THE 2025 PHOTONIQUE BLOG

UPPER DOMINICK STREET 12 JULY 2025

The Hendrons Building, Upper Dominick Street, Dublin: History, Dereliction, and Development Challenges

Executive Summary

The Hendrons Building, located on Upper Dominick Street in Dublin, stands as a significant example of 20th-century Modernist architecture in Ireland and has attained iconic status within the city’s architectural heritage. Established in 1911 by the Hendron brothers as a prominent supplier of electrical equipment and machinery, the company constructed its distinctive Broadstone premises between 1946 and 1949. Following the cessation of its original business operations, the building transitioned through various uses, including artist studios, before becoming fully vacant and falling into a state of dereliction.  

The prolonged unoccupied and derelict state of the Hendrons Building is a complex issue, stemming from a confluence of factors. Its designation as a protected structure in 2019/2020 has been instrumental in safeguarding its architectural integrity, yet it simultaneously imposes strict limitations on redevelopment, making it challenging for proposals to gain approval. A history of ambitious, high-density development schemes, particularly a 2020 co-living proposal, have faced refusal due to concerns over scale, visual impact, and inadequate amenity provision, as well as their impact on the protected structure. Community objections, advocating for genuinely affordable housing and appropriate urban planning, have also played a role in shaping the site’s fate. A live planning application for a 93-unit apartment development, submitted in late 2023, represents the latest attempt to revitalise this landmark site, with its outcome poised to determine the building’s future.  

1. Introduction: The Hendrons Building in Context
   The Hendrons Building is situated on Upper Dominick Street, Dublin 7, strategically positioned near Broadstone Station and Western Way. It is widely recognised as a distinctive and well-known landmark, standing out due to its unique architectural style and its representation of an industrial era not commonly seen in Dublin’s urban landscape. Despite its current “shabby” appearance, characterised by “crumbling brick and peeling paint,” the building is noted for being “structurally rock solid”.  

Architecturally, the Hendrons Building is celebrated as an outstanding example of 20th-century architectural heritage in Ireland, specifically embodying vernacular Modernism. Its design, featuring reinforced concrete construction and a gleaming white finish, draws parallels with iconic Modernist structures such as Mies van der Rohe’s Villa Tugendhat in Czechoslovakia and Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye in Paris. Its architectural significance was formally acknowledged when it was added to the Record of Protected Structures in 2019/2020.  

The current condition of the Hendrons Building presents a notable contradiction. While it is described as being in a state of disrepair, appearing “shabby” and “derelict,” it is simultaneously affirmed as being “structurally rock solid” and holding “iconic status” as an “outstanding example of 20th-century architectural heritage”. This juxtaposition indicates that the reasons for its prolonged vacancy and physical decline are not rooted in fundamental structural deficiencies or a lack of aesthetic appreciation. Instead, this situation points towards more complex underlying issues, likely related to economic viability, ownership dynamics, the stringent requirements of planning regulations (especially its protected status), and the inherent difficulties associated with adapting such a unique structure for contemporary use within a rapidly evolving urban environment. This paradox immediately establishes the central challenge in understanding why a building of such merit has remained unused, setting the stage for a deeper exploration into the non-physical barriers hindering its revitalisation.  

2. The Legacy of Hendrons: Business History and Operations
   Hendron Brothers was founded in 1911 by Francis Patrick Hendron and his four siblings: Henry, Thomas, Vincent, and Felix. The company initially operated from Tomb Street by the 1920s, focusing on the supply of machinery. Over time, the business expanded, establishing a presence in Dublin by 1935, which included the acquisition of the site near Broadstone Station on Dominick Street.  

The core business of Hendrons involved importing a diverse range of electrical equipment, machinery, plant, pumps, and various tools from both European and United States markets. Notably, the company served as the sole agent for Škoda, supplying turbines for the newly constructed alcohol factories in Ireland. Their extensive clientele included building contractors, engineers, harbour authorities, local authorities, state and statutory bodies, as well as farmers and individual customers. Beyond sales, Hendrons also provided crucial after-sales services, highlighting their commitment to comprehensive customer support.  

