Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

North Wharf buildings to be demolished

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    Nuke it all and be done with it. An empty field with aul fellas out grazing cattle would be preferable to whats there now. Its an absolute eyesore.


  • Options
    #63
    Tragamin2k2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 694 ✭✭✭Tragamin2k2


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    But it wouldn't. There is countless examples of where it has been done on this scale.There has been four already posted on this thread. I have posted another four in another thread on the same issue. Its already been done with the government buildings and ESB.The Granary on the Quay too, The type of thing we are talking about is available to see in the Guinness Hopstore. But the best example I have seen is in Eindhoven in Holland which I posted a link to. Ask yourself this do you actually apreciated the City Walls? Or are you only aware of it because of the efforts of others over the years. For most people it is the later because the city walls have been in a state of disrepair for generations until we finally copped on.

    what are you actually on about like


  • Options
    #64
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    Nuke it all and be done with it. An empty field with aul fellas out grazing cattle would be preferable to whats there now. Its an absolute eyesore.

    What a good atitude.....In 1970's cambodia.


  • Options
    #65
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    Tragamin2k2 wrote: »
    what are you actually on about like

    I have explained my reasoning. So have others. It's not rocket science so if you can't understand it the that is your problem.Maybe a trip to the library is in order.


  • Options
    #66
    LuckyFinigan
    Registered Users Posts: 866 ✭✭✭LuckyFinigan


    Any idea when they're planning on demolishing it? Can't wait to watch it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    LuckyFinigan wrote: »
    Any idea when they're planning on demolishing it? Can't wait to watch it.


    They're not.


  • Options
    #68
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    What a good atitude.....In 1970's cambodia.

    So you think I have a bad attitude because I no longer want to see old derelict buildings overshadowing the entire quay area? Fair enough, each to their own. The cost of renovating those buildings would surely be at least ten times what it would cost to level them and to put even a nice park or something in their place. Anything would be better than the way it currently looks.


  • Options
    #69
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    So you think I have a bad attitude because I no longer want to see old derelict buildings overshadowing the entire quay area? Fair enough, each to their own. The cost of renovating those buildings would surely be at least ten times what it would cost to level them and to put even a nice park or something in their place. Anything would be better than the way it currently looks.

    No I think you have a bad atitude because of your glib repsonses. You do not kinow what the cost is or the environmental damage by just demolishing them. Yet four people have posted several times with links as to why some (not all) of the buildings should be retained and posiible attractive solutions that have been done elsewhere. Maybe you would like to demolish Blacfriars and Greyfriars too? You see how easy the glibness is?


  • Options
    #70
    wellboytoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭wellboytoo


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    No I think you have a bad atitude because of your glib repsonses. You do not kinow what the cost is or the environmental damage by just demolishing them. Yet four people have posted several times with links as to why some (not all) of the buildings should be retained and posiible attractive solutions that have been done elsewhere. Maybe you would like to demolish Blacfriars and Greyfriars too? You see how easy the glibness is?

    I just like big bangs


  • Options
    #71
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    No I think you have a bad atitude because of your glib repsonses. You do not kinow what the cost is or the environmental damage by just demolishing them. Yet four people have posted several times with links as to why some (not all) of the buildings should be retained and posiible attractive solutions that have been done elsewhere. Maybe you would like to demolish Blacfriars and Greyfriars too? You see how easy the glibness is?

    Does using the word "glib" make you feel important or something? Comparing these buildings to Blackfriars or Greyfriars is like comparing apples and oranges. The buildings in question are rat infested eyesores, I personally do not care if they were pioneering structures when they were built or not.. If a cost effective solution would be to retain some of these buildings, then I would have no problem with that. The fact is that at the moment, these buildings have been decaying for decades and it gives an awful first impression of our historic city to tourists coming in through Ferrybank. It seems to me as if you either have a serious superiority complex (your way or the highway) or else you are completely unwilling to take on board other people's opinions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Max Powers
    Registered Users Posts: 3,510 ✭✭✭Max Powers


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    Does using the word "glib" make you feel important or something? Comparing these buildings to Blackfriars or Greyfriars is like comparing apples and oranges. The buildings in question are rat infested eyesores, I personally do not care if they were pioneering structures when they were built or not.. If a cost effective solution would be to retain some of these buildings, then I would have no problem with that. The fact is that at the moment, these buildings have been decaying for decades and it gives an awful first impression of our historic city to tourists coming in through Ferrybank. It seems to me as if you either have a serious superiority complex (your way or the highway) or else you are completely unwilling to take on board other people's opinions.

