James
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Actually – nowhere does the legislation (or for that matter An Taisce) oppose the construction of new housing on farm land for the children of farmers. Nor is the principle of cluster village type housing opposed. Scratch the surface of this debate and you find that it is very much about an Euro 800M per annum indrustry which is entirely speculative in nature.
One other matter in relation to the rural urban divide and housing – The One Off Housing Lobby regularly make the ‘My Land and its my right to do what I want with it’ argument – most recently by Tom Parlon when it was tentatively suggested that a financial cap on development sites might stabilise house prices.
These people seem to forget that the entire nation urban and rural has a stake in most of this land, the majority of Irish farms were formed through the re-distribution of large estates compulsorily purchased by the Land Commission in the 20’3 and 30’s .This was paid for by the Irish taxpayer – so look at it this way land rezoned or developed for profit which was formerly agricultural is achieving that profit / benefit at the expense of the entire state – not to mention the social and physical cost of servicing one offs.
Anyway sorry about the rant – I’m preaching to the converted here.
I remember while project architect 12 years ago on a diplomatic building working in imperial on autocad. No problems with dimensioning or component sizing, however, although ‘anthropometrically based the use of imperial was actually a disadvantage, windows were English, Stone was Norwegian, Pakistani and German, WC fittings Italian, and steel from Japan!!. Not to mention the French Contractor, British Client, and Middle Eastern Location.
Ultimately the use of imperial was meaningless (unlesswe had decided to restrict ourselves to American overpriced underspecified systems). We ended up converting metric sizings to Imperial and back again!.
CAD had nor problems handling it, the design team was another matter.
As for the chippies and craftsmen, they were all pakistani and were more attuned to the Arabic decimal system than our old 60ths based Imperial system ,(the concept of zero was ‘invented’ / discovered in India around the 16thy century and the decimal system (if not metric) was consequently well engrained in the popular consciousness.
Interesting experience though, by the way we invoiced in decimal pounds not LSD!!, so I’m not sure what the logic of using imperial was (predated my involvement).
Dunno that I agree about that ,the older I get the more time I seem to spend designing and the less on philosophizing. (not that anything I do is particularly brilliant), still although I was being somewhat facetious, I find the arcane language and poncey exclusionary tone of most of the writing referred to quite irritating. If for example writing about architecture is a developmental and experimental thing then surely the first rule should be Clarity, have a look at teh following drivel:
“Architecture is communication from the body of the architect directly to the body of the person who encounters the work.” So writes Juhani Pallasmaa in The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses
What does that mean? – everything and nothing, depending on how you are prepared to read it, now aside from the pedantic fact that I was taught that architecture is about providing shelter, I find the whole thing somewhat headache inducing.
As to opportunitiies for experimentation – there are a lot of competitions out there kiddies, you might not win but they at least will enable you to properly test out your ideas.
Last point (and apologies for sounding like the club Drone), the last person I saw ‘let go’ in an architectural practise was a lovely clever guy who would spend all day reading and spouting this stuff, would devote enormous amounts of energy to theories closer to the Cabala than to building but could’nt be trusted to draw a survey out accurately, the most recent employee I’ve appointed is a clever gauche 23 year old who could’nt explain her thesis (excellent by the way and honours) without looking embarassed , but drew and designed like and angel – now which of these two do you think I prize more as an architect.
Alan, my point was fairly Simple, (too simple?)the proposed development has a number of problems in relation to the urban qualities of the existing building.
As for its significance or otherwise, I know Sligo fairly well and personally would be concerned that most of the new regeneration work done has been pretty much anti contextual with a strong bias towards demolition and consequently a tendancy towards ‘anywhere’ architecture.
I’m delighted that the penny dropped as to which Scarpa I was talking about (the other one sells shoes I think – unless you’re talking about the glass designer or manufacturer).
Just because you can’t find any merit yourself in the existing house does’nt mean its not there, 1800’s – 1830’s vernacular architecture is becoming quite rare in this country generally and in the larger planned towns in particular mostly as a result of intrusive comercial re-development – perhaps a look at Niall McCullogh’s ‘Lost Tradition’ might jog the grey cells some what.
