pulp
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Johnglas we are not totally in disagreement but the problem i see with being against mock Georgian or any other style is that the replacement would need to be better. Georgian is a simple, elegant and of medium density, and I would think very hard to improve upon. The Queen Anne development you mention is an example of why I believe this, it doent improve on the original design. The proportality but also the actual size as well as the materials used.
As the state will be coming into vast tracks of land over the next few months, it would opportune to select an area in the city, designatt a heritage conservation areas and put a master plan with street grid etc into place with very specific guidelines. Then either each street could be designed and built much as surbabn housing estates are now. The mix could include private and social units but with very high standards of maintenance. There should be a rate system which would finance maintenance and an intitial high level of security. This could be relaxed as the concept becomes accepted. As the state comes into ownership of lands a decision will have to be made what to do with them.
A developer ( if there are any left) could also instigate a development of this nature although they would need a lot of guidance.
John, I presume by Streetscape mean artificial replicated the whole way along the street similar to what was put into Mountjoy Square and yes I agree they were of poor quality with miniature doors, incorrect materials etc but does the square not look better than if suburban legoland had been placed on one side instead.
What im advocating is a replication of what was originally there with the design standards agreed in the city centre. Pull down the ESB building and replace with excellent quality mock Georgian, once the buildings have weathered a bit the street will look far better and consistent, likewise S Mc Dermott who looks truely hideous now. The city centre could again become a beautiful place to live. There are vast parts of the city that could be residentised again.
Areas such as the Docks can be developed for the more mainly commercial use, where bigger floor plans are needed and where the imagination is allowed to excel.
The Planning Department could put together a standard set of designs.
A plan put together for Dublin for redevelopment of the cities streets; as and when the buildings come up for renewal they would be replaced with these new stock buildings. The interiors could have fantastic purpose designed apartments with high ceilings. If the street furniture and greenery etc was designed similarly these could become a real urban alternative to commuting. Many of the streets could be closed to through traffic or possibly or even better have parking at the back of the the buildings with no traffic at the front whatsoever.Yes they would be mock or fake but the original Georgian buildings are simple and elegant and enchance the city why try and create something else.
How practical would it be in the future to tear down the current detritus and re-build new Georgian streets with a number of apartments in each “house” With 4 or 5 stories are they not be a medium density elegant solution to Dublin. A common design standard could be agreed to accurately replicate the original stock with door and window dimension specs, material specs etc with stringent sign off before anything is actually built. Over the course of 40/50 years we could recreate elegant streets and clear out all the present junk allowing beautiful modern buildings to be built in outlying areas such as East Village, SoHe etc?
After seeing these before and after photos and similar from other areas of Dublin I feel physically sick at what has taken place to this city. Historic Dublin streets frontages had a consistent architectural style similar to most other European cities. So much of these streets could have easily been restored. And to think most of the dreadful replacement buildings are of public ownership.
We are preoccupied with stopping development of tall building in newer parts of the city but arequite willing to see these historic street frontages replaced by such awful muck as long as they are “of the same height”.
We cover beautiful stone and brickwork with render, we accept neon signs on historic buildings, we cover temples in glass and build permanent portacabins behind.
As a nation we must be the most aesthetically challenged in Europe!
