O' Connell Street, Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby archipig » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:41 pm

If some of tthe buildings are to be turned into restaurants / bars / cafes on the street (such as the central bar) it would be nice to see some outdoor seating areas in front of them.
archipig
Member
 
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 12:08 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby fergalr » Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:52 pm

The cleaning of the Savoy cinema block is transforming its appearance. I hope the entire length of it is getting a scrub. It's going from grubby brown to an austere grey. Lines look nice and sharp.
fergalr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Howth, Co. Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:16 am

missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Peter Fitz » Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:23 am

fergair wrote:The cleaning of the Savoy cinema block is transforming its appearance. I hope the entire length of it is getting a scrub. It's going from grubby brown to an austere grey. Lines look nice and sharp.


Hopefully it is the entire block, between this, the NIB & Ulster bank, quite a few eh 'positive' developments on the street of late :)
Peter Fitz
 

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:18 pm

Yip. Though in the case of the 1920s terrace, it's just the State-interest sections getting treatment - i.e. the southern 40 per cent or so.

A view from December 2005, shortly after the trees came down.

Image
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby fergalr » Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:00 pm

It's a vast facade alright. But it just doesn't work in the slightest. The only sense you get of a unified facade is occassional enlightenment from across the road or in a drawing of the whole block on the wall of that pub just up the road from the Gresham.
fergalr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Howth, Co. Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:54 pm

Agreed about the diluted symmetry, but it is a terrace of such breadth as to make questionable even the most rigidly proportioned set-piece having much impact. What it loses in symmetry it makes up for in grandeur of scale and design.

Current view.

Image


The contrast on one of the partially cleaned Portland stone pilasters at ground floor level of Hammam Buildings.

Image


And the rather forlorn looking former NIB across the way.

Image


A dash of Glaswegian swagger on O'Connell Street.

Image


Smithfield Resi wrote:Are there outstanding enforcement notices that have not been passed to legal proceedings?


There are certainly cases running into several years where there have been no results. Indeed, just walking down the street today after taking the above pictures, the level of complete and utter lack of enforcement is nothing short of breathtaking. Even the newly opened Spar at the corner of Cathedral Street are breaching their own planning permission, never mind provisions of the SAPC:

Condition 4. The following shall apply to the operation of the shop: a) No goods or free-standing advertising structures associated with the proposed development shall be erected on the adjoining public pavement or at the entrance of the shop. b) All windows shall be maintained at all times, and the glazing shall be kept free of all stickers, posters and advertisements. c) The sound level of any loudspeaker announcement, music or other material projected in or from the premises shall be controlled so as to ensure the sound is not audible in adjoining premises or at two meters from the frontage. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

Yah...
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:26 am

It has featured many times before on this thread, but the corner building at No. 68-69 Upper O’Connell Street, which incorporates a number of properties, is a remarkable structure on a number of levels, in spite of its down-at-heel appearance.

Image

Not only is it likely to be the oldest building standing on the thoroughfare, it has also survived no less than five extensive waves of redevelopment on the street:

1) The demolition of the lower end of Drogheda Street by the Wide Streets Commission in the 1780s, when the creation of a more formal corner at this point would have been a desirable aspiration.

2) The extensive wave of demolitions and grandiose rebuilding conducted during the 19th century.

3) The orgy of destruction inflicted by the 1916 Rising. No. 68-69’s positioning adjacent to the focal target on the street makes its survival all the more remarkable, not least considering the fate of the Hotel Metropole on the opposing side of the GPO.

4) The further destruction focused primarily on the Upper street during 1922. Again the building escaped largely unscathed.

5) The onslaught of property speculation in the 1960s and 1970s and resultant destruction, when O’Connell Street lost some of its finest stock. Again No. 68-69 stood tall.

What follows is an attempt to piece together the provenance of this intriguing structure, which has the unique cachet of being located next door to the most reproduced and photographed building in Ireland of the last two centuries, since its completion in 1818. The fact that No. 68-69 was formerly sandwiched between the grandiose set-piece of the GPO and the Pillar makes analysis of the building all the more fruitful; it unwittingly forms the backdrop to countless shots.


No. 68-69 Upper O’Connell Street has its origins in the creation of Sackville Mall, the ambitious elongated residential square laid out by Luke Gardiner c. 1748-49. Involving the demolition of some of the upper part of the late 17th century Drogheda Street, it is likely that a number of Dutch Billy houses barely 50 years old were swept away in the process.

