THE 2025 PHOTONIQUE BLOG

THE HENDRONS BUILDING IS STILL UNOCCUPIED IF NOT DERELICT

Making my blog more accessible is important to me. For readers who find the detailed text descriptions challenging, I've begun adding audio descriptions in a conversational format. I hope this offers a richer and more inclusive experience

THE HENDRONS BUILDING IS STILL UNOCCUPIED IF NOT DERELICT

00:00 / 10:51

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

SHOULD I CANCEL MY ORDER FOR THE SONY A1 II

THINGS HAVE BECOME COMPLICATED AND EXPENSIVE

In 2022 I had a bad fall while visiting Belfast and damaged my Sony A7RIV and as a result the camera was usable but unreliable but I decided not to invest in a new camera until the Sony A7RV became available but when it arrived on the market in December 2022 I decided to go a step higher and wait for the A1 update/upgrade to become available.

In December 2024 I pre-ordered and paid for the A1 II assuming that I would have it by March at the latest. It is now July 2025 and my Camera Dealer has advised me that I would not get my camera before August (best case) and that he was expecting to receive one per month going forward. My problem was that my city visits begin in March every year and this my Sony A7RIV had become unusable and I needed a replacement urgently. In April/May I got the opportunity to get both a Leica Q3 and a Fuji GFX100RF and a greatly reduced price so I decided that this might me the ideal solution. About three weeks ago I had a meeting with my dealer as I had more-or-less decided to forget about getting the A1 II and was offered a loan of a Sony A7RV until the A1 arrived and then things became complicated. I have an extensive collection of Sony glass and as soon as I began testing the A7RV I began to suspect that the Sony actually outperformed either the Leica Q3 or the Fuji GFX100RF and this was unexpected. The Sony combined with the FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II, in my opinion, outperformed the Leica Q3 which certainly outperforms the Fuji GFX100RF in low light. Don’t get the wrong impression – I like both the Leica and Fuji and have every intention of keeping them for a variety of reasons.

As I now need decide if I should keep the A7RV and cancel my order for the A1 II I commissioned a report which is included below:

A Deep Dive into High-End Camera Systems for Stills, Macro, and General Use

This analysis explores high-end camera systems, comparing the Sony Alpha 7R V, Leica Q3, and Fujifilm GFX100RF, while also evaluating the potential of the pre-ordered Sony Alpha 1 II. The assessment focuses on photographic interests that primarily involve stills, macro, and general use, with minimal emphasis on video capabilities.

The recent damage to an Alpha 7R IV, the temporary use of a loaned Alpha 7R V, and the recent acquisitions of the Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF provide a crucial backdrop for this analysis. The positive experience with the Alpha 7R V, particularly when paired with the Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II lens, serves as a central reference point.

The Sony Alpha 7R V: A Deep Dive into its Capabilities

The Sony Alpha 7R V stands out with its 61-megapixel full-frame Exmor R BSI CMOS sensor, maintaining the high resolution of its predecessor, the Alpha 7R IV. A pivotal advancement in this model is the integration of a dedicated AI processing unit, operating independently from the BIONZ XR processor. This innovation significantly enhances autofocus accuracy and subject recognition, allowing for real-time tracking through a sophisticated 693-point hybrid autofocus system that covers a substantial portion of the image area.

Furthermore, the Alpha 7R V incorporates an improved 5-axis in-body image stabilisation (IBIS) system. Thanks to new gyro sensors and enhanced processing, it is rated to provide up to 8 stops of correction. For still photography, the camera is capable of continuous shooting at up to 10 frames per second with full autofocus and auto-exposure tracking when utilising the mechanical shutter.

The positive experience with the Alpha 7R V, particularly when combined with the Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II lens, is noteworthy. The camera’s high-resolution sensor and advanced autofocus capabilities are optimally suited to capitalise on the optical excellence of a premium G Master lens. The enhanced IBIS further contributes to sharper handheld images, especially beneficial for wide-angle shots or in challenging low-light conditions.

Professional evaluations consistently commend the Alpha 7R V for its exceptional 60-megapixel BSI sensor, which delivers remarkable detail, expansive dynamic range, and accurate colour rendition, even at elevated ISO settings. Its AI-powered autofocus system is frequently highlighted as a significant advantage, demonstrating precise and consistent tracking of faces, eyes, and full bodies across various subjects, making it highly effective for wildlife, portraiture, and general photography. While the camera offers 8K video recording, it is primarily designed for still photographers, with its video performance generally described as competent rather than exceptional.

For macro photography, the Alpha 7R V’s superior acquisition speed for small subjects, such as insects, coupled with its AI-trained subject recognition, positions it as a formidable option. The inclusion of a pixel-shift shooting mode, although requiring post-processing, provides an avenue for achieving ultimate resolution in static scenes.

