Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Time for High Rise in Dublin City

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    yabadabado
    Registered Users Posts: 16,531 ✭✭✭✭yabadabado


    No
    Dr Crayfish wrote: »
    It's a big old eye sore to me. I can't see any redeeming qualities in it.
    Are you talking about interior or exterior?
    Listed building AFAIK. It has some fantastic features inside.


  • Options
    #63
    Dr Crayfish
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭Dr Crayfish


    No
    yabadabado wrote: »
    Are you talking about interior or exterior?
    Listed building AFAIK. It has some fantastic features inside.

    Both. I think it's really horrible. But again I'm not some architectural enthusiast, but yeah I have heard that it's listed, which to me is shocking.


  • Options
    #64
    yabadabado
    Registered Users Posts: 16,531 ✭✭✭✭yabadabado


    No
    Dr Crayfish wrote: »
    Both. I think it's really horrible. But again I'm not some architectural enthusiast, but yeah I have heard that it's listed, which to me is shocking.

    Nothing shocking about it imo. Bit of work needed out side but some brilliant features inside the top floor would make a brilliant bar/restaurant and I hope whatever happens to the building they make the top floor into something that's open to the public.


  • Options
    #65
    Dr Crayfish
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭Dr Crayfish


    No
    Each to their own but I think it's a disgusting looking eyesore


  • Options
    #66
    John_Rambo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,678 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    Dr Crayfish wrote: »
    Each to their own but I think it's a disgusting looking eyesore

    It's a pretty cool building with buckets of architectural merit. We've lost too many amazing buildings in the capital, we need to stop doing this.

    We need high rise to an extent, not New York or Hong Kong "super" high-rise style, but we need large apartments where families can live centrally located.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Effects wrote: »
    I'd say you should learn a bit more your architectural heritage before you tear down buildings.
    Why? Heritage is holding back badly needed building and development in Dublin.

    Heritage should be left to hobbyists, not lobbyists.


  • Options
    #68
    yabadabado
    Registered Users Posts: 16,531 ✭✭✭✭yabadabado


    No
    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Why? Heritage is holding back badly needed building and development in Dublin.

    Heritage should be left to hobbyists, not lobbyists.

    Ya gut the city and make it look like a generic UK/US city:rolleyes:. Ruin Dublin and its history,Heritage isn't holding back Dublin its bad planning.

    No reason whatsoever that buildings of importance can't be kept while the city is modernised.


  • Options
    #69
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Thing is heritage is part of culture and identity. It is more than a hobby thing and needs care when making changes. That said, some heritage is or has become crap and should be moved on from. The problem with Busaras is that on paper, in models, on a sunny day viewed from high, it is 'a pretty cool building with buckets of architectural merit', but in reality it doesn't quite work out that way. How much so is a matter of opinion but imho the style in which it was built is now much less fashionable, not that it was fashionable for everyone at time of construction, colours will have faded and most of all over 99% of people view it only from street level which has the buses and the issues they create, mainly dirt. It was designed from above but used from below.

    That aside, I would look to develop high rise not right in the CC, but in nearby development zones with Docklands and Heuston SQ still having elbow room and access. The CC is a nightmare for increased density planning due to the width and road layout being horse and carriage based.


  • Options
    #70
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    No
    I don't really see the architectural merit in Busaras I mean it's alright I wouldn't go as far as to call it an eyesore but nor would I would call it a masterpiece either. It's just really your bog standard office building that has a bus station attached.

    The three worst buildings in Dublin CC IMO in order are:
    1. Hawkins House
    2. Apollo House
    3. Liberty Hall


  • Options
    #71
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Yes with design limits
    At least Liberty hall knows how ugly it is and tries to cover up from time to time

    libertyhall.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Dr Crayfish
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭Dr Crayfish


    No
    Liberty Hall actually has a different jacket on now, something to do with NYE. Another terribly ugly building I’d love to see the site redeveloped. How on earth did that ever get the go ahead...


