Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FORMER LORD MAYOR of Dublin Councillor Mary Freehill said that she was alarmed to hear that the plans to list the former Central Bank building as a protected structure had been put aside.
Dublin City Council has delayed the plans to list the former Central Bank building as a protected structure until its next meeting.
A spokesperson for Hines, the US property company that bought the building last January, told the Irish Times it had asked that the listing be postponed.
Freehill said that at the last local area meeting last week, there had been unanimous agreement to commence with the public consultation.
In a statement this morning, Dublin City Council said that the listing was delayed only until the next meeting.
“At the recent meeting of the South East Area Committee, a decision on the initiation of the statutory process for the proposed addition of the Central Bank to the Record of Protected Structures, was deferred until its next meeting to enable the members attend a visit to the buildings at the invitation of the new owners of the former Central Bank.”
But Freehill said that they don’t have the power to do this.
“The listing of buildings to the Register of Protected Structures is a ‘reserve function’ of the council. In other words this is a function of the elected body of the Council.
The officials of the Council do not have the power to overrule the councillors in this instance.
The Central Bank has moved from its old premises on Dame Street to a new building on Dublin’s Quays.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Should be knocked down never mind protected
Exactly! But even the Poolbeg chimneys have fans. Dublin is a strange city.
@Celtic_Horizon:
Who in there right mind would want to keep that yoke!!!
@Awkward Seal: they don’t. Those chimneys are natural draught.
@Awkward Seal:
The Poolbeg Chimneys are part of the vista most Dubliners are used to. They can be seen from so many parts of the city, they need to be retained. People back in the old days probably wanted to knock Roman aquaducts because they we no longer functional. Same goes for the Central Bank, an iconic piece of brutalist architecture, it needs to be protected. At some stage our generations have to put something in place for future generations. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, it is there and should remain there.
@John Smith:
You seem to be saying no matter how good, bad or ugly any building is, they should never be knocked down?
@John Smith: Your last point is REALLY rubbish…
Personally I don’t think we have enough grey concrete monoliths in the city.
@Kevin Bell: Knock it down and restore Viking settlements there !! Or build row of cottages with piggy sheds in the gardens to follow our historic traditions !!
Why does it need to be protected? Its hardly St Peters in the Vatican.
@Bantersaurus Rex: Tell me better brutalism / post modernism architectural examples we have in Ireland ?
Protect this basic 1960s office block, used by bank clerks and with no historical or other significance!¡ We really have lost our way…
@Fank Pulman:
You obviously know little of the significance of the architecture. It has huge significance. Doesn’t matter the generation, someone will always complain. Should we knock churches because they are used by men in dresses? Or is it that because they look older we should attach more importance to them?
@John Smith: The building was by a relatively new top down method, no other significance springs to mind. As for other buildings – they need individual inspection to determine importance/relevance. With the National Trust, Historic Houses Association, English Heritage – the Brits have got it right, and places like Bath, York and Plymouth are a credit to them. Blending the old with the new…
Makes no difference. There’s not a hope they’d allow an interesting building on that site were they to knock it. Any proposal would be refused. Apparently ugly 1960′s office blocks are “national treasures” but any modern high rise is an abomination. What would we do without our inner city councillors.
@Fred Jensen:
I guess even if they knock it, it would be replaced with something worse.
They knocked a rake of gorgeous Georgian buildings in Fitzwilliam Street for the esb abomination, now they are trying again, but alas.
@Buster VL:
It would be replaced with 5-6 storey boxy rubbish, and even that would be appealed to ABP.
@Fred Jensen: You may not know but people called Eiffel Tower “ugly” after it was built in 1887 as temporary structure for 1998 World’s Fair. Lot of leading artists and intellectuals demanded it to be knocked down.
It’s a part of the Temple Bar area and it has long been a part of the dublin skyline. I know we are seriously lacking in tall buildings (Liberty Hall being the tallest) so we need to hang on to the ones we have. I personally don’t find it ugly. The views from the top floor must be amazing.
@Santa Carla: So is the view from the top of the Spire. ..
@Santa Carla: Yeah, cause tourists who head to Temple Bar definitely have that building on their to do list of sights to see.
@Fank Pulman: Whats your pount? Tou can’t stand on the top of the spire. If they do something with the building, it would be on tourists “to do” list, considering it’s proximity to tourist central (temple bar) and it’s great views.
@Santa Carla: It’s an uninteresting concrete box which was an office block for a bank. Even places like Newcastle have more historic/better buildings from the days of ship building, coal mining and the steel industry – none are protected.
@Santa Carla: really?
