The Greens and O Connell Street

Oops reset time on server….
Does Dublin Bus still have the tree cutter double decker… roof is open on itto allow them to trim trees to the height of the buses…

It’s sad to see such old trees coming down, but they were always wrong for O’Connell Street – they make it seem narrower, and they’re all gnarled and misshapen-looking. Anyway, the Green Party tried to pull this when Fingal Co Council’s brilliant new offices were being built in Swords, making out that the scrap of wasteland that was the venue for local cider parties was some sort of valuable ecosystem, or something.

yeah the whole “if the trees could talk, the things they could tell us they have seen” is a bit treehuggy for me….

language..!

On the theme of trees: Im in the UK at the moment and the current big story is ‘leaves on the line’, a huge problem at this time for the train companies. It seems that up until the 1960s BR cut back all the trees but stopped this for cost reasons (now theres foresight!)
However, try as the rail network company might to reintroduce the programme they continually come up against objections from eco-campaigners ot local activists.
I suppose the issue is the same everywhere.

Yes – they still have the tree cutting bus. Saw it a few months ago.

fjp

(screw it, I’m bored – here’s a photo of the damn thing)

Its the same in Galway… the new plans for Eyre Square have been delayed for over two years now… I went to a public meeting about it years ago and was impressed by the plans… but I couldn’t believe the amount of complaining people were doing about trees that were ‘only’ planted in the ’60’s… they do nothing for the square and such complaining has now stopped a quality development from going ahead…

Hello all, I’ve been lurking for some considerable while, but this is my first post.

On the subject of trees, how about Poplars – tall, graceful, space-efficient, and would fit in well with the spire!

As regards the tree-cutting bus pictured, this has just been replaced by a newer model cascaded down from the service fleet this summer. There is a requirement to always have at least one in the fleet, in order to prevent damage to roof-domes of buses. For best effect, cutting should be done in wet weather, for it is then that the branches hang down and cause most damage.

I am no expert on trains, but I remember someone telling me that the problems in the UK started after the end of the 60s when steam trains were replaced – the constant steam blasts apparently kept the trees from growing over too much. But I could very well be wrong on that one.

Anyway, hope the above is of interest

I agree, its ridiculous. They are to be replaced anyway, respaced in the winder pavements.

Interestingly, photos on fjp’s site show the street as being treeless in 1944! Which puts the 1916 rubbish to bed.

oh for fuck’s sake….

Green TDs chained to O’Connell Street trees
Green Party TDs yesterday chained themselves to trees in Dublin’s O’Connell Street in an attempt to reverse the city council’s decision to remove its trees. Mr Ciarán Cuffe said the party had been “inundated with calls from the public” urging the trees be saved and he described their planned removal as “criminal destruction of Dublin’s heritage”.

I have a small potted cactus next to my television that was in clear view of the events of September 11th, 2001 and as such has ‘witnessed history’.
Do I have to get a court injunction out to stop Trevor Sargent chaining himself to it?

Well whilst the south end does seem to be treeless in the 1940’s, this photo shoes that the north side from the pillar does have some pretty old trees on it.

south

north

civil war fighting

civil war fighting

The last photo show public toilets which are also of historical importance. They have railings which might be ideally suited for chains.

Still though, if I were them I’d be more concerned with the street being a shithole in general. I rang them and they’re emailing me their press release. Here it is (I’m not fixing the bad word wrapping):

GREEN TDs CHAIN THEMSELVES TO O’CONNELL STREET TREES

In Protest At Destruction

Green Party TDs chained themselves to trees in O’Connell Street, Dublin
this
afternoon in a last ditch attempt to save the remaining trees along the
capitol’s thoroughfare. The trees are due to be cut down to clear access
for
the construction of the new city centre Spike monument.

Green Party Environment spokesperson, Councillor Ciaran Cuffe T.D., said
that
the Green Party felt that they had no alternative but to hold this protest
to
highlight “this criminal destruction of Dublin’s heritage”. “We believe
that
the cutting down of the O’Connell Street trees is an absolute scandal. We
have
been inundated with calls from the public to see what we can do.”