My main point was though that it might prove far more interesting to try to work with the existing fabric rather than against it.
I really think that as architects we have to grow up a lilttle and be perhaps a little less precious about superimposing our own visions on the existing urban landscape.
I remember looking at my own rather pedestrian 18th century house when a bought it and thinking ‘what a mess’, it took a year or two of living there to realise that in its own ‘umble’ way it was quite a perfect thing and that really I should shelve all of my proposed ‘interventions’ ‘selective demolitions’ and ‘enhancements’, in honesty it was a better piece of architecture than I could produce. The point is – things survive for a reason, sometimes its accidental but more often than not there is an intrinsic quality (if only structural) which stretches out a buildings life.
As to Scarpa, don’t forget that for every castelvecchio there were myriad small interventions in humbler buildings, for me thats real ‘quality architecture’.
I’d still like to have a response to my specific criticisms.
PS: I don’t think of Sligo as a Cultural Backwater – but then perhaps I’m not that cultured, but like most people I would welcome cultural intervention – pray tell: What is the cultural content in teh proposed development??:confused:
Sorry I suspect I’ve given offence, i was referring to Carlo Scarpa – he seemed to make a virtue out of working with rather than against existing fabric.
As to horses and carts I don’t really get your point. If its a case of giving new architecture precedence over old well then thats one argument that would need a lot of discussion and would encompass a huge amount of ‘exclusion clauses’ my comments were simpler really – in that I don’t think the scheme as proposed is really very sensitive. That said I’d prefer to hear your views on my specific comments.
The images are very useful but I don’t think the scheme proposed convinces, theres a big break and difference in scale, a new very blank looking gable, and a lack of the symmetry whihc seems to characterise the original Teeling House.
I’d be inclined to say keep teh house and re-model it a la Scarpa.
James
I think Graham has a point.
The main argument in terms of applying a ‘familiar’ facade and urban treatment ot a street like O’Connell St is that it applies a contextual language that the street is ‘comfortable’ with.
The real challenge in doing this is do do so in such a way that the facade actually reflects the interior treatemnt (or maybe the other way around) so as to produce intelligent good quality buildings.
All this talk of style and modernism V pastiche is an architectural red herring. Lutyens only died in 1944 and right up to that date was producing work of great integrity in a numbere of historical idioms.
My own favorite architect – Oliver Hill who was one of the founders of the Mars and CIAM movements (and incidentally ws Michael Hopkins mentor during his very long career) at various times was quite happy to work in any style the client wanted just so long as he was allowed to bring it to a logical contextual conclusion – so his ‘stockbroker Tudor’ stripped classical country houses are fantastic and enjoyable pieces of work and in many ways just as inventive as his favoured Deco Moderne such as the Morecombe Hotel where he worked with Eric Gill and his best house Jolwynds (if you want to see his moderne work watch Poirot).
The point is – if you are going to do this kind of thing it should be doen well – usually its done atrociously badly by fairly talentless hacks who see it as an easy route to planning permission.
As to pastiche – well the kind of modernism that is so vaunted in Dublin is nearly 80 years old and most of it (including the Bensons National Gallery) harkens back to the 1930’s at latest, its just as prone to facadism but usually better executed.
to conclude – all architecture is pastichism because consciously or unconsciously it refers to something previously built – whether fad of the moment in last months AR or Burlingtons town house (eg: Trinity’s Provosts house and many others).
its crtazy getting hung up on ‘isms’ and ideologies in architecture and makes the whole businessfar too ‘po faced’ and exclusive.
I rather fancy the ‘accidental’ small linear park that replacedthe Broadstone link of the Royal Canal and is linked through to Blessington St Via the ‘Basin’ asmy favourite park.
Actually
Lumleys House No 12 is in prettty good state of repair he’s beenworking onit for the last twenty years so no surprises there.
Caseys, no 13 is in very good nick and 4 (Hanrattys) ispristine internally, don’t be deceived by dirty brickwork.
Ask for a tour.
Its an internal job being completed very satisfactoriy by Bernard Grimes of Dublin City Councils Architects Department.
