted.
Back outside again, you can see work has been underway in removing all the sashes to the York St façade:
How sad. They’re due to be knocked in only three weeks time. I should have objected at the time to the delisting of the doorcases, so really don’t have a leg to stand on in that respect, but it really is a pity to see this unique streetscape disappearing.
Agreed with Frank – those by now infamous first buildings on the street have to be amongst the worst in the city.
They’re somewhat unique all the same in that they are really the only buildings in Dublin one could most closely describe as Brutalist. Despite all the rubbish thrown up in Dublin in the 60s and 70s, very little of it if any was really in the Brutalist idiom – even Hawkins House doesn’t really fit into the category, it’s just a cheap building that happens to made of concrete 🙂The George’s St concrete ‘terrace’ really forces itself into its environs quite unlike any other building in Dublin. And again, unlike most of the stuff built in city at the time, it’s a building that looks like it has come directly from a British city – you can really imagine it sitting in Coventry or Glasgow.
Not that I’m advocating its protection or anything…:)That’s interesting what you say notjim about the new street, a nice idea – so that’s what the curved facade is for.
A pity about the Victorians disappearing as you describe ctesiphon; I thought the street was littered with stuff similar to the concrete blocks further down, so clearly not.The red brick of this street is a really lovely feature – the building directly across the road from the new curved building being a very fine example with really deep window reveals and rounded brickwork. It went to auction a few months ago…
So is Dunnes opening a megastore in these new buildings in the pics?
Yes but from earlier again – i.e. were they originally 18th century townhouses and later converted to tenements and then in c1950 rebuilt as what exists today – or were they built in the 18th century/early 19th as purpose built tenements or apartments then?
As you noted before, it goes to show what a buzzing place Dublin was in the 50s for these to be included 🙂
What was on the c1970 flats’ sites on both sides before they were built? And if tenements, of what kind?
Is it proposed to demolish these PVC-clad monsters?Sorry for the res of these pics below, they’re from about a year ago.
It seems these simple but beautifully carved granite doorcases with corbels are original; they are in the fashion of the 1750s-60s but could be later given their secondary location:
By contrast these (nonetheless elegant) doorcases appear to date from the terrace’s reconstruction in the 1940s, and seem to be cast in concrete of all materials, with very light, probably unintentional fluting to the columns due to the way they were cast:
From a few steps back they look very convincing, the only giveaway being the ill-proportioned bases of the columns 🙂
I think there’s four of both types of doorcase in the terrace.The plinths of the railings appear to be granite rather than concrete, and could concievably be original, though the railings are clearly modern.
There’s lots of old brickwork surviving in the facade too – hope to get some better pics tomorrow. It’s interesting to see how the architect was mindful of the original brick in using a plum-coloured variety to York St, while to the rear the terrace is clad in the standard of the era – that glossy, orangey 1940s-early 50s brick.
Does anyone know if these houses were originally built as fashionable townhouses, or were they always apartments of some kind?
How can you tell a window has only had its glazing bars removed? I’ve always just gone on the lack of horns on what are otherwise modern Victorian sheet windows. Is there any other way of knowing – unusually slender sash frames holding sheet windows can give a clue at times…
Some people take that one step too far though – we’ve all come across the eh ‘irritable’ ones who slam the button in about 20 times thinking it’ll change the lights faster.
In fact, the amount of people who do this is quite bizarre…To move back north of the Liffey again :), a detail that always seems to fascinate people on buildings is a date inscription, whether it be in masonry, timber, terracotta, Coade stone, metal or whatever.
Why there was a particular fashion for this practice in the early 20th century I’m not sure – does anyone know? Was it the dawn of the new century that caused people to think more about space and time? Was it the resurgence in classicism that encouraged people to almost point out that ‘this time round’ the neoclassical architecture was of the 20th century and not the 18th, or 14th or whatever?
