J. Seerski
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I am very suprised that the Dunnes Stores elevation on Henry Street (not the vile elevation adjacent the ILAC) was demolished – and this passed by all of us unnoticed!!! The Terrace from Roches to O’Connell Street was a mix of 1920s uniform commercial builings. With the demolition of the Dunnes Stores facade this terrace is now unfortunately broken. Has anyone any idea what they are replacing the Henry Street elevation with? 😮
And may I ask how many transport plans have been made in the past five years…..probably 10…..20….maybe even 50 plans have been published. Perhaps they should open up a library for them all…
I was struck by a little browsing today in Easons – I came across a picture book about Dublin’s cinemas, and I have to say the loss of so many buildings and fine interiors is quite a shame – The National Wax Museum building (c1967) was a cinema both before the re-cladding and after – they have a photo of it in that book as well as the old cinema. It was quite stark as a cinema.
Aswell as this, there were phenomenal shots of the interior of the Savoy,Metropole, Theatre Royal and Carlton – I was shocked to learn that the Savoy once had an enormouse 2,900 seat auditorium – it was lavishly decorated. Similar auditoriums existed in the Metropole, Carlton and Theatre Royal.
The exteriors of the original Savoy were quite dignified and restrained, and if there was ever a case for re-instatement, this would be one of them. The canopy was well finished with urns and other Egyptian fanciful decoration.
Have to say seeing the Wax Monstrosity as it was orignially intended – a new cinema – was not too bad.
I think the problem is ideological – there is a body of opinion in the church that says that a church is not a museum but a living building that should be changed as they please according to their liturgical requirements. Though Im puzzeled as to why churches on mainland Europe and even in Britain retain pre-vatican two layout without much difficulty. It seems over here the churches are gutted just to prove a point.
Was in Iona Church (St Columba’s – a fine celtic revival church) on Sunday and I was amazed how it retained its pulpit and much of its altar railing was untouched. It seems this place was luckily overlooked when churches elsewhere were gutted.
WILL NEVER HAPPEN,
Just back from Athens. Filthy city, poor design and planning but its metro is sparkling. Until a coherent metro plan (as in comprehensive) is finalised for Dublin then all this nonsense by Aer Lingus and others is just that – NONSENSE.
Consider the images of the Luas that were placed along ads for Swords houses etc etc – no one should promote such stuff until its actually finalised.
It still baffles me why the Broadstone re-opening is excluded from the Airport/Metro/General transport plan for Dublin.
I would say its a fair guess that there have been at least five official launches of ‘final’ plans for a Metro for Dublin – when will something concrete be produced rather than more launches of plans… its boring and somewhat irritating.It is incredible that a rail route to Navan is not seriously considered in the transport plan for this area. Considering the rail alignment is still intact between Navan and Broadstone, overlooking this and going ahead with the M3 puts into sharper focus the priority the motor car gets over public transport under the present government. Rebuilding the railway would involve no land purchasing and little extra planning as opposed to the monstrous proposed M3. There is no need to dwell on the great advantages of the railways over car congestion…..
Would this evenings crash be related to the fact that the road and path surface camoflage each other, thus making the definition of pedestrian and vehicular very hazy (with reference to the GPO Plaza)?
I am supised that, on a street where the average mph would be at best 5mph due to the traffic volumes, that a crash would happen at all. Really the Council should get rid of all traffic off this stretch completely – it is not impossible by any standards. When (if) the Macken Street bridge is completed, the council should consider, as a start, diverting all traffic away from the part of O’Connell street from Abbey Street to Cathedral Street.
The new lighting of O’Connell Street is rubbish, not individual to the location whatsoever- I’ve seen these lamps dotted around the city at new developments – debunking any idea that these lamps were created just for the O’Connell Street project. It has a very temporary feel – I wouldn’t be suprised if it is replaced again in 10 years.
This is a most important building – it appears on Malton’s view of Capel Street Bridge, when the street was the most fashionable commercial street in the city.
This building could in fact be even older – it may date back to the fifties – The road widening demolitions date back to the 1940s and seeing the state of the buildings it may well be older than you may think – it was in very very poor condition in the 1980s when I used to pass the building on the way to town. It is a very peculiar set of buildings indeed.
yeuch!!!!!!
http://www.design-unlimited.ie/ormond_quay_hotel.htmlsympathetic my ….
Couldn’t put it better myself. It would be, in the longer term, in Dublin’s (and the developer’s) interests to preserve it.