Does anybody else find the schizophrenic nature of this building disturbing – refined elevation to the campus – sheer inaccesible almost anti urban skewed walls onto Nassau St???.
It seems to be a really decent piece of work but characterless in that it rejects the existing urban context of the street and makes no effort to present a public ‘face’ to either the axis formed by Sth Frederick St or the strip of Nassau St onto which it faces??????
[This message has been edited by James (edited 27 May 2002).]
Actually, what is interesting about this series is not what it says but how it is clear that the real issues are fluffed.
For example the main element coming across clearly is that a coherent citywide masterplan is essential to the sucessful re-shaping of the city. This is completely absent.
For example – at a Bord Pleanala Oral Hearing in relation to one of the ducklands high rise schemes the City Architect admitted that Dublin Corporation did not have a masterplan for the city and that the corporations policy in this regard was to facilitate developers.
In the same hearing one of the chief planning officers conceded that the corporation responds to applications for planning permission rather than providing any kind of framework in whic they can be carried out.
This paucity of vision is what emphasizes the quality and desirability of the Georgian City as against the thoughtless unplanned mess which is currently taking hold of Dublin. On the one hand you have a visionary, controlled and well executed masterplan, on the other a ‘first come first served’ thoughtless process best characterised by the absence of ANY kind of plan – and generally leading to a proliferation of developer led, overpriced, ugly and poorly finished ‘dogboxes’ being the dominant form of architecturla expression in this city.
Dear Chas C
Many thanks for livening up what has been a particularly dull and unenlightening discussion site.
I have particularly enjoyed the edifying spectacle of an eminent ‘Director of Projects’ such as yourself using the sledgehammer of legal threat to crack the particular nut referred to in previous correspondence.
Incidentally – before we all start reaching for our legal handbooks – on whose part do you act as Director of Projects ? secondly I trust that you have the authority necessary to make such legal threats – thirdly would you care to comment on the Sunday Times Posting of 21 April.
Finally – notwithstanding the threat of legal action with ensuing dire consequences for all concerned – perhaps you might care to advise on how exactly the comments by a clearly unqualified and unexpert person can possibly have ‘potential contractual consequences’.
Finally, perhaps you might care to comment on the issues which appear to have never been properly addressed in respect of this bridge – namely the suitability of its design in respect of its location – the degree to which the structure might be regarded as visually intrusive – blocking views to the east and west of the river – Is it true that its design supercedes one prepared by Dublin City Councils Engineers Department which recommended a flat profile which would not have had such onerous implications??.
I ask these questions merely as an inexpert person – a stranger to all matters of bridge design – who simply cannot understand why it is that the proposed bridge – given the narrow width of the river – has such an apparently elaborate and high profile – if it were possible to erect a flat bed option of minimal visual intrusion.
Yours etc….
[This message has been edited by James (edited 21 April 2002).]
The burners / standards are an architectural ‘feature’.
The square dates from 1640 although all of the original first lease buildings are long gone.
The few remaining buildings of any contextual importance remain not on the square but on north king street overlooking the north end of the square – these date from around 1730 to 1830 and really only constitute one (goodish) 1730’s house (refurcished in the 1770’s, one early house (circa 1700) with additional stories refurbished circa 1830 and two facade fragments possibly dating from around 1680.
The square would have originally been a very fashionable, expensive and desirable address, interestingly the market held on the square still survives as a (debased) monthly horse fair.
The local authority is keen to see the area gentrified hence the degree of demolition and the lack of conservation. It should be added that a number of highly ambitious modern developments are either underway or in the pipeline.
The layout of the square as shown is the result of an architectural competition won some three years ago by Mc Garry NiEanaigh – Drogheda based architects. Opinions are divided as to its efficacy – I don’t like the result myself – but it’s very popular among architects and architecture ‘groupies’ – so the verdict is pretty much in favour.
Most of the information pertaining to the actual space is available in Niall McCulloghs book ‘Dublin’ or Maurice Craigs magnum opus ‘Dublin 1600 to 1800’ (not sure of the correctness of the dates in that title).
Regards
James
[This message has been edited by James (edited 17 April 2002).]