Image

One little observed aspect of Gardiner’s choice of site for the Mall is that the majority of upper Drogheda Street remained undeveloped as late as the publication of Charles Brooking’s map in 1728.

Image

Presuming little else emerged between this point and the 1750s (quite possible if Gardiner was engaged with Henrietta Street and other parts of his extensive estate), it follows that the ideal site for a grand street laid out in accordance with the newest principles would be centrally located, vacant land in an otherwise established area. Upper Drogheda Street was an obvious choice.

Named after the Lord Lieutenant of 1751-55, Lionel Cranfield Sackville, 1st Duke of Dorset, Sackville Mall measured a breathtaking 150 in width, stretching a colossal 1050 feet from Great Britain Street (Parnell Street) in the north to the junction with Henry Street in the south. Famously, the centre of the street was dominated by a promenading mall lined with low granite walls and obelisks topped with lamps. Reference has been made to it being planted with elm trees some years later.

Image

Eamon Walsh has noted that the first development on the Mall took place on the eastern side, with one of the first leases dating to 8 May 1750. Gardiner appears to have been keen to get development underway as quickly as possible in an effort to publicise the square, even lending money to some lessees to build their houses. Much of the eastern side was complete by 1755.

As nothing remains of this early phase of building due to comprehensive redevelopment on the eastern side of the street, we must turn to the western side for fragments of early construction. Rocque’s map indicates that not all of the western flank was complete by 1756 (at variance with Grace’s idealistic artist’s impression of four years previous).

Image

Whereas the eastern side had largely been purpose-built for the wealthy and powerful, the early phase of the western side (pictured below) was built by a number of builder/developers who acquired Gardiner’s narrower plots here for speculative building.

Image

The terrace of modest two-bay houses evident in Grace’s image is clearly apparent to this day in the narrow plot widths that comprise this stretch of the street. North of the modern-day Dublin Bus HQ, the houses got larger. Nathanial Clements built one of the most substantial, typical of his Henrietta Street mansions, at the corner with Great Britain Street. This plot lease, dating to 12 May 1753:

“contain[ed] to the front to the said Mall 143 feet 4 inches and in the rear to stable land 49 feet 4 inches…boarding to the north Great Britain Street., one the south to…Benjamin Burton.”

This large double-fronted house (the street mean was about 75 feet in width) appears to be this plot at the top of the street.

Image

This, along with the adjacent northern plot, informs the modern-day AIB building on the corner with Parnell Street. The date of May 1753 confirming an empty plot, contrasting with a developed plot as depicted by Rocque in 1756, tells us something of the date of similar buildings along this terrace. The lease of the building plot of what is now the last surviving intact house on the street today, No. 42, dates to 1752. It is fair to deduce that most of these larger houses on the west side date/dated to c. 1753-60.

The first reference to No. 68-69 Upper O’Connell Street occurs at an earlier point, in 1752. The building was constructed by a John Turner, who leased the completed structure in July 1752:

“unto the said Francis Morand all the new dwelling house and tenements, situated on the west side of Sackville Street.”

Given the building had already been built by this time, it is safe to assume that construction began sometime around 1750-51, making it without question one of the earliest structures on this side of the street. Critically, the fact that this building was located on the site of an older holding on Henry Street, suggests that an existing interest may have been placated with a speedy reconstruction. Also, this building formed part of the introductory stretch of the street and gave form to its entrance corner, further suggesting a quick turnaround in building. It is likely this building was the first to be built on the Mall, and is therefore the oldest on O’Connell Street. An extensive trawl through all leases of the west side would of course confirm or disprove this. In any event, it is a matter of mere months in question rather than years.

The 1752 lease reference to ‘tenements’ is a curious but illuminating one. This use would explain the odd design of the building as depicted in Grace’s image of the Mall, where a mean rounded-headed doorway leads into the house (north), and why a bizarre square-headed doorway with adjoining picture window dominates the frontage of the corner property (south). (The elaborate doorcase on Henry Street, as at the other side of the Mall, is purely artistic licence).