The observation that the Alpha 7R V “outperformed” the Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF can be understood by examining the technical specifications and operational characteristics of each camera in relation to stated preferences. Both the Leica Q3 and the Alpha 7R V share a 60MP sensor, but the Alpha 7R V boasts superior IBIS, offering 8 stops of compensation compared to the Leica’s 5 stops. Critically, the Leica Q3 lacks automatic focus bracketing, a feature often desired for precise macro photography, which the Alpha 7R V offers through its pixel-shift mode. The Alpha 7R V’s advanced AI autofocus system would also likely provide a more versatile and responsive experience compared to the Q3’s phase detection, especially for general photography and potentially for macro work involving subjects that are not entirely static. Furthermore, the Q3’s fixed-lens design inherently limits the versatility that an interchangeable-lens system, like the Alpha 7R V with the 16-35mm GM II zoom, provides.

When comparing the Alpha 7R V to the Fujifilm GFX100RF, the latter features a larger 102MP medium format sensor, theoretically offering superior pure image quality at low ISOs. However, a significant practical difference is the GFX100RF’s lack of in-body image stabilisation. This absence can be a considerable disadvantage for handheld shooting, particularly in lower light, where the Alpha 7R V’s 8-stop IBIS allows for much slower shutter speeds without compromising sharpness. The GFX100RF’s fixed 35mm f/4 lens (equivalent to a 28mm f/2.8 on a full-frame sensor) also restricts optical flexibility compared to the Alpha 7R V’s ability to use a wide range of E-mount lenses, including the versatile 16-35mm GM II zoom. The Alpha 7R V’s AI autofocus is also generally considered more advanced for general use than the Fujifilm’s system, which some characterise as more suited to a deliberate, artistic approach. The perception of the Alpha 7R V’s superior performance likely stems from its comprehensive blend of high resolution, cutting-edge autofocus, robust image stabilisation, and lens system versatility, which collectively provide a more adaptable and satisfying shooting experience for diverse interests.

Leica Q3: The Art of Fixed-Lens Photography

The Leica Q3 is constructed around a variant of the excellent 60-megapixel full-frame BSI-CMOS sensor, which shares similarities with the sensors found in the Sony Alpha 7R IV and Alpha 7R V, but incorporates phase detection elements for its autofocus system. This camera delivers superb raw image quality, characterised by abundant detail and impressive dynamic range. The build quality of the Q3 consistently receives high praise, described as outstanding, robust, and featuring an all-metal body shell with IP52 weather resistance. From an ergonomic standpoint, it offers engaging dial-led controls and a classic design, encouraging a more deliberate and tactile shooting approach. However, some photographers note that the absence of a substantial handgrip can make one-handed operation less comfortable.

While the Q3 has incorporated phase detection for faster autofocus and includes subject recognition for people and animals, its autofocus system is generally regarded as less advanced than Sony’s AI-powered capabilities. The Q3’s in-body image stabilisation is rated at 5 stops, which is less effective than the Alpha 7R V’s 8 stops. A significant limitation for macro photography is the Q3’s inability to perform automatic focus bracketing.

The Leica Q3 is a premium compact camera featuring a fixed 28mm f/1.7 lens. Its appeal lies in its simplicity, its tactile shooting experience, and the exceptional image quality it produces from a compact form factor. While its digital zoom function allows for in-camera cropping to simulate 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, and 90mm focal lengths, this is a digital crop of the high-resolution sensor, not an optical zoom. For a photographer who values lens versatility, as evidenced by the use of the 16-35mm GM II, and specific macro capabilities, the fixed lens and absence of focus bracketing likely explain why the Alpha 7R V was perceived as offering superior performance for particular use cases.

The Q3’s high price point, approximately $6,995 compared to the Alpha 7R V’s $3,898, also positions it as a luxury item designed for a specific, often less versatile, photographic purpose.

Fujifilm GFX100RF: Medium Format in a Compact Package

The Fujifilm GFX100RF is distinguished by its 102-megapixel medium format GFX CMOS II sensor, which is substantially larger than typical full-frame sensors. This larger sensor translates to approximately 70% more resolution than an average full-frame camera, providing immense detail and remarkable flexibility for cropping. For controlled environments such as studio fashion shoots, the GFX system is often considered objectively superior for achieving pristine image quality at low ISOs, complemented by the exceptional optical performance of Fuji G lenses.

A striking aspect of the GFX100RF is its relatively compact size for a medium format camera, contributing to its surprising portability. It features engaging analogue controls and offers a tactile shooting experience, appealing to photographers who prefer a more deliberate approach to image capture. However, a notable drawback is the absence of in-body image stabilisation (IBIS). This omission means that handheld video footage will likely exhibit shakiness, and still photography in low light without a tripod becomes more challenging, often necessitating higher ISO settings or faster shutter speeds. The fixed 35mm f/4 lens, which provides a 28mm f/2.8 full-frame equivalent field of view, also limits optical flexibility.

While the GFX100RF excels in controlled studio settings where its high resolution and lens quality can be fully leveraged, its lack of IBIS and fixed lens make it less adaptable for dynamic, handheld shooting or varied scenarios compared to a full-frame camera like the Alpha 7R V. The Alpha 7R V’s advanced AI autofocus and superior IBIS offer a more versatile and responsive experience, particularly for “run and gun” situations. The GFX100RF’s leaf shutter, while allowing for flash sync up to 1/125s, can be a limiting factor for managing ambient light in studio environments compared to other systems. The subjective finding that the Alpha 7R V “outperformed” the GFX100RF likely reflects these practical limitations for general and macro photography, where the Alpha 7R V’s comprehensive capabilities, including its robust autofocus and IBIS, provided a more satisfying outcome.