    +1, bit harsh maybe towards the end but there are some people (not singling out anyone) who reckon they are more enlightened than the knuckledraggers. The building is a complete eyesore in it current state, to renovate it would cost multiples of what it would cost to demolish and even if renovated would still be not very pleasing to look at. Just because innovative techniques were used in its construction, it just doesnt balance out with the eyesore factor. People who appreciate the reinforced concrete thing will just have to think back to its original charms after it hits the ground. Sooner the better


  • Options
    #73
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    Max Powers wrote: »
    +1, bit harsh maybe towards the end but there are some people (not singling out anyone) who reckon they are more enlightened than the knuckledraggers. The building is a complete eyesore in it current state, to renovate it would cost multiples of what it would cost to demolish and even if renovated would still be not very pleasing to look at. Just because innovative techniques were used in its construction, it just doesnt balance out with the eyesore factor. People who appreciate the reinforced concrete thing will just have to think back to its original charms after it hits the ground. Sooner the better

    Yeah I didnt mean to turn that into a personal attack but I dislike people with a holier than thou attitude. Agree 100% with your post. I guess we can all agree on the fact that something needs to be done down there. Its gone on for long enough now. Someone taking the trouble to write the word "C**T" in large letters across the top of the building last year was the final straw.


  • Options
    #74
    invalid
    Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭invalid


    Just wish to point out, these are not warehouses that are easily subdivided. The are grain drying silos, vertical shafts which extend from ground level to the very top. Sure, there are some stairs but no floors. Regardless of what ever technique was used in there construction they are a 1 use building that would be not be in any way, shape or form economical to save.

    I feel its about priorities now, which is better, wait and hope someone with bucketfuls of cash swoop in and renovate the buildings (and i am sure that whomever did such a thing would face an amount of objections, many no doubt from those now objecting to the demolition) or demolish them and remove the single biggest eyesore in the south east.


  • Options
    #75
    space2ground1
    Registered Users Posts: 503 ✭✭✭space2ground1


    Imagine a modern Bord Gais theatre type event centre there with a footbridge to the opposite quay. A few small restaurants and nice spaces for small open air events.. and no rats.


  • Options
    #76
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    Does using the word "glib" make you feel important or something? Comparing these buildings to Blackfriars or Greyfriars is like comparing apples and oranges. The buildings in question are rat infested eyesores, I personally do not care if they were pioneering structures when they were built or not.. If a cost effective solution would be to retain some of these buildings, then I would have no problem with that. The fact is that at the moment, these buildings have been decaying for decades and it gives an awful first impression of our historic city to tourists coming in through Ferrybank.



    No the word glib desribes your arguement in a nutshell.....Nothing.. I'm sorry so find a four letter word so overpowering. The fact that you think I am tallking about all of these buildings shows that the arguement is completely gone over your head. The atitude being expressed by you and others to the listed buildings on this site is the exact same that saw many examples of our heritage destroyed.And btw you haven't posted any facts!
    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    It seems to me as if you either have a serious superiority complex (your way or the highway) or else you are completely unwilling to take on board other people's opinions.

    It's a debate. Get over it...


  • Options
    #77
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    No the word glib desribes your arguement in a nutshell.....Nothing.. I'm sorry so find a four letter word so overpowering. The fact that you think I am tallking about all of these buildings shows that the arguement is completely gone over your head. The atitude being expressed by you and others to the listed buildings on this site is the exact same that saw many examples of our heritage destroyed.And btw you haven't posted any facts!



    It's a debate. Get over it...

    The thing is, you arent debating. You are shoving your opinions down other people's throats. I dont need to post any facts - what are you even talking about? I have expressed my opinion, which is that the buildings in question are rat infested eyesores that ruin the landscape of the town, and I either want them gone or if a cost effective solution can be found, developed. "Facts" dont come into it. I personally do not think that taking these buildings away would negatively affect our heritage in any way. Anyway, I'm tired of you now. I hope something can be done with these buildings, and very soon at that. The Ard Ri Hotel too. The entrance to the town coming from the Ferrybank direction is awful.