Image

Seemingly the corner building was a commercial unit of some kind, with a dwelling house proper attached to the side. The term ‘tenement’ in the 18th century had a different meaning to that of today, referring to all rights, leases and boundaries associated with a property, rather than the modern-day association with low order accommodation. Nonetheless, this unorthodox lease and building type on a grandiose new residential thoroughfare further suggests that an older interest on Henry Street was being accommodated.

By 1818, the same five-bay structure is depicted a little differently to that by Oliver Grace.

Image


Although ostensibly the same building, the earlier regular parapet facing Henry Street is shown here as being an exposed gable. Given artists’ tendencies to blur the focus on irregularities such as these, it seems unlikely that such a roof structure would be depicted unless it was actually there.

Image

However, given the neighbouring houses’ attic windows do not align with the lower pitch of their roofs, as at No. 68-69, it is safe to assume there is an inaccuracy in that respect at least.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:31 am

The blatantly commercial ground floor with shopfront fascia, pilasters and pretty paned windows to both elevations, suggests the entire five bays of the building had been consumed for commercial purposes by this stage. Separate access to the upper floors is still apparent.

Image

This is, incidentally, one of the earliest depictions of a modern shopfront in Dublin.

Another view, this time from 1827, is not accurate in the number of window bays depicted, but does show the same exposed gable. A shopfront also features.

Image


A further drawing from around the same time by Brocas, possibly based on the former, is also inaccurate in bays, but is probably more true to life with its mismatched parapets. Again, a grand shopfront can be seen.

Image


It would appear that the building underwent significant alteration shortly afterwards, in approximately 1830-40, involving the regularisation of the parapets, possibly the rebuilding of the roof structure and chimneys, the replacement of the sash windows, and the addition of five uniform stucco window surrounds at first floor level in line with the emerging Victorian fondness for decoration on the street’s sparse classical facades. This date would also tie in with the commonplace overhaul of a building a century or so after its construction.

It has proven impossible to determine if the render coating was applied at this time utilising photographic evidence alone. Weighing up all possibilities, including taking neighbouring buildings into account, it remains a matter of complete speculation. The only factor that may weigh on the side of the brick façade surviving until later a date is that if it was rendered c. 1830-40, the two properties within the corner block would have been painted different colours in the below images. They are not.

Just three windows dating from this c. 1830-40 wave of alteration survive, on the Henry Street elevation. These are amongst the oldest windows in the entire area.

Image



Image


One of the earliest photographs of O’Connell Street, dating from 1858, shows the shadows of stucco surrounds in situ by that time.

Image


By the early 1860s, things are much clearer, if not quite the façade material.

Image

Including the windows being bravely painted! A highly ambitious, expansively glazed shopfront with fascia is apparent by now, made possible by an internal cast iron column and supporting beams. The subdivision of the properties into their modern three-bay and two-bay form is also clearly notable at this point. It probably happened earlier, and is easily confirmed through directories, but we’ll have to leave something for any consultant architects to research themselves.

A similar scene in a c. 1870 perspective.

Image


And again this one of c. 1890s.

Image


Most interestingly however, the render finish did not appear to arrive, as one may expect, post-1916 as an economical sticking plaster for bullet wounds, as happened at the corner with Bachelors Walk. The earliest photographic suggestion of render unearthed is this picture of c. 1900. It is possible that it is painted brick however.

Image

The property subdivision is also clearly apparent here.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:35 am

In spite of myriad images of 1916, I haven’t happened upon any depicting this specific building. 1922 is more successful.

Image

Here we can clearly see in situ the different window surrounds of the corner three bays on O’Connell Street and the corner single bay on Henry Street, which are still evident to this day. Finely drawn blockwork is also apparent above the magnificent Edwardian shopfront.

Image

The newly completed terrace across the road looks crisp and smart.

It seems likely that the damaged inflicted in 1916 necessitated a re-rendering of the corner three-bay property of the wider five-bay building, where the window surrounds were also re-executed in an economical and distinctly ungainly manner and quoins added. Indeed, such was the economy of the works that it appears the c. 1830-40 windows were retained and simply worked around, as seen above. Presumably therefore, the modern plate sashes date from post-1922, though going by their poor build quality, probably from the 1940s.

Image


Poor joints.

Image


The clearest archive images of the building naturally date from the 20th century. This one shows our building in the 1940s - remarkably still with 1830-40 sashes at the upper levels - as busy home to multiple businesses.

