O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
there’s one on henry street opening too, its difficult to see or try http://maps.live.com/?mapurl=http%3a%2f%2fmaps.google.com%2fmaps%2fms%3fie%3dUTF8%26hl%3den%26oe%3dUTF8%26msa%3d0%26msid%3d108692096314893578946.00044c18f5b57f4c5b604%26output%3dkml + birdeyes
is that development at the bus park on upper abbey street going ahead and there the markets development.
see theres a route from abbey str through arnotts new street to the lane through ilac to parnell street and another from
oconnell street via the new diagonal street onto henry street through gpo to princes street through the new arnotts streets to abbey street.The Times planning list today also had something in for the Gresham; it seems quite substantial and includes infill on OCS, I couldn’t find it on dublincity.ie.
From the Times
Gresham Hotel, Upper OConnell Street, Dublin 1 on the site at rear of 19, 20/22, 23 and 24 Upper OConnell Street and 1-7 Cathal Brugha Street (all protected structures), the T Wing (1950s and 1960s extensions) and the Lavery Wing (1990 extension) and bounded by OConnell Street, Cathal Brugha Street, Thomas Lane and Marlborough Street, Dublin 1.
Proposed development:
Demolish structures at either side of T Wing behind 19 to 23 Upper OConnell Street.
Remove plant rooms at roof level to 20/22 Upper OConnell Street. Renew windows in protected structures as per previous permission (Reg Ref 5974/04). New sub-basement water storage, additional meeting rooms, restaurant area and new back of house facilities at basement level.
Relocate restaurant and new shop on Cathal Brugha Street together with new function room, relocate kitchens, extension to foyer bar,
new entrance from Thomas Lane and relocate sub-station, all on ground floor level. Meeting room in lieu of admin offices, day spa and fitness area, together with a courtyard garden at first floor level.
Total of 179 new bedrooms
*in new block either side of the T Wing on the second to seventh floors;
*in converted office/meeting rooms on second to fourth floors;
*in new infill to the fourth and fifth floors to Cathal Brugha Street and 23/24 Upper OConnell Street;
*in replacement of sixth floor level;
*in additional seventh floor level to the T Wing
*in three suites in a new penthouse along with new external terrace at 20/22 Upper OConnell Street on the sixth floor;
* in the Lavery Wing in two new sixth and seventh floors.
Executive lounge and roof garden at seventh floor.
New function/conference facility in a double height glazed structure with smoking/viewing deck and bar.Six additional passenger lifts and five additional service lifts.
Had a look at the model in the civic offices earlier. Well worth seeing so as to understand this thing.
I agree about some of the intentions in the scheme- its great to see additional streets being created and investment in the area between here, Arnotts, the markets and others will be brilliant.
However… the public spaces seem completely arbitrary and do have this feeling of leftover space. Someone earlier mentioned the muddled designs of shopping centre developments and it looks just like that. Interest and diversity are often confused with muddled and messy!
Its as if the architects are trying to create some of the randomness and diversity which accreted urban development inevitably has. Its just not working though.
The break into Henry st is an absolute crime too. Its going to make a seriously weak point where the new street and Moore st come together with a poorly defined “iconic” corner.
I’ve no issue with the height and I actually think the standard of the architecture is potentially quite high but the north facing sloping park strikes me as being pure fantasy. I can imagine it having the same atmosphere as a heavily security guarded extension of a shopping centre.
O and one more thing, The moving of the carlton facade is ridiculous too. Just knock it or leave it.
Cheers for the visualisations and the model pics.
somebody made map a interest map of the moore area with pictures, a tribute to the traders, I presume a lot of these will move to the markets I guess shifting the retail to the wholesale place and wholsesale out of the city centre.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=118408261403229194346.00043d26881da93317d8c&ie=UTF8&z=17
can put up a direct link to the planning application again I can’t find it ;/ or find where it was link before. i searched the number no luck ??
walking routes added http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=53.350065,-6.263591&spn=0.004598,0.014334&z=17&msid=108692096314893578946.00044c18f5b57f4c5b604
Go to
http://www.dublincity.ie/Planning/PlanningPermission/PlanningSearch/Pages/PlanningSearch.aspx
and follow the search for a planning application link and then put 2479/08 in for planning reference, takes you tobut you might wonder how stable that link is; still no documents.
oh thanks it was the arnotts one i was looking at with the docs…silly me, its incredibly hard to find a map of the ilac centre, i was looking for a layout of the how you get in and out, eventually found one on the planning map there but can anyone else find a one with a shop layout of the ilac centre on the internet?
yes thanks its unusual how microsoft maps present the moore street map a small bit better, it strange how there aerial/sat maps are _awful_, they seem to have skipped a process and gone for the four view birdeye views, but you might not think to look at the excellent quality birdeye view for central dublin after seeing the quality of their aerial maps.
http://maps.live.com/?mapurl=http%3a%2f%2fmaps.google.com%2fmaps%2fms%3fie%3dUTF8%26hl%3den%26oe%3dUTF8%26msa%3d0%26msid%3d118408261403229194346.00043d26881da93317d8c%26output%3dkml with birdeyes view, hope these links are working for people
hibernian.ie have new street finder thing now too, good quality maps, form 2007 though, you can follow the building work of moore street etc
The whole thing seems a bit half baked, to be honest.
