[gordon_dalton]

Why is the Spire not lit at night time?
I think the Spire is a beautiful piece of architecture, and is one of the great city landmarks of Europe.
However, at night time the Spire cannot be seen, as it is not lit up, except for some weak lighting at the base, which illuminates approximately the first 10m.
I have written to Dublin City council twice. The first time they replied saying that it is fully lit. I then sent them a photo taken at night, showing that it was not. They replied saying that the designer did not plan to light the Spire, and advised me to contact the architects in London. I wrote to that company 6 months ago and received no reply. Recent correspondence with the Council states that the Spire is not lit from "practical and financial" reasons. Can anyone explain to me why this could be so?
It baffles me why the Spire is not considered worthy of illumination, when most other important landmarks in Dublin are lit. I think a fully lit Spire at night would be quite spectacular.

[Stripey Cat]

They should stick a webcam on the top of it. That'd be good.

[Vego]

Didnt it keep breaking ???

[ihsb]

I saw the top of it lit up only last night.

[P_1]

I think the OP means why is it not all lit up.

Actually sitting looking out at it lit up at the top as we speak.

I'd say lighting it fully as it is lit on the top would be a non runner but I wonder if it would be possible to light it from the bottom, perhaps with a large spotlight shining stright up?

[Lapin]

Originally Posted by gordon_dalton

I think the Spire is a beautiful piece of architecture, and is one of the great city landmarks of Europe.
.

Its a piece of sculpture rather than architecture but thats a pedantic correction.

I'd have more issue with its description as one of the great city landmarks of Europe.

Thats really stretching the imagination.

[overshoot]

it would look awful during the day if you put strip lighting all along it for the night time light, the alternative is the superpowerful spotlight pithater1 suggested.
Now walk over the lights that are there at night... uncomfortable? now fit ones that are 10x more powerful. you would be blinded (and walk into traffic and sue) if you looked down at them and the surface area around the base which currently contains them would be increased to get an angle. plus it functions as a meeting point, that wont work anymore if its too uncomfortable to stand around.

some sort of system above eye level is the next option but other than creating a circle around the spire (which wouldnt look too good either) for a low angle and even light, the next option is this(quick google search);

personally i wouldnt go for it either and those lights would cost a fortune, (probably giving the defunct smithfield torches a run for their money) and only light another 10m... or you put an army of them over the gpo....
anyway thats my few minutes thinking as an arch student as to why its not lit... had never thought about it before this, fits with "practical and financial" i suppose

[Jellybaby1]

When I saw the original artist's impression of it before it was erected, it looked more like a lighthouse and the light from the top looked like a beam that would stretch right over the city. After it went up, the first time I saw any light on top of it, the light looked just pitiful, like a little fairy light. It has nothing to say about Dublin or Ireland. Beautiful? Maybe somewhere else it might be deemed beautiful, but slap bang in the middle of O'Connell Street it is just very wrong. There are posts in H&H about a replacement for Nelson's Pillar.

[kieslowski]

I think what the OP meant is that it should be lit by spot lights, not lit from within. Personally I would be totally in favour of that. Obviously Dublin City Council aren't and are happy to leave 'The Spire of Light' in almost total darkness during the night. Any structure of a similar nature around the world is illuminated at night without a problem. Of course there's a cost involved but if you can't afford to run something it shouldn't be built in the first place. But then this is Dublin City Council we're talking about, an institution not known for its enlightenment.

[SubBusted]

Would attract moths.

[tayto lover]

We couldn't afford the E.S.B. bill at the moment.

[Mr.S]

Originally Posted by overshoot

it would look awful during the day if you put strip lighting all along it for the night time light, the alternative is the superpowerful spotlight pithater1 suggested.
Now walk over the lights that are there at night... uncomfortable? now fit ones that are 10x more powerful. you would be blinded (and walk into traffic and sue) if you looked down at them and the surface area around the base which currently contains them would be increased to get an angle. plus it functions as a meeting point, that wont work anymore if its too uncomfortable to stand around.

some sort of system above eye level is the next option but other than creating a circle around the spire (which wouldnt look too good either) for a low angle and even light, the next option is this(quick google search);

personally i wouldnt go for it either and those lights would cost a fortune, (probably giving the defunct smithfield torches a run for their money) and only light another 10m... or you put an army of them over the gpo....
anyway thats my few minutes thinking as an arch student as to why its not lit... had never thought about it before this, fits with "practical and financial" i suppose

that photo looks nice but i'd imagine it would be to distracting for cars / planes?

[anncoates]

Am I the only one that really likes The Spire?

I like the simplicity of it and the incongruity of its form against the other structures around it.

What might look nice would be a number of single small lights studded all the way up the structure.

[Sidd]

Doesn't it have lights all the way up from about halfway? There were problems getting them to work from what I recall.

[pmcmahon]

It always reminds me a of a silver crap christmas tree at night.