“The Green Party believe that it is possible to achieve the aims of the
O’Connell Street plan and still retain the best of the remaining trees.”

Deputy Cuffe said that the Green Party had raised the issue in the Dáil
earlier
today calling on the Minister for the Environment to intervene immediately
and
call a halt to this wanton destruction.

Mr. Cuffe said that the Greens were also appealing to the public to make
their
voice hear and help save the trees. “We are calling on members of the public
to
write to the Dublin City Manager John Fitzgerald at the Civic Offices, Wood
Quay
and urge him to save the remaining mature trees which are due to be cut down
to
make way for construction work.”

Last April the following Motion in the name of Councillor Ciarán Cuffe was
moved
for report by Dublin City Council:

“That the City Manager ensure that the venerable one hundred year old Plane
Trees on Upper O’Connell Street that witnessed the Easter Rising in 1916 be
retained as part of any plan to rejuvenate the area.”

Ciarán Cuffe T.D. 087 265 2075
Stephen Rawson, Press Officer 618 4088 / 087 235 7551

so how long are they promising to stay there? i am all for cutting the trees and planting elms instead, it would be nice, but actual greens chained (chained!) to trees might be nicer still, it would certainly add life and colour to the urban environment. maybe we could throw rotten fruit at them, it could become traditional.

Pathetic – why don’t they complain about sewage sludge and chain themselves to crap in Dublin Bay. Can’t believe I gave John Gormley my second preference.

The City Council recently cut down the trees around 3 sides of St Stephens green and the smaller replacement trees along with the new paving looks superb. The Green Party are twats (in my opinion) I’m going down there at lunchtime and telling them that – if they are still there.

They are only part of the street furniture for fucks sake

http://www.irelandposters.com/Dublin1916.jpg

Not a sight of them down there – a case of we shall fight them until it gets a bit nippy

Nonsense…its good to know that the finer arts are alive in the modern age!!!

Holy God, Paul, such language!!!

But yes the Greens are a bit OTT alright! It seems that no-one noticed the removal of the trees until it was mentioned on the Marion Finucane show. Over half have been removed since the works began. In any case, the trees destroy the views of many grand buildings on the street. If I had my way, they’d be gone from College Green also – The Parliament House is obscured by those bloody London Plane Trees!!!!

According to one article, Dub City Council got more calls from journalists about the trees than they did from concerned citizens.

Black mark against Ciaran Cuffe in particular. With his background in architecture, you would think that he could, excuse the pun, see the wood for the trees, and realise that these London Planes add absolutely nothing – and take away a lot – from the streetscape.

I think this bullshit about trees somehow being sentient witnesses to the 1916 Rising is particularly sickening. It’s exactly as GregF said, lowest common denominator stuff, which in this county inevitably involves an appeal to republicanism.

Its fairly obvious if you looked at the development plan for O’Connell Street that this was to happen… frigging eejits are only finding this out now…

Sorry aboyut the language but I’m very pissed off about this….. and if i’m around for the next election I will campaign against Cuffe if this gets stopped….

I agree with Seerski, College Green should have them removed as well. I’m going down tonight with a chainsaw, anyone with me 😉

You know what’ll happen next? We’ll have smelly eco warriors up the trees. And they’ll all be from Manchester and London.

London eco-warriors in the London planes

I’m with Paul – if the O’Connell Street redevelopment gets held up by the muesli eaters I’ll take a hacksaw down there myself

Wouldn’t it have been a better idea if DCC had employed a bit of PR and re-launched their master-plan for the street?

Call me cynical but with so many working for them surely they could have counter-attacked on this???

Why not hold a press conference saying how this is all progressing (or not) and what the end result will be and how beneficial it will be for the street!!??

Just an idea!

Cheap politics is no politics!

I see there’s an e-mail chain mail going around now asking people to ring and object to the city council. I’ve recieved a few copies now. Needless to say it contains the same misleading statements. It annoyed me so much I rang the council to register my support for going ahead with the area action plan, and removing the trees to the planed schedule.