  • Options
    #73
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 30,142 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Liberty Hall, kaboom kaboom... sorry, I blame that on a combo of christmas whiskey and the Penguins of Madagascar...

    On a more serious note, we need an elected mayor who would be more responsive to the input of the general public on this issue (and others) and not an unelected autocrat running DCC.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #74
    John_Rambo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,678 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    tricky D wrote: »
    Thing is heritage is part of culture and identity. It is more than a hobby thing and needs care when making changes. That said, some heritage is or has become crap and should be moved on from. The problem with Busaras is that on paper, in models, on a sunny day viewed from high, it is 'a pretty cool building with buckets of architectural merit', but in reality it doesn't quite work out that way. How much so is a matter of opinion but imho the style in which it was built is now much less fashionable, not that it was fashionable for everyone at time of construction, colours will have faded and most of all over 99% of people view it only from street level which has the buses and the issues they create, mainly dirt. It was designed from above but used from below.

    That aside, I would look to develop high rise not right in the CC, but in nearby development zones with Docklands and Heuston SQ still having elbow room and access. The CC is a nightmare for increased density planning due to the width and road layout being horse and carriage based.

    Clothes can be dumped and bought at the whim of fashionistas.

    Unfortunately, when a building is demolished because it's deemed "out of fashion" by developers it's gone for ever.

    Thankfully things are improving in the city and we're pretty much guaranteed that Busarus will never be demolished because it's architectural merit is recognised by people who know what they're talking about.

    TrickyD, check out the Busarus talk and tour on Culture night. You'll change your mind.


  • Options
    #75
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Actually I am in favour of retaining it though I can see where you inferred otherwise. I do appreciate the architecture of it and was well versed in it many years ago. I might just do the Culture Night tour to refresh, as you suggest. At the same time, I am disappointed with certain aspects of it - mainly that it isn't great from ground level and is not as fit for purpose nowadays. As said, it's a matter of opinion which I don't see as so black and white given the many pros and cons.


  • Options
    #76
    yabadabado
    Registered Users Posts: 16,531 ✭✭✭✭yabadabado


    No
    Busarus maybe isn't fit for purpose now but the office space is and that makes up I'd say 90% of the building.


  • Options
    #77
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    Dr Crayfish wrote: »
    I don't care that a few idiots will tell me Busarus is some Art Deco masterpiece, it's disgusting, and absolutely filthy in the interior.

    It's not even in the art deco style so kind of proves that your opinion isn't worth much.


  • Options
    #78
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,309 ✭✭✭markpb


    No
    Effects wrote: »
    It's not even in the art deco style so kind of proves that your opinion isn't worth much.

    Architecture snobs like you give it a bad name. It doesn't matter if they don't know that style it's built in, they're commenting on its suitability as a bus station. All the beautiful architecture in the world doesn't make a building more suitable as a bus station.


  • Options
    #79
    yabadabado
    Registered Users Posts: 16,531 ✭✭✭✭yabadabado


    No
    markpb wrote: »
    Architecture snobs like you give it a bad name. It doesn't matter if they don't know that style it's built in, they're commenting on its suitability as a bus station. All the beautiful architecture in the world doesn't make a building more suitable as a bus station.

    I don't see anyone talking about its suitability as a bus station. Even so Busarus is a tiny portion of the building, maybe 10%.


  • Options
    #80
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,620 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    No
    If you want to see how it's done right, have a look at Frankfurt.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Skyline_Frankfurt_am_Main_2015.jpg

    And it has plenty of gorgeous old architecture as well:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Frankfurt_Am_Main-Roemerberg_19-27_von_Suedosten-20110307.jpg

    So there is no reason a city can't be both modern and old style at the same time.

    And 92% yes says it all really. It's just a few cranks and quarehawks holding on to the height limit.


