Abbey Theatre is unlikely to be redeveloped at its present location

That sounds like a very good idea burge-eye,
except that a developer paid 42m for the site or 46m including stamp duty & legal, so if O’Donaghue wouldn’t pay over the odds in Granby Row I’d say there is little chance of him forking out the say 60m the developer would require.

But if it were a competition to find the best site in Dublin that possibly could be it the views would be just amazing

I know I keep repeating myself on the Screen/College House option, but if the state were to acquire the site, they could then build a unified proposal of say five storeys on the Screen site of say two stories (one c/w double mezzanine height for the theatre space) of leisure and three offices to the front and allow a higher site coverage over say ten stories (that already exist) to the rear. It would cost but no-where near as much as most City Centre locations.

I also like the idea of the Abbey as a touring venue, with say the relocated NCH acting as its Dublin Home in Summer time possibly?

@burge_eye wrote:

This is probably a stupid idea as I know nothing about the size of buidling required, but would the Bolands Mill site work (retain shell and place theatre inside)? With all the regen in that area…

Considering the DDDA offered the Abbey a site in the Grand Canal Harbour development for free and it was turned down (Taoiseach doesn’t want it to leave the Northside) its anon runner I’m afraid.

Wonder what cultural element is going in its stead (that part of the site is designated cultural)?

@TLM wrote:

Is that the Liebeskind theatre that was the Abbey’s replacement for down there or is that separate altogether?

I think that’s it alright – is it a theatre or a concert venue or a art space?

Something I find interestimg and little commented on about this whole saga is that of the three buildings shortlisted to hold the theatre – Hawkins House, Collaiste Mhuire and Infirmary Road:
Hawkins House – subject to removal of Health Dept and now it seems to be swapped for land elsewhere
Infirmary Rd – I have just heard is AGREED as the site for the new Courts Service offices along with some of Dept Defences lands.
So when exactly were all these buildings in the running because it would seems their future was planned some time ago.

Also been some comment here about the inability of the Hawkins House site to make any statement, ie not having a river frontage. I think there is so much space available here that any architecture worth his salt could design a scheme which gave the building a real sense of presence. Why not face onto a piazza on Townsend St. In fact why not do away with this section of Townsend St completly.
Anyway it would that the Carlton site is being pushed very strongly and the wind may well be blowing in its favour. Court decision due this month.

get it onto o’connell street. create a cafe, restaurant, book shop to bring people in (footfall) make it opena nd attarctive as opposed to a closed theatre during the day.

If the Docklands gets go ahead i hope it’s a democratic and welcoming addition to an area that feels like the preserve of people, who have more interest in golf and hard dough than Brecht or O’Casey. I wonder what Yeats would make of it?

I remember the security guard in the IFSC they used to call ‘robogaurd’ he was a complete psycho when Lower Mayor Street was under cranes he’d jump out in front of tipper trucks stopping them to scream at them there was a three ton limit on Georges Dock and if he ever saw them again……..

The Home of the Abbey is the Street the institution is named after. Until a full appraisal has been carried out including the buildings to the front on Eden Quay this option cannot be considered. It is entirely premature.

Because this proposal will have no residential element it falls outside the Section 25 regime; this move will directly undermine the rates base in Lower Abbey St, Marlborough St and Eden Quay. The deciding authority is Dublin City Council whose very rates base is being undermined. The proposed development location is a protected structure listed at entry 3206 in the Record of Protected Structures,

Can someone please explain this to me the Government want to build the National Theatre in the middle of a lake that used to be a British Military base. Yeats would be turning in his grave; it could only be proposed by a Kerryman.

Really good overview of recent history in this article by Emer O’Kelly from last weekend’s Sunday Independent

Wherefore art thou Abbey Theatre?

THE Abbey Theatre is currently in a state of chassis, to take Sean O’Casey’s immortal words in vain. It’s closed, and the interior has been ripped out. When it opens again on April 10, three quarters of a million euro will have been spent on a new configuration for the auditorium. And there is very little doubt that the money will have been very well spent . . . in the short term.

Anyone who goes to the theatre in Ireland knows that the Abbey building is a theatrical disaster. Its stark modernist frontage was already out of date when it was built and opened in 1966. (It had been designed more than 10 years earlier, but as with most things cultural in Ireland, building it had been put on the long finger.)

But it’s the interior of the theatre which has always been the sticking point: a fan-shaped auditorium that prevents any intimacy between the audience and what is happening on stage, lousy acoustics with several spots where you hear almost nothing, a deadness at stage front which forces actors to strain to project their voices, frequently damaging them seriously. And woefully inadequate technical facilities and backstage accommodation.