The Sony Alpha 1 II: Launched and in High Demand

The Sony Alpha 1 II was launched in late 2024, with many reviewers obtaining copies shortly after its release. This camera builds upon the foundation of the original Alpha 1’s 50.1-megapixel stacked CMOS sensor, now incorporating the advanced AI processing unit first introduced in the Alpha 7R V. This integration significantly enhances autofocus accuracy, with projected improvements of approximately 30% for human and animal eye recognition and 50% for bird eye recognition compared to the original Alpha 1. The in-body image stabilisation has also seen substantial improvement, with a rating of up to 8.5 stops of compensation. The stacked sensor technology facilitates blackout-free continuous shooting at an impressive 30 frames per second with full autofocus and auto-exposure tracking, and it also features pre-release capture capabilities. Ergonomically, the Alpha 1 II adopts the fully-articulated rear screen design seen in the Alpha 7R V, offering enhanced flexibility.

Despite its launch, Sony has reportedly underestimated the demand for the Alpha 1 II, leading to manufacturing constraints and significant delivery delays for many who pre-ordered the camera. The experience of waiting since before Christmas 2024, with dealers expecting only one unit per month, highlights these ongoing supply issues.

The implications for performance relative to the Alpha 7R V and specific requirements are significant. The Alpha 1 II merges the high resolution and advanced AI autofocus of the Alpha 7R V with the speed and stacked sensor advantages of the original Alpha 1. For photography interests:

For macro photography, the Alpha 1 II’s even more refined AI autofocus and subject recognition, particularly for small, potentially moving subjects like insects, are likely to surpass the Alpha 7R V’s already excellent performance. The enhanced IBIS would also prove highly beneficial for handheld macro work, allowing for greater flexibility in challenging conditions.

For general photography, the combination of 50-megapixel resolution, 30 frames per second shooting capability, and advanced autofocus positions it as an incredibly versatile camera for nearly any scenario, including fast-moving subjects where the original Alpha 1 is considered “unbeatable”. The 1/400th of a second mechanical flash sync speed also represents a professional advantage, offering greater control over ambient light in flash photography.

From an ergonomic perspective, the adoption of the Alpha 7R V’s fully-articulated screen addresses a common preference, providing more compositional flexibility compared to the original Alpha 1’s tilting screen.

The Alpha 1 II retails for approximately $6,498, making it considerably more expensive than the Alpha 7R V, which is priced around $3,898. Furthermore, the reported limited availability, with camera dealers expecting to receive only one unit per month, presents a significant practical constraint.

The question of whether the Alpha 1 II is “better again” than the Alpha 7R V, given positive experiences with the latter, can be addressed by considering the synergistic combination of features in the new model. The Alpha 1 II is designed to consolidate the strengths of both its predecessors. It integrates the Alpha 7R V’s cutting-edge AI autofocus and significantly improved IBIS (8.5 stops compared to the Alpha 7R V’s 8 stops) with the original Alpha 1’s high-speed stacked sensor, enabling 30 frames per second continuous shooting, and its superior mechanical flash sync speed of 1/400th of a second. This directly addresses the Alpha 7R V’s limitations in continuous shooting speed and buffer performance for capturing fast action, while also upgrading the original Alpha 1’s less advanced autofocus and image stabilisation. For macro interests, the Alpha 1 II’s even more refined AI subject recognition, particularly for small, moving subjects like insects, would present a distinct advantage over the Alpha 7R V. For general photography, the sheer speed and versatility of the Alpha 1 II would establish it as an unparalleled tool. Owners of both the original Alpha 1 and Alpha 7R V often suggest that if they were limited to a single camera, the Alpha 1 would be their choice due to its comprehensive capability, especially for dynamic subjects. The Alpha 1 II aims to eliminate the need for such a choice by incorporating the Alpha 7R V’s advancements into the Alpha 1 platform. Therefore, from an objective standpoint, the Alpha 1 II is indeed a further advancement in overall technical capability and versatility, representing the pinnacle of Sony’s mirrorless technology. The primary considerations remain its significantly higher price and the current constraints on its availability.

Synthesising Subjectivity and Objective Data: Making a Camera Choice

The subjective experience of the Alpha 7R V outperforming the Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF aligns with professional assessments that highlight the Alpha 7R V’s robust all-around performance. Its advanced autofocus and excellent image stabilisation are particularly crucial for versatile shooting, including macro photography. While the Leica Q3 offers a unique, tactile experience and commendable image quality within its fixed-lens niche, and the Fujifilm GFX100RF excels in pure resolution for static, controlled environments, neither provides the same blend of high resolution, advanced autofocus, and robust in-body image stabilisation for general and dynamic photography as the Alpha 7R V. The preference likely stems from the Alpha 7R V’s superior practical utility for specific workflow and diverse photographic interests.

