O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
is the main problem on the bridge side at the corner next to the boardwalk where the path down the quays is quite narrow? would it make any sense to direct more people on the central medium of the bridge to cross? 😮
that might work lostexpectation but i think there is a simpler more effective solution..
on the bridge side (west junction) there is now a an unused traffic lane which could be filled in and given over to pedestrians.
on the street side (west junction) there is a bit of a jumble that has built up over time. There is a loading bay , a left turn lane which is out of sync with the other lanes.
By synscronising the left turn (onto oconnell street from bachelors walk) with the go straight and turn right options , you remove the need for a left turn lane at all. It might be possible to fill this in too .
Certainly the loading bay could be removed on bachelors walk and placed on o’connell street (with much shorter delivery times — akin to grafton street). Then move the white line some fifteen feet back .
And the same could be done to the eastern side of the street where again a wider pavement could be provided and much of the clutter (such as the ridiculously placed telephone kiosk) could be removed. I fancy the DCC have as much in mind for the future redevelopment of the Bridge, they’re just waiting for the final decision on the Luas rerouting.
Personally, sending Luas down O’Connell Street will just add to all these problems and destroy much of the good work already done there. Marlborogh Street is a much better option.
@StephenC wrote:
And the same could be done to the eastern side of the street where again a wider pavement could be provided and much of the clutter (such as the ridiculously placed telephone kiosk) could be removed. I fancy the DCC have as much in mind for the future redevelopment of the Bridge, they’re just waiting for the final decision on the Luas rerouting.
Personally, sending Luas down O’Connell Street will just add to all these problems and destroy much of the good work already done there. Marlborogh Street is a much better option.
definitely . but do you fancy a new bridge acrross the liffey ?? o’connell bridge seems completely underused to me. if it is to go around the back of trinity , it could simply head straigh up d’olier street . (a good idea to my mind — it will only be fractionally slower , due to the large number of pedestrian crossings on dawson , grafton, and westmoreland street)
O’Connell Bridge under-used! Are you mad. Its the busiest through route in the city surely, I would agree that a new bridge across the river would not be ideal but a light structure soley for use by Luas would be a small price to pay for greater public space on O’Connell Street. There was an article a few weeks back where the city traders assoc was also pushing for the new transport routes to be sent down Marlborough Street. They pointed to the possibility of creating a new stop at the current Dof Education with a public space in front of the Pro Cathedral (previosuly mooted in a plan for Cathedral Street). I think its ideal. It would remove the bus park from M St and return the street to some semblence opf normal usuage . The real estate potential along this street wont go unrealised for long.
Im not sure I get what you are saying about D’Olier Street. The M St route still allowed for the Luas to go in front of Trinty along College Green. We all know that the Pearse Street -Westland Row route is a non-runner.
o’connell bridge is hugely underused, half the lanes on it serve no purpose whatsoever. and only duplicate access provided on butt bridge.
sending the luas behind trinity might be a political non runner and so i fear we could get bogged down in a pointless argument here…
behind trinity is the superior routing for various reasons; namely the likely routing in front of trinity:
1 it gets in the way of buses which carry more poeple (several times more people).
2 it doesnt add any extra benefit to what is in place . those seeking acces to the area south of the liffey won’t get there any fast by using this extension . because of all the stopping and starting enevitable with the depestrian crossings the tram will go at walking speed between the green and oconnel street. (possibly slower)
3. With a serious lack of shopping , the routing behind trinity opens up the long term possibility of the whole of pearse street being rejuvenated . — . we have all seen the effect of the red line on arnotts , who are preparing an enormous expansion. the same would happen on pearse street. thus the green line could service two areas instead of one — surely that is a good thing. Trinity have already showns signs that they are of a mind to return their holdings to retail.
4. running behind trinity means not duplicating the metro routing.Undoubtably you have a point about the Pearse-Westland Row routing; I just think its a non-runner for the simple fact that it would take too long to travel what could more easily be walked and it would be too expensive to build. Im not really sure that the rejuventaion of Pearse would be helped by Luas. There are plenty of more attractive sites for intensive uses in the city centre. Pearse Street is a more complex kettle of fish I think because of the size and nature of its principal resident.
Duplication of the Luas and Metro lines is of course a valid point although many city transit systems have duplication. Its by no means a bad thing. I think people will be taking Metro and Luas from St Stephens Green for differing reasons.
@StephenC wrote:
Duplication of the Luas and Metro lines is of course a valid point although many city transit systems have duplication. Its by no means a bad thing. I think people will be taking Metro and Luas from St Stephens Green for differing reasons.
that may well be but with whole chunks of the city with no services i would think the last thing we need is duplicating things!!!
yes you are right to be concerned about the fact that trinity own half the street , but your concern is misplaced. They current want to redevelop the street , and they need the money . a luas on pearse street would provide irresistable impetus for change. consider the value of redevelopping the street to trinity , hundreds of millions that could go to new facilities!
yes you are right to be concerned about the fact that trinity own half the street , but your concern is misplaced. They current want to redevelop the street , and they need the money . a luas on pearse street would provide irresistable impetus for change. consider the value of redevelopping the street to trinity , hundreds of millions that could go to new facilities!
True but to what end. Its not really suitable for largescale retail use. The competition it faces from other areas for this is considerable…think of Smithfield, Markets and Abbey, Marlborough, Talbot Streets. Residential would be problematic due to the large number of social housing estates off the street and the nature of the buildinsg along the street. There is lots of scope to the north of Pearse Street and this seems to be developing fast but its no help to Trinity.
Trinity have already showns signs that they are of a mind to return their holdings to retail.
I think Trinty are more interested in developing the street for campus needs rather than retail. You only have to consider the three major scheme recently put forward to see that.
I’m honing on a complete new topic on this street. 😀
The tacky post modern whachmocalleit buildings along the GPO till the Carlton
I’m aware, that the buildings that once stood here, were victorian and were pre twentieth century and probably replicate the opposite side of the street, where their is fine standing buildings. Sadly they are gone since they were destroyed in the 1916 rsing. Correct me if I’m wrong.Now my point is… will these buildings get a makeover or something, They are even beginning to look dirty, Afterall the street is looking a million dollars, with the new paving etc. the building’s especially on Henry street corner, are revolting.
Is there a plan to do something about them:rolleyes: . It’s a depressing heap of sh!te that seems to spread around most provincial towns etc… 🙁The building on Henry street corner, is detestful.
Rant over.
@StephenC wrote:
True but to what end. Its not really suitable for largescale retail use. The competition it faces from other areas for this is considerable…think of Smithfield, Markets and Abbey, Marlborough, Talbot Streets. Residential would be problematic due to the large number of social housing estates off the street and the nature of the buildinsg along the street. There is lots of scope to the north of Pearse Street and this seems to be developing fast but its no help to Trinity.
Maybe so, but land values will increase as a result of the new Dev north of Pearse street etc, I think since the new development adjacent to Pearse station will be a fine example to further dev. on this street.
Worth mentioning the new Macken street bridge, which will also give Pearse street a more attractive location. I can’t see why Trinity wouldn’t make a risk in doing more with it’s piece of the Street.
They have! They currently have plans under consideration by DCC to demolish a number of the listed buildings and create a new complex with a gateway opposite Moss Street.
A point about this whole area is that it is seen as attractive regardless of whether Luas uses it or not. There is already a huge amount of activity around here.
However the point still remaijns that Luas down from the Green to O’Connell St via Pearse would be too long a journey. Then conside that from Abbey Street the Luas continues to Broadstone and Grangegorman under Transport 21. This means the whole length of the street given over to Luas, as well as Parnell Square East I imagine.
@StephenC wrote:
However the point still remaijns that Luas down from the Green to O’Connell St via Pearse would be too long a journey.
yes but i don’t think it will be significantly longer than the shorter route. there are so many pedestrian routes along the way that the trams are likely to have to go no faster than 10km/h between starting and stopping , whereas using the other direction could see them going at 30/40km/h on average.
This effect will really kick in if the trams start running every three minutes or two. the shorter route is a case of the shortest route being the longest way round !!!
Kiosks? Even one….
That poor man selling newspapers outside Permanent TSB is dying for a spanking new kiosk. As is the flowerseller at the Spire… And Helga, just arrived from Sweden, would really, really like a map and some tourist info, not to mention a quick wee. And personally I am dying to taste the coffee mixed with traffic fumes from the street cafes….
DCCs website is not really much help…can anyone else enlighten us.
The Street is kinda sterile, and look it too. It really needs something to make it welcoming. The superb paving acts as a good basis but it needs more in the way as whats already been said …..kiosks, information stands, seating, soft planting; something that will interact will the public. Barry Flanangan’s giant hare sculptors kinda do that now……people sit around the bases of the sculptures chatting etc….taking a breather. And will they ever enforce a law against grotty looking premises.
Fires in two Dublin hotels overnight
16 August 2006 08:25
The second blaze broke out just before 3am at the Gresham Hotel on O’Connell Street.
Another 400 people were evacuated after the fire started in a disused store at the back of the hotel.
Around four fire units attended the blaze. There were no injuries, but some damage was caused to the building.
All guests were able to return to their rooms.
Any word on the scale of the damage?
Speaking of the Gresham wasn’t it supposed to be upgraded to a 5 star, and wasn’t there a plan to revamp the Royal Dublin Hotel?
Yes and yes… Gresham have done a good bit of work over the past 2 years. Not a dickybird from the awful RDH though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