Also, see the press release from council: http://www.dublincity.ie/profile/pressr/021106.htm

While that’s very welcome is that it? (the ‘press release’ above)

Surely they could go on the offensive just a lttle bit more??? (no sarcasm intended)

Sent this to the Green party, can I suggest that like minded individuals do the same:

As someone who has voted for John Gormley in the last 2 general elections, I am writing to inform you that after the chaining to trees stunt of yesterday I shall not be voting green again. It was a tacky stunt which is a hinderance to the badly-needed renewal of O’Connell Street. The trees do not add anything of merit to the street architecturally and the replacement trees should be more suitable to the location rather than the grnarled London Plane trees that are currently there. May I suggest that the Green Party support the renewal and part pedestrianising of “Main Street Ireland” which will add more to the quality of life for Dubliners rather than blocking it with a tacky stunt.

I am amazed at the consistency, and lack of it, on this topic. Not one dissenting voice among the lot of you.
When Sir John Rogersons Quay was being redeveloped DCC slapped a preservation order on the ugly chimney and insisted the development be designed around it. Why did they not adopt the same approach when setting out to redevelop O.C.St. and start with the trees and design around them. A formal OTT design is not really fitting for OCSt. Is it beyond the capability of Irish Architects to come up with a design that incorporated the existing trees? By the way Birdwatch Ireland did protest against the cutting down of the trees but what’s the opinion of bird enthusiast v our esteemed architects! Ever ask yourselves why you are always right and the public wrong. Remember ESB’s head office, DCC’s record on Wood Quay. OK they get things right a lot of the time, boardwalk, millennium bridge and others, but this time they are wrong and the trees should have been kept.

The O’CLL Street development team are being very ambiguous and inconsistant on this. They keep saying that the existing trees are too big for the street and are obliterating the buildings, and yet they are proposing that equally tall trees (although slenderer) be planted even closer to the buildings at the edge of the footpaths! Smaller clipped lime trees are to be placed down the centre. Still, I do think that the existing trees are far too overwhelming, indeed a good many were only planted in the 60’s and 80’s, what I do not agree with is the breaking up of the street with a central plaza. The overall effect of O’ Cll Street, relies nearly entirely upon it’s fantastic continuity, as does any similar boulevard.

Consistency
You can see among non-architects that the opinion is much the same, people would rather have the street renovated than the trees.

http://www.p45rant.com/boards/showthread.php?threadid=32180

Hey Folks,
lighten up a little.
I didn’t think a little tree hugging would upset you that much.
Look, I agree with 90per cent of the O’Connell Street Plan, the Spire, the wider footpaths, the reduction in traffic, the Luas, etc.
However the intention to chop down ALL the trees was hidden in the very small print of the EIS., around about page 150 if my memories not mistaken.
At this stage all I’m asking for is that the few remaining very mature trees North of the Savoy be retained. Personally I feel that they would compliment
the Integrated Area Plan’s landscaping proposals.
OK?
Ciaran

Consistency.
Start with the trees and design around them?
Can I point out that the street came before the trees, and anyone with eyes in their head can see how much it’s already opened up thanks to the felling – the original vision for the street.
Anyway, there are only a handful left now at the top and bottom of the street and it would look ridiculous if they were retained.
Perhaps the people writing on this site are consistent in their opinions because they are the only ones dealing with fact and common sense instead of the hysteria and misinformation peddled by the bandwagoneers and busybodies.
As others have said, nobody even noticed that most of the trees were already gone, and the inference has to be made that nobody cared.
Images of the proposed redevelopment – minus all old trees- have been in circulation for YEARS without so much as a murmur from the Greens or anyone else.
“Consistency” implies that everybody contributing to this debate here is an architect. Well, I’m not.
By the way, does anyone have Marian Finucane’s e-mail address?

I’m not an architect either.
Marion’s address: marian@rte.ie

Nothing excuses that type of cheap publicity stunt. It was like something from the Simpsons.

