O’ Connell Street, Dublin

Home › Forums › Ireland › O’ Connell Street, Dublin

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 3,790 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #727887
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if they have to tear up what they are putting down now due to the Metro – but that is of course if they ever build it (I wouldn’t hold my breadth).

    I don’t like to be so negative but when you see the Spike fiasco, you couldn’t realistically trust these people (piss-up and brewery spring to mind).

    I remember clearly the extended pavement placed in front of the portico of the GPO last year only to be ripped up at most 2 months later for the initial work on the Spike.

    #727888
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    On an upside though I must have a look at that building on the corner of Henry and O’Connell St.s – unfortately the ‘Come And Visit Us’ sign is alive and well but will probably go when they remove the other tacky neon signs from the street.

    Any chance you can scan the old picture of this building.

    I always find it regretable looking at the photos of the buildings on the street in the 1950’s and comparing with now – you’ve got to ask yourself – was it progress?

    #727889
    urbanisto
    Participant

    It mostbdefinately was NOT progress and I guess that is what the IAP has admitted. O’Connell St in the 40s and 50s was a beautiful street and the centre of the city – day and night. You can see uniform shop fronts, canopys on most buildings, less traffic and a transport hub at the Pillar. The IAP is simply trying t recreate that.

    On another front: last night saw the premiere of Veronica Guerin and I must say (at least from the BBC coverage) the stars looked far from celestial against their backdrop of hoardings, broken pavements and a rather shabby looking Savoy.

    #727890
    GregF
    Participant

    I saw that too ……the premiere looked cheap alright because of the state of the street…….no red carpet, a tawdry Savoy etc…and a few people waiting at a crooked bus stop looking on.
    Very bad image for the city.

    That’s true too about shop front canopies which can be a lovely decorative addition as well as being practical …..pity we don’t see them any more.

    #727891
    Jack
    Participant

    …from the bbc…here
    …are you being totally honest with us lads!…….typically OTT from the resident Archeire drama queens!;)

    #727892
    GregF
    Participant

    was just saying what I saw – aka fact.

    #727893
    urbanisto
    Participant

    I wasn’t talking about the film.. just the premiere. And it looked crap. Noisy, dirty rundown O’Connell St.

    Am I a drama queen…. 🙂

    #727894
    -Donnacha-
    Participant

    Hey, the BBC journo hardly dreamed up the ‘glitz’ and ‘red carpet’.
    Unless he was drafted in from the new York Times….

    #727895
    Jack
    Participant

    was actually directed more toward GregF….you’ll be glad to hear….response was….typical…..but if you want more evidence…i can show you pics of red carpet…and a report sayin there were hundreds of people there… 🙂

    #727896
    GregF
    Participant

    Ah I was only kidding. Actually O’Connell Street looked great with all the glitteratti, papparazzi and thousands of fanatical onlooking members of the public. The shining Spire in the backgound soaring into the clear blue sky. It was equal to a night at the Oscars or the Cannes film festival as Bono, Colin Farrell, Cate Blanchett and other major stars strolled down the red carpet from their stretch limosines into the luxurious foyer of the Savoy cinema. Definitely a night for the beautiful people. Champagne anyone!

    #727897
    Jack
    Participant

    the bbc doesn’t lie;)

    #727898
    GrahamH
    Participant

    Tee hee, very topical.

    I saw the premiere as well, all I could see was Fingal looming in the background, a wonderful open space – no hang on – the derilict site beside it, 200,000 tacky CFL bulbs adorning the flat 60s canopy of the Savoy, and a manky upper facade that badly needs a scrubbing.

    (And I hope whoever rolled up the red carpet at the end was wearing rubber gloves, one can only imagine the joys of its underside after an evening sprawled across an O’ Cll St pavement)

    Ah yes, sarcasm the lowest form of wit, take the easy option & be cynical etc
    I know, I know, I just can’t resist it.

    I’ll try get the picture of Sackville Zap, (courtesy of the Sunday Times last week)

    It is, to say the least, an highly idealised picture of the St, all of the parapets are as straight as an arrow, not a pitched roof in sight, and even though every house had 60 million fieplaces, each property in the picture has a single tiny Leinster House chimney perched atop.
    Still, all of the buildings appear to be accurate, including the one on the Henry St corner.

    #727899
    GrahamH
    Participant

    I thought rather than just slapping up an image of Sackville Mall, I’d make up a little picture compilation of how the buildings have ‘developed through the centuries’ – as an estate agent would say.

    So there are 5 pictures (don’t worry, they’re small)
    1. The corner buildings in 1750, note how the first building is 5 windows wide before a jump in parapet level with the next building.

    2. Same buildings in 1818, this time a more accurate image, where we can see the pitched roof.

    3. In the 1950s, note the Victorian oriel window added.

    4 & 5. 2003 and oh dear, Joe Walsh tours, pink window dressings & ‘Come in & Visit’ alive & well.
    Still – note the same parapet levels as evident 250 years ago, and the same amount of windows.

    Note how fantastic a decent carved wood shopfront would look here wrapping around the corner, & the building repainted etc.

    #727900
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    The row certainly looked well in the 1950’s – cheers for that Graham.

    #727901
    GrahamH
    Participant

    I was listening on the radio to a repeat of the fiasco surrounding the trees on O’ Connell St, and various City Council officials were defending the decision etc – which is fair enough.
    What really annoyed me though was the language used by the same officals about the upgrading of the street – saying things like “It was thought that O’ Cll St had fallen into a delapidated condition” “It was widely accepted that the street was unacceptable as the city’s primary thoroughfare” “We at the City Council decided to to something about it” and blah de blah blah blah

    Now hang on just a second here, it was virtually exclusively, soley and entirely the fault of the Corporation that the street fell into this condition in the first place!
    And whereas it would be entirely unfair to accuse officals today of the mess made, they have nothing short of a hell of a cheek to skirt around the issue of how the place fell into the woeful state it is today, ie Corporation Complacency.

    It was they who allowed its paving fall into the barely concievable disgusting state it is today.

    It was they who stipped the street of the dignity of lamposts by ripping out every single one in favour of floodlights as a more practical solution.

    It was they who allowed road traffic to utterly dominate the street for the past 30 years, reaching intolerable levels by the late 90s.

    It was they who granted full planning permission in 1982 for the demolition of the last Georgian townhouse on the street, despite it containing some of the finest plasterwork in Ireland, despite it being the last tangible landmark of how the street originally looked, and despite its accociations with Daniel O’ Connell.

    It was they who granted full permission for the Eircom office block, one of the ugliest buildings in the city.

    It was they who allowed the demolition of Gilbeys, the demolition of the Metropole, and the gross intrusion of CIE and Burgerland buildings.

    It was they who sliced the railings off O’ Connell Monument, which would inevitably lead to it being soiled with every type of matter concievable.

    It was they who did nothing to impove the vast expanses of dull asphalt and tarmac on it’s carriageways.

    It was they who allowed the prevelance of the most disgusting and offensive street furniture including 3rd World standard traffic lights and posts.

    It was they who watched without so muchas a twitch as the street was devoured by fast-food joints and takeaways.

    And as to whether they had resonsibilty for enacting the Derelict Sites Act upon the owners of the site beside the Carlton, admittedly I don’t know, or resonsibility for whole trees who’s lights were’nt working at Christmas, or whether they granted permission for so many other inappropriate schemes on the street.

    It was they – above all however – that breached their policy of O’ Connell Street being a conservation area, a place of ‘major civic design importance’
    They threw the street a bit of paving in 1988 as a consession from the scrapheap and left it at that.
    As far as they were concerned it was on the Northside, Dublin 1, and the street was too large and too delapidated, and any investor who was willing to ‘put some money into the area’ was given pretty much a free hand to do as they wished.

    Today, Dublin City Council should not be congratulated for commissioning an IAP, or ‘having the vision’ to execute major refurbishment works – it is, as would be described in the UK as merely ‘the bleedin obvious’
    The work they are carrying out is only part of wider objectives to rectify the mess made by the same public body in the past.
    Never should present officals be allowed to gloat and boast about the virtues of their current project until they publicly acknowledge that it is largely their own mess they’re cleaning up.

    #727902
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    should definitely send that to the times / indo Graham …

    #727903
    redeoin
    Participant

    Great posting – the only thing I will say is that a lot of the new corpo generation genuinely seem to care, and know what they are at, and I would hate to tar them with the brush of the last two generations…

    It will be a real turning point for the northside once O’Connell St is complete. Most Dubliners are only vaguely aware of what is going on as far as I can see, and a really well designed O’Connell St will really make them sit up and take notice – and perhaps notice all the other Northside developments going on too – Smithfield, The Markets (hopefully), The Ilac Centre/Parnell St/Moore St, Talbot/Foley St, Spencer Dock…

    #727904
    urbanisto
    Participant

    An excellent critique Graham and I agree you should forward it on to the papers…

    But I think its a fair point to say that there is a new mentality in the DCC which is gradually undoing a lot of the mistakes of the 70s and 80s. There is also a lot more money about. For example, I couldnt imagine the old Feeley regime having the idea of the Boardwalk or Smithfield. Still the tendancy to drag their heels and ignore simple and obvious solutions to problems remains….

    #727905
    GrahamH
    Participant

    I agree whole-heartedly, there is now a geninue interest and dedication in the City Council to the betterment of Dublin City, indeed they almost thrive on rectifying the mistakes of the past.
    At last there is a vision in the City Council, with utterly committed staff & planners, although the delays & hitches trail on as always.

    They could have won and deserved approval for the O’ Connell St plans however – had they enacted them straight away.
    And so the only area where they could have earned credit and applause – in initiating the street’s upgrading immediatly – was the very area they utterly failed, work began on the plaza some 5 years and 4 months after the publication of the IAP – in which – rather amusingly the then Lord Mayor stated he hoped to see much of the proposed work ‘carried out by the Millenium’.

    #727906
    GrahamH
    Participant

    Perhaps the Indo will publish it if I say that Desmond Guinness was the developer behind the proposed demolition of the Georgian townhouse…

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 3,790 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.