O' Connell Street, Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:19 am

Ironically, it shows the ski slope in a particularly ridiculous light relative to its context.

Only noticed last night that the groom of the Happy Ring House no longer illuminates. Apparently he's been like that for some time, leading to speculation about a rift in the relationship, and the distinct possibility that the wedding might even be off. There were further rumours about herself left up there on her own, but they seemed more humorous at 4.30am. The neon signage is one of the few such installations in the city that is a Protected Structure (as part of the wider building).
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby jdivision » Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:57 pm

I think the Royal Dublin was on fire earlier? Smoke billowing everywhere on O'Connell Street
jdivision
Senior Member
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:34 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Smithfield Resi » Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:35 pm

I think the Royal Dublin was on fire earlier? Smoke billowing everywhere on O'Connell Street


More likely brick dust...or possibly asbestos :D
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby igy » Sun May 10, 2009 10:03 pm

Was just on O Connell St and there's workmen removing the windows from the top floor of Hammam Buildings, including over the parts which weren't cleaned/restored on the far right, which I thought was a bit odd. When I'd left the outermost (smaller) windows were still there, the two larger windows on the left were gone, and the larger windows to the right were being hammered out. No idea what they were putting in instead...
igy
Member
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Glas Naíon, BÁC 11

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby lostexpectation » Tue May 19, 2009 11:44 am

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/appeals-backlog-delays-cinema-site-plans-1743579.html
appeals-backlog-delays-cinema-site-plans

its been there how many years and they blame people appealing???

not much discussion on this... the hearing i mean
lostexpectation
Senior Member
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ctesiphon » Tue May 19, 2009 2:01 pm

The Oral Hearing was only a month ago. That's hardly a delay.

What sort of discussion did you want on the hearing? I left because got fed up hanging around listening to the 1916 brigade prattle on for two days about the significance and sensitivity of the National Monument houses on Moore Street. (One bloke started reading an entire academic journal article into the record, and when he was asked how long he would take and if he intended to read the whole thing, his reply was "But... we have five days." :rolleyes: )

I fully accept that the site is important, but what's their position? The various parties told us exactly the same story in a variety of ways, each excruciating in its detail, about the need for kid-gloved handling of the remaining fabric. O-o-o-o-o-kay... So, if they have reservations about the current proposal (and it wasn't clear that they did- I think they just wanted a day out), what's their alternative?

No suggestions? I thought not.

I've no idea what happened after day two. My sanity required my non-attendance.

Carlton thread- http://www.archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=85
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ctesiphon » Tue May 19, 2009 2:05 pm

On the other hand, I was fortunate enough to witness the inspector say, after a detailed explanation of the delivery route one objector wanted kept open during construction, "Yes. I have inspected your passage."
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Smithfield Resi » Wed May 20, 2009 11:19 pm

I fully accept that the site is important, but what's their position? The various parties told us exactly the same story in a variety of ways, each excruciating in its detail, about the need for kid-gloved handling of the remaining fabric. O-o-o-o-o-kay... So, if they have reservations about the current proposal (and it wasn't clear that they did- I think they just wanted a day out), what's their alternative?


No suggestions? I thought not.


Well if you had hung about you would have seen the alternative proposal that was presented at the Oral Hearing, a comprehensive renovation of the terrace and a marker in bronze of the proclaimation outside No. 16.

I've no idea what happened after day two. My sanity required my non-attendance.


Patronising people who actually have a personal connection with Moore St and the Rising and who presented an viable alternative treatment of a National Monument that you couldn't be bothered to stay and see says more about you than them. Personally I thought the developers side was the one droning on, they took up far,far more time than the appellants, but then the developers crew were paid to be there, the appellants actually care. I'm sure the Senior Counsel with dodgy interpretations of 'curtilage' was paid handsomely.

I think they just wanted a day out


I took annual leave to be there, I find that comment to be very insulting.
Smithfield Resi
Member
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:03 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Devin » Thu May 21, 2009 3:42 pm

Well in fairness ctesiphon, the third parties had to sit there all day of the Wednesday and Thursday listening to consultant after consultant for the developer telling us how wonderful the scheme was in every way, including a particularly extraordinary 4-hour marathon by the developer's Heritage Consultant which tested the bounds of the English language in how it can be used to describe demolition of historic buildings, or not, as the case may be.
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ctesiphon » Thu May 21, 2009 4:52 pm

Smithfield Resi wrote:Well if you had hung about you would have seen the alternative proposal that was presented at the Oral Hearing, a comprehensive renovation of the terrace and a marker in bronze of the proclaimation outside No. 16.


