urbanisto
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I never said anything about chopping the trees down however they do need to be pruned. They are overgrown and restricting light into a number of properties along here (who I am surprised havent complained). I agree that trees along Westmoreland Street are a positive feature but they have to be managed. I would also add that they should be coherently planted so that they become a feature in the overall aesthetic of the street…not simply random features.
I have to say that the Smithfield public domain works are progressing at a snails pace. All that has been done to date is the lifting and relaying of cobbles at the northern end and some new lighting. Why is it taking so long to get some steam behind this work. The press release for the scheme stated that the works would be completed in December 2010. That must have been a typo because there is no way they will have gotten even a third of the way there by then.
The condition of this area of the city is truly awful. Walking around today it just struck me how poorly maintained are many of the smaller streets of this area. Most haven’t seen anything in the way of investment or even routine maintenance since the 1980s. Old style lamps rust and decay, broken pavements, poor street surfaces with many cobbles missing, poles and bollards aplenty. Its shockingly bad really. How come the City Council just continue to ignore whole swathes of the city centre.
As one walks down towards the Market area, little changes. The newly refurbished park at Chancery Place is very smart but so much of the area is decrepit. HARP is but a distance memory around here.
Hmmm…perhaps we need a dedicated street furniture thread. Or rename this one.
Anyhow and interesting article in today’s Irish Times on the subject of how we use our streets and touching on issues such as traffic controls, signage, barriers and segregation of spaces.
Is there a better way to share our streets?
I believe Ben Hamilton Baille was speaking at a conference today on the subject. He was on Pat Kenny yesterday. The article ties in with the UK piece previously posted.
Great! the more the better I say. Its a ripe opportunity to put some teeth behind the ACA and ASPC designations.
Thats true SmithfieldResi – but now the signage has changed (its a Nokia sign now) and substantial works have taken place which I would argue required permission.I think they could take enforcement action and have the sign removed by refusing retention permission.
The inexorable rise of the bollard continues….
The latest mess has been created on South William Street on the attractive little street layout in front of the Powerscourt Centre. Most of the former stone bollards have now been removed (whether by accident or design) and replaced with that old favourite of urban designers everywhere, the concrete and steel lump in tasteful battleship grey.
Elsewhere the new bus stops being installed by Dublin Bus are great. Well designed and much smarter and robust that the aul pole they replace. But is it really necessary to have a stop sign and a shelter at the same location? And of course the roll out of the long long awaiting “real time passenger info” is necessitating yet another addition to the streetscape. Even when a bus shelter is in place. You may have spotted the stainless steel poles at various locations.
Firstly the Irish Times (IT?) have nothing to do with this building. They sold up and moved on. The major tenant for the building at the moment is the Irish Aviation Authority.
You’re right in that Architects are in competition for jobs and competition was fierce is the boom times. However from my experience, the architects of this scheme could quite easily have put forward an well designed and less intrusive new building and the client would quite easily have gone along with it. Most developers care nothing for the intricacies of the design, they are more interested in the overall look of the building and obviously the degree to which it maximises the floor space they will gain, or meets the profile requirements of clients etc.
Developers also always seek surety in the planning process. If it will get them a grant then they’ll do it. Certainly, if DCC staff had been more considered in their appraisal of the scheme (particular the aforementioned “dead as a dodo” Conservation Officer), then perhaps they could have gained a much improved design from HKR and P Elliotts.
I would also vouch that the Compliance system has failed miserably in this instance particularly in relation to the details which Graham critiques above, the poor stone masonry, fenestration etc. I would suggest that they maybe promised one thing but delivered something else.
Of course you can blame architects! What a stupid thing to say. The architect is ultimately responsible for the design of the building. Not the developer (though he/she will have their requirements for a building such as maximising space, costs, profile etc), not the planner who has only a limited scope for involvement in the design of the project, and not the economic system which has delivered as much good quality architecture as it has bad!
Depressingly you’re probably right.
It makes you wonder what everyone is thinking in Wood Quay. I know its grand having a job, getting well paid, plenty of perks, nothing too onerous, but you have to fill the 8 hours a day you’re in there. Perhaps someone will act on this just to kill the tedium.
Its also curious to note DCC’s very strident repost to John Gormley’s inquiries into planning decisions undertaken by the Council. It would be interesting to find out how they think their planning enforcement section is performing.
It would also appear that the original permission for the sign from 1997 included a condition limiting the life of the permission to 2000 and requiring its removal after that..
I noticed last night while walking through town that the large “Baileys” neon sign on Batchelors Walk was being replaced. I couldn’t see the new brand but its not Baileys. The lighting is now blue.