  • Options
    #81
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    John_Rambo wrote: »
    It's a pretty cool building with buckets of architectural merit. We've lost too many amazing buildings in the capital, we need to stop doing this.

    We need high rise to an extent, not New York or Hong Kong "super" high-rise style, but we need large apartments where families can live centrally located.

    Busaras has interesting features but is undoubtedly hideous. I think a building should be at least decent to look at, its one of the more important requirements of a building. I don't think busaras should be demolished but of the external cladding should be retrofitted with something more modern. The northern elevation is no better looking or with any more merit than any godawful commie block

    Its a very badly ageing building and brings down the area visually.
    Ive learnt all about busaras as part of my architectural history course and Ill never be convinced its an attractive building, but yes a huge milestone in irish modernism and developments of the free state and so it should remain there .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Dr Crayfish
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭Dr Crayfish


    No
    Could we not do this type of thing too?

    http://www.thejournal.ie/mansion-apartment-blocks-dublin-2-3654712-Oct2017/

    The large apartments in 6 storey buildings you see around the posher parts of London like Maida Vale etc. I used to stay in one, they're gorgeous and spacious.


  • Options
    #83
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Dr Crayfish wrote: »
    Could we not do this type of thing too?

    http://www.thejournal.ie/mansion-apartment-blocks-dublin-2-3654712-Oct2017/

    The large apartments in 6 storey buildings you see around the posher parts of London like Maida Vale etc. I used to stay in one, they're gorgeous and spacious.

    If only we could still build things that looked as nice as those


  • Options
    #84
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,852 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    If you want to see how it's done right, have a look at Frankfurt.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Skyline_Frankfurt_am_Main_2015.jpg

    And it has plenty of gorgeous old architecture as well:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Frankfurt_Am_Main-Roemerberg_19-27_von_Suedosten-20110307.jpg

    So there is no reason a city can't be both modern and old style at the same time.

    And 92% yes says it all really. It's just a few cranks and quarehawks holding on to the height limit.

    Dear god it really puts the pathetic docklands into context! But sure DCC obviously have better judgement than frankfurts equivalent counci! Lol


  • Options
    #85
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    If you want to see how it's done right, have a look at Frankfurt.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Skyline_Frankfurt_am_Main_2015.jpg

    And it has plenty of gorgeous old architecture as well:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Frankfurt_Am_Main-Roemerberg_19-27_von_Suedosten-20110307.jpg

    So there is no reason a city can't be both modern and old style at the same time.

    And 92% yes says it all really. It's just a few cranks and quarehawks holding on to the height limit.

    Frankfurts a bad example haha
    Its perfectly preserved medieval city core was quite infamously completely levelled by bombings in ww2...so those skyscrapers wouldn't really be considered harmoniously blending old and new but rather rebuilding of an entire city on its remains.
    Even the beautiful 'old' building pictures you posted are actually reconstructions
    Regardless there are many great examples of combining old and new..paris barcelona amsterdam all do it very well :) Even in new york and boston
    Docklands is fine though, just needs more density and increased heights.


  • Options
    #86
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    markpb wrote: »
    Architecture snobs like you give it a bad name. It doesn't matter if they don't know that style it's built in, they're commenting on its suitability as a bus station. All the beautiful architecture in the world doesn't make a building more suitable as a bus station.

    They are saying pull it down and build a skyscraper. I'm not a snob, I just don't have time for wilful ignorance. If it's not suitable for a bus station then make it something else. Don't just tear the building down because you don't value architectural merit and are too lazy to bother trying to understand it.


  • Options
    #87
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Effects wrote: »
    They are saying pull it down and build a skyscraper. I'm not a snob, I just don't have time for wilful ignorance. If it's not suitable for a bus station then make it something else. Don't just tear the building down because you don't value architectural merit and are too lazy to bother trying to understand it.

    Thats true. If we had demolished every building that wasn't fit for purpose georgian dublin in the city centre at least would no longer exist


Advertisement