Henrietta Street
- This topic has 100 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hey all!
As a relatively new user & first-time poster, I thought I’d open up a discussion on Henrietta Street:
Has anyone got any thoughts or opinions about the ongoing development at the junction of Henrietta & Bolton St? I was home over the Christmas & went up for a visit. Apart from the bland design, I thought the quality of the materials & workmanship were incredibly poor.
I’m beginning to wonder whether PP was actually granted! Shoddy workmanship, that’s what it is. Shoddy, shoddy, shoddy…I’m astonished that DCC have allowed such a damaging addition to such an important street, and that it is being erected in such a happy-go-lucky manner adds insult to injury.
The brickwork, bonding pattern, mortar, windows…all have major flaws in them and the overall effect certainly makes for uncomfortable viewing…
@DJM wrote:
Has anyone got any thoughts or opinions about the ongoing development at the junction of Henrietta & Bolton St? I was home over the Christmas & went up for a visit. Apart from the bland design, I thought the quality of the materials & workmanship were incredibly poor.
I’m beginning to wonder whether PP was actually granted! Shoddy workmanship, that’s what it is. Shoddy, shoddy, shoddy…I’m astonished that DCC have allowed such a damaging addition to such an important street, and that it is being erected in such a happy-go-lucky manner adds insult to injury.
What? You mean you dont like the telefone box onthe roof, capping it off? All things considered, a cringeworthy job that is all the more bizarre when you consider that the H St is the oldest planned Georgian st in the city 😮
The condition of Henrietta St is a disgrace as is the condition of most of the Georgian Northside. Is any one awayre of any plans to regenerate these areas?
I agree with you on most parts. The building sticks out like a sore thumb. I see it all the time and sigh.
“The brickwork, bonding pattern, mortar, windows…all have major flaws in them and the overall effect certainly makes for uncomfortable viewing…”
Agree with you in most aspects. For example the mortar joints appear too big, but it might just appear that way because the mortar is such a bright shade. Either way, bright or wide, looks awful.
But I was wondering what problem do you have with the bonding? Its completly standard.There’s a number of problems with the bonding:
If you look closely, the vertical joints between units vary between c.10mm & c.30mm throughout the facade.
Sorry Bren88, I should have made myself clearer, rather than the bonding pattern itself, my gripe is with the way the integrated airvents have been installed on differing courses for individual floors and break the bonding pattern unnecessarily – a 215mm airvent should only displace one brick whereas here generally, two have been cut and the vent slapped in the middle. A blatant budget job at the expense of the street.
Are the bricks reclaimed material? There’re a lot of cracks, chips & mortar staining on them, and the mortar has been very sloppily applied.
The 2 piece window sills in the widest openings look awful, are inconsistant in form if you look up from one floor to the next, and appear to be slightly askew.
I know it’s all a bit pedantic, but I don’t think there’s any credible excuse for such poor workmanship.
I’m not aware of any plans to regenerate the street, but I believe DCC have agreed to make good the road where the cellars collapsed. I’ve no idea when this will happen though.
Unfortunately I’d have to agree – the building simply is not of an acceptable standard for such an important site.
As can be seen in the pictures below, both the design and build quality is not up to scratch.The two big problems are the height of the building which is massively overscaled at the southern end, and secondly the balconies which are quite appalling: in their own right but especially when seen against the adjoining Georgian streetscape. Cheap and stuck-on in appearance, they lack any substance or permanence, a silly chic distraction on what ought to be a robust, solid facade. They also act to conceal the eyes of the building, like some ignoramus speaking to you with sunglasses on. The corner is not adequately addressed at all, nor is due deference given to the fact that this is the entrance to a street, let alone one of Dublin’s prinicpal streets.
The brick itself is very attractive: a good choice I think, as well as the white mortar were it not so sloppily applied – really a very poor job. It is ironic that many painstaking hours will be spent meticulously repointing 300 year old houses next door, yet with total control of the construction process this new-build is simply thrown up. Just look at the dodgy workmanship – it really stands out when you’re up close, especially if you’ve been scrutinising the houses of Henrietta Street as most visitors to this place do.
