The Street Of Shame

at

71b17dbe3cb9cb41fc95b2ae8894d619__20160213065353

Serv writes:

Took a walk down Grafton Street for the first time in ages. By God is it in some poo state already. The cheap ass bollards, bins and lamps are chipped to bits. Not to mention dirty and vandalised. Worse the cement between the paving is washing away so they’re all coming loose.

I’m not an engineer but is this a serious flaw in the construction material? Where the council has already repaired they can’t even match the old paving. Can we really trust these guys to pave over College Green?

Anyone?

Pics: Serv

27 thoughts on “The Street Of Shame

  1. Digs

    It’s the difference between builders and craftsmen. There has, and continues to be an awful eye for detail in the aesthetic of structure in this design free land. We couldn’t wait to destroy much of the offerings our colonial over lords gave us and now stubbornly seek to make all structure ugly and gaudy. IMO.

  2. Bonkers

    Whoever decided that the paving on Grafton St to be changed to grey slate should be shot. Did they not realise the Irish environment already has a grey sky? You wouldn’t go installing grey carpets and then paint your ceiling grey as well.

    1. brownbull

      Are you saying you preferred the cheap and nasty red bricks? The granite, not slate, was picked so that it looks better when wet, it reflects lights when wet to be brighter on an overcast day which is most of the year here. A lot of it is Wicklow granite, so the Council should be lauded for using local materials, thus keeping the embedded energy low.

        1. brownbull

          no it didn’t it was a national embarrassment, it was cheap, nasty, unsafe, poorly built, and without texture and variety, pedestrian streets such as Grafton St should be finished in cut stone – if you only regard these things in terms of colour you are going about it wrong

          1. ollie

            The red brick paving was laid in the late 80’s, therefore it survived over 20 years of heavy vehicular traffic.
            It wasn’t “cheap, nasty, unsafe, poorly built,”

          2. brownbull

            Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but an opinion that is not informed and cannot be defended with objective analysis is worth substantially less – The red brick was cheaper than cut stone, it was chosen as it it was the cheaper option. It is less durable, 20 years as you claim is nothing for an urban surface, the stone that was installed now can last forever if properly maintained. It was nasty in that it had no surface variation or texture and was very badly detailed. It was unsafe in that bricks easily came loose, the glazed white bricks had a poor slip resistance. Water got under the bricks due to the nature of the material, poor detailing, workmanship and maintenance causing bricks to pop out when the water froze, creating an unsafe surface, particularly for those with mobility difficulties. It was very badly built, falling into disrepair after 10 or so years of occasional delivery traffic – not heavy traffic as you claim – is a disastrous performance for an urban surface.

          3. Nigel

            All very important, but doesn’t really address the complaint, which was about the colour. If only there was some way of combining pleasant aesthetics with high-quality engineering standards. The impossible dream…

      1. rory

        Thanks. Great album too.
        (To anyone who hasn’t come across it, the album is called ‘If I Should Fall from Grace with God’. It’s well worth a listen.)

Comments are closed.