O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by
urbanisto.
- AuthorPosts
- January 16, 2004 at 2:01 pm #728047
muppet
Participantnot sure what stewardship means, my english is limited, but yeah, probably right 🙂
cities should most definitelt not look at this as some sort of “charity” to get teens off the street, but actually see that this might give huge paybacks in terms of more tourists and richer tourists. might sound like a superficial aim, but my impression of dublin was that most people want to turn this into a snazzy metropolitan city, which i fear is unlikely to happen unless it’s cleaned up abit.
and on these notes, a friend of mine studying hospitality management in Dbln told me (lord knows where she gets this from) that ireland/dublin is trying to market itself as a capital of technology/IT, since maybe ireland could do with a “cleaner” image than the land of endless pints of guinness. It’s got to look it too.even walking along the liffey i sometimes, no joke, had to cover my nose from the stench of it. is it too much work/money to hire some boat with proper cleaning equiptment on it and at least scrub off the green gumbo off the inner walls?
i sound very negative, but i do love dublin and would love move to go back there…
January 16, 2004 at 4:17 pm #728048GrahamH
ParticipantI think it would be a great idea as well – I’d most certainly have done it – there are so many things to be done around the city, furniture/hardware to be painted, canal banks etc to be cleared.
The Dep of Education employ local teenagers to help on school extension jobs over the summer – you can easily earn €700 and more over 8-12 weeks.This could be extended in cities and towns by local authorities, and on O ‘Connell St; there’s gonna be a hell of a lot of paving needing powerwashing a few times a year, esp after the leaves fall on the trees.
It’s giving labour to people who are looking for short-term, comparitively low-paid work. Competent teenagers fit the bill well.January 16, 2004 at 6:59 pm #728049James
ParticipantVery Interesting thread.
Particularly the comments regarding maintenance and dirt. As an Architect I’ve always felt that our profession hasa tendancy to the belief that a ‘Building’ can solve all problems – eg: Bad Area – solution New Buildings. Dirty Street – Solution New facades. Social Housing – new shiny development (the Marmion Court Queen St development is typical – social problems worse than ever but all hidden away).
I’ve long had a notion (and it’s nothing more than that) that if you want to seriously upgrade the experience of the user of the city that you spend money not on general development but on the surrounding environment eg: plant trees, better streetlights, high quality granite paving, wider sidewalks, reduced through traffic. And I’m interested in the example of Parliament St where all of this happened when the street was rather shoddy and unpleasant – within the year shopkeepers were erecting awnings, propery owners were looking at their buildings in a new light and treating them as assets rather than problems – it all worked out rather well at a relatively low capital cost.
Most of the really nice cities that I’ve been to have an excellent and clean public environment rather than particularly good architecture ,I’m thinking for example of Melbourne which I really liked but where althoug hte architecture is nothing special the whole city has a rather nice pleasant and safe vibe.
That i na way is the problem wit hour development planning, it is’nt realy ‘joined up writing’ just individual sites and buildings given atteneion on an individual basis rather than to conform with an overall physical vision based around streets, squares, and aimed at teh ground level user.
Our streets ar’nt safe, they’re not wheelchair pr pushchair negotiable, traffic fumes permeate the air and there’s a lamentable lack of and hostility to ‘greenery’ on the grounds that it costs money to maintain.
In fairness to the O’Connel St Plan that’s been a real focus for the planners and architects, making better streets. Now I don’t like or agree with everything that they’re doing but generally that type of work is unshowey and results arn’t visible until completion ofthe works.
As to the Spike – well I’m not mad about it but it does represent a very laudable attempt to address the ‘marking’ of public space in a positive and non profit driven way.
Anyway, Apologies for rabbitting on,
James
January 16, 2004 at 9:38 pm #728050GrahamH
ParticipantWell this is exactly what is being relied upon for O ‘Cll St, the domino effect.
Hopefully it will happen, even one cafe on the st would help! There’s nothing like on-street seating and awnings to make a place look great.
I walked down the st this afternoon, you can really appreciate how wide the pavements are going to be – its so exciting! The place will be unrecognisable, esp the western side which is so congested, there’s going to be so much space outside Easons etc.
The curving kerbstones wrapping around the entrance of Sackville Place look fantastic, an indicator of the quality to come.And most importantly the GPO will finally be acknowledged properly, with paving extending out beyond the portico, it’s columns have been crudely curtailed by the road directly infront.
Admittedly since it was built, this has been the case, but wasn’t as noticable as it is now.
And the column’s bases were finally cleaned over Christmas after years of neglect and look really really good. They’re so important, as not only are they part of the only classical building in the city that so many people come in contact with, but you can also literally feel the history of them walking past – I know that’s so sad – but when you think that Georgians were brushing past the very same columns nearly 200 years ago, it’s just a bit spine-tingling!January 16, 2004 at 11:36 pm #728051muppet
ParticipantGraham — exactly, and would hopefully puts some respect into their attitudes toward their surroundings, knowing they might have to clean it up tomorrow 🙂
James — couldnt agree more. The most charming places i’ve seen have nothing to do with “most famous and expensive architecht”, but about the soul of the place, and the respect that is shown to it by its habitants.
wow what a yes-person i am …
ermmm the GPO, think it’s a majestic building in itself, and i’d love to see the developement on that and the spire/spike/stiletto in the ghetto since I used to pass it daily, are there any pictures online?
January 16, 2004 at 11:50 pm #728052muppet
Participantah, all this talk is making me want to move back to dub…
so which one of you is going to find me a great job? 😉
January 17, 2004 at 1:04 am #728053Anonymous
Inactivepossibly
January 18, 2004 at 11:53 pm #728054Anonymous
InactiveRoyston goes further
January 18, 2004
“(20:36) Opposition politicians on Dublin City Council have called on the Lord Mayor of Dublin, Royston Brady to retract comments he made describing his fellow councillors as ‘clowns’.
In newspaper interviews, the Lord Mayor also described the councillors as ‘pathetic’ and ‘a waste of space’.
The leader of the Fine Gael group on the council, Ruáirà McGinley said he hoped the lord mayor would retract his comments at tomorrow night’s meeting of the City Council. He said the comments were uncalled for.
Sinn Féin’s group leader, Christy Burke, said that if the Lord Mayor did not withdraw his comments, he intended to go to the Taoiseach about them. “
Sound like muppet mighn’t be the only one looking for a job soon!
The extension of the Boulevard beyond O’Connell St would be great.
Where should it go, Westmoreland St through to Grafton St or towards Dame St?
Any ideas
January 19, 2004 at 11:38 am #728055redeoin
ParticipantI think it should follow the obvious line across o’connell bridge, which is foul looking at the moment, with no room to walk, then split at D-Olier and Westmoreland St, and then:
– swing east from D’Olier St down Pearse St as far as Grand Canal Dock. If you want to integrate the Docks into the City Centre via Pearse St, the Boulevard effect will work very well, as the footfall increases.
– swing west from Westmoreland St to the top of Dame St. There is no room to walk on Dame St as there is, and the traffic takes up far more road space than it needs to. It is a lovely st, and would be fantastic highlighted as a Boulevard.
January 19, 2004 at 2:53 pm #728056Anonymous
InactiveMy own instinct would involve Westmoreland St and Dame St.
I think that the Quays post Port tunnel will have dramatically reduced volumes of traffic. Pearse St would need to be used for traffic as it is the only south- North crossing between the East link and Christchurch these days. The architecture on Pearse st is quite patchy as well due to numerous demolitions in previous decades.
Westmoreland St College Green and Dame St present significant opportunities it is thought to extend the O’Connell St model.
Due to the streets being wide and having some excellent buildings. Hopefully if they attempt it the lessons on co-ordination will have been learned from O’Connell St.
January 19, 2004 at 3:19 pm #728057muppet
ParticipantDame str is charming, has that old-city-street and arty feel to it.
even though pearse would be needed to get traffic through, i’d love to see it brightened up a bit. get’s a bit gloomey when you head east from o’dolier.sorry if i’m not following the thread topic exactly…
crossing grand canal on the dart i used to daydream about having beautiful apartment buildings and restaurants along the canal, lots of little lights reflecting in the canal. ahhh. could make a boardwalk over the canal so that entrances to cafe’s and restaurants would face the canal.
having not actually been there except in a train i don’t know what it smells like… 🙂thanks btw Diaspora
January 19, 2004 at 3:55 pm #728058redeoin
ParticipantIt wouldn’t take as long to re-lay new wider paving on Dame St or Westmoreland St, once the council work out how much road space they can take back.
The problem with O’Connell St is setting out the entire St in a completely new pattern; moving the existing roads, and diverting utilities; catering for the Luas, putting in a full plaza at one section; not to say the spire; and dealing with the sheer bloody width and length of the street.
January 19, 2004 at 7:15 pm #728059GrahamH
ParticipantI was thinking there as to why the option of removing the central median and placing the roadway down the centre of the street wasn’t considered – then I remembered – the minor issues of O’ Connell Monument, Parnell, Gladstone, Larkin – even Jesus himself!
The bridge must be integrated into the street – interestingly it’s not exactly alligned with the street at all which is the impression given; to account for the bend in the river it had to be orientated slightly to a NE/SW angle.
Westmoreland St is very fine and a regemented paving & tree plan should be even more effective than O’ Cll St as there are less junctions and overall less distractions from its unity.
Nice dream for the Grand Canal muppet – don’t forget the Liffey too!January 19, 2004 at 7:20 pm #728060Anonymous
InactiveWhat about continuing the same central median down Westmoreland St.
The real bonus on O’Connell St I think will be the cafes in the central median. I know it will probably cost about €25 for a cup of coffee, but it’s good to dream!!!!
January 19, 2004 at 7:34 pm #728061Devin
ParticipantHere’s an excerpt from a project I’m working on for a certain un-named (!) organisation, recommending improvments for Dame Street.
January 19, 2004 at 10:29 pm #728062Anonymous
InactiveRoyston Goes Missing (rte)
(21:17) “Opposition Dublin City Council members have criticised the Lord Mayor, Royston Brady, for not attending a City Council meeting tonight after describing the councillors as clowns.
In a newspaper article at the weekend, the Lord Mayor also described the councillors as ‘pathetic’ and ‘a waste of space’.
A Fianna Fáil spokesperson said Councillor Brady was at a pre-arranged function tonight.
The Fine Gael group leader, Ruairi McGinley, said his comments had gone ‘beyond a joke’.”
I remember this guy now, laying into Tom Phillips at the Smithfield enquiry. Such parochial politics you wouldn’t get out of Jackie Healy Rae.
‘It will block my constituents light and so on’ he knew even less then than he knows now
Dame St and the magnicient City Hall really are crying out for something like O’Connell St. Only planned and executed on a much more efficient timescale.
🙂
January 19, 2004 at 10:30 pm #728063muppet
ParticipantGraham, i’ll never forget the Liffey.. not the smell anyway 😉
This is all very interesting, why aren’t you the people who are actually working for the planning council? Do they have a suggestion box? Or one that they reads anyway?
if they dont have one, make them one. One of the impressions I got from Irish people — a generalisation, mind you — is that they are indeed people with strong views and morals, but they’d much rather talk amongst themselves rather than to the correct “authority”. I imagine there would be a reason behind it; years of repression etc, not having been allowed to speak up … catholic priests … ??
Again, sorry I keep getting off track… maybe i’m best kept at http://www.amature_pshycology.com… sorry!
January 20, 2004 at 9:17 am #728064shadow
Participant“a certain un-named (!) organisation” = An Taisce
You be careful about the presence of hidden code in the properties of any document you place on the web.
January 20, 2004 at 11:47 am #728065redeoin
ParticipantI have often noticed traffic on Dame St veering drunkenly all over the place. Getting it into two or three very neat lanes would free up a significant amount of pedestrian space.
January 20, 2004 at 12:00 pm #728066blue
ParticipantI wonder could the Port Tunnel remove some much traffic that the south facing north quay could be reclaimed and pedestrianised, making the south quay two way.
Think I should get a coffee and stop day dreaming.
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