Image


This from about the same date also shows Georgian-style windows.

Image


This vibrant technicolour view from the early 1960s suggests No. 68-69 has been painted pink and white since then.

Image


Not quite so. This marvelous photograph from March 1966 shows the mother of all dodgy paint jobs (and eerily prescient of the modern-day black and yellow scheme to the Henry Street elevation).

Image

Perhaps the Pillar explosions should be added to the list of events escaped from over the years.

Image

The present paint scheme emerged soon afterwards.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:39 am

So what to do with this decrepit block occupying a prominent corner site adjacent to the GPO?

Image

Well firstly, what do we have to work with? In summary, an apparently significantly modified mid-Georgian structure of c. 1750-51, where only the principal parts of the external and probably some internal walls date to the original construction. Modified c. 1830-40, the upper parapet levels are likely to be of replacement brick Рindeed if not the entire external shroud Рwith the rear fa̤ade of yellow brick almost certainly dating from this alteration. The stucco window surrounds to the first floor of the northernmost two bays appear to date from this time also, and are of good, if unremarkable, quality.

Image


All stucco surrounds to the southernmost three bays and single bay on Henry Street are of extremely poor quality and contribute little to the character of the building.

Image


Splayed internal shutter boxes with a central square motif are typical of the 1830s and 1840s, suggesting most of the interior detailing also dates from this time.

Image


The shallow roof structure and minimal yellow brick chimneys appear to date from the c. 1830-40 renovation.

Image


As does the rear elevation.

Image


In assessing options for restoration and conservation, the questions to be asked are: is the current exterior worthy of retention as is, and if not, what state in the building’s history should it be restored to?

There is little doubt that a crass render-clad façade with mixumgatherum stucco adornments does little to lend dignity to the setting of the GPO, nor this important corner at the entrance to Henry Street. It would be illogical on a number of grounds, not least commercial ones, to restore the building to its original 1752 state, especially considering the level of modification that has taken place in the interim. It would therefore be of much greater value, logic and sound justification to restore the building to its c. 1830-40 state, a period when the building entered the modern commercial age, embracing a function which it still plays host to today, and whose modifications comprise the basic form of the current structure.

As such, it would be my view that No. 68-69 should be stripped of its (hopefully lime) render if possible, exposing the original brickwork (whenever that may date from). This would involved removing all window surrounds except those two that survive from the alteration, and their replication across the other first floor windows.

Image

All windows should be restored to late Georgian sashes of c. 1830, creating a suitably restrained classical setting for the GPO.

It is fashionable to deride reproduction, but a high quality traditional shopfront, possibly with awnings, is highly desirable for this site, not least considering the creative solutions employed until the early 20th century for retail corner entrances. Restoring the building to a hokey Bath craft shop of Jane Austin proportions is not what is being advocated – rather a shopfront informed by simple 19th century Dublin precedent to gel with the wider host building. The proliferation of mutilated heritage shopfronts across every convenience store across the capital is not excuse enough to brand such a solution as unimaginative – indeed the very fact it has never actually been done properly makes it quite the opposite.

Let’s see some action on this significant building – a structure that has borne witness to so many significant events in its lifetime from its front row seat, as to make it a wonder that it is still standing at all. It deserves some care and attention.

Image
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby gunter » Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:47 pm

GrahamH wrote:
The shallow roof structure and minimal yellow brick chimneys appear to date from the c. 1830-40 renovation.

It would be illogical on a number of grounds, not least commercial ones, to restore the building to its original 1752 state, especially considering the level of modification that has taken place in the interim. It would therefore be of much greater value, logic and sound justification to restore the building to its c. 1830-40 state, a period when the building entered the modern commercial age . . .



At one of those enthralling Peter Walsh lectures on early Irish photography, in the Gilbert before Christmas, he showed two 1850s photographs looking towards O'Connell St. taken from Talbot St. The earlier one showed this five bay corner house with it's original steeply pitched, Henrietta Street style, roof, which had, by the time of the second photograph, been replaced by the current low pitched roof.

While I agree with Graham on the restoration of the facade and the substitution of more subtle shopfronts, I think there is a case for reinstating the original roof profile as well, on the basis that elements from first construction in the case of set-piece enterprises like Sackville Mall (as with Newmarket etc.) should carry more weight than elements from subsequent phases.

