JL
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
The view down Amiens st past Busaras is interesting now Budgie Wharf is nearing completion – it looks like a morass of med rise towers
So – Hawkins house, Liffey House and the Tara St thing in addition to Georges Quay (also another lower one on the corner opposite Tara st station) – Tara St seems to be simultaneously lifting off.
As I recall the diagram in the Technical Guidance Document shows guarding to teh window at 800mm – the sill can be lower than this. The guarding is only required at upper levels.
Another alternative (if this is a new building) would be a balcony with a patio door.
Read somewhere that the Corp (now City Council, but they can’t fool us) intends to develop the fruit markets into a retail centre. In short, having spent a ton of money on a stunning refurbishment of the markets building, they’re damned if they’re going to waste it on a bunch of wholesalers trying to get by.
I think they have a Covent Garden in mind – an example of how not to if you ask me.
I think that this is the coolest part of town, with plenty of mix and mingle, and to change it to a tourist ghetto crawling with buskers and jugglers a la Temple Bar would be a pity.
Is this true, and if so, any views?
Won’t the Luas run along there? Could they have been moved for that?
I think the damage to the remaining bollards is due to corrosion of the iron chain fixings which are set into the top centre of the bollards – the metal expands as it corrodes and pops the stone – common on a lot of instances of exposed metal used with stone.
Was it in a city or the countryside? What country might it have been in? What TV channel was the programme?
If it was in a city on an English channel it might have been the conference centre in Edinburgh, the concert hall in Newcastle or the London Assembly building (all by Fosters). Anyone any other ideas?
Excellent AAI/Peter Rice Memorial lecture last night by Cecil Balmond – a director fo Arups in London. He has been working on the Spiral for the V&A, and went into great depth on the maths and engineering of that and other projects apparently Arups have had a design team of 20 engineers and 2 mathematicians working on that one – bu he still managed to give a decent insight into the principles.
Is it legal to stop people taking photos of a building you don’t own from a public street? I’m not sure it is.
Actually I’ve decided that no one is going to be able to photograph the Custom House without MY permission. Should anyone wish to do so, I can be contacted via this forum. I wouldn’t bother though, it’s going to be REALLY expensive.
its in Architectural Dubllin on this website (nice one). Built 1680 according to that. Beautiful stonework around the windows.
Practical issues aside,
I think the design of the shelters at grand Canal Dock is very strange. The structure of the shelters is galvanised steel and quite stocky looking. The actual canopy on top appears to be this flimsy corrugated perspex stuff. To me the visual effect of this is the equivalent of using a JCB to lift a feather. Call me old fashioned but I like a logic in my structural expression and it really gets me.
‘The built form is merely the proof of the pudding’?
OK I’m all for virtual buildings and an expansive definition of the word ‘architecture’ but that statement is a staggering exaggeration of the role of the architect in producing the elements of our environment which I know as architecture.
Other players who have been left out of the credits include builders, clients, end-users, God, the weather, creeping globalisation, tribal rituals, trees, inflation, democracy, communism etc.
To name but a few.
[This message has been edited by JL (edited 10 July 2001).]
is this the one on tara street owned by the corporation – if it is i think its probably going soon and being redeveloped
[This message has been edited by JL (edited 07 July 2001).]
sticking with expressing architectural intent (of course the actual buildings are more important than the drawings), photorealism has been a focus of archtiectural presentations for a long time – i think the interesting thing happening now that serious photorealism is widely possible is that i think/hope there will be a return to more personal expressive and creative graphic work
[This message has been edited by JL (edited 08 July 2001).]
earth to deepnote – dublin’s development politics aren’t the focus of world attention
[This message has been edited by JL (edited 07 July 2001).]
This points up a disgraceful loophole in the planning laws which must be closed. In this case the development was refused because the factory was of architectural significance, but wasn’t listed (according to RTE). Once the development is back out of the planning process the developer demolishes the unlisted building and – hey presto – no more planning problem, time for a new application without that pesky building.
How spiteful is that? What was it, planning decision Thursday, a morning to assess options, an afternoon to find a demolition contractor and demolish the next day? Speedy.
Surely this demolition is unauthorised development? Does anybody know?
The whole place is a tragic disaster area – this was the heart of the medieval city after all. Ripped out by a dual carriageway – and then the replacement buildings – aargh. that cuckoo clock beside tailors hall (Ambrose Kelly I think), the BKD Jury’s hotel
Unfortunately bad architecture has a long half life
I remember the Liffey timepiece because at the time it struck me as the first sizeable thing to be built which wasn’t entirely utilitarian – Dublin was a staggeringly mean and begrudging place until quite recently, and uplifting public works were hard to find – so I liked it a lot
Is this at the end of Pearse St, near Charlotte Quay? They’re decontaminating the soil on that site, I think.