The company’s operational needs necessitated a purpose-built facility that could accommodate a polite showroom for public interaction, a dedicated workshop for repairs, servicing, and tool-making, and ample space for offices and storage. Construction of the Broadstone building commenced in 1946, following the site purchase in 1935, and was largely completed by 1949. While some accounts suggest the construction proceeded intermittently over thirteen years, possibly until 1959 , recent research indicates a more concentrated period of work. The design of this new facility was entrusted to Václav Gunzl (1900-82), a Czech-born engineer who had relocated to Ireland in the early 1930s, potentially in connection with Škoda contracts. Gunzl joined Hendrons around 1939, taking on the role of manager of the machinery workshop, a position he held until approximately 1960. The building’s design was purely utilitarian, utilising reinforced concrete, steel, and glass blocks to create a functional space that seamlessly integrated workshops, offices, and retail areas.  

The selection of a “brownfield site near Broadstone Station” in 1935 for the Hendrons Building demonstrates a strategic foresight in location. This placement, adjacent to a significant railway hub like the Midland Great Western Railway , was highly advantageous for a business dealing in heavy industrial machinery and electrical equipment, facilitating efficient import, export, and distribution of goods. The decision to employ Václav Gunzl, an engineer with prior experience in large-scale industrial plants , to design the facility, coupled with the adoption of a “frank expression” of reinforced concrete and Modernist design principles for a utilitarian structure , reveals a pragmatic yet progressive approach to industrial architecture, which was uncommon in Ireland at the time. This deliberate consideration of both location and design contributed significantly to the building’s later recognition as an iconic structure, setting it apart from typical industrial premises and making its eventual dereliction all the more poignant.  

Furthermore, the construction of the Hendrons Building faced considerable obstacles, including two fires on site, a legal dispute with an adjoining property owner, and severe shortages of essential building materials like cement and steel in the aftermath of the Second World War. Despite these challenges, the company proceeded with construction using “direct labour with Hendrons using their own workforce”. This approach highlights a remarkable degree of self-sufficiency and resourcefulness during a period of economic recovery and scarcity in Ireland. The company’s ability to overcome these significant hurdles through its internal capabilities underscores a strong entrepreneurial spirit and operational resilience. This historical context enriches the building’s narrative, portraying it not merely as a structure but as a testament to the determination of an Irish enterprise navigating challenging post-war conditions. This deep-seated resilience contrasts sharply with its current state of abandonment, prompting questions about the broader economic and urban forces that ultimately led to its decline.  

3. Architectural Significance and Construction Challenges
   The construction of the Hendrons Building began in 1946 on a site acquired in 1935, with the main work largely completed by 1949. However, some accounts suggest that construction continued intermittently for as long as thirteen years, potentially extending until 1959. A distinctive aspect of its construction was the use of direct labour, with Hendrons employing its own workforce to build the facility.  

The building’s design was the work of Václav Gunzl, a Czech-born engineer who lived from 1900 to 1982. Gunzl arrived in Ireland in the early 1930s, possibly in connection with Škoda, which had secured contracts to supply and install plants in state-operated alcohol factories. He joined Hendrons around 1939, serving as the manager of their machinery workshop until approximately 1960.  

Architecturally, the Hendrons Building is recognised as a rare example of 20th-century vernacular Modernism in Ireland. Its design was heavily influenced by the “New Architecture” philosophy, which prioritised function over decorative elements, ensuring that each component served a specific purpose. The building features reinforced concrete construction, gleaming white render, and sparkling glass, incorporating plain low-relief piers and reeded glass blocks that allow for ample natural daylight. Its aesthetic subtly references iconic Modernist masterpieces such as Mies van der Rohe’s Villa Tugendhat and Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye.  

The construction process was not without its difficulties. The site experienced two fires, and a legal dispute arose with the owner of an adjoining property. Furthermore, obtaining essential building materials, particularly cement and steel for reinforced concrete, proved challenging due to shortages following the Second World War.  

Despite these hurdles and a somewhat lukewarm reception upon its completion—it received no architectural awards, was not featured in architectural tours, and garnered little mention in contemporary architectural journals—the Hendrons Building has since achieved iconic status. It is now rightly regarded as an outstanding example of Ireland’s 20th-century architectural heritage and was formally added to the Record of Protected Structures in 2019/2020.  

