Abbey Theatre to be located in the GPO

Here we go again.

On paper I think it’s a great plan, the GPO has excellent access to public transport (they recently even managed to integrate the bus and Luas outside it!!!) and isn’t practical in its current use anymore. I think it’s the right place for the Abbey. I just hope the redevelopment is done sensibly.

While I think the GPO would be a wonderful location for the Abbey Theatre, I don’t really understand how it can be accomodated there. Surely It would mean knocking down large parts of the interior. This would be a travesty for such a lovely building.
Is there anyone more familiar with the proposal who may be able to shed some light?

You know I think the GPO is a wonderful location for the GPO.

So will the building no longer be known as the GPO? How on earth will they fit it into that?

I think this is a bad idea.

Wouldn’t it be great if a newly designed Abbey theatre replaced Hawkins House?

They could design it from scratch, and there would be no compromises.

We could have a new iconic building for Dublin, and It would help to bring life back to Hawkins Street.

What’s going to happen the old Abbey now? And I heard in the Irish Times that the facade of the original Abbey is still extant, albeit in pieces in somebody’s possession in Killiney. Surely this should be salvaged?

Isn’t the GPO supposed to be a museum dedicated to the rising? I much perfered that Idea, they could even have a tacky gift shop in it. Which party’s program for govt.?

@Satrastar wrote:

So will the building no longer be known as the GPO? How on earth will they fit it into that?

I think this is a bad idea.

Wouldn’t it be great if a newly designed Abbey theatre replaced Hawkins House?

They could design it from scratch, and there would be no compromises.

We could have a new iconic building for Dublin, and It would help to bring life back to Hawkins Street.

What’s going to happen the old Abbey now? And I heard in the Irish Times that the facade of the original Abbey is still extant, albeit in pieces in somebody’s possession in Killiney. Surely this should be salvaged?

While draining life out of Abbey street.

The GPO complex was designed (and often redesigned in the back office areas) as a post office, but with really extensive office accomodation, this generally unknown to the public, sweeping down Princes St and Henry Street. Some bits of this, the former savings bank processing area, are impressive in their own right and all have been maintained in good condition.

However, turning this into a theatre, or two theatres, as perhaps the Peacock would move too, is just as easy as turning the Royal Hospital into a theatre complex, – actually harder than that as that complex has some large spaces.

So this plan implies gutting an existing, well regarded and listed building, and adapting it as the facade of a new facility, for which we have no money, using for a purpose completely alien to its original purpose, for which it has no advantage whatever, except a central location. (A central location not being enought to save the Metropole Cinema next door, or the Capitol Theatre in Princes Street, both knocked down for shopping in living memory, or to bring to meaningful use the Carlton Cinema, now closed for fifteen years further up the street, intended to become shopping!)

You could not make it up.

Ironically the GPO building in Cork used to be a Theatre!

The abbey relocation shenanigans will run and run. I heard a rumour that the set builders (a fine and irreplacable craft occupation) are being made redundant and their work outsourced, most likely to the UK. I would presume that would save a lot of space and allow the Abbey to move into an adapted use building. The opportunities for a bold new build still exist in D1 with the right backing and backbone. I dunno where this is coming from as a Green Party prerequisite for govt?. All a bit odd. It is better than sticking it in George’s Dock though.

O’Connell Street is a great location for the Abbey however the GPO as the location is madness?. Whats the obsession with having the GPO as anything other than the GPO.

Given that its one of the few monumental buildings used for its original purpose and therefore open to the public why turn it into a building which will be locked and dead for a large part of the day???

Surely the Carlton would have been the perfect site????

Join the facebook group supporting the move to the GPO is you are for it
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=166497406960
I think it’s a great idea.

The Abbey Theatre and the GPO….
Its like one of those movie trailers where they put two big name stars together to draw the crowds, but will ultimately suffers from a bad script, and poor direction, and while it looked so good on paper, you wil realise after that the only attraction was the two big names and the whole thing is a massive let down.

@Global Citizen wrote:

While draining life out of Abbey street.

Is relocation or reconstruction on Abbey Street even on the table?

@Satrastar wrote:

Is relocation or reconstruction on Abbey Street even on the table?

It appears not. Unfortunately.

Abbey Street (the main east / west axis in the north city centre) has seen a steady decline in recent years despite the presence of the Luas. It is a particularly depressing void at night and very badly lit.

Compare this to the bustling Dame Street (e / w axis) south of the river.

Your suggestion for Hawkins Street is worthy, but not for The Abbey.

I don’t know the building well enough but you would assume they would delete the red bit if needed… how many floor levels are in the yellow area to the right? I think Dublin has more important things to think about than theatres, national conference centres that will get used once a blue moon or a theatre 4 nights a week compared to some other structures that will be used 19 hours a day 7 days a week. But you would imagine a design where by the internal court yard external wall becomes the internal wall of the lobby area…

Liveline (I know) with Joe Duffy will be discussing this topic in an hour.

Might be worth a listen.

cue hysterical / non factual ‘contributions’ from ‘irate’ listeners.

Why not set the abbey free from the leash of state funding? 8 million quid a year for a bunch of rubbish plays paid for by the plebs from their vat receipts.

We have the gate and the olympia and the gaiety and the project, the helix and soon the exciting grand canal dock theatre. That’s plenty. Struggling young playwrights don’t need mega theatres they need small venues. I don’t know how many supposedly worthy but lifeless performances I’ve seen in the Abbey. Much better hit rate in the Gate up the road.

The building itself is a crime against aesthetics: mental hospital style windowless brick walls. The interior looks copied from some semi-state headquarters, with an endless budget for soft fabrics. It’s horrendously corporate and somnorific.

State funded art is a fascist idea. Art is counter authoritarian, rebellious and doesn’t need financing. How much money do you need to write a play? pen, paper, dole – off you go.

Converting the GPO would cost zillions and achieve nothing apart from confuse people looking to buy stamps and post letters.

What you could do is pack off all the lifers in the offices out the back to a more suitable location like Citywest.

I actually believe that the Abbey shouldnt have a permanent home – it should be migrating around the country with its performances – a base here is all it needs, with occassional performances in an existing Dublin venue

agree

Old Abbey theatre that I guess is now gone.

That’s certainly an argument, but one must also factor in the clout an established national theatre like the Abbey has in acting as a draw to Dublin on an international level. Okay, the typical audience is largely populated by greying sweet suckers, but the impact of a high profile national theatre established in the capital surely must make a significant contribution to the attractiveness of Dublin as a destination. Not that I’m arguing for more planning-by-tourist, but the perceived folly that the Abbey may be must be considered in the wider context of its role as one of a cluster of cultural attractions. An iconic theatre building – and I mean iconic in a memorable sense – expresses much more about a city than merely what goes on inside. As such, the concept of a fixed theatre – by all accounts with a travelling element – still has its purpose. The other thing to bear in mind is that any new facility could serve as an acting and performance centre on a much wider level than just trotting out Beckett every six months.

As for the GPO as the Abbey, the idea has its merits, but as we come back to time and time again, ultimately it is too flawed to warrant consideration. Fundamentally, the GPO was built as a post office, has survived as such for almost two centuries, and is the only major Georgian public building left in Dublin that retains its original function. It continues to serve citizens well, even if the status once attached to a postal service, and by association a building as significant as the GPO, has diminished to that of a chain store since its inception. It performs a useful civic duty, grants universal public access, and therefore should remain as is. The last thing we need is the postal element relegated to a minor corner, and happy clappy, oh-but-they’re-not-permanent, vulgar coloured banners suspended between the columns. Also, I personally find new uses in major public buildings distinctly off-putting when visiting other European cities: where what once was a palace is now an opera house, or a major bank or church is now a heritage centre or art gallery. Of course new uses have to be found for these buildings, but where that distortion of legibility can be avoided, especially with the most significant of structures such as the GPO, it should be. To move the Abbey to O’Connell Street undermines the civic dignity of a structure such as the GPO, while also banishing any chance of a major public building being built in the city centre for perhaps another century.

