johnglas
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It’s OK; I think I know what you mean – I just wasn’t sure how that area would ‘read’ on the ground.
My idea for the ‘piazza’ referred only to the immediate area of the junction of the lane and Paul St, not the whole plot.
Prax: I hope you will forgive my ignorance of the actual site, but looking at the planning application a few things come to mind:
(1) the artless and unimaginative nature of the design, even on its principal (af)front(age) to St Patrick St;
(2) the golden opportunity to create a small piazza (piazzetta) at the junction of the lane and Paul St, thus giving a wider space to view the church facade (the development could include a retail (cafe?) unit facing on to this);
(3) the lack of any evidence of ‘planning gain’ – e.g. the developer should resurface the lane with granite setts;
(4) this is a prime example of cramming as much development on as small a site as possible.Yet another gem; a pity the intended spire was never completed. The stonework and the interior stencilling are really quite beautiful.
The main problem with the fine-grain planning required here is that, failing any agreed area plan (at a really quite detailed level) or any design guidelines, planners will judge development on a case-by-case basis. What has been lost is the quaint and the familiar, the ‘organic’ memory of the original street layout, cleverly exploited by P&A. I agree any further erosion needs to be resisted.
Is there no equivalent of an ‘Old Cork Society’? One ray of light is that even if the local planners are acting dumb, I suspect ABP would be much more sympathetic to the ‘local context’ argument should it go to appeal.gunter: no need to be worried; I’m quite harmless really (so I’m told). Take your points about footfall and the current design. I still think the FM developed as a mid-end retail, food, pub area (shock, horror) could create such a footfall. Coincidentally, look at the Fruit Market in Glasgow, Designated as a high-end shopping area it was a flop, but now exclusively a noshing and boozing area it works very well (and is full) – the old Fruitmarket Gallery next door is a useful space (the play Black Watch was performed there) and this is adjacent to the City Hall (a refurbished concert venue). Synergy, dear boy, synergy – events, dear boy, events!
Fearg: PS Having looked at your post, I think the organ looks very squeezed in and uncomfortable. I still think a small loft, accessed by a turnpike stair and with the organ pipes artfully arranged on either side of the window would work. A good civic project for a carpenter with imagination and flair and a local plutocrat with big pockets.
Prax: too ethnicist of you! I’m sure a local creche would love it!
Fearg: thanks for that; you’re the one with the local knowledge.The Honan chapel is one building I would really like to see. I agree the ‘modern’ vestments are dire, but the rest of the collection is robust enough.
There are a few things that strike me about the chapel: its seating is not set out ‘chapel-wise’, which detracts from its overall setting; there is absolutely no space for a choir and no organ – could a modern ‘loft’ not be inserted at the West end, designed in sympathy with the rest of the chapel? Also, the contemporary altar sits very unconformably with the sanctuary mosaics, and the new tapestry panels intended for behind the altar are God-awful and would suit only a kindergarten.
However, the building is a real gem.gunter: I agree with you completely; I was not advocating the ‘creation’ of a planned series of ‘squares’ (or spaces) – as a former planner, I know how difficult that is to design and execute. But the FM bldg must be the centrepiece of the whole project, not just an incidental (or even a ‘nuisance’ for some great planned sceme). I was advocating retaining the ‘spirit’ of the place – difficult i know, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. So what if you design buildings and spaces deriving from the neo-renaissance of the FM; we need architects and designers with the balls to resist howls of ‘pastiche’ from the modernist lobby. You don’t have to ape old styles, just draw your inspiration from them.
An example: one of the best (and most actively used) spaces in Glasgow is the area (really an elongated triangle) in front of the Concert Hall (an awful neo-1950s lump), with a long prospect down Buchanan street (Grafton St eat your heart out!). It was not ‘planned’ to be a happening space – it just is. And it links old posh Glasgow (Sauchiehall St) with the new trendy (Buchanan St). So the statue of our esteemed late leader gets a few traffic cones and loses its specs – that’s life!Why is it that the architects were unable to propose a development involving brick and stone, voids and solids, arcades and arches, streets and piazze – in other words, a contemporary and complementary take on the classical rennaissance themes of the Fruit Market? Why is it that the best they can come up with is a quirky modernist pastiche to a tired old formula (shoeboxes but not quite)? Can nobody do inventive townscape respecting the ‘genius loci’?
The main problem with the Mayor Square bldg is that it cuts off the ‘plebs’ to the north from getting any access through it to the middle-class nirvana to the south. Why did DCC allow it? Notjim: I agree with what you’ve said: DCC should set out a detailed masterplan and individual (but largish) plots should invite design submissions. Three architects, one design; sounds like a supermarket cartel.
Unfortunately , the Fruit Market building shows up just how dire the new stuff is. The blurb descibes it as ‘world class’ – whose world? what class?
ake: Thanks for the pictures of the two churches in Waterford – they are genuinely numinous (largely because of the glass and the diminished light). In a contemporary church that is no mean feat. The larger church manges the neat trick of having a kind of ‘day chapel’ which is also the location of the tabernacle and a point of focus. The statuary is perhaps a bit chaste even for my preferences, but altogether not a bad effort. (This also offers a ‘solution’ to the ‘two altars’ syndrome: the ‘old’ sanctuary becomes the Sacrament Chapel, while still being clearly visible from, and elevated above, the body of the kirk (as we say here) and the ‘new’ altar. We might even see a fashion for the reintroduction of Puginesque screens (shock, horror) to emphasise the distinction.
I’m willing to bet that we will start to see a wave of re-reordering to ‘get back’ some of the lost character in many churches; however, it’s worth trying to see the new Holy Family church at Newington in Belfast. Not the way to go for a parish church, although the parishioners love it (apparently).BTH: thanks for the comment; good local knowledge always outweighs armchair critique. Is the Bish school the one near St Nicholas’s (a spectacularly ugly lump, I recall – the school that is)? If it is its removal would allow for a building less alien to the (medieval?) street pattern and allow for a good modern infill.
Why isn’t the carpark behind (in front of?) the Cathedral developed? The parking could go underground and you could create a ‘cathedral close’ and get some sense of enclosure round the bldg. The Cathedral is a bit of a fright, but is now old enough to be a part of the landscape and you would never think of knocking it, but the landscaping needs rethought and I seem to remember that the interior has been messed about a bit, and not for the better.The cinema is an interesting take on the tower-house and it would read very well as a sculptural shape; the actual cinema theatres seem very small capacity, but perhaps I’m just used to bigger volumes in the big smoke.
The office building – glass-fronted; how original – ho,hum. (What’ll happen when it all falls off in another generation?)The sound a cat makes, indicating the presence of catty remarks. I now realise why there is no Catholic equivalent of Towers , Spires and Pinnacles by Sam Hutchison (Wordwell 2003), a fond and nostalgic review of the architecture of the Church of Ireland, nor why there is no Society for the Preservation of Irish Catholic Churches, or equivalent (which might make a real difference). Clearly, absolute orthodoxy to a vanished dogmatic is an absolute prerequisite for being allowed to participate in this thread. That saddens me. As does the sound of empty churches, which is the inevitable outcome of such unregenerate orthodoxy.
