So much has been written concerning the past history of Dublin and the activities of the Wide Streets Commissioners that we have thought it best, in presenting this Sketch Development Plan, to deal solely with the City as it is to-day.
The advent of Town Planning should make it possible gradually to introduce order into what, at present, is too often chaotic. In proposing how this should best be done we have, perforce, been severely practical in our outlook because we fully realise that suggestions, however excellent in theory, are useless it they are impracticable owing to their excessive cost. At the same time we have attempted not to run into the other extreme and confine ourselves to trivialities on the ground that any ambitious scheme must be costly. In short, these proposals aim at providing for the replanning and expansion of the City of Dublin on sound Town Planning lines consistent with the ability of the citizens to carry the proposals into effect.
In preparing this Sketch Development Plan we have not confined ourselves to the existing municipal boundary. We have considered the surrounding County of Dublin as an integral part of the area which the Capital should occupy in order that its true dignity should be realised.
We have not graded our proposals into stages of urgency, but we have attempted to keep those proposals which are definitely urgent, such as the two new bridges, on lines which combine sound planning with ease of execution.
A sketch plan such as this would fail in its purpose if it did not at the same time include proposals for the future which may, to some, appear visionary. Such proposals, e.g., the new Governmental centre, should be treated as indications of the shape which future planning should take. There is no reason why, it Dublin is to have great new buildings during the next century, these new buildings should not be sited in accordance with a pre-conceived plan.
Dublin is not, by its nature, a city which lends itself to treatment on the symmetrical lines of Washington. Monumental axial vistas are, however, by no means the only method of obtaining dignity and architectural grandeur. These qualities are obtained in the Oxford High Street, for example, by the gradual unfolding of views along a curve. The Liffey is the backbone of Dublin, and those who visited the Paris Exhibition of 1937 will remember the effects obtained on the Seine where fine buildings unfolded themselves along the curve of the river. The Liffey lends itself admirably to similar treatment. There is no one who does not deplore the loss of the Custom House view from O'Connell Bridge due to the loop line railway bridge. We envisage a similar possibility of view for the new Cathedral up river from the bridge with fine buildings of quiet dignity connecting to the Customs House on the North bank, while the City Hall with a riverside arcade, would dominate the South bank.
Our scheme provides for the opening of Christ Church Cathedral from the river. The grandeur of this structure standing on the hill is at present lost-blotted out by mean buildings. Dublin's architectural beauty depends in the main on the regeneration of the quays.
Where possible - as in the case of the Cathedral view down George's Street - we have taken every opportunity of providing vistas of aesthetic value but these have arisen not as ends in themselves, but as the outcome of some practical solution to the planning of the city.
One of the greatest difficulties with which we are faced concerns the treatment of the central or quasi-central nucleus of Georgian Dublin. Districts on the North side such as the extensive neighbourhood of Gardiner Street and Mountjoy Square contain terraces of magnificent brick houses built with a quiet Georgian dignity which have now fallen into decay. What is to be done with these?
A district similar in architectural character but fortunately in a prosperous condition, exists in the Merrion Square - Fitzwilliam Square neighbourhood. In this case we are agreed that such rebuilding as takes place should be in harmony with the architecture of the neighbourhood. The danger which we foresee is that without some such restriction groups or isolated houses would be rebuilt discordant in design and material, and the unity which we owe to the foresight of our predecessors would then be lost. To take the specific instance of Merrion Square as an example. Holles Street Hospital has, rightly in our opinion, been built in brick with stone dressings and the harmony of the Square has been retained. Had this façade been entirely in stone it would have destroyed the unity of the Square. If, on the other hand, there were a proposal to rebuild the whole block of Merrion Square East, there would be no objection to the whole side of the Square being in stone which would balance the stone buildings on the West side.
It is, therefore, important that any piece-meal rebuilding of Georgian Dublin should be of such height and nature as to harmonise with surrounding work in its general features unless it be in accordance with some pre-arranged scheme to do otherwise. This leads us to emphasise the importance (when any large block is rebuilt) of considering how the architectural treatment of that block could be carried along to complete the street or square as the case may be. We would stress the importance of avoiding, while there is time, the confused jumble of "styles" and materials which have of late made Rathmines Road an object lesson in chaotic building.
We should like to place on record our indebtedness to the officials of the Corporation and those in authority on other public bodies with which we have been concerned. We have always had at our disposal all the help and advice which it was in their power to give.
Our method of procedure has been to report progress and consider the various problems as they arose at meetings of technical officers held periodically. The chair at these meetings was taken by Mr. J. P. FitzGibbon, Higher Executive Officer, Streets Section, and Secretary of the Town Planning Committee, and we owe a great deal to his tact and organising ability. There also attended Mr. N. A. Chance, City Engineer; Air. H. T. O'Rourke, City Architect (or his representative, Mr. E. O'Byrne); Mr. H. G. Simms, Housing Architect; Mr. P. E. Mathews, Housing Engineer; Mr. Jim White, Law Agent's Department; Mr. W. O'Doherty, Streets Section, and Mr. M. O'Brien, Acting Planning Officer. Many of the proposals in this report originated from one or other of the above officials, as for example, the weaving of traffic at the "Metal" Bridge traffic circus which originated from the City Engineer, and the general layout of the Parliament Street Civic Centre, and the position of the Government centre, which were suggested by the City Architect.
At these meetings we also had the opportunity of hearing the views of representatives of the Board of Works, the Garda Siochana, the Great Southern Railway Company, the Dublin Port and Docks Board and many other such bodies. We have also had the fullest co-operation from the County Surveyor, Mr. J. A. Ryan, and his staff, and from the Dun Laoghaire Borough Corporation.
In arriving at our decisions we have thus entered into the fullest consultation with those likely to be affected and with those best fitted to assist us. We would make special mention of our indebtedness to Mr. Michael O'Brien, Acting Town Planning Officer to the Corporation, to Mr. M. F. Costello, and other members of the Town Planning Staff. The staff has been of the greatest assistance in making valuable suggestions, and its labours have resulted in an enormous mass of essential survey work and statistics which have been at our disposal.