  • Options
    #78
    test2014
    Registered Users Posts: 91 ✭✭test2014


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    The entrance to the town coming from the Ferrybank direction is awful.

    Its like post WW2 Germany on the left side going to town. Disgusting dump.

    Part of the heritage me arse. If thats Waterford Heritage its no wonder its such a depressing, deprived, hellhole.

    Tear it down.


  • Options
    #79
    fuzzy dunlop
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭fuzzy dunlop


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    The thing is, you arent debating. You are shoving your opinions down other people's throats. I dont need to post any facts - what are you even talking about? I have expressed my opinion, which is that the buildings in question are rat infested eyesores that ruin the landscape of the town, and I either want them gone or if a cost effective solution can be found, developed. "Facts" dont come into it. I personally do not think that taking these buildings away would negatively affect our heritage in any way. Anyway, I'm tired of you now. I hope something can be done with these buildings, and very soon at that. The Ard Ri Hotel too. The entrance to the town coming from the Ferrybank direction is awful.

    I am not shoving my opinions down anyones throat. Some of the posters here are a bit quick to paint others as some sort of high handed snob becsuause they have some awareness of what is important and what isn't. You don't need to post facts? That really is an interesting approach to things. Rat infested is a phrase that is nothing but a cliche that can be used to describe anything. Do you get it? It is meaningless.The half moon tower was rat infested before they cleaned it. The granary was rat infested before they refurbished it.Everything becomes rat infested when its empty. Half the Georgian buildings in the country are rat infested at one time or another.So you don't thinks it is important enough for any sort of preservation? Good for you. Others do not just me but the experts on the subject. That is why the building in question is listed in the architectural journals. Why don't and a few other sneerers actually learn something about what is over there instead of passsing "heritage me arse comments"? Its about the heritage of the city and not the appeasement of my our your ego.


  • Options
    #80
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    Botanical-apartment-therapy-Phuket-Thailand.jpgThere could be a hundred things that could go in there. Look at the links I posted for examples. I gave three specific examples.

    Maybe give some over to the community for carte blanche projects

    Grow it yourself
    Guerilla Gardenning
    Urban Bee Keeping like they do in London

    Here is another good example from this guy where money was a constraint

    https://www.ted.com/talks/edi_rama_take_back_your_city_with_paint

    You can put a dress on a pig, but it's still a pig.

    The building is awful. I personally don't like the above buildings, but sometimes you can't demolish it as it looks better dressing it up. This building, I really suspect, is beyond repair and beyond renovation. There has been no expression of interest from any manufacturer to pop in and setup shop. To be honest, I think the quay side isn't a great place for factories to be setup. The building needs to be demolished, cleared and something better developed, bringing life to that side of the bridge. It has huge potential and we shouldn't just dress it up for the sake of the building being rare or important in terms of heritage (I really don't think a tourist would have any interest in it, even if it was 'restored' as a museum or sort).


  • Options
    #81
    debit2credit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭debit2credit


    It was during the tall ships festival that I got to look at the site up close as I was bringing friends to the funfair on the north quays.

    I knew it was an eyesore but it was actually shockingly bad up close an embarrassment tbh and gave a dreadful first impression to my friends (which the rest of the festival well made up for I might add!)

    Integrated development on the site would really give the city a shot in the arm. Imagine the train station moved there opening out onto open park space with a landmark to acknowledge the old site and WIT buildings nearby to provide the student atmosphere. Cross the new pedestrian/cycle bridge and see the wonderful quayside we show on the postcards.

    Now that would be a first impression we could be proud of!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    fuzzy dunlop wrote: »
    I am not shoving my opinions down anyones throat. Some of the posters here are a bit quick to paint others as some sort of high handed snob becsuause they have some awareness of what is important and what isn't. You don't need to post facts? That really is an interesting approach to things. Rat infested is a phrase that is nothing but a cliche that can be used to describe anything. Do you get it? It is meaningless.The half moon tower was rat infested before they cleaned it. The granary was rat infested before they refurbished it.Everything becomes rat infested when its empty. Half the Georgian buildings in the country are rat infested at one time or another.So you don't thinks it is important enough for any sort of preservation? Good for you. Others do not just me but the experts on the subject. That is why the building in question is listed in the architectural journals. Why don't and a few other sneerers actually learn something about what is over there instead of passsing "heritage me arse comments"? Its about the heritage of the city and not the appeasement of my our your ego.

