O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
After dark, the premises is transformed. Elegant, soft and understated describes the lighting scheme. Disregarding the clumsiness of the shopfront window lighting, the rest of the building is discreetly and expertly illuminated using a mixture of LED strips to string courses and cornices, and warm white, seemingly halogen, spots to the portico.
Eye-catching subtle variations in colour temperature.
Two shafts of white light on each side of the upper side windows are all that is needed to truly lift this facade.
A well considered use of light and shade.
Alas so much of this tasteful scheme is diluted by the garishly illuminated Irish Nationwide directly adjacent, for which there was of course absolutely no planning input.
The new back-illuminated lettering could not be any better if it tried.
All in all, one of the best reproduction designs ever executed in Dublin. The impact of this job in restoring dignity to one of the finest buildings on O’Connell Street, and the new boost of confidence it injects at this important introductory part of the wider street, cannot be underestimated. It is this very kind of improvement that the IAP first set out to achieve all those years ago. It may have come a decade later that expected, but it was worth the wait.
Well, it is interesting to read and note the issues concerning the work, and it does re-enforce a sense that we can’t quite acheive such high workmanship today. Overall though the job looks superb, the effect of the building now is striking.
Can’t say I like the shopfront on the right, but on the other hand the centre part of the building has so much more impact with the shopfront becoming distinct again.
Wouldn’t it be great to see more buildings on O’Connell Street get some attention?
Just an aside (not meaning to go too much off-topic), is there any reason Ulster Bank have chose to undertake such work on their buildings at the present time? They have been fixing up the building on O’Connell Street Limerick also (dated 1921), although there’s less to do there (the unveiled top two floors look pretty nice despite the RBS colour-scheme for the painted details).
@GrahamH wrote:
Some windows such as this one below had their glazing bars chopped out, probably in the 1950s or so. Their reinstatement restores uniformity and classical form to the facade.
Just a shame they’re not a sultry black. Lovely carved detail below.
Were these always 6/6 sashes? I would have thought they were 9-pane (6/3), not 12-pane.
GrahamH: stunning and sterling work (both yours and it); surely a template for the planners and the rest of the street.
Not wishing to be controversial…but, wouldn’t the O’Connel Monument have made a splendid focus to O’C St had it been moved to where the Spire now is (possibly on a raised plinth)? So, toponomy and topography would have coincided neatly and the street would have a literal and symbolic focus instantly understandable at the principal crossing of the street (and I quite like the Spire, but it’s hopelessly pointless (no pun intended) when seen from almost anywhere near it because of the extreme height in relation to the street).
An interesting concept John. The design of the Monument also lends itself to such a site that can be approached from all sides. Whereas the historical association of the existing site is obviously an important factor, greater still I think is its strategic positioning at the entrance to the street, which warrants retention as is. The grandeur and focus it provides in heralding the city’s main thoroughfare is something that rarely fails to impress. With familiar landmarks we inevitably have a tendency to stop appreciating them, and the allure of change is therefore always great. But looking at O’Connell Monument from a more objective angle, you really do appreciate its grandeur and power in signalling an upping of the stakes in the urban hierarchy, i.e. it does a fine job where it is 🙂
Agreed about the Ulster Bank window, ctesiphon. The square proportions are indeed odd, but as far as I’m aware this simply stems from less than perfect draughting on the part of the architect, and that these windows were always comprised of two matching sashes. 1920s neoclassicism was rarely a stickler for detail…
Graham: point very well taken, although I undrstand that works for the tram/metro might involve the dismantling of the Spire and the Monument (a bit drastic, to put it mildly), giving the opportunity for another think. But all far too speculative at this stage.
Absolutely sterling work on the photos Graham. An invaluable asset to the forum.
johnny21, the tree this year is totally bonkers, I love it!
Ah the tree looks cool, it blends in with the contemporary look of the street,…. ie the new paving and accessories.
I think when it’s lit with pale blue/white lights it’s fine but the rest of the colours are a mixed bag, I think it detracts from it. I’m still not a fan but I can live with it.
Actually I think it looks better in johnny21’s photo than in real life 🙂
I too am living with the Tree,hugging it almost 🙂
However as with the Spire itself,its let down badly by the base which singularly fails to make any impact.