How is that different from what the applicant is proposing? The plaque? That could have been discussed in 10 minutes flat.

Smithfield Resi wrote:Patronising people who actually have a personal connection with Moore St and the Rising and who presented an viable alternative treatment of a National Monument that you couldn't be bothered to stay and see says more about you than them. Personally I thought the developers side was the one droning on, they took up far,far more time than the appellants, but then the developers crew were paid to be there, the appellants actually care. I'm sure the Senior Counsel with dodgy interpretations of 'curtilage' was paid handsomely.


Personal connections should count for nought in this equation. This is a planning Oral Hearing.

I fully agree that the applicant's team was as guilty of droning on as the 1916 brigade. I still have nightmares about attending the wedding of a daughter of the Heritage Consultant, because if this is how he talks when he's supposed to be staying on topic...
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Sat May 23, 2009 8:42 pm

At the opposite end of the street, at its entrance, sadly we encounter a typical example of the lack of quality aspired to in Dublin city centre on the part of Dublin City Council. A small detail, but an important one, it involves the most iconic street sign in the State.

Extraordinarily, the perfectly sound, elegant metal plate with 'O'Connell St. Lower' lettering, beautiful Irish script and border all cast in high relief, sited on this corner building for at least the past twenty years, has just been pasted over with a horribly cheap flimsy piece of junk with garish italicised Irish double the size of the supposedly dominant English.

Image


The former sign was the quality of the surviving Bachelors Walk sign around the corner - itself also poorly maintained.

Image



Image

Who comes up with this muck, and more importantly, who signs off on its ham-fisted attachment over an existing sign, never mind a larger one?! It just defies reason.

The new Irish is significantly different to that of the former (rather hidden) sign, suggesting this was the reason for replacement. But even if the Irish was antiquated, it still deserved retention as a prominent example of the evolving official use of the language and the heritage of the street. Either way, the crassness of the new design and its preposterous mounting is the real issue here, and typifies the lack of commitment to quality in Dublin's public domain.

Can you just imagine the same treatment by City of Westminster Council? One thinks not.

Image
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby lauder » Sat May 23, 2009 9:01 pm

That aint the work of the council, its some militant looney pro-irish group they have been doing this for a while, same crowd behind trying to change car reg plates to irish. Tell the council and it will be removed!

The Irish should be scapped on them altogether, it looks so much more elegant in well made cast signs in english, just like the ones that were restored in Cork city recently.
lauder
Member
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 1:49 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby igy » Sun May 24, 2009 8:06 am

lauder wrote:The Irish should be scapped on them altogether, it looks so much more elegant in well made cast signs in english, just like the ones that were restored in Cork city recently.


Not that i want this thread to veer off-course into an Irish language discussion, but I disagree about making the signs English only.

Even if you ignore any heritage, preservation or language-encouragement, at the very least we should have standard street signs with both languages for the benefit of visitors.
The Oxford Street example above is something that's done (in my brief experience of London) well and consistently.
I struggle to think of any category of street furniture or signs in Ireland that are either consistent or well maintanted.
Maybe a standard street sign in city center areas (I'm not advocating removing the very old ones by the way) is to be encouraged? I can't imagine leaving Irish out of that.
igy
Member
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Glas Naíon, BÁC 11

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby rumpelstiltskin » Sun May 24, 2009 8:36 am

I think when you consider the piece of crap building to which that sign is attached, looking like something from a 70s slum, details like these pale into insignificance. True, there's absolutely no attention to detail in Ireland, but there's absolutely no attention to larger scales either.
rumpelstiltskin
Member
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby DjangoD » Sun May 24, 2009 4:09 pm

lauder wrote:That aint the work of the council, its some militant looney pro-irish group they have been doing this for a while, same crowd behind trying to change car reg plates to irish. Tell the council and it will be removed!



Is this true??? Who are you on about?
DjangoD
Member
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:34 pm
Location: Dubberlin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Seanoh » Sun May 24, 2009 5:00 pm

DjangoD wrote:Is this true??? Who are you on about?


It's true alright. Sinn Fein carried out the stunt at the beginning of Seachtain na Gaelige to hightlight their proposal for all signs in the capital to have the Irish street name in the prominent font.
Seanoh
Member
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 1:44 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Andrew Duffy » Sun May 24, 2009 7:40 pm

Were they fined for littering?
Andrew Duffy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Morlan » Sun May 24, 2009 8:16 pm

Image

That sign was erected by some Gaeilgoirs last year. I don't see any point in having Irish in large italics and English in much smaller font below. It's ugly.. a terrible design. I much prefer to older signs that are in Gaelic script.