Image

It's interesting that this conspicuously roofless perspective of Sackville Mall appears to show some manner of shopfront type installation to part of the ground floor of this house virtually from day one.
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:27 pm

And I particularly like how the central access door remains constant after two and a half centuries of alterations.

gunter wrote:At one of those enthralling Peter Walsh lectures on early Irish photography, in the Gilbert before Christmas.


Aha! For the life of me I couldn't think where I'd seen that picture! I was in the IAA scratching my head at the absence of early shots in any of the folders that I was sure I'd seen before - it must have been at the lecture :)

Given the first photographs taken in Dublin were c. 1848, it must have been within the tight timeframe of the next handful of years that the roof vanished. Personally I'd be in two minds about reinstating it: firstly as the outward appearance of the building as currently stands is generally of greater 19th century substance than mid-18th century, and secondly as the distinctive shape of the building as a cutsey little cube perched next to the GPO is surely one of its greatest assets!

Image

Nonetheless, the regimentally flat parapets of Grace's image surely must be interpreted as blatant marketing of the 'new style' on a grand scale. The absence of so much as a ridge tile borders on the ridiculous in its effort to project the image of what was effectively an unachievable ideal. All it needs is a 'The Heritage of Style - A New Way of Living' tagline, accompanied by a bewigged couple clinking two glasses of claret in their glazed setback pavilion overlooking the Mall.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby hutton » Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:54 pm

Excellent work there Graham, keep it up :)

That corner is really in a disgraceful state altogether; Joe Walsh Tours are not only an embarrassment to the nation to have their premises appearing like that beside the GPO, but moreover are - in my opinion - commercially mad to have such a tatty, dirty, battered and scruffy presentation of their shop. It is an implicit subconscious understanding of the passer-by that if these are the standards that they accept for themselves, it is a reasonable assumption that a customer could expect similar (if not worse) dirty scruffy standards were they to hire a holiday accommodation from them.

Therefore in my opinion, Joe Walsh tours are conducting an operation of commercial suicide to have their premises in such poor presentation - problem is they're dragging the street's potential down with them... I suppose if one is to be cold about the matter, the silver lining is that by dissuading potential customers in such manner, when people are increasingly buying their holidays on the internet, and less of them during a recession, it is a possibility that Walsh Tours won't be there for much longer as such a high-profile retail outlet could command increased turnover if put to other uses - and so, hopefully a more responsible stakeholder may replace them...

Regarding the Griffin's Londis-Subway adjacent, I note the proliferation of signage in their equally scruffy windows ; surely DCC can come down on them like a ton of bricks with enforcement, and also fine this business which is a serial offender in terms of breaches of planning legislation at their other outlets?

And of course then there's the ACA legislation - perhaps someone throw some light as to what the exact prescriptions and penalties there are to deal with these specific issues?

Well done again Graham, your excellent analysis is up there with you usual high standards!
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Devin » Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm

gunter wrote: he showed two 1850s photographs looking towards O'Connell St. taken from Talbot St.
After the Nelson Pillar time capsule was found during digging for the Spire foundations circa 2001, it was put on display for a period in Collins Barracks. As a backdrop to the display, they had (probably) one of those two 1850s photographs from Talbot/Earl Street blown up really big on a canvas. It looked great. I was surprised at the quality of the photo for how early it was. You could see the brickwork of the building in question clearly, and lack of any window embellishment. Looked very minimal Georgian. Though I can't remember the roof appearance now.

The owners of the Travel Shop have no shame, leaving it shabby and timewarped in a very prominent location all through the boom & O'C St. public realm improvement.

The Howley Harrington O'C St. Shopfront Design Guidelines also contained some recommendations for the building.
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:02 pm

Good stuff. Yes I definitely remember seeing a bizarre looking substantial roof plonked atop, as well as a brick finish. Possibly even railings too. Nearly sure the Archive had a picture - strange I couldn't find it the last day.