    Yep, its the appeasement of my ego that makes me want those buildings flattened. You really caught me out there. Go you!


  • Options
    #83
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    debit2credit wrote: »
    It was during the tall ships festival that I got to look at the site up close as I was bringing friends to the funfair on the north quays.

    I knew it was an eyesore but it was actually shockingly bad up close an embarrassment tbh and gave a dreadful first impression to my friends (which the rest of the festival well made up for I might add!)

    Integrated development on the site would really give the city a shot in the arm. Imagine the train station moved there opening out onto open park space with a landmark to acknowledge the old site and WIT buildings nearby to provide the student atmosphere. Cross the new pedestrian/cycle bridge and see the wonderful quayside we show on the postcards.

    Now that would be a first impression we could be proud of!!!

    Absolutely agree. There's so many better ways that the space along there could be used. Hopefully there'll be some progress made soon.


  • Options
    #84
    Zed Bank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 504 ✭✭✭Zed Bank


    test2014 wrote: »
    Its like post WW2 Germany on the left side going to town. Disgusting dump.

    Part of the heritage me arse. If thats Waterford Heritage its no wonder its such a depressing, deprived, hellhole.

    Tear it down.

    Ferrybank a "disgusting dump" ?

    Haha. Good one.


  • Options
    #85
    test2014
    Registered Users Posts: 91 ✭✭test2014


    Zed Bank wrote: »
    Ferrybank a "disgusting dump" ?

    Haha. Good one.

    No the abandoned buildings going from Ferrybank to town behind the garage.

    Ferrybank itself is one of the best areas in Waterford.

    Go read what i actually said again.


  • Options
    #86
    Deise Vu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,946 ✭✭✭Deise Vu


    The Celtic Tiger came and went and no-one showed any interest in acquiring and developing this prime waterfront site. We will never see Celtic Tiger wealth / easy credit in our lifetimes. Expecting private equity to do it now is beyond ludicrous and the govt won't have any capital budget for the foreseeable future that would allow it to ignore it's innate compulsion to spend money anywhere in the country before Waterford.

    The people who defend these monstrosities are the same people who were marching to preserve Wood Quay and who will be marching to preserve the Civic Offices built on Wood Quay sometime in the future because Sam Stephenson was an 'important' architect (ie a pompous git with the inside track). Its a matter of taste, these aren't historic or ancient and a method of construction doesn't set too many pulses racing(mass concrete - wow, fancy that!!! They should furnish it with formica tables and plastic chairs to really make it attractive.).

    Ignoring the wishes of the vast majority and imposing this visual carbunkle on them because some tiny minority has a fixation that anything older than 50 years must be great is the worst kind of elitism. The buildings are an ugly eyesore, the hills beyond are attractive. Blow the fcuking things up tomorrow.


  • Options
    #87
    MRnotlob606
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,642 ✭✭✭MRnotlob606


    Imagine turning it into the headquarters of pseudo-religious organisation for people with red hair


  • Options
    #88
    Tragamin2k2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 694 ✭✭✭Tragamin2k2


    MRnotlob606 wrote: »
    Imagine turning it into the headquarters of pseudo-religious organisation for people with red hair

    ok i imagined it and it wasnt that funny


  • Options
    #89
    MRnotlob606
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,642 ✭✭✭MRnotlob606


    Tragamin2k2 wrote: »
    ok i imagined it and it wasnt that funny

    Sorry hun u OK XOXOXO


  • Options
    #90
    debit2credit
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭debit2credit


    The only good thing from Waterford is the road out! It is a depressing kip of a town with rotten and decaying buildings and derelict sites all over the centre spreading outwards.

    www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=91453321

    From the worst town in ireland thread on AH...

    Any update on the plan to demolish the rats nest?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    thomasm
    Registered Users Posts: 1,501 ✭✭✭thomasm


    debit2credit wrote: »
    www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=91453321

    From the worst town in ireland thread on AH...

    Any update on the plan to demolish the rats nest?

    Nearly 250 submissions to that thread and only one mention. Some of the grumpy locals must not have seen the thread


Advertisement