There’s lots and lots of examples of completion dates adorning facades around Dublin, especially from 1910-1930. O’Connell St is particularly rich of course : )
Saying that, one may be surprised at how few there are given the level of rebuilding that took place, and a (perhaps imaginary?) public perception of there being lots of such interesting features on the street given how historic a place it is.Anyway, there’s six dates in total on the street, with a seventh not relevant to the practice of ‘completion dating’ as it were. Some we’ve seen before…
First up, and perhaps most famous of all is Eason’s 1919 date, beautifully executed on a bronze plaque with copper plated? lettering. A lovely piece:
Presumably this is original, certainly the limestone arch is. I’ve been searching about for an older image of the plaque but to no avail.
Directly across the road and Unity Building (Sony Centre) has a most obscure date, one you’d barely even notice – 1918 AD and the name of the building executed in crisp limestone, along with some intricate elegant carvings:
Probably the first building to be reconstructed following 1916, it was a remarkably fast build. And by no means a rushed job either, it being one of the finest buildings on the street.
The crude floodlight is unfortunate, though at least its weathering has blended it in!A little further up on the same side, and another date you’d pass by in a second – a quite faint 1920 AD inscription on a raised circular granite plaque above Ann Summers. Some fine detailing here:
Across the road and further up on Upper O’Cll St is the old Revenue? building next to the Garda Station. Up at the very top on a sharp angular pediment is yet another date. The least noticeable of all on the street, it’s really only visible to those who are crawling the thoroughfare with a toothcomb 😮 *whistles looking the other way*
1925 AD, this building was built following the 1922 destruction, along with its two other neighbours (have some more detail on these buildings soon).
Almost across the road, the chunky corner building featured previously has its date emblazoned across the upper façade along with fancy text – how very pompous : )
Similar to the McDonald’s Building on Grafton St, the owners were clearly at pains to point out how established they were, despite the 1922 destruction.
And finally, zipping way down to the bottom again, another highly elaborate carving that is very prominent yet at the same time is well hidden is the 1923 completion date of the splendid Ulster Bank:
It’s most unusual – almost gothic in character – executed in a flamboyant rococo/baroque style, which contrasts with the otherwise rigidly neoclassical architecture of the building.
As with all of the dates, there’s no wide shots going up to show this is on the building, as it’s more fun to find them for yourself : )
We all probably know most of them, but some are quite obscure.And just to prove the 1923 date is correct, here’s the domeless Bank just about to be topped out in November of 1922!
Also as an aside here’s a date on the corner of Hammam Buildings facing Cathedral St, commemorating Cathal Brugha:
Think I read last week that the apartment on sale in the building is the most expensive on the market in Ireland.
Is it a direct write-off against profits or is it more ‘subtle’ than that? Either way, yes the tax payer is paying for this
Regarding the collection itself, one would wonder if DKIT (now owners of the building) have offered to purchase the tapestry in particular, given its prominence in the building over the years and the contribution it makes to the space; it has become part of the insititution that is the Carroll’s complex.
I was wondering the very point you make ctesiphon about protection being offered to art in certain circumstances; whilst I doubt the more ‘important’ or prominent pieces in the building are protected as part of the structure’s overall PS status, the iconic sculpture to the front probably is.
Saying that, there is no specific mention of it in the RPS.
It is ironic in a way that one of the best places or contexts in which to view the collection is the very location they are being removed from – the Carroll’s factory, notably the Táin tapestry which is located if I recall in the cavernous entrance hall, suspended on a striking ‘holed’ blockwork wall similar to parts of the side elevation of the Wax Museum (!).
There were other pieces in the hall too, and presumably elsewhere in management quarters. It’s likely some of it was moved from Grand Parade out to Sandyford Industrial Estate when HQ moved out there.
Somehow, I doubt the setting had quite the same impact.@Richards wrote:
this facilates traffic from St Stephens Green thru to Merrion Row.