I have long felt that the Spire should have been set down into a circular,seated amphitheatre directly in front of the GPO, which would have enhanced it`s dei-facto role as a meeting place (C u at the Pillar/Spire etc etc )
Just look at the missed opportunity as evidenced by the throngs who stand arkwardly around the base on that uncomfortable raised metal banding.
All they do is prevent a free-flow of pedestrians between North Earl and Henry Streets…..Last Question…….where is the Crib going this year..????
I nearly walked passed this, it looks so inoffensive now!
This Moore Street aspect and the corner with Henry Street have changed the most. Dispite the lavish praise heaped on the original Moore Street treatment by the Planning case officer, Paul Kearns, the whole building over another building that respects the scale of the adjoining building has been quietly dropped to be replaced by an almost Temple of the Mount scale climbing terrace. Personally I’m a sucker for this kind of thing and I also like the fact that the terrace of Protected Structure gabled houses now seem to fit into the scheme, whereas before they looked like little dolls houses retained as a curiousity.
My reservations about the facadism to O’Connell Street, the lowering of the sheltering canopy and the spindly ‘portico’, remain, but I have to say, that centre block with the re-orientated slope and the way it confronts Henry Street are starting to do it for me.
Balsa wood models can be very deceptive though, I like to see more renders.
That’s a huge improvement over the previous proposal. However I still have a couple of reservations.
The interface with O’Connell Street is better but still has flaws. One is the angle of the “main” new street; i.e. the one which opens onto O’Connell Street. They’ve made a strange decision to make this street square with Moore Street. I’d argue that this really needs to be at right angles to O’Connell Street instead. This would properly acknowledge the prominence of O’Connell Street and its importance relative to Moore Street. This would also help it blend into the general environment; every other street and lane meets O’Connell street at right angles.
Like gunter, I don’t like the facade retention on O’Connell Street. Without getting philosophical about it whether retaining facades is justifiable at all, I feel that if you are going to engage in facadism, then at least do it properly and execute the deception properly. I fail to see the point of retaining facades when they are going to be used as components of the new facade. It seems to me to offer the worst of both worlds – offering neither a convincing deception nor an opportunity to create something new. I also fear the extra floors over the retained facades will unbalance the street.
I’m uncomfortable with the destruction of a complete victorian terrace on Henry Street. Replacing such buildings with more modern ones has never resulted in an improvement to this street in my opinion and I don’t expect this to be any different. Henry Street is starting to look more and more generic as it is.
Still, like I said, a big improvement. Not quite “there” for me yet but close.
Was walking along Westmoreland St for the last bus on Tuesday and the tree looks phenomonal late at night, even mroe so from across the bridge.
If only the Spire was floodlit…Btw, I appreciated knowing that the tree was a low-energy one. Unlike pine :confused:
@gunter wrote:
Balsa wood models can be very deceptive though, I’d like to see more renders.
There’s a hard lesson in the process of being learned here; not to shoot one’s mouth off, in advance of seeing the pictures.
These are the pictures:
In the model, this looked monumental, almost geological, great solid stone terraces climbing up out of the flat centre of Dublin like a cross between the Acropolis and Temple Mount, (OK, without the actual temples), a true landmark, the Hanging Gardens of Henry Street.
Who would have guessed, from the model, that this monumental recreation of central Dublin has actually been given an elevation treatment that places tappered vertical bands of black stone on an orange/red background, like the petrified pelt of the unfortunate Celtic Tiger stretched across the facade of Moore Street?
Jesus Christ
@jimg wrote:
I’m uncomfortable with the destruction of a complete victorian terrace on Henry Street. Replacing such buildings with more modern ones has never resulted in an improvement to this street in my opinion and I don’t expect this to be any different.
I agree. This will definitly be the end of the old Moore St, for the new proposal will wipe away the old street format. Those slab facades of the new proposal look absolutely horrible, and will look even worse within the enclosed little street and as they age and weather with time. The removal of this whole terrace is kinda a bit like the demolishment of the terrace on Fitzwilliam Street. The architects have got it wrong here and it’s rather incredible how they could do it too. I’m sure they thought it was a marvellous improvement as well when developers first built the ILAC Centre and look how that ended up. It’s similar bland and blank appearance looked equally as horrible.
But still it’s a huge devlopment and must be welcomed as well as the Arnotts proposals to breathe life into this part of the Street/City. I was in the Oval pub one day and heared tourists asking where were the shopping precincts. These new developments will help answer such queries in future!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
