O' Connell Street, Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby rumpelstiltskin » Tue Aug 18, 2009 3:25 pm

Devin wrote:There was a review of the Scheme of Special Planning Control for O'Connell Street this summer, and a revised document. Can be opened at the bottom of this page: http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/OtherDevelopmentPlans/SpecialPlanningControlSchemes/Pages/ReviewofO'CStreet.aspx

The objectives haven't changed - improve the use culture and shopfront design, avoid concentration of certain uses etc. etc.


Ya, it's really working isn't it. Maybe an elected mayor with an agenda could at least ensure existing plans and laws are enforced. That would be a start.
rumpelstiltskin
Member
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:34 am

adolf loos?

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

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:02 am

Extraordinarily, nothing has changed under the review of the Special Planning Control Scheme. Aside from a tightening of the language, the SPCS now has LESS rather than more power than before. All references to postering on windows – the greatest scourge on the area – have been deleted. Criteria for the placement and size of internal signage has been deleted. The banning of external loudspeakers has been deleted. Limits on projecting signage and the type of information they can display has also been ditched. This is nothing short of baffling – it’s as if anything that was deemed too much effort to enforce has just been choicely dispensed with! The only improvement is the reduction of the maximum surface area of lettering on first floor windows from 40% to 25%. The list of non-exempt change of uses has also been extended to include mobile phone shop, catalogue shop, discount shop and launderette/dry cleaners.

Likewise, no account has been made of newer forms of advertising such as illuminated projectors, or types of floodlighting units, light displays and light colouring, which can so degrade a building during the day and after dark. Also no criteria for on-street advertising hoardings surrounding seating (which should be banned outright in the city), or indeed any guidelines for seating for that matter. No reference to smoking areas is made, or criteria for ash units and similar paraphernalia at the entrances to buildings. Also no reference to railing structures which are beginning to emerge at roofline level, or flagpoles and similar projections. What on earth was the point of this review at all?

If there is any consolation, all above deleted elements remain in the ACA policy, which does not require a review, so we still have them to cling on to. The new SPAC policy on removing advertising hoardings is hilarious, stating: “Following a review of the area, it is evident that some progress has been made in relation to the removal of poor quality advertising structures. The following advertising signs are now designated for removal:” Suggesting that a much-reduced ‘revised’ record of advertising structures is now being published, it goes on to list precisely the same array of structures as mentioned in the last plan. Indeed the sole advertisement that was removed over the lifetime of the last plan occurred under tragic circumstances, when a window cleaner fell to his death from above Ann Summers, pulling with him the 1950s Chas F. Ryan sign that was attached to the upper facade. There isn’t even the faintest whiff of a firm commitment to remove any of the designated signage under the lifetime of the new plan, including the disgraceful Baileys ensemble blighting the image of the entire city, even though the planning authority has sweeping powers under the 2000 Act to get rid of it, and its ilk, first thing in the morning.

Section 60: [condensed]

A planning authority may serve a notice on each person who is the owner or occupier of a structure situated within its functional area, if—
(a) the structure is a protected structure and, in the opinion of the planning authority, the character of the structure or of any of its elements ought to be restored, or
(b) the structure is in an architectural conservation area and, in the opinion of the planning authority, it is necessary, in order to preserve the character of the area, that the structure be restored.

'Works' include "the removal, alteration or replacement of any specified part of the structure or element, and the removal or alteration of any advertisement structure."


Now, the planning authority must pay for the cost of the works that are reasonably incurred by the owner, in dialogue with them, but this is tiny money relative to the improvement effected. It beggars belief that no effort has been made on this front to date. Even the carrot of standard grant aid alone, perhaps boosted a little to get rid of signage, may be sufficient to get the ball rolling on property. The time of 'market force-led change' is well and truly over - not that it was ever there in the first place - but pro-active measures must now be taken.

And all of this in the context of the newly completed Ulster Bank at 2-4 O'Connell Street Lower. One wouldn't want in any way to detract from the marvellous reinstatement job done on the main 1920s shopfront, but really and truly, is the below type of dead frontage really permissable in an ACA, SPAC, on a Protected Structure, at the entrance to the capital's main street? Effectively a permanently vacant unit. It gives an appalling first impression.