The building’s initial reception, marked by “muted enthusiasm” and a lack of attention in “contemporary architectural journals,” stands in stark contrast to its current “iconic status” and recognition as an “outstanding example” of architectural heritage. This suggests a significant re-evaluation of its merits over time. The fact that its designer, Václav Gunzl, was an engineer rather than a formally trained architect further highlights its utilitarian origins and functional design ethos. This trajectory indicates that Hendrons represents a form of “accidental” or “organic” Modernism in Ireland, driven more by practical industrial needs and engineering principles than by prevailing architectural theories or academic acclaim. Its belated recognition underscores a broader trend in architectural history where structures initially overlooked for their lack of decorative flourish or high-art aspirations eventually gain appreciation for their honest expression of materials, their functional integrity, and their representation of a specific period’s industrial aesthetic. This makes its protected status particularly meaningful, as it safeguards a less celebrated but equally vital aspect of Ireland’s architectural legacy, one that emerged from the pragmatic demands of industry rather than the pursuit of architectural accolades.  

4. From Industry to Inactivity: The Building’s Derelict Status
   The precise date when the Hendrons business ceased its primary operations at the Dominick Street site is not explicitly detailed in the available information. However, it is known that following the closure of Hendrons, the building’s workspaces were found to be “ideally suited for adaptation as artist studios”. This transition confirms that the original industrial activities had concluded before its subsequent use. The building’s historical use as a workshop is noted from “1945 – 1960” , which might suggest a winding down of its core industrial function around the latter part of that period, leading to its eventual vacancy or alternative uses.  

Presently, the Hendrons Building is described as being “shabby in appearance” but remarkably “structurally rock solid”. It is “fully vacant” and “out of use” , with all structures on the site, including the main Hendrons Building, a 1950s two-storey workshop to the rear, and a circa 1850 three-storey dwelling house at No. 36 Dominick Street, currently unoccupied.  

The building’s robust construction, a hallmark of its Modernist design, paradoxically contributes to its current state of limbo. While the building is “structurally rock solid” , it remains “fully vacant” and appears “derelict”. This condition suggests that its unoccupied status is not due to physical decay or structural instability, but rather to a functional obsolescence for its original industrial purpose and a subsequent inability to secure a sustainable new use. The temporary adaptation as artist studios, though a creative attempt at adaptive reuse, ultimately proved insufficient for long-term occupancy or comprehensive revitalisation. This situation creates a challenging dilemma for potential developers: the building is too sound to be easily demolished, and its protected status further complicates any radical alterations. Consequently, finding a viable economic model that respects its heritage while addressing its functional and spatial limitations for contemporary needs becomes a significant hurdle.  

While the specific reasons for Hendrons’ original business cessation are not detailed, its prolonged dereliction can be understood within the broader context of urban development trends in Dublin. Historically, Dublin experienced patterns of abandonment in large inner-city buildings as wealthier residents moved to the suburbs, leading to their conversion into tenements. More recently, the urban landscape has been shaped by financial models that have historically favoured commercial property development over housing due to longer leases and perceived higher profitability, which can lead to vacant office blocks. Furthermore, the long lead times inherent in large construction projects mean that schemes initiated during one economic climate, such as a high demand for offices, might be completed into a different one, like the post-pandemic work-from-home boom, resulting in vacancies. The expense and complexity of converting older industrial or commercial spaces to residential use also present significant barriers. Compounding these issues, land zoning changes between 2012 and 2020 saw a decrease in land zoned for residential use while commercial and industrial zoning increased. Despite these challenges, Dublin City Council has expressed interest in increasing residential uses within the commercial core and promoting “Living over the shop” schemes , indicating a policy drive towards regenerating such sites. However, the repeated failures of development proposals for Hendrons suggest a persistent disconnect between these policy goals and the practical realities of implementation or the viability of developer proposals. Therefore, the continued vacancy of the Hendrons Building is not an isolated incident but rather a microcosm of wider urban planning challenges in Dublin, illustrating the tension between preserving industrial heritage, addressing the pressing housing demand, and navigating the financial realities of property development. Its ongoing unoccupied state underscores the profound difficulty of integrating historically significant industrial structures into a rapidly evolving urban fabric, especially when their original function is no longer viable.  

5. The Development Conundrum: Planning History and Future Prospects
   A pivotal factor in the Hendrons Building’s current status and future prospects is its designation as a protected structure. Dublin City Council resolved to add Hendrons, specifically RPS Ref.: 8783, to the Record of Protected Structures on 22nd January 2020. Additionally, a stone wall on the site is also protected under RPS 8483. This protected status mandates that any proposed development must respect and, wherever feasible, adaptively reuse the existing structure, rather than allowing for its demolition.  

The site has been the subject of multiple redevelopment proposals over the years:

Chronology of Previous Redevelopment Proposals:

2008 Application (AB Properties): In September 2008, AB Properties submitted an application to Dublin City Council proposing the demolition of the Hendrons building and its replacement with a mixed-use development. The ultimate outcome of this specific application is not detailed in the provided information.  

2020 Co-living Scheme (Western Way Developments Limited): A significant application was lodged on 7th December 2020 with An Bord Pleanála for a large-scale 280-bedroom shared accommodation or co-living facility. This proposal envisioned the demolition of existing warehouses and the dwelling at No. 36 Dominick Street Upper, while retaining and adaptively reusing the Hendrons Building (designated as Block B) with the addition of an extra storey, bringing it to five storeys in total. The scheme also included the construction of several new blocks (A, C, D, E) ranging in height from four to nine storeys.  

Refusal: An Bord Pleanála ultimately refused permission for this development in April 2021.  

Reasons for Refusal: The primary grounds for refusal were that the proposed development, by reason of its design, height, scale, and mass, would be visually obtrusive and would seriously harm the visual amenities of the sensitive area, which is in the vicinity of significant protected structures like Broadstone Railway Station and Kings Inns, and adjacent to a residential conservation area. It was deemed to constitute overdevelopment of the site. Furthermore, the proposal was found to seriously injure the residential amenities of the area through overshadowing and overlooking, and would be visually overbearing. It also failed to provide adequate amenity for future residents, particularly due to overshadowing of the communal courtyard. Crucially, An Bord Pleanála determined that the quality of the proposed development’s design did not “justify the demolition of the ‘Hendron’ building, a building of some architectural character”. This explicit reference underscores the protected status of the Hendrons Building as a significant factor in the refusal.  

The protected status of the Hendrons Building, confirmed in 2019/2020 , played a direct role in the refusal of the 2020 co-living scheme. The planning board explicitly stated that the proposed design did not “justify the demolition of the ‘Hendron’ building” , even though the proposal included its retention and adaptive reuse. This demonstrates how the protected status effectively prevented a large-scale development that was deemed inappropriate for the site and its context. However, this protective measure simultaneously restricts the scope for radical alterations or complete demolition, which can make redevelopment more complex and potentially more costly for developers. This situation forces a more nuanced approach to development, prioritising adaptive reuse and sensitive integration, which may reduce the potential unit yield or increase construction costs. Such constraints can, in turn, affect developer interest or the overall financial viability of a proposal, inadvertently contributing to the building’s prolonged vacancy even while safeguarding its heritage.  

Overview of Current Live Planning Application (2023 Apartment Development):

A new planning application was submitted on 16th November 2023 by Phibsborough D7 Development Ltd., a company controlled by the US investment firm Harbert Management Corporation (HMC). This proposal is for a 93-unit apartment development across three blocks (A, B, C), which also includes a café/retail unit and a public plaza.  

Proposed Breakdown:

Block A: Envisions 36 apartments across five storeys, incorporating the adaptive reuse of the existing Hendrons building, including the construction of an additional storey.  

Block B: Proposes 39 apartments over seven storeys.  

Block C: Features 18 apartments across five storeys.  

Total Units: The scheme comprises 28 one-bedroom, 48 two-bedroom, and 17 three-bedroom units.  

Social Housing: Dublin City Council intends to acquire 17 units (3 one-bedroom and 14 two-bedroom) within Block C to fulfil Part V social housing obligations.  

Transport: No car parking spaces are planned for the development, given its proximity to LUAS and bus routes; instead, 225 cycle spaces will be provided.  

Status: Dublin City Council requested clarifications and changes on 22nd January 2024, to which the applicant provided revised plans on 15th May 2024. The case is currently live with An Coimisiún Pleanála , and while a decision was originally expected by 12th February 2025 , the status remains under review as of July 2025.  

The transition from the ambitious 2020 co-living scheme, which proposed 280 beds and extensive new construction, to the more moderated 2023 apartment development, with 93 units and a clear focus on adaptive reuse of the Hendrons Building, indicates a strategic adjustment by developers. The previous refusal cited concerns over “height, scale and mass,” “overdevelopment,” and “injury to visual amenities”. Concurrently, the community voiced strong opposition to the co-living model, citing issues of affordability and sustainability. The current proposal, while still substantial, appears to be a direct response to these previous criticisms, aiming for a design that is more integrated with the protected structure and offers traditional apartment units rather than shared accommodation. This evolution suggests that both planning authorities and community objections are having a tangible influence on development proposals in Dublin. Developers are demonstrating a willingness to learn from past refusals and adapt their schemes to align more closely with conservation principles and, to some extent, local preferences regarding housing type. However, the continued involvement of a large US investment firm indicates that the underlying commercial drivers for high-density development persist, creating an ongoing tension between profit maximisation, heritage preservation, and local housing needs. The outcome of this current application will be a crucial indicator of how this delicate balance is ultimately struck for the Hendrons site.  

Community Concerns and Objections:

The 2020 co-living scheme faced significant local opposition, evidenced by a petition signed by 145 residents. Key concerns included the proposal’s perceived contravention of emerging national policy aimed at prohibiting co-living developments, its unaffordability (with rooms in a nearby co-living development advertised at rates starting from €230 per person per week), and the public health risks associated with such high-density shared living, particularly in the context of the global pandemic. Residents also highlighted an existing excess of short-term purpose-built accommodation in the Dublin 7 vicinity and the proposal’s failure to meet planning requirements for sustainable communities. Local residents expressed “deep concern and a degree of alarm,” advocating instead for “community amenities and genuinely affordable housing”. For the current 2023 application, the MPM Residents Association is listed as an active third-party appellant.  

Current Ownership and Development Interests:

The site is currently marketed as “Development Land” by Robert Colleran. It is known that sales terms were previously agreed for a 330-bedroom student accommodation block, indicating sustained developer interest in the site’s potential. As noted, the current applicant, Phibsborough D7 Development Ltd., is controlled by the US investment firm Harbert Management Corporation (HMC).  

6. Conclusion
   The Hendrons Building on Upper Dominick Street, Dublin, embodies a complex narrative of industrial innovation, architectural significance, and prolonged urban dereliction. Its journey from a pioneering Modernist industrial hub, built with remarkable self-sufficiency in post-war Ireland, to its current unoccupied state is shaped by a multifaceted interplay of factors. The cessation of its original business, though not precisely dated, led to its vacancy, which was briefly mitigated by its use as artist studios. However, its robust construction, while a testament to its quality, has ironically contributed to its limbo, as it is too sound to be easily demolished and its protected status further complicates radical redevelopment.

The designation of the Hendrons Building as a protected structure in 2019/2020 has been a critical determinant in its recent history. While this status effectively safeguards its unique architectural heritage, it simultaneously creates significant challenges for developers. The history of failed development proposals, particularly the large-scale 2020 co-living scheme, highlights a recurring tension between ambitious, high-density development interests and the stringent requirements of urban planning, heritage conservation, and community expectations. Reasons for refusal have consistently centred on concerns over the scale, visual impact, and amenity provision of proposed schemes, as well as their detrimental effect on the protected structure itself.

The current planning application for a 93-unit apartment development represents a crucial juncture for the Hendrons Building. This proposal appears to reflect an evolution in developer strategy, seemingly adapting to previous planning refusals and community feedback by focusing on adaptive reuse and a more traditional residential offering. The ongoing dialogue between developers, planning authorities, and local residents will continue to shape the building’s fate. The success or failure of this latest endeavour will determine whether this iconic structure can finally be brought back into productive use, achieving a delicate balance between preserving its significant heritage and addressing the pressing need for urban regeneration and housing in Dublin. Its future remains a key test case for sustainable development within a historically sensitive urban fabric.