Sir John Rogerson Qy

I don’t like curves in tall buildings. Just me. It makes more of a “look at what we can do with our high-tech materials” statement than an architectural one.

Still, very snazzy.

Sorry for diverging from the thread title but having recently seen the Swiss Re building under construction in London, I have to say it looked incredible… the curves just make it stand out… would we ever be so brave in Ireland to allow such a unique building ?!?

Image taken from Foster’s website

have to say i don’t like the curves on City Hall building beside Tower Bridge in a faraway silhouette, although it looks fantastic close up. I’d even say homely.

ps Paul, a google for “city hall london” throws up a good rating hughpearman.com

Incidently, Graham, Pearman sides with you on said techology vs. restraint argument. I’m still sitting on a very slightly curved fence

http://www.hughpearman.com/articles3/cityhall.html

Wow …what a building!

Foster is a great architect….auld codger of the realm and all as he is!
Hugh Pearman can be conservative and reserved at times.
Being conservative and restrained restricts creativity. This can lead to stagnation…….run of the mill hum drum ennui!
Aka …here’s to being bonkers and alternative
and different at times (but once it is well thought out)
Foster is a good thinker….he thinks out well his designs…….
Richard Rodgers …another auld codger and ‘knight of the realm’ produces even more bonker designs….and these are the so called ‘reserved cup of tea’ ‘nation of shopkeepers’ british.
Could we produce such characters of archtecture which produce innovative and striking architecture here in Ireland.

It’s a stylish building that’s proposed for Sir John Rogerson’s Quay….is’nt it and similar to the Burj Al Arab hotel in Dubai. Let’s hope they build it. Dublin city is in need for landmarkish and notable structures.

Burj Al Arab hotel , Dubai

I like it, would be very bold………..

Buildings that half heartedly use curves etc are just saying look at what we can do. At least a building that looks like a giant Easter egg is making a distinctive statement.

Above all, starkness and ‘going the whole way’ only works for me, whether it’s an almost clinical modern building, or the other side of the coin, a true and pure classical building. I detest watered down architecture, ie, early 90s post modernism or 80s Victoriana.

…..don’t forget your domed roofs of cathedrals of old and your onion shaped domes of Tzarist Russia and the Arabian Middle East. Curves have always been prevalent in architecture….have’nt they!
It’s just today that with hi-tech etc…the boundaries can be pushed further making statements for the times we live in today.

Curves are essential to architecture/engineering in that they create forms that efficiently resist forces – i.e. a straight beam of stone/timber can only span small distances, whereas the introduction of an arch or dome allows the material to be used much more efficiently. ‘Modern’ day industrialisation has made such forms too expensive to build due to the changing cost balance between labour and materials, along with ‘new materials’ such as reinforced concrete etc etc etc.

I like the Swiss Re building so much because it really does challenge our existing notion of what a building should look like. I think the last thing we need in Dublin is a Dubai hotel look alike, but it is hard for me to have an opinion on the Sir John Rogerson Quay building from just looking at the image above – there is no way to judge the texture/context of the building from such a computer generated model.

As for the City Hall in London – I think it looks really stumpy !!! But I think this puts it best:

I should point out that I only saw the city hall from a seat on the Thameslink so I probably should get a proper look at it before I start complaining !!! 🙂

Maybe this is a better image of the building:

Taken from the architects (Ó’Muiré Smyth – OMS) website.

brunel
the U2 site is in front of that on the corner of the quayside and going to be the landmark desired by the DDDA

But this building has planning permission. Has it expired? I thought that took five years.

So it’s not to be built then?

Didn’t realise the two sites were so close Paul

Image from DDDA site

The Sir John Rogerson’s Quay site is the large site DIRECTLY behind the U2 Britain Quay site (outlined in red). I looked at the U2 brief page here on Archeire and didn’t see anything mentioned about this building… which if it has planning (as some people here seem to think) then surely it has to be accounted for…. the view of the Sir John Rogerson’s Quay building shown above will look slightly different with a 60m high building stuck in front of it !!!

But surely this couldn’t happen ?!?!?

By the way I’m not saying that a cluster of tallish well designed buildings wouldn’t look good in this area, just think its strange that all those who submitted plans for the U2 building were not given all the info – by stating that the building was to be a landmark surely gives the impression that it will stand out from its surroundings, and not be blocked by another building right beside it !!!

But anyway I’m sure the farsighted people in the DDDA have thought of all of this….

Confused by this now…. the attachment below is from the DDDA plan for the area… the two tasteful ‘stars’ indicate the location of the two tall ‘landmark’ structures with the area, with the rest of the buildings being limited to cornflakes box proportions of 4-5 stories +1 possible setback.