Good article below on Margaret McGowan's website about the Pillar excavation. It says it all about the 1966 destruction that not even an excavation was conducted at that point in vague compensation for the unwarranted demolition. There's a great news clip of the moment the box was opened, but the link on the RTÉ website isn't working alas.

http://www.mglarc.ie/projects/oconnell2.htm
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4592
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby cgcsb » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:35 pm

how's the Carlton plan coming along? I visited Victoria Square in Belfast recently, it's stunning. Hope the Carlton will produce a similar result.
cgcsb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby hutton » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:13 pm

cgcsb wrote:how's the Carlton plan coming along? I visited Victoria Square in Belfast recently, it's stunning. Hope the Carlton will produce a similar result.

You mean what's now "Dublin Central"? Now 5.5 acres footprint, whereas Carlton/ Millennium Mall was a meagre 2 acres...

Anyhow two pieces relevant in yesterday's paper, one predictable enough that DC is being referred to An Bord P, the other piece though featuring Joe O'Reilly is quite striking - Sunday Times says Uncle Joe is one of the Anglo Golden Circle of 10!!


O'Connell Street development faces year's delay

Sunday Business Post

Sunday, February 22, 2009 By Gavin Daly
Plans for a €1.25 billion development on O'Connell Street in Dublin could be delayed by a year after the project was appealed to An Bord Pleanála. Dublin City Council granted permission for the redevelopment of the former

Carlton cinema site last year, but it has been referred to the appeals body in recent weeks. The 'Dublin Central' development by Chartered Land is due to include a €50 million John Lewis department store and a 'park in the sky' on top of the building.

However, there have been objections by at least eight parties, including the National Conservation and Heritage Group, the National Graves Association and a group called Save 16Moore Street.

The groups believe that the development will significantly change the character of the area, which has close links to the 1916 Rising.

The other objectors include Honor O' Brolcháin, an author and teacher, who is descended from Joseph Plunkett, who signed the 1916 Proclamation and was executed for his part in the Rising. Treasury Holdings, the property firm headed by Johnny Ronan and Richard Barrett, has also objected to the O'Connell Street development.

Chartered Land, which is controlled by developer Joe O'Reilly, spent several years assembling the 5.5 acre site for the development - which is bordered by O'Connell Street, Parnell Street, Moore Street and Henry Street. It plans to build 108 apartments, 109 shops, the John Lewis department store and 17 restaurants, as well as two new streets and three public squares.

The firm has said that more than 7,000 people will be employed building the development, while 3,000 jobs will be created once it opens. It hopes to open the development in 2013,althoughthat could be delayed by the referral to An Bord Pleanála.

A plan by retailer Arnotts for a €750million development of shops and homes near the GPO, called the Northern Quarter, took a year to go through the process with an Bord Pleanála. Arnotts is understood to be close to finalising plans for its development.



http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=39760-qqqx=1.asp



From The Sunday Times
February 22, 2009:

Named: four of Anglo's 'golden circle'
Gerry Gannon, Joe O'Reilly, Seamus Ross and Jerry Conlan are four of the businessmen who secretly bought 10% of Anglo Irish Bank with the bank's own cash

Tom Lyons

The businessmen who bought 10% of Anglo Irish Bank last summer, using funds supplied by the bank, include the co-owner of the K Club and the builder behind the Dundrum Shopping Centre. The "golden circle" also includes the country's biggest housebuilder and the founder of a private hospital group.

Four of the 10-strong group of investors assembled by David Drumm, Anglo Irish's former chief executive, are: Gerry Gannon, Joe O'Reilly, Seamus Ross and Jerry Conlan. Either they or some of their companies now owe several billion to Anglo. All four declined to comment last week.

Gannon co-owns the K Club, which hosted the 2006 Ryder Cup, with Michael Smurfit. He is the founder of Gannon Homes and owns a large amount of land in north and south Dublin.

O'Reilly is best known for developing the €1 billion Dundrum Shopping Centre. His company, Castlethorn, plans to build a €1.2 billion new town in Adamstown, west Dublin. He also plans a mixed-use development on O'Connell Street in Dublin.

Longford-born Ross runs Menolly Homes, the country's biggest housebuilder. He owns Dunboyne Castle in Co Meath and recently ended a dispute over profits made on the development of houses in the K Club. He lost millions when the International Securities Trading Corporation (ISTC), a finance company set up by Tiernan O'Mahony, a former Anglo executive, came close to collapsing.