Thanks for the address, Paul, I probably should have been able to guess it (duh…)
Maybe someone with a better computer than me could send her the pics of the treeless north end of O’Connell Street in the 40s to put paid to the ‘1916 witnesses’ crap.
I may be wrong, but my memories of photos from the 60s are of a treeless O’Connell Street at least up to the pillar…
By the way, I have to say being told to ‘lighten up’ by someone who chains himself to a tree of an afternoon is a bit rich.
To think I once voted Green…

to those who can no longer believe that they once voted green, or those who now feel they can no longer vote green……can I ask which particlular political party are you going to vote for now? Which one best represents your feelings on this issue? Who has the best manifesto in relation to tree protection on our capitals main thoroughfare? They all seem silent to me – ie. couldn’t give a flying f**k! At least the greens, whether you support them in this ‘save our trees’ matter or not, have an opinion on things like this which matter to all of us, and are not only concerned with the size of their brown paper envelope wallets.
If green party voter support is this fickle, it’s no wonder those other bastard parties keep winning the elections!!!

Great. A pompous architects board.

Fact: most people are prepared to allow the City Council proceed with their plans and redevelopments until it involves taking something they hold dear away from them. As is happening here.

Support for the removal of the trees has been thin on the ground. Why? Because as Dubliners, we grew up with them – pretty much everyone under 40 has grown up with the Planes on O’Connell Street, and most people – up-their-own-arses architects apart – like them well enough. And that sterile shite we are being offered instead is a poor substitute.

So – how about HANDS OFF? With few exceptions, Dublin’s experience of our own homegrown brand of architect in the past hasn’t exactly inspired confidence.

And I love how dismissive some of your posters are of the public’s opinion. Do you have to pass exams in boorishness and pomposity to qualify as an architect?

As pointed out before, you will find that many of us here are not architects but people interested in the city.

Just out of interest, why would you visit a “pompous architects board”? Where you directed here?

Yeah DaveR – plenty of us are non-architects (inc me). I even spell the damn word wrong sometimes.

This means that I’m a member of your glorious aforementioned public, and I don’t agree with what YOU just said, or the attititude you’re taking towards people posting on these boards (though I imagine you didn’t read too much before you posted).

Hands Off – interesting concept. Do you mean leave O’Connel Street as it is (inc litter, fast food, general shabiness at ground level)??? Or hands on until something you don’t like is encountered – like the trees. Then it comes down to our opinion versus yours. Your opinion seemed to be “leave them there because we like things as they are”.

Once again, we are the Public too…

fjp

Pot, kettle, black springs to mind…..I’m afraid reports of your boorishness have not been exaggerated! Me I’m just a disgrubtled plumber with an afternoon off…..well how would you know any different about me or anyone else posting here?

Work in the media, have nothing to do with architecture. Live a few minutes’ walk from O’Connell Street. Grew up in Dublin. Is it OK for me to have an opinion?

No AndrewP you’re obviously not a “professional dub” or signed up member of an environmental group, so be quiet. 😉

I’m not allowed an opinion at all because I’m not even a dubliner…. shock horror… i know i hide it well…. i’ved just lived here for 15 years…

Okay, I see how your so called discussion board works now, moderator. Remove the posts that don’t suit, like my reply of last evening. Fair enough. I’m off.

But before I go, Mr Clerkin, your “professional Dub” jibe was cheap. Actually, I don’t care whether you’re from Dublin or not. I was merely trying to explain why a lot of Dublin people like the trees on O’Connell Street, ie we grew up with them – a “strong sense of place” is what I think its called.

Anyway, enjoy each other – though blocking counterposts does kind of limit the authority of your site. Don’t you think?

Bye

Well DaveR pronouncing “Great. A pompous architects board” is hardly the best way to enter a discussion…

People here are not all architects, we just feel that O’Connell street does not benefit from the existing trees and feel that everyone will benefit from the upgrading… hence politicians jumping in for 5 mins of fame is somewhat frowned upon…

Of course u are entitled to your opinion “that [the] sterile shite we are being offered instead is a poor substitute”, as are we to differ…

PS As far as I can see your post on the 8th is and always was there….