Recommendations tailored to photographic interests can be made based on this analysis. Given satisfaction with the Alpha 7R V and its strong performance when paired with the 16-35mm GM II lens, it continues to serve as an excellent current photographic solution. The Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF, while capable in their own right, appear to be less aligned with broad photographic needs and dynamic shooting style compared to the Alpha 7R V. The Q3’s fixed lens and lack of focus bracketing are notable limitations for stated interests in macro and general versatility. Deciding to forgo the Alpha 1 II in favour of the Q3 may not be the most logical choice if versatility and advanced autofocus are primary considerations. Similarly, while the GFX100RF offers unparalleled resolution for still subjects, its absence of in-body image stabilisation and fixed lens, combined with its larger physical presence (albeit compact for a medium format camera), render it less suitable for the dynamic, handheld shooting scenarios where the Alpha 7R V demonstrated superior performance. For studio work, the GFX100RF remains a powerful tool, but for broader requirements, the Alpha 7R V’s performance advantage is understandable. Cancelling the Alpha 1 II for the GFX100RF would represent a trade-off of versatility and advanced autofocus for sheer resolution, which may not be optimal given current satisfaction with the Alpha 7R V.

The Sony Alpha 1 II, despite its higher cost and current delivery delays, is objectively the most capable camera among those under consideration. It offers a significant upgrade in speed, autofocus intelligence, and stabilisation over the Alpha 7R V. If ultimate performance and versatility across all photographic genres are prioritised, including highly demanding macro and fast-action scenarios, and the higher price and extended wait time are acceptable, then retaining the Alpha 1 II pre-order would be justified. It effectively combines the best features of the Alpha 7R V with the speed and professional capabilities of the Alpha 1. Considering current satisfaction with the Alpha 7R V, the Alpha 1 II would offer an even more refined and capable experience. The Alpha 7R V serves as an excellent camera for the interim period.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary of Key Findings

The camera analysis indicates that the Sony Alpha 7R V offers a compelling balance of high resolution, advanced AI autofocus, and excellent in-body image stabilisation. These attributes likely contributed to its perceived superior performance for general and macro photography needs. The Leica Q3, while a premium and aesthetically appealing camera, is a niche fixed-lens system with inherent limitations in versatility and specific macro features. The Fujifilm GFX100RF, despite its impressive medium format resolution, is hindered by the absence of in-body image stabilisation and a fixed lens for dynamic, handheld use. The Sony Alpha 1 II, now launched, is poised to be a superior choice, combining the Alpha 7R V’s cutting-edge AI autofocus and enhanced in-body image stabilisation with the Alpha 1’s speed and stacked sensor technology, positioning it as a truly professional-grade, all-around camera. However, its availability is currently limited due to high demand.

Personalised Camera Recommendations

Given the expressed satisfaction with the Alpha 7R V and its strong performance when paired with the 16-35mm GM II lens, it continues to serve as an excellent current photographic solution. The Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF, while capable in their own right, appear to be less aligned with broad photographic needs and dynamic shooting style compared to the Alpha 7R V.

The Q3’s fixed lens and lack of focus bracketing are significant limitations for stated interests in macro and general versatility. Opting for the Q3 instead of the Alpha 1 II may not be the most logical choice if versatility and advanced autofocus are primary considerations. Similarly, while the GFX100RF offers unparalleled resolution for still subjects, its absence of in-body image stabilisation and fixed lens, combined with its larger physical presence (albeit compact for a medium format camera), render it less suitable for the dynamic, handheld shooting scenarios where the Alpha 7R V demonstrated superior performance. For studio work, the GFX100RF remains a powerful tool, but for broader requirements, the Alpha 7R V’s performance advantage is understandable. Cancelling the Alpha 1 II for the GFX100RF would represent a trade-off of versatility and advanced autofocus for sheer resolution, which may not be optimal given current satisfaction with the Alpha 7R V.

Considering the detailed analysis, which camera system do readers find most appealing for their own photographic pursuits?

CACTUS PROVISOIRE BY ALEXANDER CALDER

FELLOWS SQUARE TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN

very dark maroon, in my images, it appears to be a deep, almost black, metallic hue, contrasting with the more commonly observed vibrant red or blue Calder ‘stabiles’ often seen in public spaces. This particular piece, as described by Paul Koralek, stands out not only due to its origin and placement but also its impressive scale, designed to complement the grandeur of Fellows’ Square.

Unlike the “red metal yokes” commonly associate with Irish towns and villages, “Cactus Provisoire” possesses a unique significance. It was specifically selected by Paul Koralek, architect of notable Trinity College buildings, for its “outstanding quality and substantial size” following a generous initiative by George Dawson. The process of its acquisition, visiting Calder’s widow and choosing from a field of large sculptures, underscores its artistic merit and intentional placement as a major artwork within a significant academic institution.

The sculpture itself is a ‘stabile,’ a term coined by Jean Arp to describe Calder’s stationary, abstract sculptures, as opposed to his famous ‘mobiles.’ “Cactus Provisoire” features multiple, interlocking, and somewhat organic-looking forms crafted from metal sheets, riveted together. These forms extend outwards, giving the impression of a dynamic, albeit static, object. The interplay of curved and pointed elements creates a sense of tension and balance, characteristic of Calder’s work. The dark, almost industrial, finish allows its form and the interplay of light and shadow on its surfaces to be the primary focus, rather than a vibrant colour.