Image

I mean really and truly, are these proposals even looked at? This new shopfront, however fancypants conservation-led, has the same effect on the street as the previous barracks-like ensemble. Indeed the original planning application stipulated that a shop display be maintained at all times, before a new application was granted that allowed for the ATM and screening. This opaque film was merely referenced in passing in the application and not even referenced in the planner's report. And this all in spite of the fact that the bank originally stated that two ATMs would have to be mounted in the granite building next door, in spite of design concerns, as placing one in the window of the shopfront above would be impossible "due to security considerations". Yet when structural issues prevented them from installing one in the shopfront next door, suddenly these 'security considerations' vanished into thin air, and the second ATM was installed as seen above. All that's needed is a dingy net curtain to complement the nasty aluminium window (again why on earth this was granted permission...) and a flickering seedy neon sign inside. A shame. You'd think Ulster Bank would have more style.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ac1976 » Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:09 pm

Graham I hope you are sending all your mini-reports to the Irish Times Letter section, you'd be giving Frank McDonald a run for his money if you were.

Well done encore
ac1976
Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:59 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ac1976 » Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:25 pm

Arnotts €1bn shops scheme under threat

More problems with the planners! It all a bit of a game this planning malarkey!

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/arnotts-euro1bn-shops-scheme-under-threat-1871079.html
ac1976
Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:59 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:29 pm

that render looks like its 5 years old...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:16 pm

Hmm, DCC's response appears a lot more muted this time arouind after the slap on the wrist from ABP.

Wish they'd give them the same treatment over operators such as this. The new Spar on Upper O'Connell Street, open barely a few weeks, and look at the state of the joint, in spite of a raft of planning conditions outlawing all manner of signage, clutter and window obstruction. Nearly all you can see below is illegal.

Image

Rather than SPCA powers being reduced, they need to be rigorously beefed up. It is critical that enforcement orders in SPCAs be made financially time-dependent, where fines for specified unauthorised works such as banners and posters start clocking up from the moment enforcement proceedings begin. This would clear out all SPCAs of their rubbish in the morning.

But alas at present, a property owner has up to eight weeks from the issuing of a notice to comply with it. This is entirely unsatisfactory in respect of banners and postering, where an entire building can become a public billboard for that length of time. An Post could drape the entire GPO in advertising and it would take eight weeks to get rid of it before court proceedings could be inititated. Indeed right across the road facing the GPO at present is a full-facade banner advertisment to Carrolls tat merchants at the height of the visitor season. Enforcement proceedings landed on their doorstep nearly three weeks sgo, yet it is still there, as is incidentially, a raft of illegal banners on every one of their stores in the city centre as erected a few weeks ago. This outrageous behaviour by this culturally bereft selfish shower is going both unchallenged, and where challenged, is giving the two fingers to the State and civil society.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby StephenC » Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:58 am

For the life of me I dont understand the problem with enforcement in this country...all the powers are there but no one uses them.

The actually shofront for the Spar isnt that bad really. the ourdoor seating (under licence) wouldnt be that bad if it looked a little less tacky. I agree about the assorted add-on signs and posters though. And as usual hideous floor lighting...I bet its bright white at night.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:10 am

Agreed Stephen re the shopfront. One of the better convenience store frontages in the city. But the postering is illegal. The Lotto unit illegal. The postcard rack illegal. The projecting signs illegal. The blanket obstruction of the window illegal. The lack of maintenance of a window display illegal. And one would have to wonder if they have a licence for the seating (though desirable).

Also these hideous canvas banner units surrounding seating are another manifestation of our ridiculous levels of over-regulation (ironic in the context that we don't use our other extensive regulations where they are needed). Other European countries get by just fine with gracious, leisurely placed seating outside shops and cafés. But here we have to shield them with hideous fencing units, which both host advertising and get thoroughly shabby, thus degrading the street. They should be outlawed everywhere, unless architect-designed as part of a planning application. But again, not even a mention in the SPCA, never mind anywhere else.
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby magicbastarder » Tue Sep 01, 2009 9:55 am

has anyone else noticed that the trees opposite the GPO do not look healthy - the leaves started turning brown about a month ago, which would have been early, plus they don't look like they're going through leaf senescence, they just look unhealthy.

to top it off, some of these trees have very recently put on new growth - certainly not what you'd expect for a tree packing up in an orderly fashion for the winter.
magicbastarder
Member
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 7:22 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby fergalr » Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:09 am

The older trees probably had more time to mature under less polluting conditions than these poor saplings. The amount of exhaust fumes from a single bus pulling away from a bus stop is dire, let alone when they're simply idling.
fergalr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Howth, Co. Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:21 am

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

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby ac1976 » Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:35 pm

[ATTACH]9843[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]9844[/ATTACH]

Bud corridor madness
Attachments
0002996510dr.jpg
0002996510dr.jpg (16.3 KiB) Viewed 6301 times
0002996810dr.jpg
0002996810dr.jpg (22.78 KiB) Viewed 6301 times
ac1976
Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:59 am

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:52 pm

An horrific incident.