Over the past 2 years, DCC have started replacing signage around the city with Irish and English in the same font size and style.

As of March 2009, all government bodies must display both languages in equal font size, with preference for Irish. The legislation only applies to new or replaced signage. Public recorded announcements now have to be fully bilingual, so expect to hear a lot more Gaeilge on the DART and Luas over the next few years!

Image


Official Languages Act Handbook: http://www.coimisineir.ie/downloads/Official%20Languages%20Act%20Guidebook_eng.pdf
User avatar
Morlan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:47 pm
Location: Áth Cliath

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Sun May 24, 2009 11:23 pm

Personally, from a design and cultural perspective, I'd like to see the Irish remain smaller. Not only does it look better and more coherent to have a design hierarchy - in terms of usefulness as well as appearance - I think it also gives special significance to the Irish language to have it on a more muted scale. It draws the attention of the curious that bit more into focus.

Delighted the O'Connell Street debacle is not the doing of authority (in fariness, there's precedent) - thanks for the clarification. I love how the picture posted by Morlan of the 'erection' of the O'Connell sign by Shinners et al is taken not on O'Connell Street, but around the back of what appears to be a munitions dump in the arse end of Monagahan.

Here's the lovely O'Connell Street proper sign, still lurking under the current affront to good design.

Image
http://www.aidan.co.uk

Can we have it removed please, and the original actually made presentable - indeed all those on the street - if it's not too much to ask? At least we don't have bone white plaques as in central London - jaysus, can ya imagine the state of them over here?!
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Morlan » Sun May 24, 2009 11:47 pm

GrahamH wrote:but around the back of what appears to be a munitions dump in the arse end of Monagahan.


Fucking LOL! :D
User avatar
Morlan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:47 pm
Location: Áth Cliath

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ctesiphon » Mon May 25, 2009 9:04 am

Am I being too charitable in thinking that the mis-'translation' from Irish to English in the Shinners's sign might be deliberate?
User avatar
ctesiphon
Old Master
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby pippin101 » Mon May 25, 2009 11:25 am

Am totally shocked at this Gaelgoir stunt. They are a minority and are forcing their views on the rest of us. This is an English speaking country and there is a long history of that language being given greater prominence. I don't agree with the new regulations that give greater prominence to Irish - it is a minority language.

Not that this is relevant to the O'Connell St stunt. It doesn't give them any legitimacy. It's littering, vandalism and shows a reckless disregard for heritage.

On a side note the lightning conductor should really be moved off the sign too.
pippin101
Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:52 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby Satrastar » Mon May 25, 2009 4:00 pm

pippin101 wrote:Am totally shocked at this Gaelgoir stunt. They are a minority and are forcing their views on the rest of us. This is an English speaking country and there is a long history of that language being given greater prominence. I don't agree with the new regulations that give greater prominence to Irish - it is a minority language.

Not that this is relevant to the O'Connell St stunt. It doesn't give them any legitimacy. It's littering, vandalism and shows a reckless disregard for heritage.


I think you should speak for yourself. I, for one, applaud this stunt, even if I would rather the unattractive plastic roadsign was removed.

I appreciate that it was intended to draw attention to heritage, rather the opposite of "a reckless disregard for heritage" as you said.

I don't understand why people spend their time undermining efforts to preserve Irish. Whether in common usage or not, it is part of Irish culture and Irish heritage and should be given the recognition it deserves. This goes hand in hand with our architectural heritage, and how you can support one but not the other is hard to understand.

Our heritage should not be politicised. We Gaelgeoirs are not all shinners - very few of us are.
Satrastar
Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 5:07 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby igy » Mon May 25, 2009 8:10 pm

Satrastar wrote:I appreciate that it was intended to draw attention to heritage, rather the opposite of "a reckless disregard for heritage" as you said.


But the sign they covered was more correct than the one they placed!
igy
Member
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:09 pm
Location: Glas Naíon, BÁC 11

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby SunnyDub » Mon May 25, 2009 9:40 pm

No surprise to see the militant gaelgoirs breaking the law there. The Irish language act requires public bodies to display signs in both Irish and English and with the same size lettering. UCD spent a fortune replacing their signs a few years ago, because although they had the Irish on them,, it was in smaller writing! This Act was unopposed in the Dail a number of years back!
SunnyDub
Member
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 4:44 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland