O’ Connell Street, Dublin
- This topic has 3,789 replies, 212 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
This is a great shame. O’Connell could be viewed in the same light as Parnell and the present day John Hume…..negotiating for Ireland and the Irish using peaceful methods. Don’t think other countries would do the same regarding their patriotic historical heroes.
(Good to see the plaque unveiled last week to ”The O’ Rahilly” of 1916, on the wall just off Moore Street. Looks very much of the time too).
Regarding the replacement of the O’Connell statue lighting, should the railings that was once there be replaced too in that case?
When were the railings removed?
Scandalously very recently – not in the depths of the dark 60s as one might expect, but in the heritage decade itself – at least 1980, if not later: possibly when the median was unified in the latter part of the decade.
It would be a scandal indeed if they disappeared as part of the heritage-fuelled Millenium project for the street – saying that there’s little point in jumping to conclusions, and as I’ve no photographic evidence the assertion ought not be pressed.
If anyone has pictures from dates in the 80s that would be great.Good point about the question of reinserting the railings; they were a highly attractive piece of street furniture:
To be honest I think it looks better without them, though saying that – only in the case of the deserted street of old where the steps majestically rise out of the ground. In the modern context they could look very well ‘protecting’ the monument from the traffic and all that’s going on around – also the Monument at the moment has a big problem with being constantly soiled with all types of matter, a lot unmentionable – no doubt why the railings went up in the first instance.
All considering, I’d probably go for no railings today, as the monument I think can be said looks at least equally well without them as with them. Considering they weren’t totally orginal to the structure, and in an effort to reduce the replica burden on the monument where something isn’t totally necessary, I think it’d be best that they be left as yet another piece of lost street furniture.
Though again, considering it was the 80s, it’s very likely they’re still kicking around somewhere…
The rilings seem to have had a short life as they are not in the original photo and not there today.
The second image is very interesting catching not only base of the monument but more importantly the people of the time, at a guess I would say c 1900?
1897 to be precise – sheesh, you mean you can’t even tell from the cut of their coat tails TP?! 🙂
The railings had quite a long life – as you say they’re here in c1900, and are probably earlier: so they went in not too long after completion in 1882, and lasted up till 1980 or so.
I think they should be re-instated if for no other reason than to keep drunks away from the base of the monument. When one looks at the number of tourists that have their photo taken at the spire and compare it with the number that did the same when there was access to the O’Connell monument. The O’Connell monument would be a better backdrop for a photo as it is at a much more person freindly scale.
I was at an exhibition of extracts from DCC traffic Cameras a few years ago showing some of the funnier and seedier passages of tape accumulted over the years. The one in question was two vagrants having intercourse on the bench in front of the O’Connell Monument at 3pm on a summers day. A situation that should never be allowed to happen again, re-instating the railings and lamps would give the monument a decent enclosure and frame it to allow it receive the type of attention it deserves.
There is also a very nice bow at the base of those railings, almost an arts and crafts influence on what could be considerd a political-religious monument, most unusual for its time.
Don’t they – very Gardineresque too…
Well putting railings up aren’t going to stop such ‘activities’ either! :). Are you sure this was a public exhibition TP?!!
I have a funny Iveagh Gardens story but I won’t go into details – only to say that this involved um – ‘lady friends’ – yes, that’ll do…It would be nice to have the whole ensemble restored if it looked right in the modern context – still a bit wary about having so much replica stuff about, but if the whole was to be restored it certainly would be above your average pastiche debate – this is a monument to a national figure here which ought to be restored to its orginal state – there is a moral element here moreso than other situations.
I have never been able to understand why these railings were removed at such a late statge – what the heck were the Corporation thinking?! Their removal had absolutely no purpose save having to paint them every five years and the effort of scooping out the odd piece of litter (which was only to be replaced with another problem) – really a disgraceful move.Pity that they ever tampered with the statue in the first place. Why oh why is this always so here in Ireland. Could they just not leave it well alone.There is hardly anything in the country whether it be statue, building, park or street that has’nt been meddled with in some way. In almost all instances something is always subtracted rather than added.
I agree it always seems easier to remove elements of a structure for various reasons such as insurance, expanded clearance etc. It would not cost a lot of money to restore the monument to its original state although one wonders if the will is there given the atttitude of the City Architects office towards Grattan Bridge and the fact that the lighting department are outside the loop.
Graham re the exhibition it was 8in the Dublin Photography Something on Camden St back in 2000, it was one of the best exhibitions I was ever at, with years of video to choose from it wasn’t difficult to catch the sad and the bad and even the mad.
GregF congrats on your 1000th post 🙂
Pity that they ever tampered with the statue in the first place.
Ya. Sometimes I wonder whether future generations will view current development in Dublin as being any more enlightened than that of the post-war heyday of destroying the Georgian fabric of Dublin. It’s obvious there’s more money sloshing around now and there seems to be more effort put into things but there’s still an “out with the old, in with the new” attitude to developing the civic infrastructure in Dublin.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big proponent of modern architecture and am in favour of much higher buildings in Dublin. But I don’t see the point of replacing old “stuff” with new “stuff” just for the sake of it. Grattan Bridge, that old park beside Jervis Street, etc. are typical.
As far as I’m concerned, the city architects/planners should seperately consider function from style. If some “old” feature has a functional problem, then by all means address it – even if this will damage it (for example adding wheelchair access). However stylistic changes, which in many cases adversely affect the function, should be avoided completely. It’s not the city architects job to decide what period elements are unfashionable. If history has thought us anything, it should be that fashions change (often very rapidly) and destroying anything of architectural significance for the sake of contempory fashion is almost always seen as a mistake in hindsight. Medieval, Georgian, Victorian, Edwardian styles all went though periods of being unfashionable. By all means, express contempory modern tastes in NEW development but don’t f*ck with older stuff just to make stylistic changes.
I totally agree,
and some of the re-modeling jobs done recently on some 1960-70’s office buildings would make you want to cry in particular Goldsmith House on Pearse St, the elevation on that one was possibly the best of its generation. What replaced it could only be descibed as architecture by numbers even if the materials used were expensive.
I agree re Wolfe Tone Park it would have been a reasonably decent effort if it were starting from scratch but given the railings that were removed it was a real waste of public funds to spend that sum of money when a decent landscaping would have yielded at least an equal result.
If not better – what a lovely breathing space it could have been for that whole area.
Changing things for the sake of the new is something that is widespread in Ireland today and by no means just limited to public bodies or private companies. Unfortunately it’s what’s fuelling so much in contruction at the minute, particularly poorly designed bog standard housing; the allure of the new hides everything until five/ten/fifteen years down the line and only then it’s realised that ‘today’ or ‘now’ is no better than any other time – things go in and out of fashion as ever.
Agreed that O’Connell Monument needs to rise out of the ground, in which instance I think it’d look better without the railings judging by that earlier pic. But in the current situation they could look very well.
Surely they’re kicking around somewhere in a CC yard or in use surrounding a flowerbed in a park somewhere – it seems highly unlikely they would’ve been dumped or sold on – they would have come in handy for a twee use in a public garden somewhere. The Corpo hadly sold on the O’Connell Monument railings – would they…?Here’s some pics of the newly restored, slightly shell-shocked looking Sheahan Memorial. It was in shadow at the time so I had to focus on details. It seems just a cleaning and weather treatment job was done, leaving minor damage as it was.There’s a pic at the bottom too:
Reigned in by the authorities yet again – Larkin looks like he’s ready to explode with rage 😮
Also a pic here of two of the information signs gone up on the hoardings (sorry about quality):
I had a look at Larkin today and it would appear that his great hands are almost spilling over the scaffolding, he didn’t look happy at his temporary incarceration right enough :p
Re: The O’Connell Monument it would appear that with persistent road widening there simply isn’t the space to re-instate the railings. The monument is going to effectively sever the central median from the bridge and it would appear that DCC are happier to widen both side paths as opposed to allow the median continue onto the bridge, which I can understand at present given the safety implications of the HGV usage on the Quays but I feel that in the post Port Tunnel environment that this should be re-examined.
What’s annoyed me for a long time is not just the removal of the railings, but also the insertion of a completely inappropriate type of limestone as a replacement for the step that used to be behind them – now the very bottom one:
It is blue limestone while the orginal stone is a yellowish grey. I’m sure everyone’s noticed this, not to mention how horrible it looks worn down and shiny and often covered in sticky filth. This should be replaced in the conservation works with a matched stone.
The Monument now only has three steps out of the original four – the railings were sited on the bottom one, now gone. Also the orginal second step that has been crudely replaced is much stouter than the previous broad step, hence the flight up is steeper than before resulting in a certain loss of grace overall, esp as a result of the loss of the bottom one altogether.
Interesting concept of linking the bridge median with the street – though I think that a clear boundary should be set between the two spaces – something that O’Connell Monument does so well at the minute.
Even with the trucks gone though, would it be possible?
From a pedestrian view it is certainly desirable.That is a pretty crude piece of work and it certainly is not appropriate to a monument of this stature and should be reversed with more sympathetic materials. The central median could be used a lot more effectively than at present with a few minor modifications with the monument not being the only obstruction that renders the median ineffective as a thoroughfare. The location of the bicycle parking and unauthorised motorbike parking must also be addressed if the area is to develop in accordance with the original plan. Widening the central median at the monument would be the perfect start.
Yes – maintaining the median seems to be pointless given the present situation of having bikes strewn everywhere – very inappropriate to have this placed on a part of the street they hope to provide with kiosks!
I dont recall any montages of the new median being used as a cycle park in the regeneration plan for O’Connell Street. A few posts back, some mentioned the proliferation of street clutter in the city centre, obscuring many fine public spaces – this must surely rank as the worst and most inappropriate.
Why were the side streets not used for parking bicycles – surely there is adequate space on Parnell Square, Abbey Street, Pearse Street etc.
Can I ask what is the point of having the median maintained? If the idea was to maintain an alternative pedestrian route through the street (which I’m sure it was) then whoever put these bike railings in has messed the whole concept up. I used to walk the median frequently in the old days (1997 lol) and it was then one of the few joys on the street to complete the stretch with minimum obstruction. The new stretch has so many obstructions (and is narrower) that I couldn’t be bothered negotiating it any more.
It is sad to see the opportunity to improve the street already make some stupid mistakes – though compared to its treatment in the past, at least the street is getting some attention.
On Upper O’Connel Street they have removed the old granite kerbing and are reducing the width of the paths. Where has the granite ended up!!!!!! Please let it not be an Irish Bar…. :confused:
And as part of the plan has been completed, I think its possible now to give a critical judgement on it. The standard of the work is very impressive, however I get an entire temporary feel to the works (ie many features will be gone in 10 years). The granite, limestone and marble paths are well finished but I am puzzeled as to why the path sizes are wholly inconsistent – again an example of cars taking precedence over design and indeed pedestrians.
Im sorry guys but I dislike the new lamps a lot – they are crude and generally unsuited to the street. Why the need for ultra modern lighting on a largely neo-classical street? The clash is truly awful. And before anyone goes anti-pastiche, why did the council think it appropriate to replace all the lamps on stephens green with victorian replicas and not do the same on OC Street? Perhaps because they new it would look awful around the green and did the right thing. Pity the same judgement was not exercised on OC St.The new bland and boring lamps are more suited to an obscure dual carriageway heading to monotonous suburbia than a city’s main thouroughfare. One word: Tacky.
To DCC’s credit, the general feel of the street is imroving. It appears less menacing than, say, five years ago. The formal square around the GPO has an almost genteel feel to it. This part – free from clutter, quality materials – and well lit (lamposts apart 😉 ) is a fine example of urban design gone right. I note the usage of buildings has changed somewhat from that of the late ninties, though the fast food outlets and the amusement acardes persist. Some private companies have been lavish in their redevelopment of their buildings (Clerys, the Gresham, Bests would be good examples) but some are still awful – burger joints aside, the RDH, the Centras, Spars, Quirkeys etc etc have done little or nothing to improve there look – then again they would probably improve the street by closing down!
Overall, the street is getting better – and maintained to a better degree than before. But some problems still persist, and some new design features are inappropriate. Perhaps when they finish the rest of the street they will begin to correct the errors of the first phase… :rolleyes:
Agreed that it is important to acknowledge the quality of the works executed – and yes the plaza is really magnificent, especially now in the summer sun; the limes look fantastic!
…which really confirms for me what a disaster it has been not to have used them on the median, or indeed any regular planting scheme. It has been such a cop-out to go for the ‘intimate’ or ‘varied’ or whatever they’re calling it scheme of sextets of trees.
The entire the street has been almost ‘plazafied’ as a result, not just the area outside the GPO.
To see how magnificently the limes define the Plaza, not to mention how good they look in their own right makes it such a crying shame to be able to see the scheme that could have been for the street at large 🙁Regarding the maintenance of the median, it’s difficult to envisage an alternative layout given the monuments on the street and how traffic and pedestrians would interact if the median was removed, and indeed what would replace it. No doubt all options were considered at the planning stage and this was decided as the best or at least most workable of layouts.
But certainly agreed it is nothing short of redundant in places with the bicycle parking there; it is ridiculous, not only making the area hostile to pedestrians as a route, but also contributing in a major way to the already undesirable clutter of the space. And whatever about the bicycles, the motorbikes are just a joke.
I walk down this median stretch almost every day – it is ludicrous that the only space for pedestrians to get by behind Sir John Grey there is at times a mere two feet of pavement – essentially the kerbline – either side of the parked bikes in an effort to continue on to the Abbey St junction.
The amount of people walking down in this direction that cross over to the side pavements before even reaching the bikes is notable.Fundamentally with the median the case for retention other than the monument aspect has two elements to it, i.e. the median should be retained firstly to define the linear nature of the street, and secondly to provide an alternative, not to mention more relaxed and pleasant route for pedestrians. As I see it the first case has not been fulfilled at all, while the second only in part.
Regarding the median lampposts – never liked them since the moment they went in, both their design which is seen in every ‘cool’ urban development in the city, not to mention Western Europe, and more importantly their number: there’s a set of two every 15 paces! Combined with the mixture of trees, traffic poles, Luas sign poles and everything else that is going on, it’s just busy busy busy. The coherence of the median, the purpose of the median, is swallowed up.
To use pastiche lighting on a large scale on the street I think would have been a complete cop-out though – modern street furniture is generally highly compatible with older environments, unlike what one may think about using the form with buildings, in most cases furniture is detached from the buildings around quite unlike any other form of structure.
But I agree about the new tall posts; first and foremost if you take them out of their environment and view them objectively as pieces of design, they fall flat on their faces. Unlike other lampposts that have graced the street, whether they be the first 1892 electric posts, the Celtic-influenced 1903ish ones, or the grand modern Art Deco posts, they all held up in their own right – these new ones don’t. They’re functional and crude, doing two jobs in one – although I think the domed heads are well-designed as said before.
Whereas I wouldn’t like to see pastiche lighting on the street, posts that were broadly classical in nature, i.e. simple but elegant should have been used, something Edwardian design successfully managed by combining classicism with modern influences. Posts that look well on their own as well as in a team marching down the street should have been used – as have always been used on O’Connell St in modern times.
Also I hate those gimmicky sign yokes attached to the lampposts – just a personal thing suppose – but I really detest them – and they’re popping up in every town and village in the country! I think they’re particularly inappropriate for the capital’s main street though – think they look naff 😮Some good points – gasp there’s good points graham? 😮 🙂 – the quality of works has been superb, both the materials and the craftsmanship.
Also the levels of maintenance have shot through the roof – from litter cleaning, to emptying of bins, to polishing of bins, to replacement of trees, to tweaking of traffic lights, to road and pavement cleansing and sweeping – really superb. The newly completed end is being kept in pristine condition.Also late at night the street feels a million time safer than before, open and spacious, brightly lit in white light and so much more inviting than before. This was a major aim of the IAP and it has been hugely successful I think.
(though just one point about the plaza lighting – the lamps at the top for some strange reason are not directed into the centre of the plaza – rather pointed just below around the area of the posts themselves. They need to be tweaked tol ight the median of the plaza also – very surprising considering this is the whole purpose of them!)What do you mean J. Seerski about the pavaemnt sizes being inconsistant? Regarding the granite kerbstones, presumably they’re being restored and kept ofr other uses. By now the CC are well aware of their value across the city – not every removal has negative intentions behind it anymore!
So the median is a failure as I suspected recently myself. How much public money has been wasted on this paving fiasco?
Jack,
I wouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, yes the median could perform a lot better but I wouldn’t say it is a fiasco as all of the errors are reversable with minimum capital outlay. An example of this would be to remove the bicycle parking stands that are so well illustrated in Graham’s photo and to remove them to their original positions on Abbey St and Cathal Brugha St. I also agree with our resident planning freak that the placing of the kiosks and their functioning must be the number one priority for the median.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