Let’s move away from the personal abuse pls.

To think all this ruin has been caused by a few auld trees…..

I am amazed with some of the comments that have appeared on this subject. The radio is full of ranting over a few bloody trees that have nothing to do with good urban design – they may suit monotonous suburban Dublin, but surely not what still is one of the greatest streets in Europe.

Until quite recently, some of the great buildings on the street were obscured by these overwhelming and hideous plane trees. Just admiring Clerys the other day from the other side of O’Connell Street, it was hard to imagine that this great building was hidden from view unless you went closer – thus diminishing the effect it has on the streets entirity. The imposing elegance could not be rightly admired less than two years ago. Now its integral beauty is there for all to see. Where you have good architecture, you should not try and hide it. Where you haven’t, cover it in Ivy.

Can you imagine what O’Connell Street would look like if its remaining stock of magnificent and powerful buildings could be visualised in its entirity without being broken by awkward London Planes? The most stirring images of O’Connell Street in the past are of a powerful street without trees. Hence most of these popular pictures are of Lower O’Connell Street – The trees of Upper O’Connell Street would distort any powerful images that the architecture could muster.

Finally, is anyone going up to the GPO tomorrow to vent their anger to Marian over, not only this debacle, but the painfully slow progress that is being made in O’Connell Street???? The Spike may be ready by January, but what of the Burger King’s, the Ann Summers, the arcades, the Dr Quirkeys, etc, etc, etc…………… the woeful office blocks, the hopeless lighting, shopfronts, mingers that run amok, filthy pubs…….oh I feeeeeel sick.

The corpo need balls if they are to take on the problems facing O’Connell Street – and respond to criticism, not just accept it. 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁

Oh, and I am not an architect………..

Maybe someone else has mentioned it previously but I noticed the Paddy Power has acquired the old Bank of Ireland up from Clerys. Now we’ll have a bookies to go with the Burger Joints, the Games arcades and the lingerie shops, Hurray!

This has to go down as one of the most divisive threads yet strted on this forum. And frankly I am utterly amazed that peoples feelings can run so high over some trees. To add my two bits worth, I reckon the trees should go and that the regeneration plan should move forwad full steam ahead.
Reemeber when the central mall was repaved in 1988 and (yet more) trees were added in no particular planned fashion. Not a peep from people back then! I really fail to see why this is being made into such a huge issue. I do think the Greens have a case to answer – because after all Ciaran Cuffe YOU have the privilege of being a member of the city council and having a direct imput into the whole O’Connell St scheme…unlike the ordinary Joe Soaps here on Archeire! The time to have expressed you views was when the plan was being formulated all those many moons ago. Not now when all it serves is to get your party’s name mentioned. And they wonder why people are cynical of politics! As for Marion jumping on the bandwagon…!

Lastly, I think we are very lucky (thank you Paul and all contributors) to have this forum to share views and at least know that there are others out there (non-architects included) who share a desire to see an improved city. Lets not bugger it up with slagging matches!

Now hand me my chain saw…..

Are you sure fjp hasn’t been at those photos of Auld Dublin and cloned out the trees!!!

Heres some nice trees 😉

Paul, seriously, does it not prove that O’Connell Street is more dramatic without trees, as the original photo had shown?!!!

In the interests of a fair debate it is probably worth having a look at an article in yesterdays Sunday Indo here, even if it is a little biased towards saving the trees…

Brenden O’Connor talks some shite about them as well here, and rounds it off by saying: “I don’t know about you, but I think that I shall never see, A Spike that’s lovely as a tree”… I can’t wait for the day when he has to eat his words…

Poll in today’s online Irish independent edition http://www.independent.ie

Do you think the trees on O’Connell Street should be saved?

At the moment: 89% Yes, 9 % No

Get voting ladies and gentlemen!

Hope so Greg – if not we’ll end up with the usual lop sided mess that we get as a “compromise” in this country – see the EBS HQ on Westmoreland Street for example of compromise.

The Sindo is really gone shite these days – you could tell the article was written by trained chimps starved of light/food, and as for Brendan O’Connor – please give up the day job. The Sunday Times “Sue Denham” column had a much better piece reflecting the fact that the Green Party protestwas a “tawdry stunt” and had an accompanying cartoon of someone chainsawing through the legs of a protestor as they felled a tree. Also reflected Paul’s “call to arms” about going down there armed with chainsaws.

(Note: anything said about the Sindo etc is “in my opinion” so don’t get too excited legal watchers)

The comments in Sue Denham were actually lifted from P45.net

Rory W, I have always wondered what the story was with the EBS building, it looks might there might be some stupid story behind it, is there?

There is… but sure we’ll let Rory tell it 😉

Thanks Paul!!!

Ah the EBS building… ok what happened was that the EBS had offices on the corner of Wesmoreland street and an fleet street and decided to replace them with something more modern. They brought in the ever reliable Sam Stephenson who designed the building around reusing the facade of the Paradiso restaurant (the white bit in the middle where the entrance is) and with blackened glass curtain walling around both sides of this. When the first (south) phase was being built the council realised what the EBS were building (“diabolical black box” was the phase of the day) and then insisted in the second (northern phase “incoroporating solid elements”. Hence the wonderful lopsided mess we see today.

Wonderfully told, I’d say you’re great sitting around a fireplace on a winter night 😉

Dreadful…. and I am sure there are many more EBS’s to tell of. The Irish Press, the collection of buildings on the site oif the old Theatre Royal, the Pennys building on O’Connell Street (used to be the Capitol Theatre I think)

Its such a struggle to get anybody to think outside the box for a change, isnt it!

I wrote to Anne Graham, the Project Manager for the O’Connell St IAP, exprerssing my support for replacing the trees. Not that it will do any good… but at least it wil make a change from all the complaints she will be receiving.

I’ll fetch my pipe and slippers ;->

Originally posted by Rory W
I’ll fetch my pipe

more trees!
have you no shame 😉

Another EBS is Stephenson’s Civic Offices on Wood Quay. While this is one of the harshest examples of brutalism you’ll find anywhere, Stephenson always claimed that he was being judged on less than half a building. While the four blocks together with the glass atrium and other features planned for the site may have looked terrible, we’ll never know.

The Central Bank (also Stephenson) was an EBS for a long time; the copper roof was only put on in the 1990s due to leaks. In this case the building was in flagrant breach of planning, and looked better before completion.

Any more examples, good or bad, of buildings or projects chopped in half due to planners chickening out?

Nationwide did an interesting piece on O’Connell Street and the infamous trees recently… you can watch it here (streamed using realplayer)

From the Guardian today:-
Ciarán Cuffe, a Green party MP and former architect and town planner, said that destroying trees which were “witnesses to history” would be “a crying shame”.
I can’t believe this old chestnut has raised its ridiculous head again.
How anybody can defend the retention of the London Plane trees after seeing the way that O’Connell Street has now opened up beggars belief.

Talking about newspapers,

The dreadfull former Independent newspapers building at 1-2 Lower Hatch St is being replaced by a larger more contemporary office building.

It will be a major improvement,

Earlsfort House (Deloitte & Touche) will be an obvious target for the next elimination of thgat dreadful 1980’s brown brick scabby windowed crap that was once considered ‘prime office property’

Originally posted by Diaspora
an obvious target for the next elimination of thgat dreadful 1980’s brown brick scabby windowed crap that was once considered ‘prime office property’

Any chance of taking out Henry St Garda Station in Limerick?
It is up with the best of em

Have to say I’ve always liked the Deloitte & Touche building – not the windows, but the brickwork is interesting and the brown I think is not only a welcome departure from red (Conrad & Co) but looks good in its own right. One of the better buildings that went up around that time, not least in the Earlsfort area I think. Just unfashionable now though.

The Guardian report was inaccurate in a few places, including saying that 50 historic trees have already been chopped.
Right up to the GPO from the river there were around 6 trees that dated from approx the 50s, the rest were later still.

Saying all that has been said, I think the case for the retention of the trees has grown substantially considering what has since replaced their Lower O’ Cll St counterparts.
Whereas it is difficult to argue from the concealment of buildings point of view, and I still agree on that front, the tree planting thus far has been very disappointing. This creation of ‘rooms’ concept should not be applied to the median. There should be regular tree planting here, whether it be limes, native species or even those varieties that have been planted – anything that reflects the grand sweep of the street, and that of the trees that are being chopped.
I cannot think of anything more horrendous than for the magnificent row of planes at the top end being replaced with feckity clusters of trees. What a wasted opportunity that would be. Fair enough, those that have been planted are hardly mature or established, but that’s not the issue, I think the concept chosen is completely wrong.

There is the small matter of constucting a plaza around existing trees, you know what they say about the tip of the iceburg, the really messy part comes when you have to relay all the utility conduits around a mature root system. It would be a complete disaster from an engineering viewpoint and they would would probably be irrepairably damaged by the same contractors responsible for destroying so much of the City’s original kerb stone paving etc.

I feel that these trees would be a small price to pay for an extension of the Plaza concept, bearing in mind that the Parnell St/Sq area is un-inviting enough as it is on Aestetic grounds.
This must be considered within the context of the Fingal CoCo offices, Findlater House and the Royal Dublin Hotel as being amongst the most visually accessible features from the Gpo at present.

I take on board what you say about the state of maturity of the trees that have been planted on the Plaza, I like them more for this reason as it almost gives the feeling of them being plants or shrubs suited to a confined space where as trees are in my opinion more suited to suburban style avenues such as Northumberland Road or Lower Drumcoundra Rd. Mature trees are seldom seen at the core of major ‘Urban Centres’

I don’t think that the trees should be just hacked down, but rather should be removed and replanted elsewhere, if these trees are of historical significance maybe a spot in the Croppies acre would be appropriate where visitors to the National Museum could view them.

I agree on the latter point, if it is possible for them to be replanted than this should be done – the Croppy’s Acre is a good idea.

I do still agree the trees should go, the continuity of the street must be maintained. However I think one of the primary arguements that has been made for removing them – that many more trees will be planted and in a fashion that will improve the street – is now redundant.
The spokesperson for the CC said of the older trees, “From an architectural point of view, it was felt their height didn’t lend itself to the design of the street in terms of symmetry.”
Well the newly planted median trees don’t either (I don’t refer to the plaza limes) – yes they are symmetrical when viewed north-south, but from the much more important aspect of the side view facing into the street, they are nothing short of incoherent compared with what used to be there.

O’Connell Street’s very identity was defined by a linear planting of trees; the primary feature that made it unique in the city is now gone. It was a boulevard, cloaked under a canopy of trees – now that it has at last been exposed, there is nothing there to highlight and reinforce this urban layout.
It has been stripped of its identity, now a series of ‘plazafied’ spaces rather than the avenue it once was.
I am surprised no comment has been made about this, perhaps cause I’ve flogged it to death here, but I really think it is a major blot on the whole O’ Cll St scheme.

The plaza works, the paving is beautiful – the limes equally so, the attention to detail refreshing, but the absence of the avenue effect a great loss.

I don’t think it had an avenue effect as you put it. The trees varied – they were sometimes in parallel rows, sometimes as a singular central row. To creat the avenue effect as you put it, they should really have been down the outside edge of the street as well. To me, the old trees were always haphazard, and I never felt that they added much to the street.

I’m always caught between head & heart on the trees issue. There’s the emotional attachment – not related to 1916 but to first experiences of town – those trees were always there & looked good – while being dragged across from Henry St to Talbot St as a 5 yr old on the heel of a Saturday afternoon before the shops closed……the first cut is the deepest – then there’s the recognition that the new planting arrangements take better advantage of the width & spatials of the street.