Now if Nelson’s column was still standing, ( it had a viewing platform, unlike a the spike) that would be one of Dublin’s top attractions.
@Santa Carla: Of COURSE the views from the top are amazing. That’s the one place from which you can’t see the building itself.
@Buster VL: In Brighton, they now have the British Airways i360 – a 530 ft high Spire like tower. With a viewing pod that moves up and down, to ground level. 750,000 people pay to go on it, every year.
@Fank Pulman: It’s actually a very interesting building from an architecture standpoint. Controversial though.
@Brian Boulter: Yes – it was built to rival The Spinnaker Tower in Portsmouth Harbour – about the same height. Modeled after a sail, it has an observation deck – accessed by lifts.
@Fank Pulman:
If nelson’s column still stood (even if he was replaced with, say, Daniel O’Connell) i bet there would be more than 750k per year visits.
@Buster VL: Maybe – but people these days want ease of access. Moving pods, lifts, escalators etc. These types of ‘viewing edifices’ are now in most European cities – and seem to be both money spinners and an easy way to see the sights.
@Fank Pulman: it’s actually quite an interesting concrete box architecturally. It was built from the top down.
So unelected council functionaries taking planning decisions that they don’t have the power to make after being asked nicely by a big property owner. Grand so. Nothing to see here. Hasn’t happened before. Move along folks.
Are these people for real ??? That building is a pile of rubble. Remove and replace with someone more elegant and more in keeping with the other beautiful buildings in the area.
Ugly building hope they knock it.
I’m alarmed that anyone would want to protect that monstrosity. Went for an interview there once. Horrible place. Best way to protect it would be with some well placed Semtex.
@David Knight: Didn’t get the job, eh?
@Santa Carla: No.
One of the ugliest buildings in Dublin.
Let’s hope one morning, it’s a pile of rubble like this one.
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/developers-who-knocked-down-convent-escape-with-1000-fine-26479760.html
Which IMHO should not have been demolished.
It’s very important that we preserve and protect Dublin’s ugliest buildings, so that they can serve as a warning.
looks more like a multi storey car park.
Is that a joke? That’s one of the ugliest buildings in Dublin. It should be demolished!
I actually really like that building. It looks great.
I don’t think it should be a listed building though. Too many buildings are listed these days.
This building is an absolute gem and it frustrates me immensely that too few people agree with me. It depresses me that most Irish people seem to automatically write off any grey building as being ugly. That doesn’t mean that I don’t also adore historic architecture- I do. Neither does it mean that I adore the cheap Functionalist tower blocks of Soviet Europe- I don’t- and anyone who thinks that this is in the same vein as those is a pleb.
As an aside, I think it’d also make a great place for a new public library.
@AdijazzJohnson: It’s a horrible out of place concrete and metal bunker that needs to be dynamited out of the city’s memory!
With the new College green plaza design coming soon, that part of Dublin city has a chance to be re-born for the people, and see the light of day that this “Darth Vader” of a building has been blocking for over 40 years!
Let’s have a Journal.ie poll on whether this monolithic eye-sore should be demolished completely or not?
And also on the Dublin City Corporation concrete bunkers, blow them up also!
I think it’s a monstrosity, totally out of character for Temple bar, and I for one will be there once the demolition crew come in to dynamite it back into rubble where it belongs!
They should knock it down and replace it with a statue of a homeless family to act as a constant reminder of the Central Bank’s failure to do it’s duty to protect the economic welfare of Ireland and it’s people
I like that building – the only building by Sam Stephenson I like.
What else would you have there? That new one across the road with the Golf Ball on the roof, (No. 79?) in front of Dublin Castle, is ridiculous
I think the method of building it involved it being built from the top storey down. It was unique at the time on account of the method of construction. Then again I might be wrong.
Yeah and the charge for the sky hooks was invoiced by an FF crony no doubt.
Fantastic building, terrible to see so much misguided negativity towards it.
@John Slade: Agree completely
Did the invitation to the meeting come in brown envelopes?..
Whatever you think of the design (personally I think it’s great) it is a rare (for Ireland) and stand alone example of fine brutalism which reflects cutting edge Architecture of it’s time. During the 1700s Georgian townhouses were ten a penny in Dublin and now we all bemoan the destruction of them. This building should most definitely be protected for future generations. The shite faux Georgian apartment blocks along the North and South Quays should be knocked instead. Concrete built is better built !!
I like it. I remember I got lost in town as a kid and wandered around inside it. It looks dated though – I’d prefer a building that came right out onto Dame Street and was double it’s height.
This is Ireland where’s the scam (akin to saying this is the sky where’s the sun? Fact you can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there…
have your say