TALBOT’S TOWER IN KILKENNY

PHOTOGRAPHED USING A FUJI GFX100RF

Talbot’s Tower is a significant medieval defensive tower in Kilkenny City, Ireland. It stands as a well-preserved remnant of the city’s extensive 13th-century Anglo-Norman walls, which were once the longest in Ireland.

Originally built around 1270, the tower was later renamed in the 15th century after Robert Talbot, a former Mayor of Kilkenny. It served as one of nine watchtowers along the city’s fortifications, playing a crucial role in defending the city, notably during sieges such as Oliver Cromwell’s attack in 1650. The original 13th-century structure was later raised in height in the 1400s with the addition of a stone-vaulted roof.

Over centuries, as the city walls became less vital for defence, Talbot’s Tower, like other sections, fell into disrepair. Interestingly, by the 19th century, a pleasure garden was even created on its rooftop.

In recent decades, Kilkenny County Council, with support from the Heritage Council and the Irish Walled Towns Network, undertook extensive conservation and restoration work on Talbot’s Tower and its adjoining walls. This significant project, which commenced in 2006, involved various professionals including engineers, architects, and archaeologists, and has provided valuable insights into the tower’s history and construction.

It features interpretive panels that narrate its story and the history of Kilkenny’s medieval walls. While the park is accessible, direct access to the tower itself may be restricted due to steep steps, though tours can sometimes be arranged by appointment. It stands as a testament to Kilkenny’s rich medieval heritage and is a popular spot for visitors to explore and appreciate the city’s past.

RIVERSIDE GARDENS KILKENNY IS PART OF A LARGER COMPLEX

THE 2025 PHOTONIQUE BLOG

RIVERSIDE GARDENS KILKENNY IS PART OF A LARGER COMPLEX

00:00 / 12:04

PHOTOGRAPHED BY INFOMATIQUE JUNE 2025

Riverside Gardens Kilkenny is a significant public amenity and green space, strategically located along the River Nore. It serves as an integral component of the multi-faceted Abbey Quarter urban regeneration project in Kilkenny City. The site of the Abbey Quarter, which encompasses Riverside Gardens, historically functioned as the Smithwick’s Brewery, a prominent industrial complex. Its acquisition by Kilkenny County Council in 2012 marked the formal commencement of its transformation from a defunct industrial site into a vibrant, mixed-use urban quarter.

The comprehensive redevelopment began with the adoption of the Abbey Quarter Masterplan in 2015. Key milestones include the official opening of the Riverside Garden and Skatepark in 2021, and the ongoing construction of the Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk, anticipated for completion by the end of 2025. The planned end-state for the Abbey Quarter is a modern, permeable urban core that integrates living, working, and recreational spaces, with a strong emphasis on public access to the River Nore and the development of a River Nore Blueway to enhance tourism and water-based activities. This vision is dynamic, as evidenced by the Masterplan review initiated in 2023, ensuring the project remains aligned with contemporary urban planning principles.

Introduction: Setting the Scene in Kilkenny
This report provides a comprehensive analysis of “Riverside Gardens Kilkenny,” detailing its role within the broader urban redevelopment of Kilkenny City, its historical context as a former industrial site, the timeline of its transformation, and its envisioned future state. The analysis adheres to British spelling conventions throughout.

Kilkenny, often referred to as ‘Marble City’ due to its black marble quarries, boasts a rich medieval history, with significant landmarks such as Kilkenny Castle and St. Canice’s Cathedral. Its strategic location on the River Nore has historically been central to its development, from early settlements and Norman influence to its industrial past. The city was granted city status by King James I in 1609 and was the capital of Confederate Ireland between 1642 and 1649. Kilkenny’s distinctive urban fabric, characterised by its medieval core and riverside setting, provides the backdrop for the current regeneration efforts, aiming to consolidate its role as a regional hub.

Riverside Gardens: A Key Public Amenity
“Riverside Gardens” in the context of this report refers to a public park and amenity space situated along the western bank of the River Nore in Kilkenny. It is designed to enhance public access to the river and provide recreational opportunities. The Riverside Garden Project, officially opened in June 2021, provides a riverside walk from the Tea Houses at Bateman Quay to Greensbridge and incorporates a skate park. This public space is a tangible outcome of the city’s broader urban renewal efforts.

It is important to clarify that while a private residential property, “3 River Gardens, Greens Hill,” shares a similar name and a prestigious riverside location with direct access to the River Nore, it is a distinct entity. This private home, built by Kevin Moore Construction, represents a high-end, detached residence and is not part of the large-scale public redevelopment discussed herein. The user’s inquiry regarding a “larger development or area redevelopment” and the replacement of a “defunct industrial complex” directly pertains to the public amenity known as Riverside Gardens and its integration within the Abbey Quarter project, which is designed to open up previously inaccessible areas for public use and enhance urban connectivity. The focus of this report is therefore on the public domain and its transformative impact on the city’s fabric.

The Abbey Quarter: A Transformative Urban Redevelopment
The Abbey Quarter is Kilkenny’s flagship urban regeneration project, guided by a Masterplan officially approved by Kilkenny County Council on 31st July 2015. The overarching vision is to redevelop and regenerate the former Smithwick’s Brewery site into a modern, vibrant, and permeable complement to the medieval core of Kilkenny City. This ambitious undertaking aims to consolidate the city’s role as a regional hub, creating a place for people to live, work, and play, while re-establishing the River Nore as a central feature of the urban landscape.

The Riverside Garden Project is explicitly identified as a “key component” of the Abbey Quarter development. It represents one of the first projects to link the former Brewery site into the public realm of the city, providing vital public access and green space along the river. Its completion in 2021 marked a significant step in the broader regeneration.

The Abbey Quarter encompasses a range of interconnected projects designed to achieve its comprehensive vision:

Urban Street and Park: A contract was signed earlier in 2025 for the Urban Street and Park, awarded to David Walsh Civil Engineering Ltd. This development has been described as a ‘game-changer’ for the city, opening up areas that were previously inaccessible for public use. The street will extend from Bateman Quay to St Francis Bridge, primarily designed as a pedestrian and cyclist-dominated space, with limited vehicular access for deliveries and emergency services.

Brewhouse and Mayfair Buildings: Works have already been completed in respect of the Brewhouse and Mayfair public realm areas, with the Brewhouse office building now fully occupied. These refurbishments demonstrate early success in attracting commercial tenants and integrating former industrial structures into the new urban fabric.

Cultural Hub: Plans include the redevelopment of old squash courts into a cultural hub, funded by the Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF) and Kilkenny County Council. While this project aims to provide a much-needed facility, concerns regarding accessibility, particularly the lack of a lift to the second floor, have been raised by local councillors.

New City Library: A significant civic amenity, the new City Library, is currently under construction within the Abbey Quarter, further diversifying the quarter’s offerings and enhancing its role as a community hub.

Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk: This vital connectivity project, linking Riverside Gardens with Bishops Meadows Riverside Park, had its construction contract signed on 11th April 2025 (publicly announced on 2nd May 2025). A standout feature of this project is an elevated boardwalk spanning the western bank of the River Nore. It also includes the reopening of the historic tunnel at Troy’s Gate, offering a direct and safe passage under the road. This project is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2025, further enhancing riverside access and promoting sustainable transport options.

River Nore Blueway: A broader vision aims to maximise the river’s potential for recreation, training, and tourism, with Riverside Gardens poised to be a key access point for this future Blueway.

A central underlying principle of the Abbey Quarter redevelopment is the strategic enhancement of pedestrian and cycle connectivity, particularly along the River Nore. This approach aims to seamlessly integrate previously inaccessible or fragmented urban areas. The various projects, such as the new Urban Street, the riverside walk, and the Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk, collectively demonstrate a fundamental commitment to improving urban permeability. By linking Riverside Gardens with Bishops Meadows Riverside Park and opening up areas like the former brewery site, the development seeks to reduce traffic congestion, promote sustainable modes of transport, and forge cohesive links between historical sites and new public spaces. This comprehensive strategy transforms the urban fabric, making the city more accessible and enjoyable for residents and visitors alike.

From Industrial Heritage to Modern Renewal: The Site’s Past
The Abbey Quarter development, including Riverside Gardens, directly replaces the former Smithwick’s Brewery site. This brewery was a prominent industrial complex situated on the banks of the River Nore, representing a significant piece of Kilkenny’s industrial heritage.

Kilkenny has a rich and long-standing industrial heritage, with sites of past industrial activity extending back centuries. Historical records indicate the presence of numerous watermills along the River Nore, such as those associated with St. Francis Abbey and St. John’s Priory, dating back to medieval times. Some of these mills were notably destroyed by floods, such as the “enormous flood” of 1338. The city’s industrial past also includes corn and textile mills, and the Ormonde Woollen Mills, highlighting a long tradition of riverside industry. The Smithwick’s Brewery site itself was historically part of “burgage plots” established by William Marshall in 1207, which were long, narrow gardens behind houses with sheds and dovecotes.

The acquisition of the Smithwick’s Brewery site from Diageo by Kilkenny County Council in 2012 was not merely a land transaction but the foundational step for the entire Abbey Quarter redevelopment. This strategic purchase provided the municipal authority with direct control over a large, centrally located industrial brownfield site. This control was essential to enable the comprehensive urban renewal envisioned in the Masterplan, effectively transforming a private industrial legacy into a public asset and the nucleus of a new urban quarter. The Masterplan explicitly aims to “reconnect the former industrial site with the urban fabric of the city, creating a welcoming pedestrian and cyclist dominated area within the city centre”. This transformation represents a deliberate shift from a post-industrial landscape to an environment attractive for creative and knowledge-based industries, leveraging the site’s prime riverside location.

Redevelopment Journey: Timeline and Milestones
The redevelopment of the Abbey Quarter is a multi-year undertaking, characterised by a phased implementation approach.

Commencement of Redevelopment
The foundational step for the Abbey Quarter redevelopment was the purchase of the Smithwick’s Brewery site from Diageo by Kilkenny County Council in 2012. This acquisition provided the municipal authority with direct control over the key redevelopment area, enabling a strategic approach to its future. Following this, the Abbey Creative Quarter Masterplan was officially approved by Kilkenny County Council on

31st July 2015. This document established the comprehensive strategic framework and vision for the entire redevelopment, outlining its objectives and phased implementation over an anticipated overall timeframe of 10 to 15 years from its adoption.

Phased Development and Key Project Completions
The Abbey Quarter development is being implemented incrementally, with several significant milestones already achieved or underway:

Riverside Garden Project & Skatepark: The Riverside Garden and Skatepark were officially opened on 9th June 2021. The skate park itself opened to the public slightly earlier, on 1st May 2021. This project marked a significant early completion, providing a key public amenity and a new riverside walk from the Tea Houses at Bateman Quay to Greensbridge.

Public Realm Works (Brewhouse & Mayfair): Initial public realm works complementing the Brewhouse and Mayfair buildings have been completed, with the Brewhouse office building now fully occupied, demonstrating early success in attracting commercial tenants.

Urban Street and Park Construction: A contract for the construction of the Urban Street and Park was signed earlier in 2025, awarded to David Walsh Civil Engineering Ltd. This is a crucial infrastructure project designed to open up previously inaccessible areas of the city and create a pedestrian and cyclist-dominated space.

Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk: The construction contract for this vital connectivity project, linking Riverside Gardens with Bishops Meadows Riverside Park, was signed on 11th April 2025 (publicly announced on 2nd May 2025). This project is anticipated to be completed by the

end of 2025, further enhancing riverside access and sustainable transport options.

New City Library: A significant civic amenity, the new City Library, is currently under construction within the Abbey Quarter, further diversifying the quarter’s offerings.

Ongoing Review and Adaptation
The original Abbey Quarter Masterplan, adopted in 2015, began a comprehensive review in 2023. This proactive review aims to ensure the Masterplan remains aligned with current urban planning thinking and best practices, incorporating public feedback and adapting to evolving needs. This process indicates that the Abbey Quarter redevelopment, including Riverside Gardens, is characterised by an adaptive and iterative planning process. The “planned end-state” is not a static blueprint from 2015, but rather an evolving vision that incorporates continuous feedback, new opportunities, and adaptation to ensure long-term relevance and success. This flexible approach is crucial for large-scale urban developments to remain responsive to socio-economic, environmental, and urban design changes over time.

Key Abbey Quarter projects and their timelines include: the Smithwick’s Brewery Site Acquisition in 2012, which was a foundational step for redevelopment ; the Abbey Creative Quarter Masterplan Approval on 31st July 2015, formally adopting the strategic plan ; the Riverside Garden & Skatepark Official Opening on 9th June 2021, marking the first major public amenity completion ; the Urban Street & Park Contract Signing in early 2025, a major infrastructure project ; the Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk Contract Signing on 11th April 2025, a key connectivity project ; the Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk Anticipated Completion by the end of 2025, further enhancing riverside connectivity ; the Abbey Quarter Masterplan Review Commencement in 2023, for ongoing adaptation of the long-term vision ; and the Overall Masterplan Phased Delivery from 2015 to 2025/2030, representing the long-term vision for comprehensive urban regeneration.

The Vision for Tomorrow: Planned End-State and Future Potential
The planned end-state for the Abbey Quarter is a comprehensive transformation of a former industrial site into a dynamic, integrated urban core, with the River Nore as its central amenity.

Comprehensive Outline of Abbey Quarter End-State
Integrated Urban Core: The Abbey Quarter aims to be a “modern, vibrant and permeable complement to the medieval core,” seamlessly integrating living, working, and recreational spaces. This includes the development of new residential and student residential districts, and dedicated accommodation for creative and knowledge-based industries, fostering a diverse urban environment. The ambition is for Kilkenny to be a competitive city in the knowledge economy of the twenty-first century.

Enhanced Public Realm: A core objective is the creation of high-quality hard and soft landscaping, new public squares (e.g., at St Francis Abbey), and pedestrianised areas. The removal of the former brewery’s boundary wall is key to integrating the site into the city’s existing streetscape, promoting accessibility and flow.

Cultural and Educational Hub: The plans include the redevelopment of old squash courts into a cultural hub, and the aspiration to accommodate a university or third-level institute. This strategic focus aims to position Kilkenny as a competitive city in the knowledge economy of the twenty-first century and beyond.

Sustainable Development: The Masterplan places significant emphasis on sustainable and energy-efficient strategies for individual buildings and the overall site. This commitment aligns with Kilkenny’s broader efforts to enhance its infrastructure and green credentials, contributing to the city’s overall revitalisation.

River Nore Blueway Vision
The River Nore is central to the planned end-state, with a comprehensive vision to “maximise the river’s potential for all citizens and visitors, transforming it into a prominent hub for recreation, training, and tourism”.

Key Access Point: Riverside Gardens is envisioned as the most important access point on the future River Nore Blueway, a planned linear network extending from Bleach Road to Inistioge, serving as a vital recreational corridor.