Most disappointing of all however is that the imposing nature of the street, sited on a steep gradient, has been partially lost. The vast bulk of this building makes no concession to its sloped environment, greedily consuming the limelight. It drains the area of its dramatic gradient, devouring the crucial ‘introductory’ slope of the street by means of its huge bulk and standard level parapet, A stepped building here would have made the world of difference. The fact that it is also too big for Bolton Street makes the permission for this scale all the more bizarre – it uses of the height of the buildings on Henretta Street as an excuse to sneakily blast pout onto Bolton Street in all its seven storey glory. It doesn’t wash.
Whilst the most of the buildings on Henrietta Street are not stepped, this building ought to be – most of the upper Georgian street is flat: it is the road leading up to it that is sloped.
The apartment building’s height to the north fits in perfectly with the neighbouring Georgian terrace at least – integrates very well. Again however, the timber yoke to the top unfortunately does not relate to the rest of the building, and it seems as though there is a roof garden being built on top to capature the views over the King’s Inns and south over the city. If it generates anything like the level of clutter that’s up there already (building materials) – oh dear…
Gardiner must be rolling in his grave at the sight of those jumpers draped over the balcony – almost in full view of his drawing room windows 😮
God, that’s NASTY. The last pic Graham 😀 Headache or what?
I know I’m always going on about building height but this is far too bulky for that area. This is the first time I’ve seen this awful heap of crap and the first thing that came into my head was “abandoned council flats”
Here’s a photochop (if you don’t mind that I entertain myself, Graham :)) Something to look forward to…
Flippin heck Morlan. You don’t really like it I take it?
Excellent work – rather apt that burnt umber brick is in use 🙂
But really and truly, look at those monstrous balconies both to the side and the feckity little ones tacked on to the rear:
…and that ugly timber elevation to the bottom, which is particularly poor in real life. It looks like an original undercroft space that was filled in in the 70s with cheap prefab panelling.
So very very poor 🙁
Being a modern building it was never going to match the old houses. If they had tried to copy the georgian look it would have looked naf ( which is what i think of number 2 on the other side of the street.However if it was a great modern architectural piece in itself it would take away from the old houses.
While it could be better it does what it needs to. Scrolling up you can clearly see that the brickwork matches the old houses quite well. One of the photos shows that the line of the brickwork extends to the top of the old terrace. Because of this when standing on henrietta street the buildling feels like a natural extension of the old terrace.
In sum it’s modern and plain ,but this is probably a good thing.
I see it in the same way as the building to the left of the mansion house. Not too showy.It is worth pointing out that this site was not part of the original terrace.There was no previous masterpiece on this site to replace. The terrace is as it is since laid out ( well just about ).This building sits on an add on to the street.
I thought it would have been a lot worse,
I agree it is quite plain but I am of the opinion right building (for infill at the equivelent land value) wrong place; Henrieta Street deserved a lot better.
@a boyle wrote:
Being a modern building it was never going to match the old houses. If they had tried to copy the georgian look it would have looked naf ( which is what i think of number 2 on the other side of the street.However if it was a great modern architectural piece in itself it would take away from the old houses.
I don’t think anyone is really arguing that there should have been some sort of pastiche of the original terrace in this location. To me it looks like a bad attempt at what was achieved at 1 Castle Street and 24 Werburgh Street:
Yes 1 castle street is much better. BUT this is the idea i want to get across. castle street has very little of note at that end of the street , and so the modern building has become the main focus of interest at that end of the street.
This is not what was required on henrietta street.Having a masterpiece like 1 castle street would take away from the terrace in my view. Sometimes boring is good! .It does exactly what it says on the tin ( get lot’s of people into a run down poorer part of the city, while not detracting too much from the terraces )
While it could be better: At least it’s new money going into the northside, and with enough new money maybe some of the run down buildings in the area will get investment in the future. I just don’t think it deserves the rant above.
@a boyle wrote:
Yes 1 castle street is much better. BUT this is the idea i want to get across. castle street has very little of note at that end of the street , and so the modern building has become the main focus of interest at that end of the street.
This is not what was required on henrietta street.Having a masterpiece like 1 castle street would take away from the terrace in my view. Sometimes boring is good! .It does exactly what it says on the tin ( get lot’s of people into a run down poorer part of the city, while not detracting too much from the terraces )
While it could be better: At least it’s new money going into the northside, and with enough new money maybe some of the run down buildings in the area will get investment in the future. I just don’t think it deserves the rant above.
I agree that you don’t want something that would detract from the terrace, but I don’t think that is enough to excuse what appears to be a fairly badly designed and finished building from being built in such a location (1 Castle Street is dominant in that location I agree, but I dont think it takes away from St Werburgh’s next door: http://www.irish-architecture.com/buildings_ireland/dublin/southcity/werburgh_street/werburgh.html). I also don’t buy into the anything is better than nothing argument in terms of the rejuvenation of an area. Whilst it might seem of quality to some people at present, it is not sustainable in the long run. The problem with many mixed use schemes that end up in multiple ownership is that they have a greater degree of permanence about them than office buildings. Therefore, if this building starts to wear badly it will be hard for it to be replaced, which then has a negative effect on the area in the long run.
No point in saying it could have been worse – it’s a pile of shite – cannot believe that it was allowed in such an important position.
It looks like a prison
As said, the building is ‘in the style of’ deBlacam & Meagher (soft dark brick & lime mortar pointing, timber panelling, undercut at the front), but has none of the sensitivity of their work. It is a greedy monolithic building. A building here so obviously needed to follow the scale of Bolton Street and so maintain the scale hierarchy between Bolton Street and Henrietta Street.
The passage of the building through the planning process was highly suspect. As you might expect, there had been objections to it from residents of Henrietta Street and other groups, but there was a series of planning applications lodged for it (some invalid), and in the confusion one of them received no objections and was granted by Dublin City Council, so that was that; there could be no appeal.
The sickening thing is DCC knew there had been earlier objections to it so there was a much greater onus on them to get it right (given that there were no objections in on this one & could be no appeal). It shows you that they will grant permission for almost anything … scared shitless to remove a storey. The city is stuck with this wrong building now forever, because of some stupid planner. I think that after this construction boom, questions are going to be asked about DCC decision making. You just have to look at this building and what’s happening in somewhere like Cork Street ….
allright fair enough, it’s no peach. I am just more of a realist: there simply isn’t the money there to fund a beauty at this spot. On one side there is noisy bolton street and the other council flats. Despite it being no peach it does in fact fit in very well when you stand on henrietta street.
The photos above mostly focus on the bolton street view. I am going to stop posting on this topic , it is too easy to slate something instead of taking the whole impact into account. I feel that having more people living here with perhaps a few shops in an okay building is pretty good for the area. Henrietta street might deserve much better , but the money isn’t there to make it happen, so there is little point in sobbing about it. Overall it’s a four of ten , a bare pass.
Yes, the repopulation of the area is of course welcome. The problem is the building is overscaled on a strategic site on probably thee most important Georgian street in the city.
@a boyle wrote:
the modern building has become the main focus of interest at that end of the street.
This is not what was required on henrietta street.Having a masterpiece like 1 castle street would take away from the terrace in my view.
In my opinion this building does take away from the terrace, only not because it is a “masterpiece” such as castle street. But because it is so very badly built. alot of people here have problems with design elements. a boyle you think they are fitting and so have tried to justified. But the BIGGEST problem is the downright bad wormanship, esp with the brick work. It is this messy work that makes the building stand out, as being an eyesore. They tried to make it plain and unnoticed but it stands out from the street completely. Walk up Kings Inn street and you will see what an eyesore it is.
I have looked at it closely . The reason the brickwork looks this way, i suspect is because it is an attempt do it as it was done a few hundred years ago.I can’t be sure however.
To my eye the brickwork is similar to the brickwork on some of the buildings that form the terrace. perhaps i am too kind. I expect that it will weather quite well in time. Much better than number 2 across the road which looks like it’s made of shiny new orange lego bricks, although i know it to be around ten years old.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