Conlan is the least well-known of the four. He sold 400 acres of land he co-owned in Naas, Co Kildare, known as Millennium Park, for €340m. He used much of the proceeds to found the Mount Carmel Medical Group which owns a maternity hospital in Rathfarnham, south Dublin. Mount Carmel has been appointed by the Health Service Executive to build private hospitals on the grounds of public hospitals as part of the co-location strategy.

The Sunday Times has been able to ascertain that the following businessmen, some of whom have had dealings with Anglo, are not among the 10 investors: Sean Mulryan, Patrick Doherty, Sean Dunne, Derek Quinlan, Denis O'Brien, JP McManus, John Magnier, Noel Smyth, Michael Whelan, Jim Mansfield, Richard Barrett, Johnny Ronan and Fintan Drury.

Patrick Kearney, a founder of PBN Property in Belfast, did not return repeated calls made last week. He was variously "in a meeting", "in another meeting" and then "flying to Gibraltar". Kearney is Anglo's largest client in Northern Ireland and a close friend of Drumm. His business partner, Neil Adair, established Anglo's Belfast branch.

John McCabe, the founder of McCabe Builders, also refused to comment last week. He was said to be "out of the office", then "not at home" and finally The Sunday Times was told "he will call you back if he wants to".

McCabe is an important Anglo client who lives on a stud farm in Meath formerly owned by Charles Haughey, the late taoiseach.

Last week Ulick McEvaddy, a well-known business figure, described the "Anglo 10" as "heroes" who were prepared to put themselves at risk to support the bank.

One banking source said: "Sure, they were patriotic, but if your bank asks you for a favour [in these market conditions] you do it."

In total, Anglo Irish Bank lent €451m to a group it has described as "10 long-standing clients", to buy 10% of the bank. The shares are believed to have been acquired through nominee companies.

The transaction was agreed to prevent the stake acquired through contracts for difference (CFDs) by businessman Sean Quinn coming to the market last summer. It was feared that this would result in a sharp fall in Anglo's share price.

Three-quarters of the loans were secured against the shares themselves, with the remaining 25% secured on the participants' "personal assets".

The bank admits it is likely to have to write off €300m of the money it loaned the 10 investors. Because Anglo has since been nationalised, this loss now passes to the Irish taxpayer.

The Financial Regulator has "categorically" denied knowing the terms of the deal or the identity of the investors beforehand.

It said it knew "steps" to unwind the Quinn shareholding were being put in place, but has not explained why it did not seek further information on the final structure of the deal.

The emergence of four of the 10 names will put further pressure on the government to disclose the others.

Brian Cowen, the taoiseach, said last week that his advice from the attorney general was that he could not disclose the names.

Donal O'Connor, the Anglo chairman, said last week it "would be wrong for the bank to refer to any transactions or dealings with any specific customer of the bank".

Eamon Gilmore, the Labour party leader, yesterday called on the government to appoint a High Court inspector to investigate various activities at Anglo.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5781014.ece
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby lostexpectation » Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:31 am

you should send that stuff to the owner if the building see if he has to ability to be ashamed.
lostexpectation
Senior Member
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Morlan » Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:05 pm

Devin wrote:The owners of the Travel Shop have no shame, leaving it shabby and timewarped in a very prominent location all through the boom & O'C St. public realm improvement.


AIB own this corner building according to the guys in Travel Shop.
User avatar
Morlan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:47 pm
Location: Áth Cliath

Re: Libeskind - Grand Canal Theatre

Postby hutton » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:17 pm

Peter Fitz wrote:is there some merit in giving the grand canal theatre an actual purpose & declaring it the Abbey's new home ?


jdivision wrote:It's privately owned (Harry Crosbie) so think that may be out unfortunately. Would have been a most sensible idea otherwise. Too sensible by far for those doing the botching


Got to say while I can see your reasoning, I would be fundamentally against such an idea. The north inner city centre has seen far too many venues and attractions close over the last generation - countless cinemas, as I noted on another thread, as well as various other multi-generational interactive attractions, such as wax museum, SFX, etc. (I see also Gobshite Martin Cullen has also recently cut the funding for Writers' Museum :mad: )

O'Connell Street has been subverted by the departure of such attractions in it's hinterland - sure Parnell Cineplex may have opened, but on the whole there are far far fewer attractions in this area now then there were in the midst of the early 80's recession.

