60s and 70s office blocks - love them or loathe em?

wakka12

JupiterKid wrote: »

What do AHers make of the new/proposed buildings that will replace older 60s/70s office blocks? Are they being perhaps a bit too hasty in getting rid of the originals?

And is pastiche better than bold modernism? Steel and plate glass was all the rage during the Celtic Tiger era, but how will these buildings be looked at in 20 or 30 years' time?

architectures on your mind very early today :pac:

conorhal

wakka12 wrote: »

Its an interesting debate all the same. Paris is undoubtedly beautiful, but if you preserve everything and don't allow renewal and redevelopment many of the buildings will become unfit for purpose. The city will stagnate and fall behind. Do you risk turning your city into a museum for the sake of beauty and culture?

There are many, many historical buildings in the city that still fulfill the purpose that they were built for, like Hueston Station or the GPO, or have been re-purposed, like the old parliament into a Bank of Ireland.

I have never seen buildings become so unfit for purpose in so short a time at the architecture of the 60's and 70's, most of which are crumbling, uninhabitable eyesores. This to my mind is the most damning indictment of that period, how fast brutalism managed to brutalize the human spirit to the point nobody could or would inhabit them and now the only purpose they are fit for is as a warning of how wrong planners can get things.

JupiterKid

So many 60s and 70s office blocks have become "sick buildings" where those who have to inhabit them don't feel well and feel dejected and demoralised by their work environment. It doesn't help morale or productivity.

An indictment of these buildings methinks...

Neil Issagum

JupiterKid wrote: »

What do AHers make of the new/proposed buildings that will replace older 60s/70s office blocks? Are they being perhaps a bit too hasty in getting rid of the originals?

And is pastiche better than bold modernism? Steel and plate glass was all the rage during the Celtic Tiger era, but how will these buildings be looked at in 20 or 30 years' time?

I think the only legitimate reason to knock the likes of Hawkins and Apollo would be to reuse the footprint to make more space i.e. taller, but that's not going to happen with our outdated planning laws so why not just completely refurbish the existing buildings instead?

Most people would probably disagree and say just get rid of ugly eyesores but I think if they were done properly like the 'one' building down on grand canal street they would look really well and save us a lot of money too

wakka12

Neil Issagum wrote: »

I think the only legitimate reason to knock the likes of Hawkins and Apollo would be to reuse the footprint to make more space i.e. taller, but that's not going to happen with our outdated planning laws so why not just completely refurbish the existing buildings instead?

Most people would probably disagree and say just get rid of ugly eyesores but I think if they were done properly like the 'one' building down on grand canal street they would look really well and save us a lot of money too

Very true. And the concrete and glass and other resources saved by not demolishing them are a much better alternative for the environment. You can make those old ugly blocks like Hawkins house relatively nice and modern looking too with some love and care.
This was the old are lingus head office
https://flyinginireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Dublin-Airport-Aer-Lingus-former-head-office-IMG1911A-JL.jpg

After refurb
http://imgur.com/uAA65yC

Nothing special but then again at least its not offensive tot he eye like the other one!

wakka12

Also I think there is a legitimate reason to known Hawkins/apollo house as they are a massive impermeable block and the plans to create a new diagonal pedestrian street through the block would really open up that part of the city centre and breathe new life into an under used area just off college green, which would tie in very well with the pedestrianisation of college green

Neil Issagum

wakka12 wrote: »

Also I think there is a legitimate reason to known Hawkins/apollo house as they are a massive impermeable block and the plans to create a new diagonal pedestrian street through the block would really open up that part of the city centre and breathe new life into an under used area just off college green, which would tie in very well with the pedestrianisation of college green

Oh I wasn't aware of that part of the plan I suppose it does kind of make sense then

I wonder though in years to come will people look back and wish we didn't knock the few brutalist buildings we have. I quite like the style to be honest, reminds me of the 80's in London

Earthhorse

newacc2015 wrote: »

Most of these buildings have been flatted, are being flatted or the outside refinished. Findlater house is now a Holiday Inn.

I walked by this the other day for the first time and it looks great. I meant, it's a Holiday Inn, but it looks really well. It's probably benefiting a little from being new but still.

me_right_one wrote: »

I cant understand the hate for these buildings, especially Hawkins House. Whats exactly is wrong with it??? In most cases, its a million times better than what was there before. Safe, dry, warm, plumbed for toilets. There are workplaces around the country where you still have to go outdoors to the toilet building!

