How the hell did this get planning?

eringobragh

https://www.independent.ie/life/home-garden/this-small-house-in-stoneybatter-thinks-big-and-makes-a-modern-statement-on-a-historic-road-37514441.html

Surely a brown envelope job , ridiculous build completely destroys the character of that area

Looks even worse when you look at it on google maps

kieran.

Whats wrong with it it stands on its on merit/strengths while harmonizing with the existing materials.

A Pastiche house to mock the architectural style neighbouring houses would be alot worse.

Mariomaker

Which the two horrible houses or the nice house lol?

Cosmo Kramer

The last thing you want to do with these kind of infill sites is mimic the traditional buildings around them. So, the principal of doing something contrasting I have no problem with. I don't like that particular design and it's not what I'd have suggested for that site but I can see how it got planning permission - no brown envelopes needed for that one.

Assetbacked

Lookswise I wouldnt be a fan of the front of it. But I'd hardly deprive someone their dream home because of that reason.

Graham

eringobragh wrote: »

How the hell did this get planning?

From the link you posted:

It reflects a preference on the part of the planning authorities in areas such as this, where there is an existing distinctive historic architectural vernacular, that new buildings not replicate the architecture of the past but showcase a modern design sensibility instead.

engiweirdo

Think it's a gorgeous modern take on a "brown stone". Surrounding houses are corpo/workmens 2 up 2 downs not elegant Georgian townhouses, no particularly striking features imo.

eringobragh

Seriously think its hideous - must be just me so:pac:..could have tried to match the stone at the very least

Topgear on Dave

Meh... Iv seen a lot worse.

utmbuilder

Think its a disgrace iconic street from the past.

That is a genuinely ugly building, though I can see what they were going for. It looks the architect got distracted by a game of tetris half way through the facade...

Victor

The planning file references are

4431/16Sub01
4431/16
0003/17

The documentation can be downloaded from http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/wphappcriteria.display

I concur that it is easy to go wrong with pastiche and that contemporary design should be used, provided the new building is not incongruous with its neighbours. However, I think the flat roof / parapet, brick colour, windows and lack of a boot scraper are intolerable at various levels.

Rubberchikken

The flat style roof is a bit at odds with.the houses either side.
Having said that.i like both styles.

tradesman

It is a total disgrace. Nothing blends in. Could be a different story if it was in an area of detached houses with plenty of space between them. Having said that, it will probably win some obscure award for architecture soon!

Gumbo

tradesman wrote: »

It is a total disgrace. Nothing blends in. Could be a different story if it was in an area of detached houses with plenty of space between them. Having said that, it will probably win some obscure award for architecture soon!

That's the point, for it not to blend in.
In 100 years or whatever, people can view this streetscape and clearly see the different periods of construction and architecture styles.

I think it looks quite well.

LirW

I think it blends in really well. It's not 1900 anymore, that style isn't done anymore and simulating it would look even worse. I think it's tastefully inoffensive.

o1s1n

It's an interesting design but just doesn't work where it's located.

The minimalist design makes it look sandwiched in.

listermint

eringobragh wrote: »

Seriously think its hideous - must be just me so:pac:..could have tried to match the stone at the very least

Not matching the stone is the point...

Do you never watch grand designs?

Faking stuff to match in is a no no

And so it should be.

Thud

eringobragh wrote: »

the inspiration for the design...

zell12

No pebbledash
tut tut

sbsquarepants

kieran. wrote: »

Whats wrong with it it stands on its on merit/strengths while harmonizing with the existing materials.

Jaysus, Stevie is that you? Any chance of an autograph, maybe a few bars of I just called:D

eringobragh wrote: »

Seriously think its hideous - must be just me so:pac:..could have tried to match the stone at the very least

No, not just you. It's one of the ugliest houses I've ever seen...and probably cost a half a million! The ones either side aren't exactly architectural gems either mind, but they are what they are and that hideous piece of crap just stands out like a sore thumb.

whisky_galore

It's things like this that convince me that the Irish are aesthetically challenged. How come the Italians can put a modern building next to older ones without looking awful?

This looks like sh*t stuck to an army blanket.

Topgear on Dave

Why is there such a shortage of rentals?

Well...... we build 2 storey houses in the city centre.

strandroad

I can see the need for modern infills but this one is horrible. Proportions should be in harmony even if they are different; here they are completely random and the house looks broken. Looks like a botched project with good intentions.

zell12

strandroad wrote: »

I can see the need for modern infills but this one is horrible. Proportions should be in harmony even if they are different; here they are completely random and the house looks broken. Looks like a botched project with good intentions.

I agree.
Should be four stories high, otherwise that whole streetscape will be forever unchanged and forever low density

swarlb

Thud wrote: »

the inspiration for the design...

Kind of ironic that you'd pick a character from a cartoon based on a 'person' from the past, trying to blend in, in a world from the future.
I once lived in Stoneybatter, in a house similar to these. They were cold, damp, small... little boxes of rooms cluttered together. I'd imagine the interior of this house is much more user friendly then the originals.

Franz Von Peppercorn

What’s with the modern fetish for flat roofs?

I dint particularly like that design but there’s no problem with modern housing offsetting old housing.

listermint

whisky_galore wrote: »

It's things like this that convince me that the Irish are aesthetically challenged. How come the Italians can put a modern building next to older ones without looking awful?

This looks like sh*t stuck to an army blanket.

Self deprecating nonsense.

Go to the continent you'll see similar designs in city's across the place.

Ray Palmer

The comment on brown envelopes just illustrates the assumption everything is corrupt. Regular planning allows for this and there was no corruption. Of course people making the claim will affect other's perceptions to believe in corruption

whisky_galore

listermint wrote: »

Self deprecating nonsense.

Go to the continent you'll see similar designs in city's across the place.

I am on the continent pal. It's hard to beat us for ugly misplaced buildings.
At least the Soviet style apartments are functional and people still live in them unlike our own well known experiment. And they didn't turn into ghettos either.