Try Dublin City Council Conservation Officer.
The general allowance is a max of £10K for half the cost of remedial works to superstructure for either weathering or structural repair purposes- roof repairs, re-pointing, new windows, repaired windows, chimney flue lining and repairs, underpinning foundations etc.
Internal works do not qualify and you can make one application and draw one grant per year.
Bear in mind however that funds are low and are usually given to the most ‘deserving’ causes – often buildings in a very dilapidated condition and usually list one.
That said – grant aid will eventually be approved although probably not immediately.
I think you are too late to benefit for 2002 but will need to apply in 2002 for grant aid in 2003.
You will probably need to get an architects report justifying the expenditure and specifying the works and yo uwill need to have possession of a valid tax clearance certificate at time and date of draw down.
Regards
Dunno about the archaeologist or engineer!!.
It should be fairly straightforward if as you say the extension is an add-on to the existing building.
You will definitely need planning permission for any alterations to a protected structure however the local authorities are fairly sensible in relation to allowable works in this regard – the general principle being that any new works or alterations should not adversely affect the protected structure.
Again the local authorities take a fairly robust view as to the need to make existing residential protected structures ‘liveable’ and will be of assistance to you rather than obstructive.
get an architect involved – preferably one with experience in this area – the RIAI will give you a list of recommended practises.
Don’t worry about the archaeologist or engineer as its unlikey that the y are necessary as the groundworks for a new extension are not likely to exceed the existing and in any case the criteria for archaeological excavations are not pertinent to every protected structure – likewise a letter from an engineeer condemning part of a protected structure won’t be of assistance as the condemnde part might be of importance and merit retention.
Anyway – you should’nt be put off by the listing – there are benefits such as grant aid for structural restoration works eg: roofs and windows, wall pointing, re-rendering etc. and listed houses are generally considered more desirable than their modern equivalents.
finally – the building (no offence) sounds as if the listing is not that significant – most of the south city victorian terraces are protected structures – not for any particular merit in the individual buildings (unlike the Georgian town houses of the inner city)- but because of the urban context that they present – in short – it should’nt cause you too many problems provided that you have an architect with the relevant experience dealing with it.
Regards
James
PS – my own place is list one – early georgian – rare and still has’nt bee na problem in this regard so – again – don’t be put off by the listing.
[This message has been edited by James (edited 10 April 2002).]
Funny to think that we criticise (rightly I think) Georgian pastiche or fake Victoriana and yet hail as a masterpiece what is essentially a pastiche of the work of Corbusier (and not a particularly well thought out pastiche – Ronchamp meets Chandigargh meets Shodhan and gets it off with Garche!!!) I do like Benson and Forsyths work but it looks pretty dated and pointless to be re-hashing the same old motifs and ‘iconic references.
Methinks this is the Post modernism writ over!!!.
Also to be honest the building has a major flaw – it is essentially a series of retail and cafeteria spaces with a somewhat isolated series of galleries up top.
When I visited it was packed – but there was little to show of paintings. I had to re-enter (via a fairly tortuous route) the ‘old’ Galery to actually view an exhibition that had any coherence.
I’m inclined to assume that Edward is just blowing off steam – so I feel the ‘dialogue’ to date has gotten a little over personal and should be stepped down somewhat.
That said – Edward it IS difficult to se everyone who cold calls – too often (as an employer) you get caught – on the hop – running out to site or preparing for a meeting. I do believe cold calling is useful but you must have a precis and details to leave in the event that you don’t get any further than reception. Yes some practises can be very ‘stand offish’- thats life – people and standards differ from place to place – the best thing to do is get on with it.
One thing I find particularly irritating is when I do have time to talk briefly with callers such as your friend I often find that they have no information to give about themselves or work to show.
As to working for ‘Name’Architects being of assistance in getting work – I would tend to agree that this often does’nt mean much – A years experience working on tender packages for Joe Bloggs Associates is often more useful and desirable than two years spent colouring perspectives for Frank Lloyd Wright. A good name on a CV might stimulate interest but certainly won’t get you a job on its own. (Actually Genry would be a bit of a put off for me but that’s a personal prejudice)
Regards
James