Location of the ‘star’ though is right between Britain and Sir JR Quay’s …. maybe there was method in the madness of their graphic designers ?!?!?!

The Charlotte Quay apartment tower is another “landmark” there; it must be about 45m tall. Interesting to note that there are buildings of about the same height around and across from it on the map.

I suppose in an ideal world the whole area should be a ‘landmark’… will two or three buildings have to do then?

According to skyscrapers.com Sir John Rogersons Quay development has been given the go ahead. It comes under the approved section. What’s going on?!!

i quite like the imposing facade of Bolands Mill.

I remember seeing some modern paintings of and around these Mills by Joby(Jos?) Hickey. Very good they were too! Since then I’ve quite liked the Boland Mill. They also made it easy to counter objections to Millenium tower (which is the same height?)

Originally posted by Desmund
According to skyscrapers.com Sir John Rogersons Quay development has been given the go ahead. It comes under the approved section. What’s going on?!!

Multiple reasons
A) Recession – not much need for new office space when the existing stuff can’t be filled
B) War – see above
C) big fight within Dunloe Ewart led to delays in all their projects – now that Liam Carroll has his hands on it do you think Zoe developments are cgoing to build something as dramatic as this?

How about changing the use from offices to appartments………I’d bet they’d sell like hot cakes too. What a cool looking complex to live in.

We’ll I’d like to live there certainly – but I doubt I could afford it!!!

Is it just me or is it not strange that the fact that there is planning for a landmark building RIGHT BESIDE the U2 sight was not mentioned in the competition brief ?!? How can one design a building in the context of its surroundings when one isn’t even told that, oh ya by the way there is planning for a huge building across the road !?!?

Is it not up to the designer to familiarise themselves with the surroundings? Including history of and plans for the immediate surroundings?

I don’t think the building can be prevented if the developers wish to proceed with it as An Bord Pleanála have approved its permission:

http://www.archeire.com/news/archives.cgi?f=keyword&keywords=dunloe+ewart

Can DCC revoke a planning permission they have granted? Can you appeal to An Bord Pleanála if this happens?

With all this confusion about two large buildings being built juxtaposed I think the best people to ask would be the DDDA as they have total control of how the dock’s will develop.

Does anyone have any news or inside information on this building? Are there any plans for a commencement date on construction?

Given the recent U2 building decision, this is my last hope for Dublin!

Argggghhh, you and your tall buildings Will!!!!

I thought the west elevation of the Zoe/Dunloe Ewart building implied some semblence of architectural form which would have been conducive to a landmark building, visually terminating the quay. The east elevation however reveals a confused hodge podge of forms and proportions. This, coupled with the stumpy “twisted torso” U2 “tower” at the quay edge merely demonstrate the incompetance of planners who have squandered 2 wonderful opportunities to develop a worthwhile building in this painfully conservative city…….Oh what they would have done in Paris!!

Sorry Graham, just keen to see it developed thats all.

and so you should be keen. projects like these take far too long in ireland. the wait is terrible.

there could be a two year wait just like tara street.

true. tara street is a two year wait. as for the other, i don’t know but i’d say it will be some wait. that’s if it is even built!

Originally posted by d_d_dallas
Those are the Boland’s Mill etc… they are tall but featureless concrete walls.

I read somewhere that there are plans for this site now.

The walls may be featureless but the form looks very well from College St looking up Pearse St.

I believe Tara Street may have been cancelled.

There was a site notice on the property last week applying for alterations, although the changes sought looked quite minor it wasn’t dated.

Here are some Boland’s Mill pictures:

Originally posted by Diaspora
There was a site notice on the property last week applying for alterations, although the changes sought looked quite minor it wasn’t dated.

On the Tara Street site? Good. Maybe theres still hope.

Does anyone know anything more about the Sir John Rogerson’s Quay development? Has it officially been scrapped? Its still listed on OMS architects website.

As far as I know nothing at all has happened with it. Someone correct me, though, if I’m wrong.

Now that JR Quay is largely complete which of the buildings below do people feel would be most appropriate or should the Quay feature both?

@brunel wrote:

Image below

or

https://archiseek.com/content/showpost.php?p=45187&postcount=472

Its one or the other in my opinion – And I prefer the U2 tower by a LONG way. That rendering of the other tower looks revolting…

U2 tower.

I’d have to go with the U2 tower. The image above from that view looks a cumbursome pile plonked on the quayside. It’s not very attractive. The newer rendering of the U2 tower makes it somewhat more elegant, what the building above lacks.