Henrietta Street
- This topic has 100 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Devin wrote
“You say (sarcastically) that “the best that the stupid planner can do is to mitigate the worst excesses of the architectâ€
I’m afraid I was not being sarcastic. And I am not as comfortable as you are in describing a hardworking public servant as stupid on a public forum (it seems that a number of people already know the individual’s name – those who do not merely have to check the file reference on the DCC website). Of course you do have the right to do so.
Nor am I suggesting that planners always succeed in their endeavours (I agree that there are numerous examples of failure – including the case in question) – just that most planners are well intentioned and diligent and are trying to deal with an unrelenting tide of architectural mediocrity against strict statutory deadlines and under the beady eye of the Manager and his apparatchicks.
I would tend to agree that there is a lack of appreciation of heritage matters within the planning profession however – and it is in this area that An Taisce has an invaluable role to play (but that could be a whole new thread .:D
I really think it is unreasonable to expect planners to prevail in such circumstances. I do not know what the answer is but a large part of the problem stems from the greedy and underdesigned applications – (and I know too that many jobbing architects are under immense pressure to maximise the floor area and minimise the cost – the cost to the developer that is).
Personally speaking, I think it’s the way in which they’ve been used that has caused offence – A lot of the units havn’t been properly alligned with neighbouring rows. The colour works very well in relation to the townhouses.
What’s the philosophy on using a mock Flemish bond in such circumstances? – given the existence of the townhouses, perhaps it would have been more appropriate to do so. Or would this be seen as a crass impersonation? Stretcher seems to be the accepted norm these days, but it would be interesting to hear a Conservationist’s take on this…
I havn’t been able to figure out whether the bricks are reclaimed, or simply produced to give an ‘Olde Worlde’ look – surely it’s unlikely for a salvage yard to have such a massive stockpile of bricks in such a uniform colour. But if this is so, then why so many cracks & chips ?
The brickwork facade would look ok if it was laid symmetrically and if most of the bricks had right-angled corners.
Publicrealm you git! You’ve nicked my plan to start a thread on An Taisce 😡 Get cracking or I’ll have one up in the next few days 😉
I think what you’ve said in the above post is a very fair and balanced view on the role of all parties involved in the planning process. More man power up in Wood Quay, and indeed throughout the country would seem to be a starting point to rectifying the situation.
Make no mistake about it – the Henrietta Street decision was a bad decision by Dublin City Council planner …….. . ……… (Ooooh, nearly said the name there!! 🙂 ).
As I said, detailed 3rd party submissions were made (on plans almost identical to the approved one) on the huge scale of the building and the need for significant scaling-back. These concerns were ignored and the building approved, and – even more ominously – with the knowledge that, as there had been no 3rd party submissions to the approved plan, it could not come before the appeals board (thanks to the restrictive measures of the Planning & Development Act 2000 on the taking of appeals).@publicrealm wrote:
I really think it is unreasonable to expect planners to prevail in such circumstances.
What?!! 😮 Are you serious?! Well they had bloody well better be able to prevail when there’s a site like the Henrietta Street corner at stake!! (Ok, I’m being OTT, but you get the drift).
To be honest, publicrealm, I can’t make that much sense of your last post at all. You seem to be trying to tell me that most planners are well-intentioned and diligent – did I say they weren’t? You tell me planners are under-resourced and under pressure from other forces – did I not say this in my last post? You seem to think I’m attacking planners as a whole – already said I’m not. Good decisions are made. Bad decisions are made. As it happens the proportion of good decisions (decisions that accord with proper planning and sustainable development) would tend to be higher in Dublin than elsewhere. Dublin City Council have just refused an overscaled 8-storey building on a rear site behind protected structures on Aungier Street (Ref.1037/06) – a good decision. But Henrietta Street was a bad decision. Where did I say I there was a lack of appreciation of heritage matters among the planning profession? – the issue with the Henrietta Street building, as I and others have maintained, is good urban design & cognisance of historic town planning.
@publicrealm wrote:
I do not know what the answer is but a large part of the problem stems from the greedy and underdesigned applications
The answer is – would you believe – MORE RESOURCES! 🙂
The Henrietta Street building just gets worse …
Check out the completed roofline from the Bolton Street approach:
.Sadly, it’s actually the best building in that shot. There is a neglected townhouse squeezed in there, but it’s in very poor condition.
I agree but feel that your observation speaks more about the functionality as opposed to beauty of its neighbours than the design suitibility of the subject design for this location. In most other City Centre sites this would be a highly welcome design it is simply the location at the end of Henrietta Street that is problematic
The unfortunate thing about Georgian Dublin is that for some reason architects appear to feel somewhat compelled by its legacy to design every inner-city building which they design in a basic rectilinear block form adorned with a facade of standard red brick. The above photo encapsulates that perfectly. Will Dublin ever blossom into a city with architectural forms that are not based on red-brick rectangles? Personally, I hope so as the sad streetscape shown above is hardly going to make Dublin a world heritage city in the next 500 years.
That building is a travesty of good architecture and good planning. Those responsible should honestly be ashamed of themselves…
I would love to see the marketing for it though…. “Stunning new development on one of Dubl
There is a huge difference between the proposed image in post 30 and what was actually built particularly in relation to the treatment of the balconies as stated in the post as well as the ommission of the glazed rail to the left of the Bolton St elevation.
If the proposal was built as per the first image it would not look as cheap as it currently does; I wonder if this proposal was in a less sensitive location would we be discussing this?
I’ve been writing to DCC about this topic since mid January. Four letters have been sent, but I’ve not received any acknowledgements of receipt, nor any replys.
A telephone call to Planning Enforcement told me that my letter had in fact arrived some 6 weeks previously, but that its content was the responsibility of Building Control…and that the letter would be sent on to them in the next few weeks. :confused: (How’s that for efficiency!) No joy here either I’m afraid.
Dublin City Council launched a Conservation Plan for Henrietta Street yesterday. Hard to make out if the plan is definitely completed from the press release though. Seems that it is, but then I wonder why it isn’t available to download in pdf if that is the case.
DCC are obviously having a laugh – after giving PP to that bit of gik at the bottom of the street!
40 years too late for them to start taking an interst. They should be leading conservation not just trailing the private individuals who have spent their own money and lives trying to save the street.:eek:Wednesday 13th December 2006: The Henrietta Street Conservation Plan will be launched today by Lord Mayor Councillor Vincent Jackson and the Dublin City Manager, John Tierney at the King’s Inns, Henrietta Street at 6pm. The Conservation plan re-affirms Henrietta Street as one of the principal architectural and urban ensembles of this country.
“This conservation plan is essential in highlighting the architectural vulnerabilities on Henrietta Street and will help to re-affirm its significance through the implementation of appropriate policiesâ€, said the Lord Mayor.
The building on the other corner of henrietta street and bolton street, The Kings Inn, Has an application in to knock the three floors over basement and build appartments. Lets hope the DCC get it right this time.
@Bren88 wrote:
The building on the other corner of henrietta street and bolton street, The Kings Inn, Has an application in to knock the three floors over basement and build appartments. Lets hope the DCC get it right this time.
It along with the four buildings beside it are for sale with the signs advertising their development potential.
I was on Henrietta Street today. Even with many of the buildings in poor condition, it really is an incredible street.
@vitruvius wrote:
DCC are obviously having a laugh – after giving PP to that bit of gik at the bottom of the street!
40 years too late for them to start taking an interst. They should be leading conservation not just trailing the private individuals who have spent their own money and lives trying to save the street.:eek:Spot on. Henrietta St is already covered by both the HARP IAP and the 2001 Dorset St And Environs Area Regeneration Plan. During this period “the incredible bulk” has been permitted at the bottom of the St, while on Dominick St Upr the Corpo erected a block in the mode of Eastern Europe circa 1952 – adding nothing to the context of H St. The other outrage is of course the lousy job done – by the corpo – on resurfacing H street 15 years ago which led to the collapse of the cellars.
The Dorset St plan, as is the case with this plan, incorporated some fine ideas – but with likewise no budget; 5 years, on what implementation except for a couple of trees now being planted during election year?
The public domain of Henrietta St is a disgrace; in the abscence of this plan indicating a basic schedule or budget to resolve the mess created by the corpo, it is an exercise of futility – or worse hypocrisy.
As inventories go, Grainne Shaffery has done a careful and well researched job – I can only commend her part.
However, what is the point in DCC bringing out another ‘plan’, after the horse has bolted, without even funding earmarked for the public domain… never mind taking into account the fiscal realities faced by the owners of the properties themselves?
It is now clear to owners on the street that they will get no support in continuing to run the houses as they do – incorporating many artists studios as well as maintaining heritage properties. It would seem clear to me that they will have to review their affairs – and most likely rely on themselves in putting their properties on a more commercial footing. And what will Dublin get – most likely the loss of an active cultural quarter in that the artists studios will go, to be replaced by another Georgian office quarter that dies after 5pm.
Still, Im sure that the canopies were nice at the launch :rolleyes:
PS For anybody who wants to see DCC’s actual level of commitment to the area, have a look at Bolton St at the entrance to Henrietta St where there satellite dishes continue to have a population explosion on the facades of buildings – nice unauthorised shop fronts too … grrrr… 😡
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
