redeoin

I saw that in the paper. Would such a design work for the mast on O’Connell Bridge house? It would be brilliant and ironic if it did – get rid of that awful skeletal structure – considering there are five-lamp sets on the bridge.

I would happily retain the entire right hand side of the street – just strengthen and refurbish the derelict areas of buildings. I know a lot of the buildings aren’t architectural wonders, but they are a monument to their time, and they are buzzing with activity.

However I would pull down the ilac centre facade, which I know they are doing to some degree anyway, and design some shops, apts or whatever to restore this side of the street.

I believe that the inset on Parnell St is also designated for apts, and the Jury’s hotel is well underway. So instead of Moore St being a sad and lonely relic of what used to be there, it could be an extremely quirky and lively unplanned section of a street complemented by some very user friendly apartments and shops, coherently linking Parnell St to Henry St.

When exactly are the towers due for demolition? I don’t want to miss it!

Well it is high time that the government and RTE actually did proper research into these issues.

No-one knew that a tunnel existed between Heuston and Connelly. This means that CIE kept it a secret.

When it was discovered, CIE insisted it was too small, but no-one went down with a measuring tape to look. That is all it would have taken – a standard 30 ft builders measuring tape.

And finally booz hamilton think spending a billion on building a brand new tunnel is a better option, when we don’t even have a metro service.

I mean, I read the booz report, and it is a disgracefully shoddy piece of rubbish. In their section on ‘how to build a world class system’ not once did they mention electrified very high speed rail of 350km plus. That to me as the most advanced technology in use is by definition a world class system.

They obviously considered this scenario too unrealistic, and that it would be laughed at if they bothered mentioning it. But then why claim the slow diesel system is world class when it patently isn’t. I thought their job was to keep all options on the table.

They should never be employed in a such a serious study again.

I still like my architectural competition idea. Imagine that 60 architects were let loose on the street with a building each to play with!

Ten buildings a year for six years.

I could turn into the quirkiest, most exciting street in Europe, let alone Dublin.

Does anyone have the wherewithal to post the full text of yesterday’s Irish Time’s article on the Spire?

There is a tantalising bit of text on the homepage here, but after that thanks to the greed of the Irish Times it is still pay per view, even a day later….

I like the tower. It looks like a proper maritime building. Are we a maritime city or not?!

I am all on for stacking up the horizon slightly in the right places.

The Dublin horizon is as flat and featureless as a 15 mile long, sixty foot high pancake.

Now that the Spire has been up for a while, I am not 100% convinced by it, and would probably give it a 5 out of 10. This is bearing in mind that I was firm advocate of it based on the plans.

I like –

1. The height. It is very very high, and that is good.

2. The lights on top – they look really well, and shimmer when the spire sways.

3. it in the day when it is sunny – which is sadly rare enough

4. at night when it is lit up – as the stains and material is less evident.

I dislike –

1. The stainless steel: It looks like the taps in my kitchen, and I feel cheated because I had been persuaded it would look like something else. It looks tinny and cheap.

2. Cloudy Days: On cloudy days it looks especially dull and tinny and all the dirt on it looks highly visible. It looks like someone has been hurling icecream at it, as there lots of large blotches, never mind the large streaks as far as the eye can see.

3. The base: Were they insane. I can’t over the peeled wrapper look.

4. The location: I think on retrospect it does not in the architectural terms so beloved of the Dublin City Council ‘take it’s cues from it’s surroundings’. Talbot street is very rundown, and Henry St very narrow, and looking at the Spire from either of those angles always disappoints me, as it doesn’t elevate the character of the street. I probably would have opted for a stone structure of some sort, maybe half or two thirds as high. Stone has such inherent character as a material, it would have worked wonders.

However when the Street is complete, and the treescapes planted, it may fit in better. I would plant quite high trees close to the monument if possible, to at least attempt to integrate that peeled wrapper look into something more natural.

And why can’t they simply clean as far up as possible with a large firehose once a week? It would be done in every other city.

Unless you own a helicopter, or happen to be a brand-name journalist and can e-mail your work to Dublin from Wicklow, trains are the only way to avoid the 21st Century Urban nightmare.

I don’t like the lamps or the flags on henry St anyway. They completely crowd a fairly narrow street. The street should use wall lamps, and the flagpoles should be removed altogether. Every time I look down the street I can’t get over how cluttered it is.