Arnotts

Actually that has been bothering me as well…..

And everytime I’m in the Architectural Archive, it slips my mind to look it up.

Well it definitely had one tower, that was taken down. Only a the base of it remains, (I’ve seem photos of it somewhere). The other tower would have been where the awful 1960s facade ends, whether or not it existed was another thing.

Rory W

Why is the Arnotts bag of interest? What can the “mute testimony” of residential developements of the past (and next?)two decades say about Irish Architecture? Why isthis kind of topic not of interest?

A photograph I have seen of Arnotts, taken sometime post 1916 but before the GPO was rebuilt, does indeed show a second, broadly similar tower – but one which is both smaller in volume, and lower, than the original. The angle from which the photo was taken does not give great detail.

As an earlier poster says it was roughly where the “new” extension starts.

I was looking at a bag and the building this morning. Basically the shop facade is only half the elevation on the bag. This leads me to believe that this was the original design, never completed as there is enough length in the block for another repetition of the elaborate victorian facade.

I’ve been following this up. Here is the illustration from the bag.

And here is basically what exists now. Basically it seems that the original block which stretched from Princes Street to Henry Street was completely destroyed in 1894 after a fire. Designed by G.P Beater in 1894, extended in 1904. So either this is the design as reconstructed after the fire, or a completely new replacement design that was just never completed due to lack of funds or interest (ie original 1894n concept), or perhaps damaged beyond repair in 1916. Thje top of the tower was removed in 1949 which is a pity.

The new book in the picture series called “Central Dublin” shows a picture of Arnotts, as it was.

Just remember this over the weekend while standing on Henry Street. Am contacting Arnotts to find out.

Image from “A Companion Guide to Architecture in Ireland 1837-1921 ” which is closer to what we have today….

Penny’s down the road has a couple of fine copper domed Baroque like towers, (or is it just one)…….pity about the street frontage however.

Talk about a world away from what we have now!

Arnotts was assembled over the 19th century with a collection of standard Georgian buildings (no’s 11-15 Henry Street), then called Cannock, White & Co, with John Arnott as part owner, and took over the store in 1865. A massive fire in 1894 destroyed all the buildings, and the present day structure was built in 1896, making it now the oldest & now largest dept store in Ireland.

I quite like the 60’s section. but then I liked a lot of the Roches Stores facade as well. A restoration job, and a decent branding/signage makeover (not the horrid job they recently got) would have been my choice for this rare example of late 60’s (?) dept store design.

Feel free to pull down the stephens green centre though.

and wouldn’t boyers, with a basic restoration, make a fantastic upmarket boutique dept store? It could be a gorgeous building with a little thought.

Why was the tower & terminating spires removed? Looking at Arnotts the other day, if you stand back from it, you can see stunning original large display windows, with cut stone dressings that are obliterated with that nasty 60’s canopy at ground floor ceiling level. Also that offensive vertical 70’s
A
R
N
O
T
T
S
sign does the building no favours.

The tower was removed in the 1920s as it had been seen as unstable (something caused by a little riot or something in the GPO circa Easter 1916).

Bumping this up again, as no-one has answered the original question

….

Here is the illustration from the bag.

And here is basically what exists now.

Given that Arnotts are going to redevelop, it would be timely that they re-examine the entire building as opposed to just adding on another extension at Abbey Street. It is an exceptional building on Henry Street, but it has been sadly diminished by the poor canopy and shuttering. If these were removed it would enable a greater appreciation of the building (as well as giving the building a greater presence on Henry St.)

On another matter, when they refurbished in ’98 -’99, they removed many sixties fittings revealing, for a short time, some late nineteenth century pillasters at the main entrance. These were, sadly, covered with marbel slabs which can be seen today.

And, while Arnotts is older than Clerys, Clerys was the site of the first department store (1851) – arnotts opened as a small store in 1845 – In fact, Clerys was the first of its kind, pre-dating Bon Marche in Paris!

Indeed Clerys is often touted as the oldest dep store in the world, the first to market shopping as a leisure activity.
They achieved it by containing many departments under one, very lavish roof. Suppose the first shopping centre as well.

An indication of the modernity of the building were the large plate glass display windows on the ground floor, which were unheard of in this country at the time, and must have been prohibitively expensive in 1851-53.
The Mansion House is otherwise the earliest example of the use of such glass I’ve come across in the city, dating from around the same time.

The mystery of Arnotts lives on.
What’s very wierd about the design on the bag is how unsymmetrical the building is – the wing on the left after the tower is 5 bays long, while on the right it’s only 3 bays, why aren’t they balanced out with four on either side?

And over the pilasters J. Seerski mentions are magnificently carved capitals, laden with all sorts of foliage etc, sadly obscured by the canopy.

Does anyone know of the trademark green railings inside are original, I’ve never been sure – they look decidedly Stephens Green Centreish. Then again, their railings are pretty good repros.
T

On the general question of this thread, I’ve always taken it that the symmetrical drawing of Arnotts posted above from A Companion Guide to Architecture in Ireland 1837-1921 (and also appearing in Lost Dublin) – with one big central tower and two smaller terminating ones – is what was built.

So, having believed for some time that what stands today is the original building minus its towers – removed in 1949 – I was aghast to notice, when walking down Henry St. the other day, that one of the terminating bays (the one nearest Liffey St.) is missing 😮 – instead the ’60s building begins (I know earlier posters refer to the fact that one of the towers which appear in the longer façade on the Arnotts bag (if this facade ever existed) would have been roundabout here as well).

Since the building doesn’t have its 3 towers anymore, the slightly-projecting terminating bays are important to the composition, so it’s quite gobsmacking that one of them isn’t there….

What I want to know is why they feel the need to put a picture of a store that never existed on the bag?

They could have used the old image above or the image from the early 20th century invoices (all scrolling text and picture of the building)….

I cannot even recall a photograph of it with the central large and two flanking domes – Devin, I’ve definitely seen photos of the central tower and the tower nearest O’Connell Street – now that could be down to the difficult of getting a clear angle on the building or perhaps the other image is a fiction too? Perhaps they intended to build the design on the bag, stopped, intended terminating what was built with a tower and never bothered….

so many possibilities….

Here’s the only pic available on the net – pretty good though at showing the join:

Maybe the western tower was removed when the 60s part went up? Hardly likely though.
It’s difficult to see exactly why such a palatial facade was drwan up considering it could never be appreciated properly if built, given the location. Then again perhaps that’s why towers were used, to stand proud over everything else and be visible from all around, to make up for the lack of a dominant facade in a prominent location like Clery’s or Pims had.

I see the signature dome was only added in 1980, according to the site this pic came from. Hence presumably the surrounding railings beneath are repros afterall.

The internal railings are all repro Graham… Think the dome was later tha 1980 too…

You may be right re the dome – was reading yesterday and found the date 1980 but looking now I can’t find it!
I was hoping the railings may have be based on an original design considering the ironwork of the columns etc, but they do seem to be of the shopping centre handbook variety. The forest green paint and natural wood works very well nonetheless.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

The internal railings are all repro Graham… Think the dome was later tha 1980 too…

Twas at least 1990 when the dome went in

Certainly looks later than 1980 anyway. Here’s the link to the engineering/materials firm that built the Arnotts extention – it’s here that says 1980. Intersting bits and pieces of info about the job:

http://www.corusconstruction.com/page_9065.htm

@Graham Hickey wrote:

Certainly looks later than 1980 anyway. Here’s the link to the engineering/materials firm that built the Arnotts extention – it’s here that says 1980. Intersting bits and pieces of info about the job:

http://www.corusconstruction.com/page_9065.htm

Must be 1990 (1980 must be a typo) if it says they were utilising the benefits of the 1986 Urban renewal act! (and I remember being in secondary school when it was being done!)

You must be right – we used to have to go a different way as kids to get to the annual Christmas Lego Exhibition in Arnotts before the dome came along – the highlight of the year 🙂

Christmas has never been the same since 🙁

Was passing early this morning and noticed something that may be of interest. Inside, the trademark cast iron pillars which presumably are Victorian, extend out beyond the original facade and into the 60s section.
How far I’m not totally sure – went in to have a look and braved a totally empty teenage girl store with suspicious staff eying every move 😮
It seems the columns only extend as far as a couple of bays into the 60s part, maybe a 1/4 or so – perhaps the width of the terminating pavilion?

The pillars could be repros but it seems unlikely as they only extend a small part into the new building when they could have gone the whole way if desired.
Does nobody have a pic of Henry St from the 50s – surely someone has one!

Hmmmm thats interesting about the columns…

Found a nice photograph I have of the exterior

http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/dublin/northcity/henry_street/arnotts3_lge.html

and this one just about shows the join

http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/dublin/northcity/henry_street/arnotts_extension_lge.html

Arnotts have placed displays of some of their higher end ranges in the windows of the former Irish Independent offices on Middle Abbey St, I presume that this is a prelude to a much more intensive use of the building. :p

@Thomond Park wrote:

Arnotts have placed displays of some of their higher end ranges in the windows of the former Irish Independent offices on Middle Abbey St, I presume that this is a prelude to a much more intensive use of the building. :p

What is so damn interesting about a larger department store?

I wish they’d set the clock properly while they’re at it.

I really think what they did to the old Adelphi was insulting.

Do they just zoom in and out across the tracks?

Ps, this is a reply to Grahams post about the cars going in and out of the car park. For some reason it came up as though I had posted it before Grahams post! Hopefully this editing will sort it out!

The users of its car park are just as ignorant towards the Luas.

28/12/2005

Not to ‘compete’ with the other current Arnotts thread, but as it reminded me, it’s only logical I post here to in some way bring closure to this long-running saga 🙂

I can now confirm for definite, as was suggested earlier by some, that this is what what built at the turn of the last century:

A central tower flanked by two smaller terminating pavillions.

The IAA has a picture of Henry St prior to 1916 clearly showing the building above in all its glory, with the now-demolished right-hand tower standing in the distance.
The vast building as depicted on the bag, as everyone knew, never existed.

It also explains why there are still interior decorative cast iron columns continuing into the 1960s part – as far a I can make out they run precisely to the depth that the terminating tower and extra bays would have extended to. Clearly they were demolished to make way for what is a mere curtain wall 🙁

Didn’t have time to check out the original ‘bag plans’ for the building – work for another day.
Only then will the Arnotts Mystery be truly solved…….

@Graham Hickey wrote:

I can now confirm for definite, as was suggested earlier by some, that this is what what built at the turn of the last century:

A central tower flanked by two smaller terminating pavillions.

The IAA has a picture of Henry St prior to 1916 clearly showing the building above in all its glory, with the now-demolished right-hand tower standing in the distance.

Are you sure Graham? I presume this is the photo you refer to (below), which you posted in the other thread. I can see something which might be the domed roof of the now-demolished tower … but then again it mightn’t …

The possibility was suggested earlier in the thread that the western tower could have been demolished at the time the ’60s curtain wall bit was built. The picture above (from Lost Dublin) is a view from the top of the pillar in probably the ’30s or ’40s (certainly before the ’60s bit was built). The western tower does not appear to be present – at least there’s no sign of its domed roof, and I think it would be visible from this point, all things considered. (What might appear at first glance to be the top its domed roof is actually just one of four finials at the base of the central tower’s roof.)

I’m still not satisfied the west tower was ever built – arrgh!!

Other thread here: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?p=44335#post44335

You’re making me uneasy now! 😀

I deliberately checked in the IAA for this very purpose, and the only photograph they had of Henry St as I recall was that of the street similar to that above but taken from street level and possibly a little more to the right – clearly showing the western tower. The ‘steeple’ as it were may not have been visible, can’t remember, but the shaft/main body of the tower was.

Really ought to get a photocopy of the picture to sort this one out for good.

Is this not it here?

Hard to know isn’t it – I don’t think it would be visible in Devin’s image but if it was built, it must be in a photo somewhere.

I can make it out but it is a good inch higher than the arrow

Looking at the building now from the same spot as that 1916 pic might help (bearing in mid the other changes) – I might do that tomorrow if I’m nearby.

Graham, if there is another picture where as you say it is definitely visible, well that will nail it.

Indeed – I’ll try and get a photocopy.

But the extending of the interior columns into the 60s part to the width of the tower does it for me – take a look.
It’s difficult (not least without looking suspicious), there’s only one or two columns left, and you tend to lose your bearings with the lamppost marker outside once when you go in – but it is possible 🙂

Ok – will do that too.

OK, very small pic I know. Apologies. I took this snapshot from the fascinating program about the Moore St Traders originally broadcast way back in 1974 but shown again last week. Credit for this pic is with RTE. Now the pic is of the site now occupied by the Ilac Centre. Question is, the building toward the top left of the pic with the dome, is this Arnotts or possibly Jervis hospital. I first thought it was Arnotts but I think there are too many windows, bay wise. And it looks like the Guiness buildings behind it so this would not be right. Jervis seems to the candidate then? Anyone have any ideas? Sorry for possibly going off-topic. I don’t really think this warranted a new thread.

Thanks

Graham

Bigger picture for you:

Thanking you Morlan – Don’t know why it’s so small in the post by myself. Should’ve came out bigger.

You can see it very clearly in the image posted by Devin above.
The huge hulk of a grey box to the left would appear to be the rear end of Roches, if that puts any bearing on things – assuming that’s it of course…
If so, the red building would have stood at the top of Liffey St, behind/on the current site of the ILAC entrance.

Yes, that building is also mentioned in the caption of the picture from Lost Dublin (last picture in Post 38, above). It says: ‘To the right … is the dome, surmounted by a flagpole, of the Henry Street Warehouse Company latterly known as Denmark House, Little Denmark Street, an early steel-framed building which was demolished in 1976’. Lost Dublin was published 1981 – Little Denmark Street was of course subsequently wiped out for the ILAC.

Once you know what the mystery building is you can see what the other things are: back of Roches on the left as Graham said; the ugly back of the Jervis Hospital behind the Denmark St. building; Pennys’ excellent Baroque dome to the right; and the blurry spire & tower to the right of that would be the Augustinian church, Thomas St., & the Four Courts.

geraghtyg, is the picture a digital grab or a photo of the tv screen? – it’s quite good if it’s a photo!

Spot on Devin….

Thanks a million for explaining all that Devin. All makes sense now. And I did need to see that pic from post 38 to get my bearings. To be honest, I never even new there used to be a street where the Ilac is now. Presumably this would have linked Dominick and Liffey Streets???

Anyway, regarding where I got the image from: I recorded the program from digital TV onto the hard drive of my DVD recorder, then copied it onto DVD, loaded up the dvd onto my PC and using my editing program, took a frame grab and posted it on here. Quality of picture and sound is excellent as the original film footage was restored. There are many fascinating scenes in this program of Moore St, Smithfield and surrounding areas. I actually have a good few other screen grabs saved to my PC as I have created DVD covers and images to print onto the DVDs themselves to make them look better as I intend to keep this program for archive purposes. I could post up more here if anyone is interested although I’m not sure what the story with doing that is, copyright wise.

Graham

Yeah, definitely! I often find myself watching old stuff on telly & going ‘it would be good to get access to that’. Like that Frankie Byrne documentary that was on RTE last night – there were some interesting views of O’Connell Street and the Quays in colour, showing all the buildings that have since been demolished & replaced at the west end of Bachelor’s Walk.

The old series’ of Hands are good as well. You get background scenes of Irish towns, and every building still has its sash windows – and they were only filmed in the ’70s & ’80s! (i.e. before PVC blight! 🙁 )

.

I came across this interesting picture of Henry Street in the ’70s (left); and the same view today (right) – Roches on the extreme right in both pictures. The gap just beyond Roches in the ’70s pic would be the no-longer-existing Denmark Street already mentioned.

Good to see Denmark St, well the beginning of it anyway. And I have to say that the street looks really nice with the palm trees and benches. Almost looks mediterranean until you look at the shopfronts, that is.
OK, well when I get a chance, I’ll post up a few more frame grabs if I can find any shots of interest.

What a bizarre photograph! Out of interest, what the heck started that craze for palm trees in the 70s? Package holidays?!
No suburban house of the era is complete without one in the middle of the front lawn.

One interesting snippet of info about Little Denmark Street is that in 1926 2RN, Ireland’s first broadcasting service (later Radio

Funny you should mention the radio broadcasts from the GPO. Main lock on the door in my house is actually the original lock to the Radio Eireann studios or whatever they had back then. Fine big lock and fantastic looking key.

Really?! Got a pic? Yes there were proper studios in there by the time the GPO opened. It was refurbished again in the 50s, when shudder-inducing gloss painted partitions with bubbled glass went in to the office section. The place was falling down round their ears by the time Donnybrook beckoned.

If you mean a pic of the studios, then no. Lock looks quite normal in the door – It has been in the door for a few decades now I reckon. If you want some pics of the lock and key, it could be arranged. If that is what you looking for pics of, that is.

Graham

Just the lock – if it’s interesting like 🙂
What it’s got to do with Arnotts now….

@Graham Hickey wrote:

Out of interest, what the heck started that craze for palm trees in the 70s? Package holidays?!
No suburban house of the era is complete without one in the middle of the front lawn.

Lol! It was definitely the jetset influence, & popularity of programmes like Hawaii 5-0!

Must have been all those “look up, it’s Aer Lingus ads” still burned into the cerebral cortex of a few of us

Ahhhhhhhhh I can’t get the image of a contemporary to that time Aer Lingus air hostess uniform out of mind!!!!!!!!!

I saw on the news that the Arnotts masterplan was unveiled today there is as yet nothing on HKR’s site and I hope that the architecture is of a good standard. In circulation terms I am very pleased that they have chosen to add to O’Connell St by creating a major retail zone on South Princes St which will add to the City it is felt and the idea of a Square is also great aqnd a quantum leap form the orginal idea to just carve a new street between Henry and Abbey St.

I hope the detailing is good on this as this would allow a breathing space for Liffey Street to be redeveloped with a replacement pedestrian route being provided.

I am looking forward to seeing some images.

@Thomond Park wrote:

Ahhhhhhhhh I can’t get the image of a contemporary to that time Aer Lingus air hostess uniform out of mind!!!!!!!!!

I saw on the news that the Arnotts masterplan was unveiled today there is as yet nothing on HKR’s site and I hope that the architecture is of a good standard. In circulation terms I am very pleased that they have chosen to add to O’Connell St by creating a major retail zone on South Princes St which will add to the City it is felt and the idea of a Square is also great aqnd a quantum leap form the orginal idea to just carve a new street between Henry and Abbey St.

I hope the detailing is good on this as this would allow a breathing space for Liffey Street to be redeveloped with a replacement pedestrian route being provided.

I am looking forward to seeing some images.

Images are on new street for Dublin thread

Those of you interested in this development might wish to have a look at the model on display in DCC at the moment. From what i can see the development invloves demolishing a whole section of the existing Arnotts store, not just the 1960s addition but the Edwardian section west of the tower. Also on the Abbey Street side Chapters book store also seems to have gone along with the remaining buildings cornering Upper Liffey Street including ‘aul Hector Greys (its a sad day for Dublin). Some of the new linking street look very narrow, particularly the Abbey Street links. Im not sure they’ll make such nice places. Also would like to see changes to the Pennys facade to fit in better with the GPO and Easons. One area thats not included (which I thought was) is the corner of Liffey Street and Henry Street. All the buildings at this corner are outside of the development area.

Somebody want to photograph the model for some detail?

Guys this is all very confusing. Can someone please clear this up for me and correct me if I’m wrong.

I gather it is safe to say that the tower existed some time before the 1960’s curtain walling extension. Does anyone know what happened to it?

Also the illustration from the bag. Did this building ever exist?

As was noted on the other thread, it’s not 100% clear, but it’s nearly definite that this was built:

because:

1. The original interior cast iron columns extend into the 1960s part roughly to the depth of the tower.
2. The 1960s part is wider at the front that the back, to the depth of a tower.
3. Various photographs we’ve seen suggest the tower as being there.
4. A photograph in the IAA to the best of my knowledge clearly shows the western tower fully extant.
5. This map from 1936 depicts the tower

The store was extended in 1904, so it’s possible the western pavilion wasn’t built till then, perhaps when it was realised that the entire proposed scheme couldn’t be built/funded.

If you’re serious about researching C.H., go to the Irish Architectural Archive on Merrion Square for us, head straight for the photographs bookcase, look up Henry Street, and see if there’s a 1930s-50s picture clearly showing the building with western pavilion. I’m nearly sure they have one. 🙂

Top marks as always Mr Hickey

Any news on where the proposed redevelopment is at; last I heard the Management had this out to three development groups to appoint one in a JV

Forgive me…I may be coming late to the game here, but as regards the tower, I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that it was taken down some time post-independence because it was seen as a piece of unnecessary, flippant Victorian embellishment.
I think it’s in Pat Liddy’s “Dublin; A Celebration”.

Centros Miller I think

Thanks for that JD

was a bit in the dark no SBP here unfortunately

That’s them. Was in sunday times first with an indo follow up. SBP haven’t followed it too closely.

Oddly, given the enormous commercial implications of this scheme…

The tower you refer to Fergal is the central tower that was taken down in 1949, for no apparent reason other than it was deemed to be ugly, or at best unorthodox. It had survived 1916 and 1922. Presumably it was also at this time that the turrets were removed from the two side towers. And then about 15 years later the western tower disappeared completely with the construction of the 1960’s curtain-walled extension, however it would appear that only the tower’s facade was demolished, with its substructure including Victorian cast iron columns being retained behind part of the new facade, at ground floor level at least. Indeed it’s possible this is the reason a curtain-walled solution was called into play with the Arnotts extension: to partially clad over the western tower. Though why/if this was done is anyone’s guess…

Btw I recently tentatively ventured deep into the bowels of Arnotts, into the school uniform and baby needs section high up on the second floor in the Victorian block fronting onto Henry Street, and as hoped it’s a hidden enclave of original features that survived the 80’s and 90’s remodellings, with cast iron columns puncturing up through the floor. The floor seems to line up neatly with the windows, but the low columns and capitals, some only at waist level, clearly suggest a much grander plan originally, perhaps with no floor divisions at all, like a double or triple height space over the main entrance behind the red brick facade. There’s also a few simple arches that may or may not be original, clad over if I recall. It’s all very make-do-and-mend, with the shop charmingly muddling around these curious relics of a bygone store 🙂 – an increasingly rare phenomenon in Dublin today.

Of course many of the columns around part the central rotunda are also original, the mezzanine level only installed in the 1980s. That’s why the columns are ridiculously short at that level. So the original store was at the very least a double height space in the red brick block.

I see Arnotts have an application in for their shopfront (3269/09)

“PROTECTED STRUCTURE-The development will consist of the restoration of the ground floor shop front facade and entrance portico of the original Arnotts Building to its former style. The restoration work to the protected structure will consist of the following work. The removal of the existing canopy, flag poles, illuminated signage and existing glass shop windows on facade of department store fronting No. 11-15 Henry Street. The existing mezzanine floor plate will be cut back by 2 metres to re-create double height shop windows and to allow the re-establishment of original facade with reinstated pilasters. The installation of new entrance doors in lieu of existing shutters at main entrance flanked on both sides with new glazed entrance doors (1 set per side). The existing 8m high vertical illuminated external sign on Henry Street will be removed and replaced with a new 8m vertical illuminated external sign on brickwork panel at west end of no. 11-15 Henry Street facade; The proposed development to which this application relates is within a conservation area and the building is a Protected Structure.”

@StephenC wrote:

I see Arnotts have an application in for their shopfront (3269/09)

“PROTECTED STRUCTURE-The development will consist of the restoration of the ground floor shop front facade and entrance portico of the original Arnotts Building to its former style. The restoration work to the protected structure will consist of the following work. The removal of the existing canopy, flag poles, illuminated signage and existing glass shop windows on facade of department store fronting No. 11-15 Henry Street. The existing mezzanine floor plate will be cut back by 2 metres to re-create double height shop windows and to allow the re-establishment of original facade with reinstated pilasters. The installation of new entrance doors in lieu of existing shutters at main entrance flanked on both sides with new glazed entrance doors (1 set per side). The existing 8m high vertical illuminated external sign on Henry Street will be removed and replaced with a new 8m vertical illuminated external sign on brickwork panel at west end of no. 11-15 Henry Street facade; The proposed development to which this application relates is within a conservation area and the building is a Protected Structure.”

Good news. Would be interesting to see some drawings.

@lauder wrote:

Good news. Would be interesting to see some drawings.

are we going to see the replacement of the horrific 6O’S facade?

its would appear that they arent rebuilding the west tower which stikes me as a bit hald arssed

http://www.dublincity.ie/AnitePublicDocs/00273005.pdf

No the west tower will not be rebuilt, as this application (lodged two weeks ago) forms part of the wider Arnotts redevelopment which involves the remounting of the facade of the west wing of the building as the elevation to the newly opened Liffey Street. This will make the existing central tower three-dimensional and a prominent feature of the streetscape.

This is a very welcome development, not only as the Arnotts store – as admitted by the group’s chief executive – is getting a bit tatty round the edges, but also as this phase of the development project was scheduled to be one of the last completed in around 2011-12. Now it is the first. It makes complete sense to undertake it now, independent of the delay to the wider project, as it serves a dual function of greatly improving the store in the interim while also tackling one of the cheaper parts of the new quarter scheme. It also explains the rather high figure of €10 million that was being bandied about for these cosmetic works!

Just on the west tower mystery again, there is little question that it was built. I came across this rare image of the store some time ago, reputed to date to 1902, but is perhaps more likely to be 1904 if this is when the building was finally completed (the main structure being of 1894).

This trade card appears to be more pragmatic in terms of detail than the earlier sketch we have of the building (but it also serves to confirm that it was correct too). Interestingly, the two gabled buildings to each side of the building are depicted here as forming part of the store – perhaps it was these elements that were the ‘extension’ of 1904? It is significant that these buildings are depicted at this time, as this tells us that the left-hand one, which still survives, pre-dates the 1916 destruction, and is likely to be the only other building on this side of Henry Street to do so.

Also interestingly, the image also shows the vast workrooms (in somewhat embellished perspective) to the rear of the main building, where clothes were made for the ‘monster store’ and probably custom-tailored for customers when required.

KITCHEN and DINING ROOM can clearly be made out, along with WORKROOM and CABINET to the rear (above image), presumably referring to furniture-making.

The newly proposed works will radically transform the appearance of the store, turning a dingy 1960s vision of retailing back into the gracious ensemble of tall plate glass picture frames addressing the street that Arnotts once was. The photomontages look extremely impressive – literally a new Victorian building will land into Henry Street, as the typical shopper cannot appreciate the store in all its glory at present. These works will do wonders for the prestige of Arnotts, injecting it with considerable street presence.

One final point is the ground floor pilasters proposed to be reinstated dividing the windows. The drawings propose to reinstate ‘stone pilasters to match original’ but there is no bronze band detailing depicted (as seen above), as once wrapped around each pilaster in typical Victorian style. Such a motif can still be seen on polished granite shopfront pilasters on Dawson Street, and more critically, on Arnotts itself, where the banding marks still remain on the pilasters of the grandiose side entrance door.

© fjp

What’s the likelihood of those going back on across the board? They’d cost a fortune to get made up. Sourcing a similar dark grey granite for polishing also won’t be easy. These issues are not specified in the otherwise very well detailed conservation method statement.

http://http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=3666/09&backURL=Search Criteria > urbanisto

Oh bugger go an find it yourselves…. Reg Ref 3666/09

@StephenC wrote:

Oh bugger go an find it yourselves…. Reg Ref 3666/09

everything can be divided by 3

didn’t they say a while ago that there was no finance for this and it would be in suspense until economic recovery………………………………..?

be pushed to get this underway before PP runs out.

So the interim revamp of Arnotts’ interior is well underway. It is remarkable the difference a dash of new flooring, cheap slab ceilings and a lick of paint makes in updating a store.

All of the trademark cast-iron columns have been beautifully painted in charcoal grey, to distinguished effect. Not only do they now look fashionable and elegant (grey very much being ‘the’ colour of the late 000s), the dark shade also highlights the columns as a prominent feature of the store, where their previous white glossy coating made them dissolve into the background. Smart grey carpets also feature on the stairs, as is a growing trend in retailing at the moment. The beechy counters are, however, a bit dodge…

The crisp, glossy new tiled flooring is modern and durable. It really shows up the tattiness of the previous manky beech coloured timber-effect covering which has yet to be covered over alongside it. Indeed, that whole interior scheme of beech surfaces and oval forms dated remarkably quickly, just as the fit-out of Debenhams in Jervis did, of identical date. By contrast, the sharper lines and better palatte of materials of the Jervis Centre itself have actually held up very well (even if they have been tweaked since). An interesting contrast.

Arnotts’ new slab ceilings could have been a little more inventive than the rather humdrum plain coffers on offer, but the glittering array of simple new halogen spots prove extremely effective in generating a sense of warmth and elegance. The glossy floor tiles pick them up beautifully. A very encouraging upgrade thus far, with the major interventions to the front of the store in cutting back the mezzanine to expose the full-height windows yet to come.

Some of the pre-canopy Arnotts shopfront visible on the right here.

Anglo Irish Bank to take control of Arnotts
Wednesday, 28 July 2010 07:28
The well known Dublin department store, Arnotts, is set to come under the control of Anglo Irish Bank.

The move comes as the retailer struggles with a significant debts of in excess of €0.25 billion. The debt is owed to Anglo and also to Ulster Bank.

Anglo Irish Bank has sought permission from the European Union to precipitate the move under EU rules. There is a deadline of August 9 for objections to the move.

AdvertisementIt is understood that none of the 950 jobs at Arnotts are under threat and that the store, located on Henry Street in Dublin, is trading well.

Arnotts generated debts arising from a proposed €750m redevelopment of the 5.5 acre area surrounding the store. The ‘Northern Quarter’ development was to include a shopping, entertainment and residential district.

Arnotts has declined to comment.

If they had secured planning earlier it might have been very different; great brand Arnotts, a pity they didn’t put resources into expanding overseas and diversifying their consumer base as opposed to redevelopment. Good retailer

To my mind it was a great brand, though for me (a former small shareholder) much of the sheen was taken off the brand by the somewhat murky events surrounding the re-privatisation of the company and the subsequent purchase of the Independent Newspapers building.

However, in the light of subsequent events, such as the deal with Boundary Capital (whose principal, a Mr McFadden, now seems to have fled the country) and today’s announcement, I’m quite glad that myself and other small shareholders were forced out.

If Richard Nesbitt happens to lose a lot of money because of this, well I’m sure it couldn’t happen to a nicer fella.

there goes any hope of abbey street seeing any tlc anytime soon

I think that the main problem stems from the fact that many people had a sudden epiphany and realised that they really really didn’t need to buy any more shite

Ha, no Arnotts is still trading reasonably well. It is still without question the king of Dublin department stores, with the advances Roches were making being pulled back a decade by Debenhams, Clerys remaining a basketcase and more isolated than ever, and Brown Thomas increasingly finding itself priced out of the market. Arnotts has the most flexible business model and the most diverse range of departments to help weather the storm and keep itself relevant to the consumer. It’s just a bit of a headache that there’s a €250 million-plus debt lingering in the background… If there’s one area that needs serious reordering, its their Kitchenware department in the basement which has gone down the tubes in the past couple of years. There’s a big opportunity to be grasped in catering for the loss of that trade from Roches and other smaller stores that have vanished.

Most of us have probably noticed that the €10 million revamp of the existing store, including the removal of the external canopy on Henry Street and reopening of its magnificent original display windows, appears to have come to an abrupt halt since last November. Is this dead in the water too?

It was remarkable how little coverage the Arnotts redevelopment received back in 2007 relative to the Carlton site which has received widespread and sustained attention since its launch. The initial Arnotts scheme, gleefully rubber-stamped by DCC, proposed the most eye-popping over-development imaginable looming over Abbey Street, Liffey Street and Henry Street. This mindless stacking up of arrogant, formless and incoherent boxes merely designed to ‘contain’ XXX ‘units’ of half a million euro apartments, was in addition to a Liberty Hall squeezed onto the corner of Abbey Street and Liffey Street, a canyon of a new street entered from Henry Street (the concept itself an admirable one), and the most outrageous, bombastic recladding and stacking up of setback storeys on Penneys next to the GPO on O’Connell Street – without so much as a whimper from DCC or reference to their own ACA policy. Talk about a far cry from the expert architectural group of late 1916. As usual, it was left to a pitiful number of people to decry the latter dross being sent over from the UK from a so-called ’eminent’ architect of retail design, over whose illustrious work casting so much as a concerned glance, never mind an open critique, yielded a scornful look of pity last practised in Dublin following the opening of the doors to the mob after the Duke of Dorset’s viceregal banquets of the 1730s. The lack of commitment to architectural excellence on this, one of the most important sites in the State, was nothing short of frightening.

It took the Board to turn this scheme from a gratuitously overscaled, if broadly urban-minded development, into a contextual, fully integrated and principled urban scheme. DCC were quite willing to sell out the north inner city lock, stock and barrel for vast development levies and rates. It will be interesting to see how the banks handle their newly acquired assets: namely if they dispose of individual properties, in which case the masterplan collapses, retain strategic sites to eventually develop part of it, or develop the entire plan incrementally – if perhaps scaled down.

@GrahamH wrote:

Ha, no Arnotts is still trading reasonably well. It is still without question the king of Dublin department stores, with the advances Roches were making being pulled back a decade by Debenhams, Clerys remaining a basketcase and more isolated than ever, and Brown Thomas increasingly finding itself priced out of the market. Arnotts has the most flexible business model and the most diverse range of departments to help weather the storm and keep itself relevant to the consumer…………

Not very relevant, other than for selling it off as a going concern. Lots of businesses are “trading well” (it was the builders’ mantra for an age) but are broke. Huge difference between trading profitably and bottom line profit.

Agree with you on Clerys & BT, not on Roches who had serious issues before the sale to Debenhams, the latter continuing to make the classic Brit mistake of thinking “We will show Paddy how to do it.” Arnotts had developed a reasonable business model (mainly copied from what Switzers was doing) until it began to think it was a developer, not a retailer. Caught up in the gargantuan plans it also took its eye off the ball and ignored the need to adapt to the changes in retailing practice – particularly in the furniture business. There is more to retailing than fancy floors and counters.

I too would hope that ‘they’ would keep the closest adjoining properties with an eye to future development but I do not think so. Banks will want the debt paid down as soon and as much as possible. Nothing will be built for a decade.
Kb2

The banks will find the holdings difficult to sell as length of lease and strength of company on the lease are the only drivers of value in this market. The pre-dominance of vacant offices and retail units let on temporary/short term leases to retailers no one has heard of outside Dublin leaves the banks in a position that they are much better holding out and taking a long view on the entire holding. I agree with Graham on Arnotts being the daddy of Dublin department stores and I agree with KB on Debenhams; Arnotts reminds me a lot of House of Fraser in terms of delivering a wide range of products mostly operated through concessions in a very pleasant fit out; why I prefer Arnotts to HoF is that Arnotts will also allow you to buy a bargain.

When you are that good at retailing why throw it all away to follow the herd in terms of redevelopment taking undue focus. Arnotts were never going to build a better centre than Chartered Land as they didn’t have the track record of Dundrum and simply didn’t have a site capable of delivering 50,000 sq m of retail boxes in MSU format. I hope that a revised proposal comes back for this site that focuses on a leisure element i.e. the best terrace of restaurants and cafes done to date in Dublin that can cater to a more sophisticated crowd than Temple Bar. Above all this site needs to be developed sustainably which will allow the developers to make money as it is a seriously strategic location that when fully let will deliver very healthy ITZA rates per sq m and they can get some height through the use of set backs / graduated internal punctuations on the basis of it being a very deep site. I would look at Goldman Sachs Int offices on Fleet St London and the way they used the former Art Deco Period Daily Telegraph Offices to mask a very high end office scheme in terms of the Indo Building.

Now the City Council have an excuse to stop neglecting Middle Abbey Street

EU approves banks’ move on Arnotts
Monday, 9 August 2010 18:08
The European Commission has approved the move to allow Anglo Irish Bank and Ulster Bank assume full control of the Dublin department store Arnotts.

Arnotts is struggling with debts of €300m.

A leading retail specialist and CEO of private equity firm Palladin Capital Group, Mark Schwartz, is set to be appointed to oversee the management of the business. Mr Schwartz has been working closely with the banks and Arnotts for the last five months.

AdvertisementIn a statement, Anglo Irish Bank said it and Ulster Bank were totally committed to Arnotts.

The banks will not be involved in the management of the company but said they are taking the ‘necessary steps’ to ensure that the company will be run by experienced professionals in the best long term interest of the staff, suppliers and customers.

‘While there has been understandable concern in recent days about the future of Arnotts, I wish to reassure staff, suppliers and customers that this great institution will continue to play a leading role in the Irish retail market,’ Mr Schwartz said.

‘Our goal is to focus on the future, work closely with our strong staff and our suppliers and create the conditions which will enable Arnotts to thrive for many years to come,’ he added.

Arnotts generated debts arising from a proposed €750m redevelopment of the 5.5 acre area surrounding the store. The ‘Northern Quarter’ development was to include a shopping, entertainment and residential district.

This is a very positive development; the banks have taken a very mature decision to work this one through rather than kitchen sink the debt off their books. Does anyone know what the market cap of Arnotts was before the MBO was announced in the ill fated private ownership phase?

@PVC King wrote:

This is a very positive development; the banks have taken a very mature decision to work this one through rather than kitchen sink the debt off their books. Does anyone know what the market cap of Arnotts was before the MBO was announced in the ill fated private ownership phase?

PVC I have to admire your bullish outlook. Positive development my nether regions!
That article is a large heap of equine excrement and bluster, rather than hard reporting. Why, oh why, cannot we have a level of financial journalism in this bloody country that might reach the level of Pass InterCert Business?

Why should the banks not exercise their rights as mortgagees? It’s not as if they are in a monopolistic position, unless they are “in” to lots of other retailers for equally dodgy amounts of debt?

Off the top of my head, Arnotts was bought by Nesbitt for 250 million in 2003. It had a t/o of about 150m back then and while it had an operating profit of about 10 mill, it was losing about the same bottom line. That was eroding the shareholders funds which stood at about 70m at the time of the MBO.

So, today, shareholders funds have been wiped out, the property values (plus the useless oddments & sodments sites around its perimeter) are a fraction of what they were bought for / have been booked at on the Balance Sheet, a debt of 300 million brings interest-only charges of minimum 15 million, and an operating profit (today) of probably slightly more than break-even (it was only 10 mill in the tiger years) means that the business, its model and its future is FU###(rudeword). For a very long time, if not forever.

Now, why were the questions about debt service, or the prospect of financial survival not asked? Coffee? nasal attributes?
K.

You are a touch harsh; from a turnover of €150m a net margin of c10-15% should have been acheivable. Without the interest burden imposed by the €250m MBO I have no doubt the enterprise would not only have survived but have thrived because Arnotts is a very good retailer.

You would hope that the company in time recover to a €10m – €25m net profit level and be released back into the market when 3 years of solid returns are securely lodged with the Companies office this would give the banks a very safe exit. To me the Arnotts story is not unique; it is very clear that leveraged buy outs in retail are not a clear road to success but 7-10 years ago they seemed very attractive to many private equity houses and investment banks.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

I’ve been following this up. Here is the illustration from the bag.

And here is basically what exists now. Basically it seems that the original block which stretched from Princes Street to Henry Street was completely destroyed in 1894 after a fire. Designed by G.P Beater in 1894, extended in 1904. So either this is the design as reconstructed after the fire, or a completely new replacement design that was just never completed due to lack of funds or interest (ie original 1894 concept), or perhaps damaged beyond repair in 1916. The top of the tower was removed in 1949 which is a pity.

We never did figure this out.

[attachment=0:z0jtngou]arnottsfiresmall.jpg[/attachment:z0jtngou]

Plan of Arnotts showing the extent of fire damage in 1894, issued by the fire brigade

[attachment=0:rub7putj]539252_573366576023974_67104285_n.jpg[/attachment:rub7putj]

Photo showing the street level facade before the canopy – click to enlarge

A great image of the street. Its amazing how its character has dramatically changed today. I would like to see the canopy removed. I think it would give the building a much more impressive front.