So the promise of a new building for the centenary of the National Theatre Society in 2004 wasn’t an extravagant gift to the theatre-going population of Ireland; it was long overdue when the promise was made during the Millennium celebrations.

But we’re still waiting, seven years down the line. The promise was first made to us by the last Minister for Arts, Sile de Valera. She expressed a preference for building the new theatre on the site of the current building, which in turn replaced the theatre burned down in 1951.

The then Artistic Director of the Abbey, Patrick Mason, agreed with her. He was already on the record with a passionate plea for the continuation of tradition and history, as well as pointing out practical concerns like the central location and the impending arrival of one of the Luas lines.

Consultations began. Properties around the current building were available (and have been since). But the word was out, it seems, and the projected prices started to rise. The government couldn’t be held to ransom, we were told. Back to square one.

The Taoiseach was lobbied, and met the interested parties. He seemed to accept the necessity of keeping the theatre on the original site. Nothing happened. Then the new Artistic Director at the Abbey, Ben Barnes, stated that he was in favour of a greenfield site, a greenfield site having been made available “free of charge” in a development along the south bank of the Liffey basin. That was the terminology used: effectively, the proposal was to move the National Theatre out close to Ringsend.

The Taoiseach was annoyed that, having been lobbied, and having agreed in principle to the theatre remaining in Marlborough Street, his time had been taken up to no good purpose.

Back to minus square one, with costs rising all the time, and the centenary of the Old Lady of Marlborough Street approaching. Whispering got louder, of political jockeying: “Bertie” wasn’t going to see a major cultural institution moved out of his constituency; it was a matter of territory, even though he couldn’t care less about any kind of theatre. (I quote the gossips, not Mr Ahern himself.)

Well, there was another site, and it was in Mr Ahern’s constituency: the old Carlton cinema in O’Connell Street, together with the more or less derelict buildings behind it.

Not entirely unsuitable, was the verdict among those whose interest was theatre, rather than personal vendetta or empire-building. The political powers seemed to favour it, as did the City Council who saw such a positioning of a major institution as a much-needed boost for the tourist potential of the about-to-be-revamped O’Connell Street of the fast-food honky-tonks. Once again, other concerns were coming before the welfare and future of Irishtheatre.

But the freeholds were in a mess, it turned out, and the site would not become available in the foreseeable future. Back to minus square two.

There was a brief frisson about the Parnell Square site of Colaiste Mhuire. Not bad, mused the theatre-going public. Central, and the idea of the city’s two major theatres being close neighbours would be attractive, with the addition of the gracious cultural partner of the Hugh Lane Gallery creating a nice little cultural district, again a boost for the north city.

Aw, but there was a small property in private hands in the middle of the proposed site. Once again, official jaws were set; nobody was going to get rich on the backs of the Irish government. (The price reputed to be asked for the site would now buy two decent suburban houses, or would have provided a few lavatories in the newly gold-plated Croke Park.)

Then the property developer Dermot Desmond donned his pink taffeta frock with the green sash and decided to come to the ball. He offered a site at George’s Dock. The George’s Dock development is financial, glamorous, and glass-bound. But it’s anything but ideal. And perhaps significantly, Harvey Nichols, originally to move into the area, decided against siting a store there.

However, it has apparently been decided upon as the site for the new Abbey Theatre. It’s set in stone; the debate is over.

In its favour is the fact that the current Abbey Artistic Director, Fiach Mac Conghail, feels he (or his successor) can make it work, with three stage spaces and all facilities available on site. He has been assured by all parties involved, including Government and the Docklands Development Authority, that the new theatre will be up and running in five years. Privately, he is known to believe that this is distinctly optimistic.

And he has felt it necessary to spend three quarters of a million on reconfiguring the auditorium in the interim. He has already overseen a major modernisation and overhaul of the above-stage system known as the flies, so that lighting and sound equipment as well as complex sets, can be “flown” on and off stage. That refurbishment has already been seen to extraordinary advantage in the recent production of Julius Caesar which featured a splendid set by Jon Bausor. And with the international theatre design consultant Jan-Guy Lecat working with architect John Keogan on the new auditorium, things there will probably have improved spectacularly when audiences come back on April 10.

The money is not going down the drain; but it should be. It should be a total waste, because the new Abbey Theatre should be close to completion already. We were, remember, promised it for 2004. And the international design competition for the new building is not evenunder way.

Fiach Mac Conghail is doing an impressive job at the Abbey, and it’s part of his brief to be optimistic. I, on the other hand, am profoundly pessimistic. I don’t believe that the new Abbey Theatre will be completed in my lifetime, because once again we have talked ourselves hoarse and consulted ourselves to death because we’re such a “culturally aware” nation.

The only thing we’re not is a culturally active nation: as in building the damn thing.