I am getting somewhat concerned, having heard of a number of other proposals sloshing around, that the GPO is now being viewed, in 1930s style, as the only game in town. Literally every public and civic project going is now looking to house itself in or leech itself onto the GPO redevelopment, desperate for a slice of the cake. I fear we risk compromising not only the GPO as a major historic site, but also each of the proposals looking to piggy back off it in their desperate hope of being realised within the next decade. It’s like the post-war restoration of Dublin Castle, Busáras, or indeed the GPO itself in the 1920s, all over again, where everything short of the kitchen sink is thrown into the mix to maximise the net gain to the State in cancelling out other projects with the stroke of a pen. We need the GPO and its courtyard to have a clearly defined clarity of function, by all accounts encompassing a number of uses, but not those that would be better served – such as the Abbey – elsewhere.

Without question the Hawkins House site is the most perfect location for the Abbey Theatre on a host of levels: across the water from the existing site, a state-owned site, right in the heart of the city, an incredible regenerative potential for this part of the city, a new ceremonial axis between the theatre and former House of Lords, a new civic plaza at this major multiple street junction, erecting a public building in the spirit and midst of the adjacent legacy of the Wide Streets Commission, the fabulous orientation and dynamics of the site… The list is endless. I wish somebody would have the vision to realise this, instead of the lazy, fawning vote-getter that the GPO proposal is.

@Global Citizen wrote:

Liveline (I know) with Joe Duffy will be discussing this topic in an hour.

Might be worth a listen.

Apologies.

During the promo for the programme nobody said Mary O’ Rourke would hog it all.

And she did.

@GrahamH wrote:

. . . . Okay, the typical audience is largely populated by greying sweet suckers. . . . .

I can see the logistical logic of sticking the Abbey in the GPO, . . . . giving people the opportunity to attend the theatre and cash one’s pension cheque in the same building, you have to say they have thought this through.

Either way, I don’t agree with Paul that closing down these senior centres is the solution. What right have we to say that it is wrong, or too costly, for citizens in their autumn years to get pearled up and congregate for a few hours where it’s warm and comfortable and where they can be for a time with their own kind.

I wouldn’t get too worked up about the actual productions either, O’Casey, Beckett, whatever, . . . . the show, either side of the interval, has always been incidental to the theatre experience. As Graham says, the real contribution of theatre to society has always been the occassional decent building and that’s what we should hold out for, wherever the theatre ends up being located. In this regard, the GPO is already a decent building so we gain nothing by sticking the Abbey into it.

Leaving the prospect of gaining a decent new building aside for the moment, and whatever is the true depth of our financial predicament, it would be wrong for the state to abandon the Abbey and wrong for the state to abandon it’s senior generations of middle class lefties and hand theatre over to a class of youth that are only there because they’d get the s/*t kicked out of them on a football pitch, or to the permanently experimental, or to the just plain mental.

There are some things you just don’t mess with.

What ever happens the postal function should remain in the GPO in some grand form…
Or new Kildare st? you could just walk right in…

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1015/1224256681742.html

it seems there is wave of proposals competing for various dates!
innovate Dublin? or small houses? There should be an exhibition of all these ideas!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1015/1224256692317.html

Will they ever leave well alone…..The GPO is grand as the General Post Office as it graces O’Connell St.. So let’s hope it stays that way and will be not gutted again for this ludicrous idea.

Kinda like putting an opera house in the Four Courts, a circus in the Custom’s House or the Dail in Kilmainham Gaol, (probably not a bad idea, ie the TD’s)

There are plenty of vacant sites around the city for an ultra modern new Abbey Theatre…..(to show some of those dreary “national” plays with the stereotypical stage Oirishness and how “tick” we really are).

Maybe Irish architects and planners just aren’t up to the job of designing a brand new national theatre!

This is like when idiots in the 60’s and 70’s moved to as what they saw Georgian premises of prestige in well to do locations of the city only for them to gut the fine old buildings converting them to offices. Today, the idiots in this case think that by moving to the GPO, the fine exterior of the building as well as the history of 1916 will add some prestige to the new Abbey.

David Norris says…”First of all it is owned by the State and due shortly to be vacated as a postal facility.”

Is that true? Are there plans underway to vacate the building – have to say I think it’d be a real shame for this to happen – why not look at ways of reinforcing its function as a post office and perhaps provide other public services in vacant parts of the building.

Not the place for the Abbey.

If they’re hell bent on shutting it down as a postal facility then I wouldn’t be wholly against the theatre idea, as long as it was combined with other uses so it was functional throughout daytime hours also – local history centre museum or something? I shudder to think what else they might do with the GPO if it’s not going to be a post office. Wasn’t there some proposal recently to put retail units in there? What happened with the IFSC site that they were proposing for the Abbey a while back?

The most obvious solution would be to use the Carlton Cinema Building. It would draw people further up O’Connell Street and enhance the dour Upper O’Connell St area.

Surely only the facade of the GPO is Georgian as anything beyond that was destroyed in 1916. Does anyone know what the office space is like on the inside? That said, when/if they do relocate they Abbey I hope they actually replace it with a venue that is designed with consideration to the needs of a modern theatre rather than cram it into something which is unsuitable. The present Abbey, as i understand it, is a joke with little to no wings, flys and poor access and many of the venues popping up around they country seem to be designed by people with very little understanding of the theatre.

@lauder wrote:

The most obvious solution would be to use the Carlton Cinema Building. It would draw people further up O’Connell Street and enhance the dour Upper O’Connell St area.

Nothing will enhance Upper O’Connell Street. Maybe another cinema. People go to the cinema.

@fergalr wrote:

Nothing will enhance Upper O’Connell Street. Maybe another cinema. People go to the cinema.

Without going too far off topic, I sense a twang of inverted snobbery creeping through some of the posts above. The suggestion that people don’t go to theatre because cinema is more popular doesn’t merit a response.

Others have suggested that those who do attend The Abbey are “senior generations of middle class lefties” and “greying sweet suckers”. Apart from a few grey hairs at the age of 36, I cannot identify with any of those descriptions
As for the person who said The Abbey only shows “dreary national plays with stereotypical oirishness and how ‘tick’ we really are”, all I can say is, he hasn’t been there for a long time.

I won’t deny the fact that there are many problems with The Abbey. It’s current home being paramount amongst them.

But reading some of the posts above it appears that no matter what building the theatre is housed in, it will only be a waste of time anyway.
Because nobody under the age of 60 goes there by all accounts.

Fuck it then. Lets just offer the GPO to its neighbour Dr. Quirkey.
He can turn it into a bowling alley. And like the cinema, more people would go there.

Irish culture 2009.

I see the senator is finding a synergy in the proposed move of the Abbey to the GPO in the ”relationship between the Rising and the literary renaissance”. . . . using the quote from Yeats:

In the circumstances, turning the GPO (where the English first started shooting at certain men who were not queuing for stamps) into a theatre could be considered ironic.

hmmm . . . . . ironic, iconic and ionic

@gunter wrote:

I see the senator is finding a synergy in the proposed move of the Abbey to the GPO in the ”relationship between the Rising and the literary renaissance”. . . . using the quote from Yeats:

”Did that play of mine send out
certain men that the English shot”

In the circumstances, turning the GPO (where the English first started shooting at certain men who were not queuing for stamps) into a theatre could be considered ironic.

hmmm . . . . . ironic, iconic and ionic

Fifth column ?

Corinthian perhaps ?

“As for the person who said The Abbey only shows “dreary national plays with stereotypical oirishness and how ‘tick’ we really are”, all I can say is, he hasn’t been there for a long time.”

“Because nobody under the age of 60 goes there by all accounts.”

Yep indeed, too bad the Irish public don’t hear much about of what is going on at the Abbey, just like that other great instituton of the arts, the RHK. How is the Irish public ever going to have a general appreciaton of arts and culture when it only caters for the very small few.

“Fuck it then. Lets just offer the GPO to its neighbour Dr. Quirkey.
He can turn it into a bowling alley. And like the cinema, more people would go there.”

Nope, it is fine as it is, the General Post Office.

“Irish culture 2009.”

Indeed!

http://www.abbeytheatre.ie/

BTW…The New Electric Ballroom portrays a gombeen Ireland with the usual – spinster sisters etc…. Rosaleen Lenehan has made a career outta playing such stereotypes of Irish women.

Why does it have to be the Abbey that develope’s the office’s at the back?

Isn’t only the facade of the GPO used as a post office?

What is the purpose of the oversized amount of office’s behind the facade?

With the Arnots Development hopping to add to Prince’s Street and make it a used throughfare and store front area.

All development in O’Connel Street is welcome. The North West end is always going to be a dark blot, but with Arnot’s going ahead, extra development could be a good thing.

O’Connell Street was re-paved with an aim of making it the main street of the city.

Throughout it’s history O’Connell Street has been rebuilt and developed with that in mind but instead the city centre is still developing in a more ad-hoc basis South of the River, but still close to O’Connell Street.

With all that has been done to that historic street, more money, more development can’t hurt. It can’t be left to waste.

Lower Abbey Street is a desolate place at night, and it’s a shame.

Middle Abbey street, has some resturaunts but for the most part it’s “travel row”, nothing but travel agents, an ironic sign of how no one want’s to spend to much time in some parts of North inner city Dublin.

I use the GPO as a meeting place all the time. I then go off to Cineworld on Parnell Street. A wasted development with only one good use.

The whole of North Inner-city Dublin has failed developments.

Not far away is Smithfield.

Investment and more development, and public buildings are the best way to draw more people to North Inner-city Dublin.

Development shouldn’t be restricted to the Northside either.

All along the cities main throughfare of Grafton street to O’Connell street is the potential for urban renewal and mixed use between retail/services and social structures and pubs.

Luas expansion could help this, but the red line didn’t help Abbey street….:rolleyes:

do some people not want it to become a 1916 mecca?

mecca…

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid17574880001?bctid=23801083001

@gunter wrote:

I can see the logistical logic of sticking the Abbey in the GPO, . . . . giving people the opportunity to attend the theatre and cash one’s pension cheque in the same building, you have to say they have thought this through.

Gunter’s been making archiseek famous again…

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2009/1017/1224256878304.html

“I can see the logistical logic of sticking the Abbey in the GPO . . . giving people the opportunity to attend the theatre and cash one’s pension cheque in the same building,” writes one glib contributor.”

Some fodder for a playwrite ham.

Come to think of it, that would be kinda strange ….a play about the 1916 Rising at the GPO shown at the Abbey Theatre in the GPO.

Ah the glib remarks are always the most pluckable aren’t they 😉

Could we have a poll on this Paul? A yes/no option wouldn’t be particularly insightful, but if scenarios such as staying put, George’s Dock, GPO or Hawkins were proferred, we might stimulate a wider debate on this. I think it is sorely needed, as the public, like ministers, will blindly follow the ‘obvious’ option. The GPO should not be a foregone conclusion.

@GregF wrote:

Come to think of it, that would be kinda strange ….a play about the 1916 Rising at the GPO shown at the Abbey Theatre in the GPO.

I think there first play should be about that and commerce…

@GrahamH wrote:

Ah the glib remarks are always the most pluckable aren’t they 😉

. . . . if scenarios such as staying put, George’s Dock, GPO or Hawkins were proferred, we might stimulate a wider debate on this.

I suppose I’ve got to eat this humble pie, do I?

Ok, I shouldn’t have been glib, . . . moving the Abbey to the GPO is a serious idea and we need more people like David Norris to care enough about the city and it’s significant institutions to take the time to push new ideas into the public arena.

I can understand how people could see this proposal as a match made in heaven, a great building looking for a new use to maintain it’s significance into the future (in an era when a post office has become a hatch in the back of a Spar) and a great institution (cough) looking to finally get itself a fitting building, but it would be a move that gives us less than we have at the moment. We start out with two city icons and we end up with one city icon that doesn’t know which it is!

Assuming that the Abbey has to move, and you hear different views on that, there are actually a huge number of options for where it could move to, with more appearing every day. Graham’s idea of moving it to the site of Hawkin’s House is a great one, but it probably lacks the ‘revenue neutral’ attribute that everything needs at the moment.

In the light of the current proposal to redevelop the Liberty Hall site, another idea would be to propose a land swap. The fact is that, unless we’re creative about it, we’ll never get rid of a tall building from the Liberty Hall site, so we’re either stuck with the 1960s Liberty Hall, which gains heritage value with every passing year, or we allow it’s replacement by something that, for a time, will be equally shiny and new, only bigger and bulkier inevitably.

Google view of the Abbey St. / Eden Quay block with the Abbey Theatre at the top left and Liberty Hall at the bottom right.

I personally wouldn’t have the same reservations about a tall structure (a new Liberty Hall) on the Abbey Theatre site, that I have about constructing another, taller, structure on the current Liberty Hall site, and the latter, if a bit of road surface was taken in, would be a potentially magnificent site for a new Abbey Theatre.

Could you sell the idea to SIPTU? . . . . they’d be reluctant for sure, but after two or three planning refusals they might sit down with you around the table.

I think the Abbey / GPO issue shows up the need for an ‘Ideas Dept.’ in DCC. We shouldn’t have to rely on David Norris, or Archiseek, to come up with ideas and then wait years for the necessary heads to be knocked together, the City Council should want to do this itself.

Its funny I was thinking about this exact same land swap today except that liberty hall took both sites… and either reduced height to 4+2 or covered the whole thing in grass!;)
I mean it’s not like liberty hall was ever going to get slimmer in both directions

I have my own theory on the spar atm post office combination…

renzoo mini scaled down?

I don’t know about you but there is an opportunity to them to move home?
I don’t think I would have an issue with given them a few lanes of the street?

RGB

@gunter wrote:

……..but it would be a move that gives us less than we have at the moment. We start out with two city icons and we end up with one city icon that doesn’t know which it is!

Good point: We’d end up with a post office with its own theatre, or a theatre with its own post office.

@missarchi wrote:

renzoo mini scaled down?

I don’t understand this at all. Whats the point of building a new (national) theatre from scratch in the back yard of the GPO where it can’t be seen ?
Its as though you are trying to hide it.

I just know any proposals are going to be substandard…
So it should be hidden in the first box or second one.

why not add a themed bar to the mix… j/k

I’m not suggesting any of the below but I have never seen paintball or airsoft laser tag in dublin central. I’m wondering if they would offer roof top tours? The natural green roofs to the north of the site where not designed by architects!

Poll added…

so wheres the front of house ops of the gpo going to go

Looks like alternative sites will never materialize. So the best place then for the new Abbey Theatre is where it is at the moment and where it has always been. They can always dig down for more space too.

There’s a task for some “innovative” Irish architects and designers now to come up with something…..kinda Dr Who’s TARDIS sorta stuff.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1020/1224257055097.html

anyone got photos of the court yard ect?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1021/1224257148201.html

If there’s some compelling need to stick the Abbey Theatre on O’Connell Street, there are plenty of better options than the GPO.

old Eircom office block outlined in red, Gate Theatre in view on the top right

The old Eircom office block on the corner of Cathal Brugha Street would be sitting on the right size of site and it must be coming near the end of it’s unnatural life anyway. Again a land swap would take some of the sting out of the cost, and the Abbey located at this site would give us a potentially fine new civic building where it’s most needed (Upper O’Connell Street) and create the beginnings of a cluster with the Gate Theatre near by. Be close enough too to North Great Georges Street be able to wheel the senator down in a Bath-chair!

I think I slightly prefer the Liberty Hall swap option, on the basis that if you’re going to kill two birds with one stone, you’d like them to be big ugly birds.

Madam, – I feel a genuinely worthy opportunity is being missed, while the easy option is being taken. The GPO, by virtue of its historical function, is inherently unsuited to the location of the Abbey. Built as a post office in 1818, it has graciously survived as such for over two centuries, and is now one of the last major Georgian public buildings in Dublin to retain its original function.

It continues to serve citizens well, even if the status once attached to a postal service has diminished since its inception. The building performs a useful civic duty, grants universal and free public access, and therefore should remain as is when entered from O’Connell Street – by all accounts with new, complementary cultural uses. Even if the grand 1920s public office was retained as a post office with the Abbey located to the rear, the status of the National Theatre would naturally be vastly diminished.

To move the Abbey to the GPO not only confuses the legibility of this significant public structure, it also deprives the historic centre of Dublin of probably its only chance of a new civic building any time this century. With this in mind, the ideal site for a striking contemporary Abbey Theatre and arts centre is that of Hawkins House, home to the Department of Health and Dublin’s most reviled office building, facing the current theatre directly across the Liffey.

Not only is this site in State ownership, it is the perfect location for a major public building, addressed by the junction of five streets with the potential for a grand civic piazza to the front. Such a development would also continue the strong legacy of the Wide Streets Commissioners, Georgian Dublin’s planning authority, in this area, whose grand urban schemes left us with fine terraces such as the former Irish Times offices on D’Olier Street, punctuated with major civic buildings.

A new axis could be created between this site and the former House of Lords portico on College Street, in turn linking around to a pedestrianised College Green.

The Abbey relocation project is about so much more than simply finding a new home for the National Theatre – it involves the very essentials of urbanism, architecture, civic life and fundamentally giving something new and meaningful back to the centre of Dublin. Sadly, the GPO option ticks very few of these boxes. – Yours, etc,

GRAHAM HICKEY,

Victoria Road,

Clontarf,

Dublin 3.

today’s ITimes

Well done Graham!

Graham while I kinda fell your sentiment I’m not so sure I agree.

the options I can see are…

a) wizz bang at hawkins house which I highly doubt we will ever get and it puts the diagonal xray axis into dispute… but the plaza might off set this… If college green was added I accept your case…
b) subtle black panther box at GPO with neons or heavy metal/ Waterford crystal
c) do you think it will happen on the Carlton site I don’t think it should and I don’t think they will want to sacrifice street frontage unless it has a tunnel entrance or pay rent for the rest of there lives…

Graham while I kinda feel your sentiment I’m not so sure I agree.

the options I can see are…

a) wizz bang at hawkins house which I highly doubt we will ever get and it puts the diagonal xray axis into dispute… but the plaza might off set this… If college green was added I accept your case…
b) subtle black panther box at GPO with neons or heavy metal/ Waterford crystal
c) do you think it will happen on the Carlton site I don’t think it should and I don’t think they will want to sacrifice street frontage unless it has a tunnel entrance or pay rent for the rest of there lives…

what theatres do people admire out there? old and new

The Druid.
I have some photos of it somewhere. I’ll put them on the Galway page when I find them.
Straying off topic i fear……

Fintan O’Toole was making much the same point (in the IT Weekend Review http://www.irishtimes.com) today that Paul made here last week; that the Scottish model of an itinerant national theatre might be a more appropriate transformation of the Abbey than creating a new theatre for it in the GPO, or anywhere else.

Some quotes from today’s article:

Is the answer a building at all? The killjoy conclusion is of course, no! . . . . no civic revitalisation, no ‘trophy architectural statement’, just sink whatever money there might be in the remnants of future Arts budgets into theatre productions rather that producing a theatre.

Like most articles from the Tool, you can’t really argue with it, the case is moral and the logic is sound, but it is the same case and the same logic that tells us that the church should sell all it’s buildings and get back onto the street with the poor.

The only problem with this flawless logic is that if it was followed, down the centuries, we wouldn’t have great cathedrals, we wouldn’t have religious art, and it’s not just Michelangelo that would have been poorer, society would have been poorer.

What is the role of theatre in society? Subversive, maybe, but there’s also an argument that for every theatre-goer that likes to indulge in a bit of subversive society role play, there are thousands of citizens who’d probably get more out of having an actual civic building of quality somewhere in the city to be proud of, or occasionally meet a friend for coffee in.

who goes to theatre for coffee?

Ok, whatever!

I love this; a letter in the IT today from Ben Barnes, former head bottle washer at the Abbey (I think) and it starts off with:

. . but by paragraph fifteen, BB has climbed onto the bandwagon and joined the roadshow:

I can just about imagine the groan that went up when the people behind the Grand Canal Theatre heard this one, . . . . shiny new theatre – stodgy old Abbey, . . . . oh gawd!

If we’re going to merge the Abbey with another institution . . . . and take over their building! . . . what about the National Wax Works?

I think his point is rooted in the fact that Docklands offered the theatre at GCD to the Abbey years ago but Aul Bertie (the visionary that he was) put an end to it saying de teatre should stay on de nort side. In fairness to the grumpy old shite he has a point

@gunter wrote:

Ok, whatever!

I love this; a letter in the IT today from Ben Barnes, former head bottle washer at the Abbey (I think) and it starts off with:

”Madam, – O dear, the “Whither the Abbey?” roadshow is back in town”,

. . but by paragraph fifteen, BB has climbed onto the bandwagon and joined the roadshow:

”. . . . the new theatre complex at Grand Canal Harbour would stand a much better chance of success as a home for the Abbey (and the National Concert Hall) than setting itself up in competition with the 02 and Harry Crosbie, especially now that – as we are being constantly told – our spending power has been spancelled for a generation”.

I can just about imagine the groan that went up when the people behind the Grand Canal Theatre heard this one, . . . . shiny new theatre – stodgy old Abbey, . . . . oh gawd!

If we’re going to merge the Abbey with another institution . . . . and take over their building! . . . what about the National Wax Works?

i believe Dr Quirkey is a bit busy at the moment-he might welome a chance to join the relocation jig

not sure we’re treating this matter with due reverence 🙂

. . . . but then, I can still remember sitting through this, cringe inducing, theatrical experience twenty five years later.

If someone comes on now and says this was a classic production, gunter has a programme in good condition to flog on ebay!

Come to think of it, but the amount of buildings in Dublin whose original specific purposes has since changed from the time they were first built.

So, we once had fine and grand old chuches and banks that are now pubs, nightclubs, hotels and offices, distilleries that are now colleges, colleges and warehouses that are now concert halls, hospitals that are offices, courthouses, museums and shopping malls, theatres that are now offices or cinemas, cinemas that are now offices or appartmants etc….. and now we have the notion of the GPO becoming a theatre to cap it all. So if it were to happen, what would become of the old location on Abbey St. then….emmmmm…. perhaps put a pub or hotel there and call it the…ehhh Abbey?….or maybe put a new general post office there.

The butchers and botchers are abound in Dublin, can’t leave well alone, thus many old landmark buildings lose their significance somewhat in the modern urban landscape of fastfood joints and general thrashiness. There will be fuck all left untouched in the city. I doubt if such malarky here is as prolific in other European cities. Ah sure fuck it, I suppose.

(Gas too, that they want to maintain the low skyline amid all the butchery of wiping away what’s left of the architectural history.)

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1212/1224260597237.html

@GregF wrote:

Looks like alternative sites will never materialize. So the best place then for the new Abbey Theatre is where it is at the moment and where it has always been. They can always dig down for more space too.

There’s a task for some “innovative” Irish architects and designers now to come up with something…..kinda Dr Who’s TARDIS sorta stuff.

Totally agree from a cultural perspective retaining it at its original location must be the object. When looking at the existing site securing the buildings on the southrn side of the lane that have their southern frontage to Eden Quay hasn’t been easier for 22 years. With a facade retenetion on those and a proposal that oversailed the lane you would have a site that was far from constrained.

Just how did the GPO ever come into the frame as a possible location it is almost as dumb as trying to float it in a flooded dry dock. You would almost think the objective in some quarters is to come with undeliverable solutions so as that no government funding will ever be given for a revamp.

The problem is, as nice as it would be having the Abbey in the GPO, you are not adding anything to OCS by making that move.

OCS is a nice street, I know many of you have big problems with it but by and large, it’s a very nice street, however there’s still plenty of junk on it and the Carlton Cinema site is a prime example.

A new structure should be built for the Abbey, one that will “add” to OCS, rather than simply not subtract.

Also, anyone notice this in that IT article?

He intends that a new national opera company will be established next year, definitely in Dublin, not Wexford, with decisions about how it is to be structured made within three months so that plans can be included in next year’s Estimates.

Haha! How many times have I waffled on about Dublin needing an opera house 😛

Calatrava, Dublin Opera House, on the Liffey.

Make it so.

@Yixian wrote:

The problem is, as nice as it would be having the Abbey in the GPO, you are not adding anything to OCS by making that move.

OCS is a nice street, I know many of you have big problems with it but by and large, it’s a very nice street, however there’s still plenty of junk on it and the Carlton Cinema site is a prime example.

A new structure should be built for the Abbey, one that will “add” to OCS, rather than simply not subtract..

Very few major Cities have their National Theatre on their main Street; beyond the obvious architectural quality the GPO is of significant historical importance as a post office. Why would anyone want to break the link with history to create a dark single purpose space which is predominately night-time use?

The GPO as a post office is just perfect if An Post can’t afford to run it just as a post office then let them open a cafe in the middle of the circulation space and sub-let the telephone booth section but do not wreck the 1920’s counter fitout.

@Yixian wrote:

Haha! How many times have I waffled on about Dublin needing an opera house 😛

Calatrava, Dublin Opera House, on the Liffey.

Make it so.

Investment Banks = Corporate Freinds of Opera
Broke Investment Banks = No Opera outside special events such as Wexford Opera Festival or one offs at NCH

@PVC King wrote:

Very few major Cities have their National Theatre on their main Street; beyond the obvious architectural quality the GPO is of significant historical importance as a post office. Why would anyone want to break the link with history to create a dark single purpose space which is predominately night-time use?

I do agree, I would rather the Abbey be relocated to anywhere else on OCS other than the GPU, as far as I’m concerned fine architecture is too often relegated to nothing more than museums, government buildings or office blocks in todays world, but a building like the GPO that serves a public function become part of our lives and thereby enrich it.

And like you say, it has historical value *as* a post office.

One of the primary reasons being touted for siting the abbey in the GPO is to bring life to the northern portion of O’Connell St.

Are people serious about this?

The GPO as a post office attracts hundreds if not thousands of peoplel to the street everyday. As a theatre it would attract virtually no traffic during the day and only hundreds at night, mainly at the weekend.

This idea is a disaster and short sighted. A portico does not a national theatre make.

wasn’t the GPO supposed to become a museum dedicated to the rising? are people forgetting that? Are people also forgetting that there isn’t an internal space big enough in the GPO, so the building will have to be altered (partially reconstructed) this idea would be very damaging to the City

I think a good job could be done but the post office should stay…
rising = lowering?:D

@cgcsb wrote:

wasn’t the GPO supposed to become a museum dedicated to the rising? are people forgetting that? Are people also forgetting that there isn’t an internal space big enough in the GPO, so the building will have to be altered (partially reconstructed) this idea would be very damaging to the City

The museum idea has been chucked.

I hope there are some planning hurdles on which this idea can fall.

Why change the GPO at all? It doesn’t need changing.. It’s a beautiful building used by hundreds of people every day. Carlton cinema on the other hand…

I liked the museum idea, it was respectful to the buildings history, required no alteration of the building. For the theatre to work, some wall’s have to be knocked and steel reinforcement put in place, the courtyards will have to go aswell. If this goes ahead, it’ll be typical of the state of planning in Ireland. The carlton proposal gets chopped for being a bit tall, but this idea will probably get the go ahead to gut and perminantly damage a landmark building.

Perhaps they could find room in the GPO for the museum without ceasing function as a post office? Maybe underground?

A museum on it’s own would be 10 steps back in terms of livening up OCS.

What is the current plan for Carlton anyhow? :/

I never knew models could be so dangerous…

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1215/1224260711369.html

THE PLAN to move the Abbey to the GPO will cost about half what moving to the docklands would have done, and will help rejuvenate O’Connell Street, the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism has said.

Martin Cullen said he planned to take a decision on whether to move the Abbey to O’Connell Street soon and estimates that relocating it in time for 2016 would cost €80 to €90 million, much less than the expected cost at George’s Dock (€150 million to €170 million), which had progressed almost to architectural competition before problems arose.

That’s probably the thinking in a nutshell; pick the option that costs the least amount of money.

I’m having difficulty with the concept that the Abbey could bring life to anywhere, but leaving my baggage aside for a moment, how will any theatre-transplant remotely improve the footfall in a building that is routinely teeming with people and which would presumably attract multiples of the current visitor numbers, if it incorporated a museum content illustrating the building’s pivotal position in the history of the country? How would any theatre-transplant advertise it’s presence in a such an iconic building with such an iconic name, . . . . perhaps in the way that the National Gallery of Scotland recently advertised an Andy Warhol exhibition:

. . . . this will send Graham over the edge 🙂

So the penny has finally dropped, . . . the Arts matter – economically, . . . . Culture counts – economically, . . . . who would have even dreamt?
Now if we only had some old buildings . . .

It takes a politician to almost simultaneously . . . . . finally get the right message . . . . and then head off in the wrong direction :rolleyes:

The Abbey moving into the GPO may have started out as a well intentioned notion, but it should be starting to become apparent, on deeper reflection, that it is a hopelessly inappropriate idea that will never escape the impression that it was done to borrow stature and gravitas that doesn’t belong to it, or to find a new use for a building that already has the best possible use:- it’s design use.

The board of the Abbey itself should come out with a clear statement that stops this nonsense now before scarce public money is wasted on it.

OK, coming up with new ideas fosters interest in the urban debate, public engagement with architecture and bar-stool discussions on heritage etc. all of which is good, but ministers coming out with apparently quassi-official positions on loosly grasped proposals like this and then watching them slowly die over the course of years, as critical judgement is slowly brought to bear, gradually revealing the flaws in the concept, is ultimately a debilitating process that saps the energy out of the urban debate.

Why can’t we have some critical judgement up-front?

We’ve got all these official bodies and academic institutes with supposed expertise in matters like this, why don’t we ever hear from them? . . . . . outfits like the Heritage Council, the Urban Institute, the RIAI etc. etc.?

Further proof we need a strong, elected Mayor of Dublin. Someone like Ciaran Cuffe.

Exactly how set in stone is this? It’s starting to get a bit beyond a joke now..

this is crazy, the minister supports this? how many plays does the current Abbey have on per day? 1?2? sometimes none? and pretty much always on evenings.
Is there room for a theatre space in the GPO? obviously not.
Does it already have a useful function that attracts people in their thousands? Yes.

So this plan will save the government some money, but destroys a landmark building of national importance and creates a tumble weed affect on south O’Connell street. WOW!

we need a mayor now, a face that can be identified, and someone who can be hung, drawn and quartered if needs be.

Ok, so it’ll cost a bit more money to build it in the docks. But look at all the European cities building amazing new structures for things like this, like the Opera house in Oslo, and the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen. This is just about he fustiest option imaginable for the Abbey Theatre. It ought to be making a bold statement about the dynamic future of the Irish arts, and instead it’ll be in a drab wood-panelled neo-classical building. I think moving it to Upper O’Connell St. would be great, but in the absence of cash couldn’t they just buy the Libeskind building and put it in there?

And how come nobody thinks that it might be important to retain the site of the original Abbey so that the original theatre can be reconstructed at some time when there’s enough money for it? Maybe they could play all the old crap in that theatre, and turn the new one into something a bit more contemporary.

not saying poles are perfect but…

Same site on Abbey Street 21 12.65%
GPO, O’Connell Street 34 20.48%
Carlton Cinema, O’Connell Street 63 37.95% (can’t pay rent)
George’s Dock, Docklands 11 6.63% (docklands is a bit crass)
Site of Hawkins House 31 18.67%
Other 6 3.61%

I’m surprised Dublin does not have enough capacity with all these new buildings? libe,the keg ?

“Mr Cullen said the conference of business people in Farmleigh earlier this year was “a turning point” in making the case for arts funding”

Here in lies the crux of the matter… business people. Who could possibly be less qualified to recognise what is good for the arts; like putting two A list actors in a crap movie, its just not going to save it.
When I read it first, I assumed it was just one of those things, it would all blow over, it would be forgotten about in a year, but now for once I find myself worried that it WILL actually happen; and worst of all, the possibility that it will just be given to an office like STW, or even done “in house” by the OPW.

If it does happen, let’s hope it at least goes to an open competition (as opposed to the ESB kind) so that some bright spark might propose some tasteful way of doing it (of which I’m sure there is)

why was the ISFC considered in the first if you can’t even take photos?
reminds me of another basket case…

@rumpelstiltskin wrote:

but in the absence of cash couldn’t they just buy the Libeskind building and put it in there?

My thinking is not that different except that why buy the GC Square building when a formal hire agreement could be entered into for x number of days per year. As a rehearsal space the existing theatre is perfectly adequate and a share of the GC Square building could work perfectly if the plays were put together on its existing site with the final rehearsals and performances taking place in GC Square or around the country and World in other theatres. Surely the priority is that the National Theatre company produce the best quality plays and that the resources go into exactly that.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1217/1224260838069.html

opera or theatre? 2 sides or 1?

http://www.abbeytheatre.ie/images/uploads/user/resources/8847cb995da7bb662388b0f99164de6f.pdf
http://www.abbeytheatre.ie/images/uploads/user/resources/8c6f9e679f69233eea966a21aaddfc6b.pdf
http://www.abbeytheatre.ie/images/uploads/user/resources/f3948d8bbde64662d47d87358d9adebb.pdf

do they want a new one or a bigger one?

In 2008 as part of a discussion with Senator David Norris the School of Architecture at DIT – Bolton Street undertook an analysis of 4 key sites in relation to a speculative brief for the Abbey Theatre. The brief was close to what might be considered viable. The 4 sites, The Carlton Cinema, the existing site, George’s Dock and the GPO were all considered. Comparative studies were undertaken using over 100 theatres world wide and the sites were themselves subject to design studies.
Some samples of the work can be found here.
http://four.dublinschoolofarchitecture.com/galleryAbbey/index.html
For the record
The GPO can take the Abbey Theatre
The GPO as you see it today is not the same GPO of 1918
Most of the buildings (offices) to the rear of the facade are Edwardian
An innovative design to take account of a museum, shopping a post office along with the theatres is possible and would contribute to 24/7 activities on the street
This information was conveyed to the interagency committee responsible for deliberating over the site (under the auspices of the OPW).
The detailed analysis of the various sites was also issued to the OPW in a PDF format.
The city is re-written over the same ground through many generations, nothing stays the same. Some things persist and the city is better for it but what has persisted form the GPO is its arcade, the rest is myth.

David Norris and Fintan O’Toole were fighting over this again this morning on Pat Kenny:
http://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_patkenny.xml

@GhostWriter wrote:

. . . . what has persisted form the GPO is its arcade, the rest is myth.

by ‘it’s arcade’ I hope you mean the portico. The GPO Arcade is an entirely different kettle of fish.

I don’t think anyone was suggesting that we start some kind of Francis Johnson Trust to cherish the lost innards of the GPO

@GhostWriter wrote:

The GPO can take the Abbey Theatre
The GPO as you see it today is not the same GPO of 1918

Not much to dispute in either of those statements, it’s just a question of whether the city gains anything by implanting a new [potentially exciting] ‘national’ theatre building into the external envelope of an existing ‘national monument’ building.

The GPO is the ‘ground zero’ of modern Irish history, you couldn’t devise a better location for an exhibition/museum space dedicated to telling the story of the pivitol events that took place in this very building. Add to this that the existing building is more than capable of retaining it’s perfectly satisfactory existing original function in conjunction with imaginatively re-designed courtyards and exhibition spaces and we have, near enough, the perfect combination of location, structure and function.

@GhostWriter wrote:

An innovative design to take account of a museum, shopping, a post office along with the theatres is possible and would contribute to 24/7 activities on the street

Again it’s the ‘theatres’ bit that seems forced and unnecessary to me. I wouldn’t have a problem with a small scale theatre as an ancilliary use thrown into the mix, but I doubt that this is what the Abbey would have in mind.

@GhostWriter wrote:

This information was conveyed to the interagency committee responsible for deliberating over the site (under the auspices of the OPW).

Yeah, the ”inter-agency-committee”, address: sleepy hollow :rolleyes:

i agree with everything gunter mentioned in his last post. I really believe that there are only two best options for the Abbey. Either it is relocated on the Carlton site or (and this is my favourite option) stay at it’s existing location but jump the lane and have it’s main entrance facing south onto the river. The Peacock and secondary entrance can address Abbey street and Marlbourough street.

The Liffey quays are the city’s primary urban feature. And it needs to be reinforced. Carefully. Im not advocating any particular design and not necessarily demolition of existing buildings facing the quayside. But surely a well designed (via arch competition) solution would provide another jewel along the quays (albiet smaller than the scale of the Fourcourts or Custom house).

Another great public building spilling onto the quays. And of course the quays should eventually become more pedestrian friendly and traffic calmed. I understood the Port tunnel was the key to open up new possibilities of calming and slowing down vehicular movement along the river. And i also remember a few years ago DCC discussed the need to develop a detailed framework plan for the river corridor (The goal being to reinforce, amplify and consolidate it’s urban character and quality as the primary urban element of the city centre.)

Maybe i’m missing something?

I totally agree the natural home of the Abbey has to be where it has always been; but we are in the middle of a period of fiscal rectitude. If the GPO proposal were to proceed what would the opportunity cost be to the rest of the Arts budget?

Retention of the existing as a base combined with doing the site assembly on Eden Quay to expand at a future time is the way forward. In the interim the new Liebskind theatre at GC Square clearly can provide a capacity that the GPO would unless obliterating the existing fit out struggle to match.