If the city centre is to have any chance of functioning, anchor attractions need to be reinserted onto the capital's grandest street - otherwise, despite all your IAP fancy footpaths, the street will alas continue in a downward trajectory.

Therefore, rather than adding to this trend by relocating Abbey Theatre away from O'Connell Street, it should in fact be located onto O'C Street as a key attraction in the GPO.

If we have any cop in this town, we should realise that the current recession is likely to last a number of years - possibly 10 or more - and therefore we should start figuring out other ways by which civic pride can be brought back up again. Cheesy and all as it was, I believe that Dublin's 1988 Millennium did wonders for reinstating civic pride when we really needed it - a pride that helped get the city back on track so that it was able to act as a capital of a country that subsequently boomed.

The centenary of 1916 is coming up: rather than a destructive episode such as that which became of the Pillar in '66, what say we use 2016 as a rallying point to do something positive, much as what the millennium became, and in that regard I put it to you that a restored GPO containing the Abbey and other venues such as for opera/ ballet would be a real beacon that the capital could do with - right when we need it most!

What say? :)
hutton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: NAMA HQ

Re: Libeskind - Grand Canal Theatre

Postby Peter Fitz » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:57 pm

hutton wrote:The centenary of 1916 is coming up: rather than a destructive episode such as that which became of the Pillar in '66, what say we use 2016 as a rallying point to do something positive, much as what the millennium became, and in that regard I put it to you that a restored GPO containing the Abbey and other venues such as for opera/ ballet would be a real beacon that the capital could do with - right when we need it most!

What say?


Fully agree that a site on O'Connell Street (particularly upper) would have been both good for the Abbey & good for the street & have said so here previously, definitely my preferred location.

Suggesting the Grand Canal Theatre as an alternative was based on the depressing reality of where we're at, we are very unlikely to see anything emerge, the george's dock decision is crazy and meanwhile we have this impressive if odd theatre nearing completion while its purpose fairly obscure ... anyway as jdvision said, not a runner.

2016 is a big deal, locating the Abbey within a re-worked GPO complex is an excellent idea & a worthy signature project for the centenary. Their existing home opened its doors in 1966 if i'm not mistaken, a flagship project for the 50th anniversary - there's an appropriate synergy at play here between a defiant national theatre & the birthplace of the state, it gets my vote hutton*

*would like to see a functioning post office remain however, & the existing museum proposal is also worthy of inclusion, given the size of the place there's no reason why all cannot be accommodated.
Peter Fitz
 

Re: Libeskind - Grand Canal Theatre

Postby mp » Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:22 pm

The centenary of 1916 is coming up: rather than a destructive episode such as that which became of the Pillar in '66, what say we use 2016 as a rallying point to do something positive, much as what the millennium became, and in that regard I put it to you that a restored GPO containing the Abbey and other venues such as for opera/ ballet would be a real beacon that the capital could do with - right when we need it most!

What say? :)[/QUOTE]

Just one problem with that: the GPO is a post office.
mp
Member
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:12 pm

Re: Libeskind - Grand Canal Theatre

Postby PVC King » Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:05 am

mp wrote:The centenary of 1916 is coming up: rather than a destructive episode such as that which became of the Pillar in '66, what say we use 2016 as a rallying point to do something positive, much as what the millennium became, and in that regard I put it to you that a restored GPO containing the Abbey and other venues such as for opera/ ballet would be a real beacon that the capital could do with - right when we need it most!

What say? :)


Just one problem with that: the GPO is a post office.[/QUOTE]

The Royal Mail closed most of their post offices in prime locations last year due to rising property costs; replacing almost all these post offices with smaller format concessions in WH Smith Stores.

GPO >> Easons it has been proven to work in a similar set of locations; An Post would of course retain their North Prices Street offices whatever happened. The admin and storage areas for the Abbey could of course be located in the Arnotts scheme. Wouldn't a change of use of the GPO Arcade in to leisure uses sustained by the GPO not be a real asset not to mention providing much enhanced income streams?
PVC King
 

Re: Libeskind - Grand Canal Theatre

Postby Peter Fitz » Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:36 am

mp wrote:Just one problem with that: the GPO is a post office.


Reworking the GPO with an eye on 2016 has been mooted previously, previous posts are simply suggesting possible uses in that context.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/0324/1206144654457.html
Peter Fitz
 

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland