Parnell Square redevelopment
- This topic has 186 replies, 51 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
What was wrong with the GoR the way it was? The addition of the new north gate makes sense on a certain intuitive level: it opens the square, improves pedestrian accessibility, ushers in a new cultural quarter etc etc, but it seems in doing so the integrity of the original design has been compromised.
So maybe I can save myself half a minute cutting through from the east side of Parnell Square to the Hugh Lane, wonderful, I’ll get my cup of coffee that much quicker, but I’m going to miss the symmetry that was implied in the single entrance at the base of the cross, the ‘IN’ on one side and ‘OUT’ on the other, the Oisin Kelly sculpture as a central fixture. . . Say what you will about improved accessiblity but there was something wonderfully reverent about the original design and concept, suggestive of, say, a stations of the cross. It may be a small, symbolic detail, but an important one nonetheless. Ah well. Changed, changed utterly as the man said.
It’s a concern most of us have I think. There was always something faintly sacrificial – not quite the word, but the right one’s just not coming at the minute – about there only being one way in and one way out. You had to make a commitment to entering the place; leave the outside world behind for a few moments. It’s just that bit more self-conscious now, more populist, more Celtic-Tigeresque – more bland.
I do see the point of providing access north-south through the Garden: Parnell Square is soon to be revolutionised with a central garden surrounded by new four-storey Rotunda buildings – all linking into the Garden of Remembrance at the top.
It’s just too tempting an opportunity not to do something on the new axis, but I can’t help thinking that something more discrete was in order as regards the design of the entrances.
29/9/2007
This might as well go here given how the Square feeds into Parnell Street.
The ‘down-at-heel’ envirnment that characterises Parnell Street is well known, even the recently developed areas, but the eastern end of the street is still stuck in the 1980s. It hasn’t been touched by the boom years, and remains the decrepit backwater it has been for the latter part of the 20th century.
This is the reason it was included in the O’Connell Street IAP, was designated an ACA, and sited in an Area of Special Planning Control. It was also because of its second-rate state that the street was given special site cluster designation, with the entire stretch of buildings from O’Connell Street to Marlborough Street tax-incentivised for redevelopment and refurbishment. The ACA also requires that “all new buildings should be designed to the highest standard in a modern architectural idiom. Pastiche will be discouraged and will only be allowed or required in exceptional circumstances.”
And yet the very first of these sites to be (finally) redeveloped, and it gets this.
I kid you not. Notwithstanding basic common sense, even with every development control a planning authority can be afforded in this state this utter rubbish is allowed through the system. It is a shocking indictment of the state of planning in the city.
And what is particularly offensive to the citizen or indeed resident of this building is the enormous dividend handed on a plate to the developer by DCC in the form of this mammothly-scaled development, of which only a tiny fraction actually requires architectural treatment – and yet this is the tight-fisted, mean-spirited veneer of muck presented as the sole public face of the development. What an insult to the city.
Its all-singing upturned finger character on the streetscape is fitting.
And to add insult to injury, tax-payers’ money actually went into subsidising this scheme, a development that was worth a fortune in the first instance. And what did the city get back? Abolutely nothing. The developer wins again.
Meanwhile the important collection of decrepit mid-18th century townhouses directly adjoining it have just a ‘face-lift’. You couldn’t make this up if you tried.
It’s just unbelieveable: all protected structures, in an ACA.
Ravishing.
The adjoining Georgians at the junction with O’Connell Street are also in bits as ever.
So much potential here. And in terms of the architectural hertiage of this part of the city, these facades are almost as significant as the RDH townhouse on O’Connell Street.
An intriguing little gem next door.
Rare Wyatt windows.
An entire streetscape that sorely needs attention. Given these facades can’t be given the developer treatment, I suppose neglect is the appropriate period building equivalant.
😮 The true cost to the city however is the sad loss of Fibber Magees’ beer garden, once the biggest and rockingest outdoor drinking spot in town. So many memories….:(
Hmmmm. The red block is a missed opportunity alright. Why oh why is the council not getting developers to bring form and finish up to par where bulk and mass is being permitted? The same has been let happen at the corner of Granby Row, while for anybody who wants to see a real horror story, just get in and inspect the recent ten story block of apartments on the corner of Moore St and Parnell St, designed by Tony Reddy’s firm IIRC… It’s well worth having a look; given that such bulk was permitted the standards within are really second-rate – awkward angles greet the visitor at the entrance hall, non-opening windows are not self-cleaning from what I can tell, lifts are tiny given the amount of people that they’re to serve, long dark corridors that were already smelling of dampness prior to final comletion, and a ‘penthouse’ apartment where the ceiling is at the same relatively low height as the rest of the apts. Remarkable. The only slightly edeeming feature in my book are the razor-edged metal plaques erected on the Moore St gates, commemorating the 1916 leaders; its just unfortunate that the gates themselves slam closed at all times of day and night – very nice for the residents overhead, I’m sure :rolleyes:
Returning to Parnell Square itself, the new access point facing the Hugh Lane Municipal Gallery is indeed a welcome improvement. The attention to detail in terms of the etched glass reflecting the motifs is a nice touch, and all round it seems to work very well. I am also glad that DCC didn’t try to do anything overly “radical” which may have botched up (such as happened with the former park at St Marys outside the Jervis Centre). So hats off to the architects in DCC on this one; sensitively handled it should be a real success 🙂
@GrahamH wrote:
Regarding the proposals for renewing the square as a whole, I was impressed by this plan when regeneration was first planned. The idea of erecting hospital buildings along the east and west perimeter in exchange for returning the middle of the square to use as gardens seemed a very sensible and smart idea. However given the development of the National Childrens Hospital being planned for Eccles Street, it would appear likely that it will become the maternity hospital – superceding the Rotunda]not builld[/I] along the perimeter, and instead return Bartolemew Mosse’s Pleasure Gardens as a real amenity to Dubliners. It’s not as if the north inner city has much green space anyway; Mountjoy Square and King’s Inns front at Constitution Hill add up to relatively little when compared to the area of Merrion Square, Stephens Green, Iveagh Gardens, St Patricks etc. Even at present part of what was the park at Sean MacDermot St/ Gardiner St is being built upon – so all in all a real shortage of publically accessible green space in the north inner city, hence the case for really trying to restore the amenity aspect of Parnell Square to it’s maximum. Any takers?
Why do you think the Rotunda will close? The new NCH at the Mater will replace Temple Street hospital. Its not planned to be a maternity hospital.
Is this redevolpement going ahead. This thread is 3 years old and all we have is a new canopy over the rotunda’s main enterence. No trees no reduction in parking no granite paving no improved bus bays
I was going to post this up for busman on the College Green / O’Connell St. thread and then the Parnell Square thread turns up. Better again!
If there was a bus equivalent of the train-spotter, Parnell Square would be the equivalent of Crewe.@cgcsb wrote:
Is this redevolpement going ahead. This thread is 3 years old and all we have is a new canopy over the rotunda’s main enterence. No trees no reduction in parking no granite paving no improved bus bays
there is also the new entrance to the garden opposite the hugh lane, a new electricity substation (just saying whats happened not that its a positive) and works to the rear of the ambassador
@gunter wrote:
If there was a bus equivalent of the train-spotter, Parnell Square would be the equivalent of Crewe.
Yes there have been some minor improvements like the new enterence to the park. However the more expensive parts of the plan such as new paving and bus bays seem to have gone the way of the Millenium Clock. I always thought it was horrible for the buses to stop on front of those Georgian Buildings. I’d rather if they stopped on a central median/traffic Island similar to the inbound Abbey Street luas stop
It all goes back to Charles Haughey’s decision to stop Dublin Bus from building an underground terminus at Temple Bar with a tunnel under the Liffey to another terminus near Capel Street. This would have gotten ALL the buses off the streets, and turned Parnell Square, Fleet St, College Green etc. back into thoroughfares. Instead they are bus car parks, with all that entails in terms of pollution – both noise and air.
Meanwhile bus passengers have to wait on the streets in all weathers, instead of being able to go to an indoor terminus, buy a newspaper, sit down, actually know when the next bus is coming, and generally be civilised.
But no, Haughey wanted a left bank, arty farty quartier and made CIE sell back all the house bank it had accumulated with a view to building a terminus. So we got a giant drinking den instead with not a bus in sight. Well done CJ, you corrupt little crook. RIP 😡
agreed, i doubt any major changes will actually happen to parnell square, maybe a repaving but nothing on the scale proposed.
sue, such a large scheme would never have gone ahead (thank god) instead temple bar would have been flattened and turned into a surface carpark for dublin bus and would have only been redeveloped recently… never thought id defend charlie haughy!
yep Charlie was a slieveen of the highest order and a scab on the face of irish public life, but saving Temple Bar was a great deed for Dublin. Any fucking ignorant prick who calls it a “drinking den” should be thrown in the Liffey, not literally of course – but taken to task in some way. The fact that Temple Bar has not a car in sight either seems to have escaped our old friend sue…
good to see the standard of debate is as high as ever. nice one alonso
the car parks were going to be underground. I’m no engineer, but apart from egress points for the buses, I think the impact on the surface would not have been huge. You could still have had a drinking den/cultural quarter overhead
it was my understanding, and i’m open to correction, that a massive concrete block would have been built on both sides of the Liffey that looked suspiciously like a giant bus garage for buses like.
I see you’re still calling it a drinking den. Christ almighty have you actually been in it at all?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