So, being curious I checked to see if a site notice was in place. No. I checked the planning register to see if an application had been made and permission granted for what are works to a protected structure, in an ACA and a Special Area of Conservation and works which would generally require planning permission in any event (unless I am mistaken). No permission in place.
Now, if I am not further mistaken, it is an objective of Dublin City Council to seek the removal of all the neon signage on Batchelors Walk under the O’Connell Street ACA and SPC schemes. To date this has never been acted on…as with so many of the ACA objectives. It would seem that this is a perfect time to hit the owners of this signage with an enforcement notice to have them remove the sign fully given that they havent applied for permission.
Any thoughts? Is it worth a letter to Planning Enforcement.
The nighttime view o the D’Olier Street facade is awful. The floodlighting is completely pointless. It neither highlights the architecture of the terrace nor does it provide any prominence to the building in the streetscape.
For me, what this development so awfully highlights is the failure of the “one type fits all” planning process we have in Ireland. Arguably a UK-type process requiring Listing Building Consent separate to planning permission would force greater scrutiny of applications involving protected structures. It would require much more engagement than currently exists from Conservation Officers and indeed might even encourage Conservation Planners with a greater eye for the detail and intricacies of these buildings. It is obvious from this shameful case that the Conservation Officer was either disengaged, asleep, dead or on holliers while all the work was being done.
An excerpt from the Planner Reports states:
Interdepartmental Reports:
Conservation – No objection in principle however the appropriateness of the proposed
walkways running along the rear facades of the protected structures is questioned. These
should be omitted from the proposed development.
City Archaeologist – No objections subject to conditions.
Drainage – No report available as at the date of writing this report.
Roads – Discussed by phone with Roads and Traffic Planning Division and no objection in
principle.Quite obviously there was no follow up from anyone while the works were taking place (presumably under the direction of a Conservation Architect as per the standard conditions/requirement).
The recent improvements to buildings on Dame Street are ongoing. I see the scaffold up above Toni and Guy and the adjoining vacant shop. Toni and Guy has a lovely decorative oriel window and it will be great to see it painted and the facade improved. The last occupier of the vacant unit was a kebab shop (one of many along Dame Street). Hopefully something more upmarket is planned.
And there are a few other notable additions to the streetscape about the city. Exchequer Street continues to retain a very high standard to shops and shopfronts. The latest additions to the street include The Green Hen (a very nice new French style bistro) and a very attractive use of green tiles further down the street for a new bakery and coffee shop (cant remember the name). They both add greatly to the quality of this street
Another noted building (though not really a shopfront) is the Bookend building (or at least its neighbour) on Essex/Wood Quay. This building was one of the more impressive new buildings in the city in the early 1990s as part of the Temple Bar development. Since then the constant traffic along the quays (including buses and lorries) had left the frontage dirty and worn. The shop/office units at street level are occupied by a solicitors but hardly make an impact on the street. The building was under scaffold for a few weeks over the past months and has now been revealed. The render facade has been cleaned and metalwork cleaned and repaired. Of interest are the new cyan coloured windows. I quite like them.
Further down the quays the former city council office at Wellington Quay are being remodelled with a rather bland and standard facade. Still, the original building was a bit of a blight on this section of the quays (a smaller section occupies a prominent point on Essex Street) and the remodeling is welcome. It would be good to see some improvement to the public realm along the quay here. Maybe some trees and greater width to allow for more life along this stretch.
A brutal and cutting analysis of one of the most disappointing and shameful outcomes of the latter period of the boom. Well done Graham. The Times Building is certainly a sad indictment of the lack of vision, imagination and clarity of execution of so many built environment professionals from architects to developers to planners and professional staff at the Council. A real pity.
An interesting move by the new UK Govt reported in the Guardian
Now if only Mr Cuffe could put some pressure to bear on Irish city and town councils.
But you see the place above all the surrounding shite….which is important.
– “Where abouts on O’Connell Street are you?”
– “Beside Ann Summers?”
– “Huh?”
– “The really, loike, old building beside Ann Summers with the bright green pillars”The newly renovated Mercantile on Dame Street is a revelation…a really beautiful job, although as you say let down by the corner unit and dare I say the rear wall and fenestration which you see from S.G. Georges Street. In fact the little “space” here is a prime candidate for improvement.
Two other Dame Street properties I would like to see tackled are Mermaid Cafe and Gruel building – given a lively paint job when the restaurant first opened in the 1990s but now increasingly dirty and forlorn looking – and The Pen Corner building – surely one of the outstanding buildings on the street lost beneath a layer of soot and dirt. I imagine were this building to be cleaned it would provide a revelation similar to Govt Building when it was “revealed” to the city in 1990.
A good collection there Graham.