Water-Based Activities and Facilities: The plan includes establishing permanent, well-designed facilities for water users, such as toilets, showers, changing rooms, club rooms, and equipment storage. It aims to facilitate significant growth in activities like open water swimming, kayaking schools, triathlons, rowing clubs, and dragon boat racing, significantly increasing the current 2500 individual uses of the River Nore annually.

Centre of Excellence: The site has the potential to become a centre of excellence for various kayaking disciplines, leveraging its deep, relatively calm water, and the provision of lighting for night training and a competition venue for national canoe polo events.

Tourism Enhancement: The Blueway will significantly enhance the visitor experience, complementing existing Blueway developments on the Barrow and Suir rivers. It is designed to strengthen Kilkenny’s position as an internationally compelling destination within “Ireland’s Ancient East,” attracting leisure visitors year-round and dispersing tourism across the city and county.

Historical Integration: Future developments may include the restoration of Chancellors Mill, potentially for interpretive centres or other amenities, further integrating the site’s rich heritage with modern recreational use.

The redevelopment of Riverside Gardens and the broader Abbey Quarter represents a strategic move towards diversifying Kilkenny’s economic and recreational base. By leveraging its natural heritage, particularly the River Nore, the project aims to boost tourism, sports, and overall quality of life, moving beyond a traditional industrial reliance. This reorientation of the city’s development strategy underscores a commitment to creating a more vibrant, sustainable, and attractive urban environment for the future.

The River Nore Blueway vision has several key objectives: to ensure appropriate river access, providing safer and more convenient travel for pedestrians and cyclists, as well as emergency access ; to establish permanent, well-designed facilities to support water users, including toilets, showers, storage, and club rooms ; to facilitate continued growth in river use, increasing participation in water sports like kayaking, swimming, and triathlons ; to become a key access point for the River Nore Blueway, serving as a vital link for outdoor tourism and extending the tourism season ; to establish a Centre of Excellence, developing Kilkenny as a hub for kayaking disciplines ; and to explore the restoration of Chancellors Mill, increasing site attractiveness and its potential as an interpretive centre.

Funding and Collaborative Framework
The Abbey Quarter redevelopment benefits from significant public funding, underscoring its strategic importance and the commitment from various levels of government. This comprehensive scale and funding, heavily reliant on national and European public funds and led by Kilkenny County Council, signifies a strategic, public-sector driven commitment to long-term urban regeneration and economic reorientation rather than purely private development. This approach allows for a broader focus on public benefit and sustainable growth beyond immediate commercial returns.

Primary Funding Mechanisms
Major funding sources for the Abbey Quarter development include: the Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF), a major Irish government fund for urban renewal, which supports projects like the Urban Street & Park, Pedestrian & Cycle Link Boardwalk, and the Cultural Hub ; the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), a European Union fund for regional development, contributing to the Riverside Garden Project and the Urban Street ; Fáilte Ireland, the national tourism development authority, which aligns with Abbey Quarter tourism goals through the Kilkenny DEDP ; and Kilkenny County Council, the lead authority, responsible for site acquisition, co-funding, and overall project delivery and management, including the Smithwick’s Brewery site purchase.

Key Stakeholders and Collaborative Approach
The comprehensive nature of the redevelopment necessitates a collaborative effort involving various public bodies and community groups:

Kilkenny County Council: Acts as the lead authority, responsible for the Masterplan’s development and approval, site acquisition, and overall project delivery and oversight.

Department of Housing, Local Government & Heritage: Oversees and provides the substantial URDF funding, highlighting national government backing for the project.

An Bord Pleanála: The independent planning body responsible for approving significant developments, such as the pedestrian and cycle link, ensuring adherence to planning regulations and environmental assessments.

Kilkenny Recreation & Sports Partnership: Collaborates on the development of recreational facilities, including the skate park and the broader vision for water-based activities on the River Nore.

Local Community Groups: Active participation in consultation processes, particularly regarding river access and facilities, ensures the development meets community needs and fosters local engagement.

Conclusion: A Revitalised Riverside for Kilkenny
Riverside Gardens Kilkenny is more than just a public park; it is a tangible manifestation of Kilkenny City’s ambitious Abbey Quarter urban regeneration project. This extensive redevelopment has successfully transformed the former Smithwick’s Brewery industrial site—a significant piece of Kilkenny’s industrial heritage—into a dynamic, integrated urban space. The process, initiated with the site’s strategic acquisition by Kilkenny County Council in 2012 and formally guided by the 2015 Masterplan, represents a phased, long-term commitment to urban renewal.

The project underscores a fundamental strategic shift for Kilkenny, moving from its industrial past towards a future as a vibrant hub for tourism, recreation, and knowledge-based industries. The strong emphasis on enhancing connectivity, ensuring comprehensive public access to the River Nore, and the ambitious development of the River Nore Blueway highlights a holistic vision for improving liveability, promoting sustainability, and boosting economic vitality. The ongoing review of the Masterplan demonstrates an adaptive and forward-thinking approach to urban planning, ensuring the project remains relevant and impactful for generations to come, creating a truly revitalised riverside for Kilkenny.