You know what, the many good points from 'your side' has actually swayed me slightly.
I have come to my final conclusion that O' Connell St has always progressed.
Gardiner created a unified composition, which the Wide Sts Comms adapted sypathetically for commercial uses, then the Victorians came along and wreaked havoc on the street with their 'feature' buildings, then the 20th century came and bombed the backside out of half of it, resulting in a fantastic opportunity to restore some architectural unity to it, which was achieved to a degree in the 20s & 30s.
I have been swayed to agree that a more modern, nonetheless sympathetic, facade is appropriate for the RDH and Eircom simply due their lage, expansive facades, where the potential exists to create landmark buildings at the upper end.
However, looking at Dublin Bus and Schuh again this morning as I was passing, there is absolutely no excuse for modern facades on these. Both are very narrow buildings, both exist in entirely brick clad and older terraces, and both exist in the lower, or near the lower unified part of the street.
Building modern here smacks of sheer arrogance, that 'we must make a statement'.
Building 'replicas' in the areas I mention is not a theme park attitude, if that were the case, is Harcourt St a theme park? Or the east side of Stephens Green? Or the south and west sides of Mountjoy Sq? Or all wooden Victorian shopfronts going up in every town and village across the country?
Building 'old' as it were, in strictly limited areas to either architecturally or historically unify an area is not a bad thing.
I think its very interesting though, that if Gilbeys, once one of the city's finest Victorian buildings, that existed on the Fingal site, was demolished today, there would be absolute uproar over the issue and an immediate order would be slapped on the developer to rebuild it faithfully, down to the last doorknob. And yet, because 30 years pass by with Fingal in its place, the whole idea of rebuilding now is completely laughed at. Indeed, such is the extent of this irony, that it is entirely likely that if its owners proposed to built Gilbeys now, it would'nt even get planning permission!
Just found out that Carrolls Gifts and all of it's terrace has been protected since at least 1991, long before its PVCs was installed upstairs.
And I also see that the GPO have lodged an application to modify the Princes St entrance to the building. But the sheer ignorance of An Post, they have posted the application on the HENRY ST side, of the building, so anyone seeing it couldn't be bothered to go around to the other side to inspect the development. But above all, its posted as high as is possible on the lower sash of the window so the average passerby can't read it. I could barely make it out, other than interventions to the exterior stonework and modifications to the 30s interior lobby.