Plumbed toilets? You're setting the bar pretty low there. Hawkins House was an eyesore. I say this as someone who is a city dweller and actually had to look it on a regular basis as my bus stopped there. Brutalist architecture is the kind of thing people only seem to love if they don't have to work in or around it.

I'm not a huge fan of the glass and steel look of modern architecture but it is far superior to the bored and tired look of those horrible concrete slabs. They buildings will also be far better for the people who use them, allowing for more natural light.

Thats a serious step back in my opinion. Nothing wrong with the red brick, it looks warm and inviting compared to the stone-and-steel that other people on here are lamenting!

I agree that the passport office looked quite well but again I never had to use the building on a daily basis.

JupiterKid

Yaay! Was on Pearse Street earlier and saw - to my delight - that the vile early 70s Oisin House is being knocked.

The_Valeyard

JupiterKid wrote: »

Yaay! Was on Pearse Street earlier and saw - to my delight - that the vile early 70s Oisin House is being knocked.

It always looked like something from the apocalypse or the Fallout universe.

JupiterKid

I really hope the Berkeley Library, the Central Bank, the former BOI head Offices and the Irish Life Centre are around for a very long time.

But the interior of the Irish Life Centre needs a massive refurb.

The thing about our 60s and 70s office buildings are that so pitifully few of them had real architectural merit. Most of what was built was pure rubbish.

That said, a lot of those sentinel like plate glass and steel frame Celtic Tiger buildings aren't of much merit either. An exception is the new Central Bank Building and a couple of others.

I think brick, when well used as a facade, makes a building so much more appealing to the human spirit than brutalist concrete. Stone can be rather good too.

prinzeugen

The main reason Apollo House etc are coming down is because they are unsafe. This has been known since the late 60's (Ronan Point).

Its why similar office/residential buildings in the UK have been pulled down en-masse, since the mid 80's.

Most would not meet modern fire regs even if refurbished and the method of construction (large panel) was never sound for buildings that height.

Giant, concrete house of cards. Take out a lower panel and everything above it comes down as well.

JupiterKid

prinzeugen wrote: »

The main reason Apollo House etc are coming down is because they are unsafe. This has been known since the late 60's (Ronan Point).

Its why similar office/residential buildings in the UK have been pulled down en-masse, since the mid 80's.

Most would not meet modern fire regs even if refurbished and the method of construction (large panel) was never sound for buildings that height.

Giant, concrete house of cards. Take out a lower panel and everything above it comes down as well.

And to think that Georgian buildings built 250 years ago - or indeed the 800 year old Trim Castle, are still standing but something built less than 50 years ago is at the end of its structural life. Shows how much thought went into them!

JupiterKid

These two Celtic Tiger era buildings in Trinity College and on Merrion Row are among the best and most interesting of their era. I think they will stand the test of time. Anyone agree?

Jesus Wept

osarusan wrote: »

Blow this place up please.

It'd be grand cleaned up.

Murrisk

Rumpy Pumpy wrote: »

The ESB Head Office is being demolished and redeveloped. Due to start this year. The new design appears to be more sympathetic to the Georgian buildings surrounding it on Baggott Street, Fitzwilliam Street, Mount Street and Merrion Square. Current one is a terrible eyesore.

I actually like the current ESB building. Nice proportions.

I hope they don't replace it with some Georgian pastiche, that'd be way worse. It can be modern whilst still being sympathetic to its surroundings.

wakka12

JupiterKid wrote: »

These two Celtic Tiger era buildings in Trinity College and on Merrion Row are among the best and most interesting of their era. I think they will stand the test of time. Anyone agree?

They're beautiful buildings and look thoughtfully considered and actually respond to the context unlike those other things

Murrisk

Zaph wrote: »

Busaras is one of the first buildings in Dublin I'd dynamite if I could. I think it's an absolute eyesore.

Me too. Hate it. And the awful wavy canopy is the worst feature.

Murrisk

Candie wrote: »

I absolutely hate Trellick Tower, regardless of it's status as a Brutalist masterpiece. Tiny one-beds on the lower floors go for around £400k, the floors with the views for much more. I suppose it's in W10, so it has that going for it.

What I like about Trellick Tower is how narrow it is, it makes it very striking. But I'd have no interest in living there. The apartments are internally non-descript and supposedly very cold. So I wouldn't see the point, even for fans of the exterior.

prinzeugen

JupiterKid wrote: »

And to think that Georgian buildings built 250 years ago - or indeed the 800 year old Trim Castle, are still standing but something built less than 50 years ago is at the end of its structural life. Shows how much thought went into them!

