O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 6 months ago by
urbanisto.
- AuthorPosts
- February 7, 2007 at 4:54 pm #730327
Anonymous
InactiveI would prefer to see a comprehensive redevelopment of this area than a replication of the piecemeal development of the sites surrounding Findlater House most of which will probably come down again over the next few years having gone up late 1990’s.
February 8, 2007 at 5:13 am #730328GrahamH
ParticipantHmmm – sounds like the proposed Royal Dublin Hotel revamp is in the bin so.
February 8, 2007 at 3:16 pm #730329Anonymous
InactiveGood to see the INBS building getting a revamp it has grown tired in recent years; would love to see something like the NIB signage on Upper O’Connell put on and hope that the update does not involve a like for like replacement of the existing signage.
The Royal Dublin design has dated very quickly it is good in my opinion that it looks like it will be shelved. I wouldn’t think that offices would feature as a runner at this location as passing rents would never acheive higher than 50% of prime rents for places such as IFSC or modern offices in Georgian Dublin 2. This area has always attracted a disproportionate number of government department offices and independent governmental agencies on large floor plates historically and in the context of decentralisation offices are an unlikely choice as the demand from professional service companies would most likely be light on viable rental levels.
My guess is that this site will form part of the wider Carlton scheme and the real value of the site is certainly the ability to create large retail floor plates with the level of profit determined by the number of apartments on top; the quantity and overall height of these will probably be decided by ABP.
Some won’t like this but a continuation of a Carlton Style facade for the entire holding would be my preference for this location and further hope that the apartments are set well back.
February 8, 2007 at 5:31 pm #730330urbanisto
Participant@PVC King wrote:
I would prefer to see a comprehensive redevelopment of this area than a replication of the piecemeal development of the sites surrounding Findlater House most of which will probably come down again over the next few years having gone up late 1990’s.
Im not sure you can compare like with like. The section of the street with Findlaters House has only three other properties fronting OC Street and they are all historically smaller plots. ‘Frazers’ the largest looks likes a bad pastiche job alright and perhaps a more suitable replacement can be considered.
Quote:My guess is that this site will form part of the wider Carlton scheme and the real value of the site is certainly the ability to create large retail floor plates with the level of profit determined by the number of apartments on top]I agree about forming part of the Carlton site…I would imagine that the developer is loking for a Parnell Street facade as well. It would be worth keeping a eye on the site beside Jurys Inn as well as the two pubs here. The last proposal for the site adjoining Jurys was shot down last year. Among the problems was it fell victim to proposed road widening of the rear landway here (is it call Moore Lane).
I disagree with your call for a continaution of the Carlton facade. I think the fact that somany monolithic looking facades were put up here since the 1960s was one of the problems. A smaller more human scale is required, even if what is behind the facade is uniform floorplates. I think a break in the streetscape here and the creation of a new street are called for.
February 9, 2007 at 3:33 am #730331Devin
ParticipantPVC King wrote:Good to see the INBS building getting a revamp it has grown tired in recent years]Yeah, it is designated for removal here in the O’Connell Street Special Planning Control Scheme (scroll about halfway down):http://www.dublincity.ie/Images/ASPC%20Text%20-%20final%20version_tcm35-17124.doc
Advertisement Signs Designated for Removal
Irish Nationwide – between 1st and 2nd floors and 4th and 5th floors – 1 Lower O’Connell Street – internally illuminated and individually mounted lettering. Although the structure has a clear relationship with the use of the building, the size, position and materials and use of internally illuminated lettering detract from this protected structure including the fenestration and stone finishes. Its prominent location at the main entrance to O’Connell Street from the south city seriously detracts from the visual character of the area.Also agree about about the colour of the windows. I hope they will have the good taste to repaint them dark as they were in the early & mid 20th cen. It looked much better.
February 10, 2007 at 4:55 am #730332GrahamH
ParticipantYes – and even as late as 1978 they were still stained dark, dressed with classy 70s smoked nets 🙂

I think this property definitely looks better with dark frames. Also, I can’t find the appropriate picture, but even as recent as the late 1980s it’s very notable just how sparklingly bright and clean this corner building was. Either it was cleaned at the time, or the enormous increase in passing heavy goods vehicles in the intervening 20 years has sullied the facade substantially. Either way we can look forward to a bright new pin on the corner of the bridge by the end of February :). Here’s hoping the signage designation in the IAP will have the desired impact too.
A probably little-noted building on Lower O’Connell Street that is sorely in need of urgent works is No 8, next to the Bank of Ireland premises. It has a delightful facade with a sunken upper floor treatment unusual for this street.

The resulting void, albeit oddly proportioned, is filled with a lovely two-tier bow window with original stained glass intact, so typical of the early 20th century: this building completed around 1918.

As can be seen however, the bow is in an appalling condition, with most of the upper casements replaced with horrible white aluminium or early PVC, and the frames unpainted for so long they’re in danger of decay. Also as can be seen, the orginal stucco or timber swags have long-disappeared, their shadows left to tell the tale. What an ugly setting for the mellow granite framing it all.
The state of this property creates an appalling impression at the entrance to the street, and yet no enforcement proceedings have been initiated in spite of it being both a protected structure and sited in an ACA. No amount of public domain improvements are going to have the oft-touted ‘knock-on effect’ with a small property like this. Meanwhile, the original timber fabric is slowly rotting away up there, even though a local authority can step in at any point to protect the integrity of a PS.
Hee’s a (poor) wider view from a while ago.

And enough said about the ground floor…
The neighbouring property is interesting in having two-over-two sashes – almost an historicist approach taken by the architect, something that usually resulted in Georgian sashes rather than this type.
The building on this site prior to 1916 was the founding place of Conradh na Gaeilge in 1893 – they moved up to near the Savoy in the late 1890s.February 10, 2007 at 5:17 am #730333hutton
Participant@GrahamH wrote:
The building on this site prior to 1916 was the founding place of Conradh na Gaeilge in 1893 – they moved up to near the Savoy in the late 1890s.
Thats right – I was just examining the plaque yesterday! 🙂 First time Id noticed it tbh – it doesnt appear as if its polished much.
I notice that the signage at ground level is for an internet cafe; surely DCC would not have given pp to such signage since the arrival of the internet?
Graham youre quite right about the ACA and yet wheres the enforcement? Remind me again as to what the meaning is of the phrase “Protected Structure” :rolleyes:
Nice shots.
February 20, 2007 at 4:03 pm #730334urbanisto
ParticipantThe wrapping came off Irish Permanent yesterday. All clean again. White windows as predicted. New floodlighting that is far too bright…it looks so out of place along side more subtle lighting such as GPO and Central Bar. And of course they hung on to their signage. What a shame. Here was the perfect chance for DCC to get to grips with the big illuminated signage along the street. Im disappointed.
Also…even though it planting season there is no sign of those 10 missing trees from OConnell Street. Or the kiosks.
February 20, 2007 at 7:46 pm #730335lostexpectation
Participant@StephenC wrote:
The wrapping came off Irish Permanent yesterday. All clean again. White windows as predicted. New floodlighting that is far too bright…it looks so out of place along side more subtle lighting such as GPO and Central Bar. And of course they hung on to their signage. What a shame. Here was the perfect chance for DCC to get to grips with the big illuminated signage along the street. Im disappointed.
Also…even though it planting season there is no sign of those 10 missing trees from OConnell Street. Or the kiosks.
what ya reckon of the huge signing placed inside the building like on the bank next door?
seems very cool, what use to be in that large arch?
February 20, 2007 at 10:03 pm #730336GrahamH
ParticipantAs with all of O’Connell Street’s arches, the entrance to a cinema, lostexpectation.
Hope to have more on this building shortly – it’s had a chequered history.Disappointing news about Irish Nationwide, Stephen. It was a prime opportunity…
February 23, 2007 at 3:21 pm #730337markpb
Participant@StephenC wrote:
Also…even though it planting season there is no sign of those 10 missing trees from OConnell Street. Or the kiosks.
They were planting trees at the southern end of O’Connell St when I passed there yesterday afternoon. Not sure how many though, I only saw one poor tree sitting in the claws of a JCB.
February 26, 2007 at 6:00 pm #730338urbanisto
ParticipantIt seems the cast iron vents that were located at the Parnell Monument prior to the revamp have returned. They were being reinstated today in the same spot.
February 28, 2007 at 3:41 am #730339GrahamH
ParticipantIndeed they have returned, though not in the same position, on account of the sprawling new pedestrian crossing created at this northernmost tip of the median. They’ve been shifted southwards.
2003

2007

It was a concern that they hadn’t returned so long after the completion of works; it looked as though they were going to be quietly removed, hoping nobody would notice. Though they are protected structures, however this raises the question as to the correctness of their removal from site, and also their reinstatement in an alternative location. Surely their ‘merit’ is derived not only from their aesthetic, but also their positioning untouched on the original site for the past 140 odd years? What’s the point in roughly throwing them down again ’round about here’, if the connection with their historical purpose is lost? Sure why not shift O’Connell Monument to the centre of College Green while we’re at it?
I appreciate there can be practical concerns regarding pedestrian movement, and one must be pragmatic, but in this case they simply did not need to be moved given the skewed angle of the crossing. As seen below, the right-hand median crossing need only have been moved a couple of feet southwards (if even), while the Parnell crossing left as it was (it was orginally straighter and the bollards closer together).

Indeed this whole crossing has been treated with the finesse of a sledgehammer. Just relish the City Council’s appreciation of the urban vista and sense of aesthetic.



I mean you really would wonder. That pole is entirely unnecessary, the signals being easily hosted on other existing poles to either side. And especially if the Parnell crossing was straighter on account of correctly positioned bollards, which would line it head-on with the left-hand poles. You see this all over O’Connell Street: seperate poles being used for single signal units, and multiple hosting almost non-existant.
Anyway, the bollards themselves have been beautifully restored, with layers of thick black gloss paint chipped off to reveal crisp relief.

They’ve also been painted matt grey which generates a higher contrast, better showcasing the decorative detail. The black originally concealed much of this.



They all still need to be wiped down!
February 28, 2007 at 3:46 am #730340GrahamH
ParticipantThey’ve also been positioned further apart than they used to be.

Of course the central question remains: what they heck are they?! Well as far as can be made out, they were simply part of a ‘suite’ of furniture introduced to the street roughly around the 1870s. Not only was this design used in protecting William Smith O’Brien at the entrance to D’Olier Street…

…but also used in the base of certain lamp standards in the centre of Sackville Street.

(image a bit squashed at the bottom above)

Our friends at the northern end appear to have been used simply as a protective feature around a three-arm lamp standard (as featured here before), long since disappeared, located in the vast untamed environment of Upper Sackville/Great Britain streets.

From what can be made out, this part of O’Connell Street has been used for generations as a taxi point, reaching back to the mid-19th century. The bollards and lamp would have been a safe point for patrons to wait after dark.

Perhaps the holes in two of the bollards were used as a convenient venting point of a gas/sewer main? Not that that quite explains the mysterious later trapdoor…

And for what it’s worth, once again those fantastic National Library photographs from 1969 🙂

February 28, 2007 at 3:51 am #730341GrahamH
ParticipantAlso, clearly it was decided to leave damaged parts as they were. This model for example has many decorative features missing entirely, and other parts cracked off. The studs around the base also indicate what once was.

Interesting to note some parts have been missing since at least the 1960s if you compare with the above pictures.
February 28, 2007 at 5:32 am #730342Morlan
ParticipantAnother fine chapter Graham, another fine chapter.
They are curious little things. Do you think these particular ones were moved here when Willy O’Brien’s nest was uprooted?
February 28, 2007 at 12:38 pm #730343urbanisto
ParticipantGood to see them back isnt it. And new trees have been planted in most of the missing sections. I garee with your comments about the traffic signals Graham. It follows on with earlier comments about clutter on the street, regasrding the bike stands, telephone kiosks (all Smart’s are now out of use and derelict looking) and other bits and bobs that DCC seem to be happy to put in.
February 28, 2007 at 9:16 pm #730344GrahamH
ParticipantIndeed you’d really have to question the proliferation of telephone facilites here, given the largest telephone room in the state is located on the same street! Surely a double provision at either end is more than enough. Yes it’s good to see the tress going back in
As for the bollards Morlan, no they weren’t moved with Smith O’Brien was because: 1) they’re not the same ones 🙂 (his ones were narrower), 2) they appear in 1870s photographs at the top end of the street which are contemporaneous to the erection of WSO’B, and 3) WSO’B was only moved to O’Connell Street in 1929, so quite late.
Just on the monuments of the street, there’s a new publication out hot off the presses from DCC’s Heritage Office all about the enormous conservation project conducted over the summer of 2005. The foresight for such a publication is most impressive, with many beautiful before and after photographs by Donnacha O’Dulaing and Jason Ellis. The text is highly detailed, focusing on the proceedures adopted for each monument, and really brings home how shockingly badly they were treated in the past. In one instance a stone conservator remembers working on O’Connell in the 1980s (presumably when the railings were also removed), where silica sand was blasted at the stonework of the monument at a pressure of 100 pounds per sq inch! Today glass powder is used at 20psi! It had also been coated in a layer of coppery-orange paint, followed by a layer of black paint!
But the real heros without question are the bronze conservators of Conserve Europe. Here’s some information about the project as seen from their perspective:
http://www.conserve-europe.org/exam_mon.html
‘From O’Connell to Parnell’ is in pamphlet-like format, and only costs a fiver in most bookshops. I suspect they’ll be snapped up fast.
March 1, 2007 at 6:52 pm #730345manifesta
ParticipantThe Stonehenge of O’Connell St? Look at the way they’re huddling round the trap door in that first photo. I’m surprised this hasn’t led to a new thread of speculations on ‘Underneath Dublin’ (and the ice cream factory under the Liffey!).
GrahamH wrote:2003
2007

It was a concern that they hadn’t returned so long after the completion of works]
Because why do something right when you can do it wrong just as easily? Inscribe that in Latin and you’ve got yourself a new motto, DCC. I bet it sounds really good in Latin. Still, it’s great to see the restoration work done on these. Glad the structures are back, albeit in the wrong place. I did like the composition of the four of them guarding the trap door to the hidden underground tunnel network, I mean, sewer.
Beautiful photos and research, Graham. The book’s coming out… when?
March 1, 2007 at 8:50 pm #730346GrahamH
ParticipantOh please – history-by-numbers in action. But thanks : )
Yes the ‘huddled’ layout was perhaps their most endearing quality originally: a shame it’s been lost. Particularly as these are the sole survivors of historic street furniture on the entire street. Indeed considering the GPO bollards and bridge lanterns are embellishments to wider architectural set-pieces, the four bollards are the sole remnant of street furniture on any of the city’s principal commerical streets around the Liffey, if not wider.
An elegant grey gloss paint was also used for the GPO bollards and former lamp bases in the recent works.

Irish Nationwide as mentioned was recently unveiled – a decidedly damp squib all round I think it’s fair to say.

Indeed parts of the facade, particularly the first floor, don’t look like they were cleaned at all. The windows do look smart however, in what was a very neat job.

Alas the ridiculous, tacky Nationwide green pediments have been retained.

They are elegant 1920s frames up close, with good carved detail including typical ribbon and flute carvings, and little ribbons on the pediments.


Also the crude ground floor fascia signage hasn’t been addressed.

While the new floods are rather intrusive and ugly.

And even on the ground floor, the charming brass plinths haven’t even been mended, though this could be happening later.

Why little of an improving nature was done to this property must stem from the fact that no official planning application seems to have been made – probably only consultations with DCC regarding like-for-like repainting and floodlighting. As such, DCC couldn’t impose any conditions such as removal of the notorious signage to the bridge or at ground floor level. A pity.

- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