Elaborating on my earlier post,
I think creating a new street off north west O Connell St, is a good idea. As it is, the unbroken facade is too long, and that part of the street is a bit devoid of atmosphere.
However, all that’s needed is a small, narrow street, for pedestrians. The chunk taken out is far too big, and will lack the atmosphere, narrower shopping streets, such as Grafton St, have.
I think a medium sized public square, surrounded on all sides by buildings, with small eccentric narrow streets leading to it, would be ideal for the location. It could incorporate existing as well as new buildings. The Carlton should be left where it is, and refurbished. It could be converted into a Galleria, or shopping arcade leading to the Public square, or reconverted into a cinema. It’s one of my favourite facades on the street, but I don’t think moving it, is the answer. I’m too young to remember what it was like inside. Is it worth preserving the interiors?@Blisterman wrote:
The whole thing seems a bit half baked, to be honest.
Elaborating on my earlier post,
I think creating a new street off north west O Connell St, is a good idea. As it is, the unbroken facade is too long, and that part of the street is a bit devoid of atmosphere.
However, all that’s needed is a small, narrow street, for pedestrians. The chunk taken out is far too big, and will lack the atmosphere, narrower shopping streets, such as Grafton St, have.
I think a medium sized public square, surrounded on all sides by buildings, with small eccentric narrow streets leading to it, would be ideal for the location. It could incorporate existing as well as new buildings.That does sound preferable right enough.
A ‘square’ that opens off a bigger space, as at Smithfield, or off a wide street, as here, has pretty limited value. To take hutton’s point, you can’t really call this a square, it’s just a recess.
The same amount of actual space (or a bit bigger preferably) buried within the scheme, could be a real joy, as you suggest.
On the Carlton itself, the drawings submitted indicate that the original cinema is reasonably intact and not unimpressive, though I can’t actually remember it myself.
Carlton Cinema interior was changed in the 60/70s to make it a 4 screen, nothing really worth preserving as all the good stuff was ripped out then
A friend who works in Dublin Bus says that only the facade is ‘modern’ and the rest of the building is quite old. Is this true?
It is indeedy Punchbowl. This was once one of the largest houses on Sackville Mall, and probably the largest on the west side. Here you can see it proudly dominating that side of the street – a big five bay affair.
It also marked the boundary between Gardiner’s low cost numbers – the dodgy duplexes if you will – to the south end of the Mall compared to the generally more exclusive three-bay houses – the modern-day executive mansions in Phase Two – to the north.
A few years ago the cladding from the ‘proscenium arch’ of Dublin Bus was taken down/fell off and has never been re-erected. If you pass by today you can clearly see the substantial extent of the old brown stock brick walls of the original house (though it had been much-altered in the 19th century). How much of the rest of the building survives I don’t know.
There is a full A3 booklet of survey drawings submitted with the application and I was surprised to see page after page of section drawings showing a lot of intact looking interiors. No. 60 (not sure which one this is) jumped out at me, as well as the ‘National Monument. houses on Moore Street. I didn’t have time at the Planning counter to take it all in. I presume they are scanning away and we’ll see this stuff on the website pretty soon.
@Rory W wrote:
Carlton Cinema interior was changed in the 60/70s to make it a 4 screen, nothing really worth preserving as all the good stuff was ripped out then
I’m not doubting what your saying, but the submitted survey section drawing does hint that a good proportion of the overall original package might have survived. The smaller cimemas may have been inserted into the shell, without destroying the guts of the original.
There’s an EIS, a ‘Planning Report’ an ‘Architect’s Report’ and half a dozen other reports in the three storage boxes at the planning counter. Presumably. somewhere in there is an analysis of the Carlton Cinema and why it isn’t worth keeping.
An application of this scale is supposed to include a section on what alternatives were considered and a critical analysis of why these other options weren’t adopted. Hopefully this section will throw light on the extent of the original fabric and an evaluation of it’s worth. It will just be down to the integrity of the authors, as to whether this tells the full story.
@gunter wrote:
An application of this scale is supposed to include a section on what alternatives were considered and a critical analysis of why these other options weren’t adopted. Hopefully this section will throw light on the extent of the original fabric and an evaluation of it’s worth. It will just be down to the integrity of the authors, as to whether this tells the full story.
Ho ho ho – look forward to that 😉
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
