I'm not sure - still - how I stand on this. I love the Clarence as it is now, but that is for sentimental reasons. I stayed there for the first time about 14 years ago, before it was renovated to what it is now. Then in recent years have stayed in the Garden Terrace Suite (the terrace of which was used in the Beautiful Day video) and the penthouse. It is a fine hotel of its type and has some wonderful features.
But the plans the owners have will bring it into the 21st century. Do we want that? Do we NOT want that. I can't decide. As long as it remains "beautiful"... that's all that matters. Because at the moment, it IS.
don't know exactly what all the board has a problem with. From what little I've seen, it looks like the plans will change the architectural character of the general area on the Liffey. The board probably has made a good decision to try to preserve this - Dublin is more than U2.
Could the hotel and adjacent buildings not be brought to the 21st century in a way that preserves Dublin's character on the exterior?
I agree with SS -- the design renderings for this expansion seem very much out of keeping with the nature of buildings on the Liffey. They use the facade of the Clarence but enclose it in a futuristic housing.
With all the marvels of renovation, there's no reason why you couldn't save the buildings, but gut them and reinforce them in order to modernize them. I worry that both this and the U2 Tower are awfully glitzy and don't take Dublin's nature into account. It's not Singapore or Hong Kong, after all.
Many cities in the UK and Ireland have renovated by knocking old buildings down and building new futuristic one in their place. This results in a loss of character, and places end up all looking the same. Cities like Manchester have renovated well because often they have kept the facade of the old buildings yet it's ultra-modern inside.
The Clarence needs upgrading, and it would probably benefit from being bigger, but why knock down the Georgian buildings beside it? Why can't they be incorporated into the upgrading with their facades just spruced up and all the modernity inside? The Dublin quaysides have character and I would like to see that stay - Dublin has lost so much of its architectural heritage over the last few years and it would be a shame if Edge and Bono were part of destroying more of it.
i really can't say i care that much whether our little richie riches get their way or not, but it is my understanding that the facades of the surrounding buildings will be retained.
7 Comments:
I'm not sure - still - how I stand on this. I love the Clarence as it is now, but that is for sentimental reasons. I stayed there for the first time about 14 years ago, before it was renovated to what it is now. Then in recent years have stayed in the Garden Terrace Suite (the terrace of which was used in the Beautiful Day video) and the penthouse. It is a fine hotel of its type and has some wonderful features.
But the plans the owners have will bring it into the 21st century. Do we want that? Do we NOT want that. I can't decide. As long as it remains "beautiful"... that's all that matters. Because at the moment, it IS.
Just MHO
don't know exactly what all the board has a problem with. From what little I've seen, it looks like the plans will change the architectural character of the general area on the Liffey. The board probably has made a good decision to try to preserve this - Dublin is more than U2.
Could the hotel and adjacent buildings not be brought to the 21st century in a way that preserves Dublin's character on the exterior?
I agree with SS -- the design renderings for this expansion seem very much out of keeping with the nature of buildings on the Liffey. They use the facade of the Clarence but enclose it in a futuristic housing.
With all the marvels of renovation, there's no reason why you couldn't save the buildings, but gut them and reinforce them in order to modernize them. I worry that both this and the U2 Tower are awfully glitzy and don't take Dublin's nature into account. It's not Singapore or Hong Kong, after all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Many cities in the UK and Ireland have renovated by knocking old buildings down and building new futuristic one in their place. This results in a loss of character, and places end up all looking the same. Cities like Manchester have renovated well because often they have kept the facade of the old buildings yet it's ultra-modern inside.
The Clarence needs upgrading, and it would probably benefit from being bigger, but why knock down the Georgian buildings beside it? Why can't they be incorporated into the upgrading with their facades just spruced up and all the modernity inside? The Dublin quaysides have character and I would like to see that stay - Dublin has lost so much of its architectural heritage over the last few years and it would be a shame if Edge and Bono were part of destroying more of it.
can you imagine having THE EDGE on your news? for something not related to music... I wish I lived there!!
i really can't say i care that much whether our little richie riches get their way or not, but it is my understanding that the facades of the surrounding buildings will be retained.
The development is expected to rejuvenate the Essex Street end of Temple Bar, despite objections from conservationist Michael Smith that the area was already lively enough.
However, opponents also fear the new development, which propose demolishing a significant proportion of protected buildings on Wellington Quay and retaining the facades, could set a precedent for protected buildings in other areas of the city.
The proposed new hotel was praised by Fáilte Ireland, which welcomed the redevelopment and innovative design, which it said would attract 'well educated and affluent' visitors to Dublin's city centre. However, the body expressed concern that the demolition of the protected buildings, retaining only the facades, would set a precedent for similar developments.
Speaking for Fáilte Ireland, Paddy Matthews refused to be drawn on whether the organisation was seeking to overturn planning permission, saying that it remained a matter for An Bord Pleanála.
Post a Comment
<< Home