They do give this impression alright, but it is not the case – these lights have always been like this, long before the Green scheme ever came into operation.
STW’s is a surprisingly striking structure. It’s difficult to see how judges can fairly appraise this in the context of the other conventional entries.
I like Castle St in how it so effortlessly reinforces the streetscape, both in design and material with that lovely plum brick, though fully agreed about the ‘feature’ window – you can just see De&M standing on the street as it went up and muttering ‘uh oh…’ – a token feature, it just doesn’t hang with the rest of the building.
Fingal seems a likely winner – in terms of quality, scale, ‘civic value’, and being amongst the first of now many quality county HQs going up about the place.
Indeed – though worse I think is the chunky modern mouldings, especially if they stand proud of the glazing bar itself as in this case.
I can vouch for how horrible those PVCs look in number 47 having looked on in horror seeing them for the first time a few months ago not having been in the area for a while. What made it so bad until right now was that it wasn’t clear if they replaced original sashes as I couldn’t remember! I’ve been searching for an older photo since!
So at least your pictures Devin are something of a ‘relief’, though clearly not in relation to the clumsy repros, nor the PVCs that have gone in, regardless of what was there before.Glad to hear an official complaint has been made.
Just on the idea of the reinsertion of sashes in the No 47 yellow house, even if done correctly which design would you go for? Given the pane formation of the aluminiums, it is highly likely this house had two-over-twos installed in the early 1860s. So which would you put back in upon replacement: c1820s Georgians, or Victorian two-over-twos?
I’m glad others have noted the Leinster House lights – they never fail to raise a cynical eyebrow every time one uses them.
There is no question that these are sequenced in the fashion they are for no other reason other than they’re outside the seat of Government – heaven forbid a TD or Senator should have to wait more than 10 seconds to nip across the road to RTÉ’s offices on the corner there (which incidently has recently had delightful mirror glass installed in its sashes :rolleyes: ).
The CC fall on their knees round here in an effort to make a good impression – especially on Merrion St.The only other lights in the entire city that I know of to be as responsive or even more so than these are those outside the Carmelite Church on Aungier St; they always change instantly to facilitate the older people here – and hence everyone else 🙂
Well it certainly looks like it 🙂
Scott is a valiantly insightful, yet incorrect attempt – next please!
Architectural historian indeed… 😀Very close ctesiphon, but it was in fact the Main Man himself:
But the apartments built further down have also established the expansive width of the street; were you to build an extended corner would you not end up with a narrow stretch, then a wide almost plaza-like space in the middle outside the 70s flats, then a narrow stretch again down at the Liffey?
Agreed about the lack of traffic though, it’s almost eerie – you can easily stroll from one carriageway to the other. What has caused this – was it not much busier 5-10 years ago?
The slender metal light switches built into the door frames of all interior doors is a striking little feature – I presume these are protected as part of the Grade II listing…
One example that often comes to mind when modernist architecture or high-rise is singled out as the cause of social ills is the 12 storey Ardoyne House in Ballsbridge built in the 1960s.
If it was in Ballymun it’d be knocked in the morning, yet despite if being ‘high-rise’ and distinctively crude in design, it is one of the most supposedly exclusive addresses in the capital.It comes across as more than just a little bizarre that those two 10ish storey ‘gateway’ buildings are going up in Ballymun as residential accommodation, while about 10 15 storey towers are coming down.
Is it another case of new and shiny coming to the rescue?Ballymun was equally new and shiny in 1969.
Who said drivers aren’t antagonistic towards cyclists? 🙂
There’s bad eggs burge eye. There’d be more motorist bad eggs too were it not for the contraints put on that mode of transport.
But yes you do always encounter poor cyclists – only the other day walking through the Coombe on a pavement a cyclist lashed past causing me to stop in fear of him crashing into me. It’s not this that was irritating, but rather there as a brand spanking new wide cycle lane running alongside the kerb! AND the road was empty! :rolleyes:
