GrahamH

Yes agreed about the apartment element – for once it would appear that a decent architectural standard is to be set above the city’s five story parapet level instead of the north inner city’s ugly concoction of mansard roofs, multi-storey car parks, plant rooms and air conditioning units. Indeed their views of the Lotts or westwards over M&S/Jervis are not going to be pretty! Particularly the latter – frankly it’ll be terrible looking directly out on that first thing every morning.

But the new view up Liffey St towards the tower looks impressive, and it is a suitable nodal point for such a structure too I think. The only concern is the increasingly tunnel-like street network being created here. Should M&S be developed soon, it no doubt is going to reach to 7-8 storeys on that side too, as well as the H. Samuel corner with Henry St. Setbacks should help though, as is planned with Arnotts:

I also like the detached nature of the apartments in how they ‘float’ over the existing streetscape. Hopefully that will turn out as imaginative as it appears to look.
Slight reservations about how the (excellent) 1990s facades are going to gel with the new infill – again it should be doable…

Here’s the current disaster zone – squat 1900-1920 buildings, some seemingly older too, that no doubt would be charming if cleaned up, but are equally knockable, along with 80s rubbish on the corner:

And the terrace to the other side, including one of the most remarkable structures in the city to term itself a building:

It’s like a sophisticated cardboard box.

All of the latter pic is going to go, sadly including this grand early Victorian building with original window to the top right (left seems to be later). Presumably the interesting glossy red brick is c.1900.

Regarding the principal Arnotts fa

5/10/2006

I thought this would fit better on this thread if that’s okay.

The new Arnotts 😮

As Stephen says, the entire western wing is to be demolished to create the new street!

However, because an extraordinary development, not all is quite as it seems. Obviously they’re not going to get away with demolishing part of a protected structure, let alone a prominent one, so what is proposed as far as I can gather both from the model and the site notices (didn’t have time to inspect app :() is that the deconstructed wing will be rebuilt on the new street, forming one of two facades of a new ‘Victorian building’ with corner tower!

Will this also involve a new tower oriel window and other replicated features?!

The frustratingly evasive nature of the planning application is telling. The existing store is referred to elsewhere on the document as Arnotts, but when it comes to the deconstruction of half of the principal building, it suddenly becomes “No’s 7-15 Henry Street”, even in spite of it being central to the current complex. It is not a secondary independent building like those of Abbey Street.
And DCC can’t spell either: its not Penny’s (Pennys or Penney’s), nor Arnott’s :rolleyes:

Not sure what to make of this – evidently they want to do it to 1) link in with Cole’s Lane across the road leading to the Ilac, Roches and new Dunnes, and 2) to bring the new street as far east away from Liffey Street as possible. It’s difficult to argue which would be better when considering the current castrated Victorian affair versus a signature corner building and invigorating new street, but comparing the new ‘building’ with a fully restored original design as almost currently stands is a different matter entirely. What appears to be proposed is meddling with history, but then again it is also very much compatible with the enterprising nature of Victorian business and engineering that originally brought Arnotts into being….

It certainly appears to be causing waves within DCC – while I was there a couple of suits marched over with one almost whispering to the other “look what’s happening to Arnotts”, as if also told by someone else. Gasps and tut tutting ensued.

The development as we know is huge:

Down on O’Connell Street the new Penneys is crisp but ugly next to the GPO:

Expansive glazing is a cheap and lazy way out of having to respect the solid to void ratio on the Lower street, and is a slap in the face to the post-1916 reconstruction efforts. What is the point of redeveloping an out of place building with an equally incongruous one? Penneys’ fashionability is not its greatest problem. Eason’s mansard roof is also being used as an excuse to further increase the height of this terrace – nowhere on the Lower street is this rule broken.

Shimmering in the midst of O’Connell Street:

It makes a mockery of the Georgian terrace-to-landmark concept – the GPO is now isolated.

The extraordinary car access tunnel near the centre of O’Connell Street, reducing the pavement back down to single width on the busiest part of the street:

Minus attendant railings, lighting and signage of course.

oops – double post

Just on this building at the junction of Marlborough Street as mentioned in another thread, it really is a shame what a decrepit state it is in:

Not only is it a lovely building, reminicent of many European townhouses, but it also appears to be a very rare early Victorian facade in a city centre that was stripped of them in 1916 and 1922.

It’s actually a good example of what parts of then Lower Sackville Street used to be like: tall Wide Streets Commission buildings with applied Regency/Victorian stucco decoration, though in this case it seems the entire building dates from the 1830s-40s, possibly even townhouses orginally which would make it rarer still.

The windows are so remarkably early that it’s a wonder they’ve survived – that’s Talbot Street for ya 🙂

Simple 1820-1840s horns:

Also unusually tall elegant windows:

The stucco requires a lot of repair:

At last the bulding was recently sold, marketed as suitable for apartment development to the rear, so hopefully we’ll see some action soon. Surprisingly this building isn’t protected from what I can make out, so those Georgian sashes may very well disappear.
Note it’s also heavy stapled at the top:

Sounds like a good mix. Yes I’ve been watching these being boarded up and the diggers moving in – but would question exactly why a substantial investment has just been completed in reroofing and rebuilding the chimney stacks, only for it all to be pulled straight down?! They’re brand spanking new!
At least in the pic above it would appear that the concrete tiles are being salvaged.

Bit of a shame to see the Corpo’s ‘Big House’ design gradually disappearing, even if they weren’t anything much and probably very inadequate inside. They hold a certain sombre elegance in contrast to the all-singing, cheap window-studded muck evident in the same picture.

A much nicer scheme here on Empress Place off Portland Row, either recently built or refurbished – presumably the latter:

Here is a rendering of the building:

So the stairs is staying…
The building is depicted in a manner as to maximise the view of the AIB, a building it unfortunately dominates over in real life. It is also substantially smaller when viewed from two storeys up across the road – typical ploy :rolleyes:
Generally I don’t think the building is too high for this wider area, but is is definitely too tall so close to the AIB.

The timber as depicted is as good as non-existent as built. Being north facing, it never gets any direct sunlight; instead the glass simply reflects the cold sky, creating a sheer black facade. The timber might as well be more aluminum underneath – it lacks all the warmth and interest as visualised above.

The ‘brochure’ for prospective tenants can be viewed in this pdf:

http://www.hwbc.ie/uploadedfiles/pdf/Palace%20Street%2C%20D2%20-%20April%202006.pdf

I think it only fair that the rent roll generated be ploughed straight back into the rejuvenation of Dame Street.

Penneys first preposed a major revamp of this store at least two years ago from what I heard at the time – perhaps they were waiting for this Arnotts plan to get off the ground. Here’s hoping indeed that they invest a significant sum on their principal facade – I won’t stir it by suggesting what I’d put there 😉

Overall the Arnotts square alas looks a complete mess of conflicting design concepts and building usage – and all worrying wallpaper-like, in a way that facades can be peeled off and replaced every decade or two. Maybe it’ll stand up better in other renderings. Agreed the store itself ought to be more ‘monumental’ if that’s the word – certainly more distinguishable and coherent anyway.

Needless to say the 152 bedroom hotel is availing of the Independent Building according to yesterday’s IT, which is nicely appropriate. If this doesn’t set the Gresham’s and RDH’s refurb wheels in motion nothing will!
I’m very curious to know exactly where this proposed car and service tunnel “at the junction of O’Connell Street and Middle Abbey Street” is going to go. Bulldozing through Manfield Chambers is hardly on the cards, and Eason’s wraps the whole way around this corner, meaning the entance will have to be substantially further down, maybe on the current small Penneys frontage?

The full IT article:

Arnotts seeks approval for €700m project
Arthur Beesley, Senior Business Correspondent
13/9/2006

Department store company Arnotts is seeking planning permission for a massive redevelopment of its extensive properties behind Henry Street in Dublin, where it aims to create a new shopping, entertainment and residential zone akin to the fashionable SoHo district in New York.
The €700 million Northern Quarter project, which is being led by Arnotts chairman Richard Nesbitt SC, includes proposals for a new central plaza between Henry Street and Middle Abbey Street.
If planning approval is granted, construction work could continue for the remainder of the decade.
The aim is to attract big-name mass market international retailers such as the fashion chains Abercrombie & Fitch and Armani Xchange and Apple Computer into the Henry Street zone, a retail hub which has largely stolen the march on Grafton Street in recent years.

“We believe this project is exactly the kind of ambitious, visionary development the area needs. The Northern Quarter will write the next chapter in the evolving history of Dublin city, retaining the charm of an open-street environment by overlaying it with the dynamism and diversity of a modern European capital,” said Mr Nesbitt.
In preparation for the scheme, Arnotts has spent some €100 million in the past two years buying up most of the buildings between Henry Street, the GPO Arcade, Middle Abbey Street and Liffey Street.

The central plaza will comprise 47 new shop buildings, 17 cafes, restaurants, bars and 189 apartments. A 152-bedroom four-star hotel will be built behind the old Independent Newspapers building on Middle Abbey Street.
The plaza will be connected to O’Connell Street through an extension from Princes’ Street, an underdeveloped thoroughfare which Arnotts hopes to revitalise as a pedestrianised central route into the plaza. Car-parking and service bays will be located in an underground complex, which will be accessed via a tunnel at the junction of O’Connell Street and Middle Abbey Street.
In addition, Arnotts wants to build two new streets to connect the plaza with Henry Street and Middle Abbey Street. Princes’ Street North, off Henry Street, and Abbey Lane, off Middle Abbey Street, will be roughly parallel to Liffey Street.

While Arnotts’ department store has been a central feature of the Henry Street scene for generations of shoppers, the plan will see the focus of its building moved southwest towards Liffey Street. Such a move will reduce its iconic shopfront on Henry Street, but it will provide frontage directly on to the plaza and increased frontage on Middle Abbey Street and Liffey Street.

Mr Nesbitt, a barrister who led the takeover of Arnotts in June 2003, said the initiative will create a “renewed sense of pride” in the north city area. He suggested it could act as the catalyst for further development of the Lotts Street area next to the Liffey.
A new pedestrian bridge over the river between O’Connell Bridge and the Ha’penny Bridge was also possible, Arnotts said.