The key priority is it is felt that the Theatre continue to develop and nuture emerging Irish talent and to do that it needs to be funded in a way that ensures key staff retention not a large interest bill to fund a large capital project.

@kevin dillon wrote:

i agree with everything gunter mentioned in his last post. I really believe that there are only two best options for the Abbey. Either it is relocated on the Carlton site or (and this is my favourite option) stay at it’s existing location but jump the lane and have it’s main entrance facing south onto the river. The Peacock and secondary entrance can address Abbey street and Marlbourough street.

The Liffey quays are the city’s primary urban feature. And it needs to be reinforced. Carefully.

Maybe i’m missing something?

Eden Quay is a shithole populated by junkies and dealers and frequently smells of exhaust fumes and urine?

The Hawkins House suggestion is a fine one and only a hop, skip and a jump across the river directly opposite the current site.

Redevelopment of the Abbey on the current site is too much of a lost opportunity. Yes it has historical resonances, but as it can never address the Liffey on account of the protected Georgian building (yellow block), probably by the Wide Streets Commissioners, it would have to face Abbey Street – what is, and will always be, a glorified railway embankment. The frustration of being so near yet so far from the river would be too much to bear.

Far better to take a similar, but much larger, more grandly positioned equivalent on the south side of the Liffey in the form of the Hawkin’s House site. This is by far the optimum solution as far as I’m concerned. All other options pale in comparison relative to the architectural, planning, social and economic gains – resulting in major gains for the arts – derived from this location.

I encourage everyone to look at GhostWriter’s link of proposed design options for the GPO site, and absorb the astounding – if nonetheless unsurprising – arrogance of architecture students and what they are taught. Every one of the ‘solutions’ proposes whacking all 1920s additions, effectively the entire modern-day GPO, encompassing Dublin’s only proper shopping arcade, a grandiose, unified purpose-built office and retail elevation to Henry Street, a gracious office elevation to Prince’s Street, and the two courtyards – leaving nothing but Johnston’s facade and ‘arcade’ standing. One even proposes the complete removal of the main Public Office!

No wonder the GPO ‘works’. As for the Carlton proposals…

It’s such a shame that such obvious talent is so often mis-directed in student work, where they appear almost encouraged to completely disregard context, planning legislation, and basic urban principles. Yes, it’s important to get the creative juices flowing, but what’s the point with important and supposedly pragmatic, demonstrative exercises such as this? Nonetheless, there are some extremely nice concepts amongst the outlandish stuff in there.

get rid of bank of ireland on college green and stick the Abbey there. the bank is just a waste of space.

@jesus_o_murchu wrote:

get rid of bank of ireland on college green and stick the Abbey there. the bank is just a waste of space.

Are we so afraid of modern buildings in this country that we have to transplant this theatre into an old one with columns?

In the case of the Bank of Ireland, I think we’d safely win most I’ve more columns that you have comparisons.

Do engaged columns count I wonder?

@fergalr wrote:

Eden Quay is a shithole populated by junkies and dealers and frequently smells of exhaust fumes and urine?

The Hawkins House suggestion is a fine one and only a hop, skip and a jump across the river directly opposite the current site.

Eden Quay shouldn’t be a shithole, but you seem to be suggesting that it should be left as it is instead of improved. There needs to be a master plan for the entire stretch of quays on both sides from O’Connell Bridge to the Customs House, ideally involving pedestrianising the whole stretch. A new Abbey Theatre would be an ideal contribution to this process of improvement.

@rumpelstiltskin wrote:

Eden Quay shouldn’t be a shithole, but you seem to be suggesting that it should be left as it is instead of improved. There needs to be a master plan for the entire stretch of quays on both sides from O’Connell Bridge to the Customs House, ideally involving pedestrianising the whole stretch. A new Abbey Theatre would be an ideal contribution to this process of improvement.

Yeah some places are always going to be shitholes. Especially one with a dead string of shopfronts and a transient population of bus commuters who only come to Eden Quay to leave it.
And its hinterland? The equally dead Lower Abbey St and Lower Marlborough St.

Can we also move on from the notion that theatres are forums where masses of the People come to congregate and watch fine acting? It’s primarily an elitist activity. More people use the GPO Arcade than would ever use the Abbey Theatre on the same site.

Good old Bolton Street:)

In this one, the white cardboard bit at the front is the GPO, We know this because the great portico of six giant ionic columns are here represented by six tiny round pencil circles . . . . in time honoured architecture-student fashion.

Beyond that, a couple of Laurel and Hardy theatres are stacked in to establish that the proposed Abbey + Peacock transplant works.

As a provocative challenge to architecture students, the idea has a lot of merit, [how did the crits go??] it’s just in actual reality that you’d hope someone has the smarts to call stop.

@gunter wrote:

So the National Theatre will open onto Henry St?? Maybe we could sell the name for advertising too. The Debenhams Abbey Theatre, for example.

This an interesting one proposed for the George’s Dock site.

It points up the main problem with this location: the fact that there isn’t an actual site here, without squeezing the new building up against the office blocks of the IFSC, or filling in the dock, as here.

Breaking the massing up into individual components and making the theatre complex link across what would effectively be a canal, is a decent idea, but the loss of an existing functioning social space and a successful festival location, would be too high a price to pay and the residue of space around the perimeter would probably have not much amenity value. Also the individual blocks look a bit uninspired.

Still it’s a good idea, IMO

@fergalr wrote:

Yeah some places are always going to be shitholes. Especially one with a dead string of shopfronts and a transient population of bus commuters who only come to Eden Quay to leave it.
And its hinterland? The equally dead Lower Abbey St and Lower Marlborough St.

Can we also move on from the notion that theatres are forums where masses of the People come to congregate and watch fine acting? It’s primarily an elitist activity. More people use the GPO Arcade than would ever use the Abbey Theatre on the same site.

Does anyone else find it depressing that on a planning forum, a series of blocks in the dead centre of our capital city are described as being eternal shitholes? It’s fine if it’s way out somewhere, but to suggest that Eden Quay is condemned to eternal shittiness is absurd. This is right next to O’Connell St, visible from O’Connell Bridge. Are you nuts? If we give up on that we might as well give up on Dublin.

And if you want to get rid of the drug dealers, then moving the Abbey Theatre there seems like a good way to do it. DCC isn’t going to be happy with American tourists walking out of the Abbey to see junkies hanging around.

I found a solution that will get used more use and not be elite indoor paintball…

http://www.skirmish.ie/

I still think GPO has potential it all comes down to scale… But I would rather dig deeper

consultants?

http://www.theatreplan.co.uk/

Just to return to Eden Quay. Let’s up the quays.

A new Abbey can address the river and doesn’t have to damage the protected Georgian building at the junction of Marlbough st/ Eden Quay. This building can be carefully integrated into the design. The ‘new’ architecture can sit overhead maybe and behind (this corner could carry another floor or two or a fly tower element) Maybe take fosters ‘skycatcher’ off the clarance and pop it over this protected structure.. He He He. (i’m only half joking about the skycatcher – a bit of quality new into protected buildings can work sometimes)

In any case the the new architecture can spring onto the quays through the space occupied by the two 2story buildings to the east which could surely be sacrificed.

I think on balance it’s always best to retain as much of the current building stock as possible. So i’d be glad if the protected corner building was retained. If anyone wants an example of how it could work just look at how architects O’Donnell and Tuomey dealt with the irish film centre or their new proposal for the new entrance to Trinity at the Pearse St/ Moss street junction.

Via the quays – our primary set piece.
Now i ‘m going off this thread so apologies. Another issue i think essential to the quality of the quays is the old loopline bridge. (We all must accept that it is unrealistic to hope for it’s removal) But does any engineer type out there know if it is possible to reduce the the visual impact/ bulk of the loop line bridge? The rectangular latticed box of steel. I really like the bridge but prefer the view of the custom house.

I am aware of the glass and steel curve proposal by some design firm over 10 years ago but think it was a bit cheap and obvious and would have drawn a lot of attention to its dominant curve. Is a more visually minimalised approach possible. To open up the view towards the custom house and docklands as much as we can?.

Firstly apologies, yes I meant Portico and not the arcade (behind).
Secondly the projects are student projects and some of the images are study models (not final designs)
Thirdly they are Student projects, not real since in the space of 6 or 9 weeks it is unlikely to deal with everything.
Fourthly I should have said that the feedback on the 4 sites based on the same brief was:
Carlton – too small
Abbey – possible but required significant compromises in operation
Georges’s Dock – too big, solutions lacked compactness and had to deal with 4 different contexts, not ulimately successful
GPO – even with cultural and historical concerns offered a challenging but potentially rewarding intervention.

It should be noted that theatres generally have a lot of blank facades. If they are to make a contribution to the city they have to be mixed with other complimentary uses. If you want an illustration in this look at the side and rear elevations to the National Conference Centre.

Carlton site would still be the best place – if shopping does not pick back up to previous levels the large department store pegged for behind the Carlton facade is not going to be a sucess .. maybe Abbey can be worked in instead ..

Would hate to see it put in the GPO.

Hawkins House site is no use as it needs to stay north of the river.

Completely agree Devin, I would hate to see the Abbey Theatre squeezed into the GPO.

Why cant we leave the GPO on O’Connell St to stand proudly as she is?
Surely we need a central post office in the city centre, the GPO serves as a fine public building with enough heritage and history to survive into the future. Perhaps it could be adjusted or developed for enhanced new public services. However in my view the fabric of the building and its context should largely be protected, conserved and unchanged for future generations to enjoy. Havent we ruined enough of our heritage already?

Having said that I completely recognise the important role of the Abbey theatre in the development of modern Ireland, in that context I support a modern design for a new Abbey, just not at the expense of a national treasure. God knows there are alot of derelict sites throughout the north inner city which would benefit from such a scheme.

@Devin wrote:

Hawkins House site is no use as it needs to stay north of the river.

Why? Most of the people who attend it are from the southside.

@fergalr wrote:

Why? Most of the people who attend it are from the southside.

Nice bit of baiting there fergalr, no doubt you’ll hook a few on that one.

Good point Devin, shopping space may be over supplied so the proposed john lewis and friends may be shelved leaving loads of space behind the old carlton facade. Of course i still think i would prefer Eden Quay but please leave the GPO alone…. its not broke so don’t fix it etc.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/1222/1224261109333.html

@Devin wrote:

.

Hawkins House site is no use as it needs to stay north of the river.

curious. why?

Indeed, Bertie is gone, so no prerequisite for a certain constituency…

As I’m not living in Dublin its largely immaterial to me what side of the river The Abbey sits. However, as most of Dublin’s cultural institutions are already located south of the Liffey, I think it’s important that those already situated north of the river should remain there. This has nothing to do with politics or engendering a silly north v south debate. It is simply a call to maintain some degree of balance on both sides of the Liffey.

why not put the central library there? thus remain a point of information, you keep a small post office and then a museum too, still can’t see ambassador being big enough

@lostexpectation wrote:

why not put the central library there? thus remain a point of information, you keep a small post office and the a museum too, still can’t see ambassador being big enough

Jesus, I’d completely forgotten about the library! I’m guessing the Council has as well.

nice idea – much as i love the idea of the round room in the ambassador as a great reading room for a library – the gpo would have more than enough room to do a 1916 museum / post office / central library

@d_d_dallas wrote:

Indeed, Bertie is gone, so no prerequisite for a certain constituency…

if you really think so, you dont need to join that facebook group – keep bertie out of the aras

Absolutely – won’t somebody think of the wallpaper!

@wearnicehats wrote:

curious. why?

Cross between history & the northside desparetley needing to hang on to any institutions of cultural value it has.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2010/0119/1224262632325.html

Simon says steven

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0311/1224266044715.html

And so it rumbles on…

Call for clarity on Abbey move to GPO

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0625/1224273269999.html

zzzzz

”Ms Hanafin said a feasibility group involving the key stakeholders had been set up and had begun an assessment of the GPO complex to ascertain if it was a feasible location for the redeveloped national theatre”.

feasibility group . . . feasible location . . . feasibility study . . . fees, fees, fees

. . . . and when everyone’s done feeding at the trough, it will still come down to the simple question; is this a good idea, or is it a bad idea? and that’s the decision that should have been made at the start.

Abbey Theatre to close for nine weeks after asbestos discovered in building
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0509/abbey-theatre-asbestos.html

When I read that first, I thought it said an albatross had been discovered in the building.

@gunter wrote:

When I read that first, I thought it said an albatross had been discovered in the building.

Now that would be dramatic!

I remember going to Belvedere College to see a production of a play – they have a great theatre there so it’s only natural that they’d use it.

So the wheel comes full circle and we are back to the Abbey Theatre of Abbey Street (or more properly Marlborough Street) and now with the potential of frontage to the river. The Abbey today confirmed that it has bought 15-17 Eden Quay (which archiseekers might remember it originally wanted to buy but then it let the cat out of the bag in the middle of a property bubble and the owner upped the price to ridiculous heights).

It seems a sensible outcome to me. The best place for the Abbey after the saga of where it should move to that has gone on over 10 years.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0926/breaking33.html

I would imagine that they’ll want to remove those buildings now (even though they’re WSC facades) as any architectural competition is going to produce lots of landmark buildings on the riverfront concepts.

1829 – Dublin Steam Packet Building, Eden Quay, Dublin

Looks like the facades are on the list of protected structures so it will be interesting to see how they square that circle.

Either way it has to be good for Eden Quay.

I would also assume that the laneway along the side of the Abbey will be closed at one end post any redevelopment. This can only be a good thing given the rampant drug abuse in that area.

I can see no reason why the shouldn’t keep the corner buildings and use as a lobby/reception area – in fact, I’d be pretty sure they will

I agree. They would probably work out well for elements like shop, bar, offices etc.

I cant imagine there’ll will be much appetite to fund a major new building on the site.

Incidentally, 15-17 Eden Quay looking decidedly worse for wear than your picture Paul.

With devils advocate hat on, retaining the existing buildings while adding the lane (Old Abbey Street I think, although Google Maps seems to believe its called Lower Abbey Street) probably doesn’t increase the footprint of the site enough to cure the theatre’s major problem – backstage space, stage, auditorium etc as you cannot turn the theatre site 90 degrees. Although there does seem to be some sort of extension that can be removed behind the WSC buildings.

[attachment=0:awxjebgc]abbeytheatre.jpg[/attachment:awxjebgc]

Thats the former Riverside Gym, Boring brick box from the 1980s.

Given that the bulk of the properties in the block bounded by Abbey Street and Eden Quay are owned by just 3 organisations SIPTU/VHI/Abbey Theatre, all of whom are looking to re-develop….its a pity they can’t get together to produce a new city quarter with flagship buildings and new public spaces!!

C

I don’t have a map of Dublin to hand, but I think it’s actually Little Abbey Street.

(sorry about the above. I can’t seem to get the quoting right. I must be forgetting something).

No, sorry Paul, you are right.

[attachment=0:auzyecgg]abbey-noporch.jpg[/attachment:auzyecgg]

Still think its looked better without the “porch”, although that might be damning it by faint praise