Bewleys was preserved (no architectural comparison whatsoever) due to the public outcry, inspite of the owners being perfectly entitled to do what they liked with the building (in terms of usage).
The first I heard of this demolition was when it was granted permission – An Taisce appealed it, and lost. Nonetheless, I am still hoping some sort of awareness may change the developers mind – it would be a tragic loss to the streetscape and to the quays as a whole. It would appear this development is related to tax breaks for the hotel sector which expired on December 31- development for development’s sake really…
If I had known of the demolition naturally enough I would have objected. This is about saving a part of Dublin’s quays which is reasonably coherent – think of it this way – it has almost the impact as the demolition of the Fitzwilliam Street terrace for ESB offices, something which architects and conservationists lament to this day…
I hope your point isn’t to poke out the fact that I am only campaigning now – I was only aware of this development AFTER it passed An Bord Pleanala – which can happen, many awful planning ideas only come to general public knowledge only after the decision is made. The decision was wrong and EVEN planning bodies do make mistakes. I am hoping that public pressure would make the developers realise they are demolishing something that is of commercial and historical/architectural value to the city.
Hi all, I never participate in architectural wars, but in this case I think a campaign is warranted.
For those not in the know, the Ormond (in Dublin city centre) is due for demolition. An unremarkable building many would say, but its understated nature lends to the build up to arguably the greatest vista in the city (the dome of the fourcourts towering above the city terraces). Also, the building, while ostensibly Georgian/Victorian from the outside, may date back to the late 1600s, as most of the terrace of Ormond Quay was constructed at that time.
It holds an important place in Dublin’s social and literary history. Apart from its place as the setting for ‘The Sirens’ in Joyce’s Dubliners, it was the location for many a controversial, often significant political rallies from the Larkin lock-out of 1914 to blueshirt rallies in the early thirties.
It is an inoffensive, unpretensious building, inspite of inappropriate changes to fenestration, it stll maintains a calming presence on the quays.
What is proposed for its replcement is a typically bland ‘inn’ type motel structure, wholly inappropriate for such a critical location on the quays. All the more worrying is that this has gotten planning permission and thus the future of the Ormond looks bleak. Who knows when the buldozers will move in….
However, inspite of the go-ahead for demolition, there is still time for the owners to re-consider. They will not only be removing forever part of an unassuming terrace leading up to the glorious Four Courts, but eradicating a hotel of considerable heritage value, something that any new construction cannot hope to have. Hospitality dervives from traditions, and with the smashing of the Ormond, yet another tradition is undermined.
In saving this building the owners could create a spectacular hotel within the confines of a deliberately modest bulding. In replacing it, they will add yet another monotonous, inappropriate, and shallow complex onto the historic quays, which, in spite of decades of conservation pleas, is continuing to be chipped away till there will be little authentic remaining.
If anyone would like to help me in getting a campaign going on this please send me a private message onsite. I will be lobbying as much as I can on my own, but time is of the essence. This building is vital to the future coherence of the quayside – its demise would be a tragic loss. Any help would be appreciated.John
80 – 100 million for just more than one kilometre of light rail…… what a joke. I’ll bet the proposals just mention that they
line will stop beside the other line rather than a straight through link that could carry passengers from Sandyford to Heuston etc.
Given the sorry history of cost over-runs on this project I wouldn’t consider this proposal from that RPA technocracy. Why is an alternative route – via Merrion Square, Matt Talbot bridge not cnsidered?Either way expect it to be completed at 2020, costing 1,500,000,000 excluding VAT and other costs!
And also, whatever happened the northside line…..? A huge gap in our public transport.
The Inns Quay – Ormond Quay section certainly seem to be subject to major changes if the Ormond Hotel and this new second hotel development go ahead.
The Ormond replacement will alter the view of the terrace dramatically, and if the other seven storey goes ahead it will diminish the ‘wow’ factor the courts impress on the viewer.
From an economic point of view, does no one realise that the hotel sector is going through particularly difficult trading conditions at the moment? The sheer quantity of rooms now available and also in the pipeline is impacting on occupancy rates, and thus on profitability. While the jurys closure of two hotels in Ballsbridge is an unique case in terms of land values, they were trading poorly in any case and should act as a warning to those thinking of building hotels in an already crowded market.
Apart from the seven storey hotel proposed, hopefully the owners of the Ormond will realise the folly of destroying a hotel of heritage in favour of bland bland bland yellow pack architecture. There is still time for the owners to prevent a major mistake of destroying the Ormond. I am still suprised the demolition was allowed through by the Council and ABP. The worst heritage decision in over a decade.