Luas collides with bus

Some 16 people were injured this afternoon when a Luas tram collided with a bus at the junction of Abbey Street and O’Connell Street in Dublin City centre.

The double-decker Dublin Bus was coming from O’Connell Bridge when it collided with the tram shortly before 3pm. The Luas, which was moving in the direction of Lower Abbey Street, was derailed in the crash.

There is an unconfirmed report that the Luas driver went through the window of his cabin and into the bus. The driver had to be cut out of the wreckage by members of Dublin Fire Brigade and has been taken to hospital.

The emergency services said 16 people had been injured and at least four people had been taken to the Mater hospital by ambulances from St James's and Loughlinstown hospitals.

Several other people were treated for minor injuries by emergency service personnel at the scene.

A spokeswoman for Luas operator Veolia confirmed several Luas and bus passengers, including the Luas driver, had been injured in the crash.

She said the company had begun an investigation into the incident but it was too early to give more precise details on the circumstance behind the collision.

She said the Luas red line services between Tallaght and Connolly Station were still operating between Tallaght and Smithfield and Luas tickets were valid on Dublin Bus.

© The Irish Times

Image


It's difficult to imagine the Luas being at fault, especially when one sees buses tearing over the bridge and down the street to make the lights on a constant basis, but we shall see how things unfold. There could be some extremely nasty injuries there :(
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GrahamH » Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:02 pm

O'Connell Street all abuzz this evening.

Image


It is expected the tram and bus will be removed by midnight. The lifting equipment arrived earlier.

Image


What a scene.

Image



Image



Image



Image



Image



Image



Image


There was an eerie silence on the street for what was a very busy period. In spite of the grim circumstances, the pleasant pedestrian air to the closed off upper street could not have been any more noticeable. So rare to see so many people and no traffic at the same time. All of the usual hostility vanished like the flick of a switch.

Image
GrahamH
Old Master
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:24 am
Location: Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby gunter » Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:25 pm

Image

. . . . and people always complain that our public transport isn't integrated.

When is the first meeting of the O'Connell Street Survivors Group?
gunter
Old Master
 
Posts: 1905
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:07 pm

This is the spot where the luas honks.
I'm surprised there is not a video of the actual crash floating around from de bunkers.
All buses have internal cameras?
Hope everyone ok. How does the photographer get in that building?
You can see the new it building...
That's why you have bumps on roads...
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby dc3 » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:29 am

Amazingly very little signs of the crash there this morning, and the street is open more or less as usual, just guards and yellow tape.

I heard a man on the bus say in the A&E Department last night that only for diving out of his seat, as he saw the crash coming and on to the floor, he would have been a goner. I can well believe it looking at the photos.

While not wishing to judge as to what happened, or how caused, I still believe that the colour chosen for the Luas makes it hard to see.It tends to blur into the grey background in certain light conditions. The front and rear, at least, should have more prominent, high visibility markings. There are many out there with poor sight and difficulty with hearing.

Incidentally, there is a nice view of the "Heineken" sign, also a recent topic here, in one of the photos.
dc3
Member
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2000 1:00 am
Location: dublin, ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:43 am

I think its more to do with sight lines and trees than colours...
Anyway that's what speed bumps are for...
Attachments
100101291029102910291.jpg
100101291029102910291.jpg (48.59 KiB) Viewed 6267 times
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby StephenC » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:16 am

I dont think its anything to do with sightlines and trees. It would seem to me its more to do with jumping lights or perhaps incorrect phasing of light with too short an interval between when one set goes red and another green.
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby missarchi » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:50 pm

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

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby StephenC » Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:08 am

Luckily there are 5 investigations taking place to tell us this....
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby GregF » Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:47 am

Luckily no one was killed. It was a horrendous accident.
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby StephenC » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:34 am

I shouldnt....but it is funny
Attachments
Advert.jpg
Advert.jpg (70.51 KiB) Viewed 6235 times
User avatar
StephenC
Old Master
 
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Dublin

Re: O' Connell Street

Postby johnglas » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:48 am

There are many out there with poor sight and difficulty with hearing.


dc3: Yes, but you kind of hope they're not driving buses. This won't stop until prosecutions follow; any bets?
johnglas
Senior Member
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron