O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
It sounds likely doesn’t it? Relocating it to a central position in the building would be no bad thing though – the glazing obscures much of the detail and real-life vividness of the sculpture (although it does look great at night).
There are so many options here. I wonder how the post office element will continue to function around a central processional route, expecially given nearly half of the public office is in fact a single-storey building projecting into the courtyard. If this is removed to enhance the square, there’d be nothing left of an interior save the shallow depth of the original building from the front wall to the current balconies.
Another option, given the scale of the proposed square, is to build up this structure to full height, thus enabling a large double-height space to the interior instead of the current stepped arrangement. Though it would be a shame to lose the handsome pilasters and balconies – perhaps transform it into an exterior wall with balconies overlooking the courtyard… Whatever happens, this is a rare Art Deco/classical interior in Ireland, let alone Dublin – it ought to be retained in some significant form.
It strikes a chord that the Cross Blocks of both the GPO and the Castle were/are to be demolished…
Of course the central question – what’s the interior space and the courtyard going to be used for?!
@Graham H wrote:
Of course the central question – what’s the interior space and the courtyard going to be used for?!
eh a Presidential address every 7 years or so ]
perhaps transform it into an exterior wall with balconies overlooking the courtyard… Whatever happens, this is a rare Art Deco/classical interior in Ireland, let alone Dublin – it ought to be retained in some significant form.
[/QUOTE]It is difficult to see how the project overall will be tackled alright & on first look the work required seems to amount to a major intervention rather than a project of a scale that is complementary to the original structure … the outward looking balconies sounds like a nice idea.
Fergair can you check the link to the Prague pic ? Cheers !
lol, I’m going around proxy firewalls in work…so…the url is going to be a little weird for the picture!
Working on a bank holiday, is there no justice in the world !
This thread has slipped from the front page so it’s time to bump it 🙂
rte wrote:A planning application for a €]It’s good to see _anything_ happening at this end of O’Connell street after so many years of neglect, especially now with a huge magnum ad hanging in the gap. I find the idea of moving the Carlon facade a bit odd though.
What’s with the gimmicks in the last few years…. do they think that it stops people appealing?
The centrepiece of the development will be a 12-storey building with a sloping public park on its roof. The park, which will cover more than an acre, will be accessed by cable car.
they won’t get more than 7 storeys there. not from ABP anyway. And oh yeh; about bloody time – they should be on site at the same time as the RPA though – heh, Good Luck to y’all
Interesting renders on RTE news today, a roof top park reached by cable car 12 floors up. Looks like a ski slope from what I saw but at least something is happening. According to the developers they have had 75 presentations including a number with DCC to agree the design! as Alonso said on the other thread this looks like it will run into problems with ABP.
Another fine example of DCC doing one thing and ABP likely to do another. The council better assess the development plan as with the current economic downturn can Dublin afford to loose this development.
With this development, Arnotts and Ballsbridge the city could have €3.5 -4.5 billion worth of investment at risk if planners deem all of them too large!http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0421/carlton_av.html?2364726,null,230
Sorry about the chocolate man.
CC105: sorry, but you can’t get away with that! ‘The planners’ respond to what is in front of them – developers will always overstate the benfits of any scheme and downplay the disbenefits. If these include overdevelopment and an affront to the townscape, what do they care? If these sites stack up in money terms, they will be developed, albeit on a smaller scale than the developers’ optimum.
The planning system can be constipated, but the Carlton site could have been developed at any time during the boom, but wasn’t. That was not the fault of the planners, but of greedy developers. If the times are not right for it to be developed properly now, perhaps it’s better to wait a few more years than get something we would all regret.The plans as outlined on the news programe appear to portray a tacky development that would ruin the facade of O’Connell st and replace a ruin with a wreck more suited towards a shopping centre in Lucan or Portlaoise, not as the main thoroughfare of the capital.
Like anyone, I find it quite vexing that there are so many empty and often ugly 1970s monstrosities on the street when there could be tasteful powerscourt type shopping centres or boutique hotels but I would certainly hope that the planning authorities would refuse such an poor quality proposal.
This new scheme looks cool. It should be given the go ahead. It would definitely lift the lifeless air of this part of the street. With the newly proposed massive Arnott’s scheme going ahead as well, this whole quarter will be a brilliant addition to the city. No half measures, redevelop the whole lot as planned. The roof garden concept is a great feature. If this isn’t given the green light, we will probably get another rather bland featureless scheme, after many more years of idleness.
At least if it gets the go ahead it will gives us sometheing to talk about here…. 🙂
It’s been so quite lately.The centrepiece of the development will be a 12-storey building with a sloping public park on its roof. The park, which will cover more than an acre, will be accessed by cable car.
Will they have an interconnect with the cable cars along the Liffey…sure who needs the Luas..:D
@GregF wrote:
This new scheme looks cool. It should be given the go ahead. It would definitely lift the lifeless air of this part of the street. With the newly proposed massive Arnott’s scheme going ahead as well, this whole quarter will be a brilliant addition to the city. No half measures, redevelop the whole lot as planned. The roof garden concept is a great feature. If this isn’t given the green light, we will probably get another rather bland featureless scheme, after many more years of idleness.
At least if it gets the go ahead it will gives us sometheing to talk about here…. 🙂
It’s been so quite lately.Wouldn’t it be rather windy up on this roof garden??? Can the cable cars meet with Suas? Isn’t this a bit silly
Looks like the roof garden is facing north, maybe thats to protect from the prevailing winds or maybe its all they thought they could get away with.
Overall, its certainly of a sufficient scale to give this part of the north city the kick it needs, I wouldn’t be worried about the height of the park building (12 stories) so much as the quality & usability of the park. The height of the new builds facing O’Connell Street, seem to be breaking the parapet line.
Difficult to judge based on what we have so far but its certainly interesting & looks to be of a higher quality than what Arnotts are trying to do just a stones throw away.
Evil Kinevil would have loved this!
If you took off at 120km/h up this, where would you land? I’m guessing SuperValu on Aston Quay! I suppose time will tell.
I’d like to see the other side of the ski slope, it looks, from the render, to be slick glazing, when you might have expected something a bit more rugged in the circumstances (a nice bit of old fashioned ‘Brutalism’ would do me).
Apart from the glass framing around the Carlton, this doesn’t look too bad! I presume there’s loads of horrific bits they’re not showing us.
So which buildings on O’Connell street are getting the chop if this goes ahead?
Also where on Henry street is the ski slope peeping over? Are they talking about knocking more of the Henry street red brick terrace for a new street?
it looks completely nuts to me – they’re knocking a huge hole in that side of O’Connell St, the roof garden looks daft and will be windswept and unuseable for much of the year (our climate is clearly getting windier too), and why are the moving the Carlton facade?? Either leave it where it is and incorporate it into the new development, or just demolish it. Its a nice building but its not worth the trouble of moving it…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