Originally posted by Graham Hickey
O’Connell Street’s very identity was defined by a linear planting of trees; the primary feature that made it unique in the city is now gone. It was a boulevard, cloaked under a canopy of trees – now that it has at last been exposed, there is nothing there to highlight and reinforce this urban layout.
It has been stripped of its identity, now a series of ‘plazafied’ spaces rather than the avenue it once was.

(raised eyebrow smilie) Graham, do I not recall, in the early pages of the O’Connell Street thread, you lauding the arrival of the first of the great new “architectural” limes for lower end plaza, and egging the council on to finally take a chainsaw to “those old ladies” at the top end?

(and, yes, I see that for continuity you say they should still be cut)

Arrrgh – it can be so difficult at times to get a clear arguement across.
I mentioned the case for retention of the older trees simply to register my dissatisfaction with what has gone in to date on the median – the fact that the CC were saying what was proposed would be superior to to the existing trees.
I still genuinely think the trees should be chopped – as exactly as I said before, and as you say Devin, to axe them is difficult but necessary.
I did indeed laud the arrival of the limes (as I recall it was the upper plaza trees) and still think they look great. That is the plaza trees, not the median ones.

I also agree with every word Paul says about the lower trees, they were ridculously large, and not only were they planted in parallel rows, they were actually tripled over, with the 40/50s trees in the middle, and a row of spindlies from the 80s job either side! And their size not only blocked nearly all views of the other half of the street, they also began to loom over the street like a dark cloud.

However, what they did contribute was an identity for O’ Cll St. From a distance, and on the street itself, you could see them stretching into the distance, you could appreciate the grand length of the thoroughfare. And developing your point Devin, every child in the city knew these trees from the effect generated and the ‘importance’ of the median, with facinating glances of stone statues hidden amongst the foliage.

I viewed the plans for the street as an opportunity to remove the existing mess, and start from scratch, reinserting the boulevard effect on a managable scale and in a more effective way, not to mention in a contemporary fashion – involving replanting trees in line of what was once there, ie along the median.
We do not have this now by any means, and the idea of the grand effect of the upper trees being replaced with a couple of clusters of 6 trees and bike parks I think is terrible.

One need only look at the area outside Easons, where the plaza simply runs into the rest of the median, save two limes. There are no new trees here, it is just a bland plazafied area now, similar to other areas.
Either way the upper trees have to go, they can’t be left stranded, further contributing to the lack of the ‘boulevard effect’.

I just think what is going to replace these 101 year old trees is a slap in the face to their age and history.

The enclosure of the GPO plaza does seem poor at south side, where it meets the area outside Easons, especially now in winter when the few trees that do form this side of it are so bare & puny looking (though admittedly their Xmas lights have given them a bit of zing!).

It’s funny – the south and north sides of the plaza are supposed to read as two sides of a four-sided enclosure of limes, with two holes in each to let the traffic through, but I think the trees here will need to fill out a good bit more before achieving this effect.

And maybe these sides could have taken a few more trees than the two in the median and & one each where they meet the east/west sides??

I’m glad you noticed this Devin – thought it was just me!

What doesn’t help at all are the acres of granite cobbles on the roadway here at the Princes St junction, and on the other side, at Clery’s.
Exactly what purpose do these serve? All they do is blur the lines with the plaza.
I originally objected to the idea of a plaza, concerned at the impact on the nature of the street – but conceded upon considering the benefits for the GPO, and the creation of a focal point for the city.
But it has not been executed properly.
The undefined paving, coupled with the lack of tree regularity has led to a bland space here.
I note the silver birches on the median stretch outside Easons have been omitted on the O’Cll Monument stretch. Surely the CC can’t think up any more inconsistencies for this street?

I really think the linear nature of the street has been destroyed, which is a great shame considering the quality of upgrade. I wait in hope for the execution of the Upper Phase.

Here’s a great pic from FJP’s ever-fantastic site of O’C’ll St from the air. I don’t know how anyone can say that this magnificent boulevard has been justly treated in the current upgrade in terms of tree planting:

http://www.fantasyjackpalance.com/fjp/photos/kf/aerial/002/north-lotts-1-aerial.jpg