Indeed. Was a quick fix at the time. I think large panels were only supposed to be 3-4 stories max.

JupiterKid

ESB HQ on Merrion street has now been completely demolished. The replacement buildings could have been a Georgian pastiche, but the approved plans indicated a mix of modern contemporary and some elements of pastiche.

Thoughts?

wakka12

Its interesting, and obviously more innovative than just copying the old buildings.The new building will be a lot more versatile and functional than the georgian building layout would.
Some elements are a bit jarring, I think those big square doorways are very awkward, why not make smaller arched doorways like most georgian buildings had for their horse carriages? And why do the top windows extend all the way to the parapet? Those two features immediately make the block stand out which surely defeats the purpose of such a contextual design, which is especially puzzling as they put so much effort into making whatever those things sticking up at the top are look exactly like the old georgian chimneys from the original historic streetscape. But it has a lot going for it too, its zero energy usage, the mews lane at the back will be activated by the design and has a public social amenity element, theres new public routes through it which didnt exist before, looks like nice courtyards and lighting inside. Overally itll be great for the city!

whisky_galore

It does look better than the offerings from the current glass box/aquarium school of architecture.

You very rarely get outstanding modern architecture here, that actually looks nice and ages well.
Busarus would be nice if it was actually maintained and cleaned, grubby as hell anytime I've been through.

Likewise I see DCC want to get rid of nice looking Art Deco apartments just because they are 'old' and they couldn't be arsed upgrading them.
If everything was slated as being 'old' and 'not fit for purpose' we'd have no Customs House, Four Courts, Leinster House etc.
20th cent buildings don't get the love old Georgian ones do these days.

JupiterKid

Molyneux House, a Small Church on Bride Street, converted into the former HQ of highly controversial architect Sam Stephenson, who designed the Central Bank building and the Civic Offices on Wood Quay. Built in 1973 and IMO ahead of its time - red brick and tinted glass.

I do hope this becomes a listed building.

pleas advice

I love a bit of brutalism

Wait, what's this about architecture?

wakka12

Yeh I really like that building too. If only Sam stephenson and his ilk had decided to build more modest interesting modern archicture like this rather than hideous hulking carbuncles then we wouldnt have to think of changes to our old cities as loss but just change and maybe for the better, if buildings like this had replaced some of dublins lower quality buildings during the period 1950-1990 imagine how gorgeous a city it would be today. but thats just how it should always have been, a building of lower quality should never replace one of higher quality thankfully it happens less today but certainly still happens, in many places in the world

The Crowman

This might not seem related at first but goes some way to describing the ideas behind the rise of brutalism and how it was considered progressive and forward looking at the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_DJTqPk3aQ

CrabRevolution

My father was an engineer in Eircom for years and when I was a child he would sometimes bring us around the country on his work.

As a result I've developed a keen eye for old eircom/ telecom Éireann /p+t buildings. They seemed to be thrown up in the 60s to 80s according to a pretty standard blueprint. Brown bricks and a few tiny caged windows seemed to be prominent themes. Very utilitarian. Some of the later ones had bigger windows, but always with with brown metal frames and fittings.

They ain't pretty but I'd miss them when they're gone.

ED E

Can you size your images there Jupiter, zooming to 20% is a pain.

CrabRevolution wrote: »

My father was an engineer in Eircom for years and when I was a child he would sometimes bring us around the country on his work.

As a result I've developed a keen eye for old eircom/ telecom reann /p+t buildings. They seemed to be thrown up in the 60s to 80s according to a pretty standard blueprint. Brown bricks and a few tiny caged windows seemed to be prominent themes. Very utilitarian. Some of the later ones had bigger windows, but always with with brown metal frames and fittings.

They ain't pretty but I'd miss them when they're gone.

Theres a fair contrast to MDFs built atop POs and later ones (late 70s on say?) that got the concrete version of a 40ft.

https://goo.gl/maps/1DbYNT59Xdx

Infrastructure points like Crown Alley buck the trend a little bit.

Billy86

osarusan wrote: »

Blow this place up please.

It looks pretty terrible, but also shows another problem with these buildings - painting the exterior to that building would do it a world of good. It might still not look very good, but it would look a hell of a lot better than it does right now.