Cathedrals of Commerce

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:14 pm

I think you are pretty much on the mark there. However, they all seem to agree that the Olympics budget got totally out of control.

I mean, OVER spending.

Barcelona/Sydney done it without going to town money-wise.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:20 pm

The Olympics are in Bejing I think, so that I presume will be a real politburo jobby no expense spared on those egos.

It will be the first time anyone has lost the plot with an Olympics since Montreal in 1976, I think the canadians are still paying interest on that one.

Thats whats great about Shanghai it's all private and mostly foreign money, with the government putting in strategic pieces of infrastructure such as airports and the Maglev.

A bit like Smithfield build a Plaza and let the private sector do the rest. If the Luas was only a Metro that did 150mph to the airport
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:33 pm

I was watching Rocky III last night and realised suddenly that all that Cold War stuff is sadly missing from sporting events these times.

I don't know if you have ever seen movies like 'Steve Prefontaine' and such, where the American used sport as a means to 'take on' the different political types around the globe.

Same even back in Nazi Germany. I mean, in a way all the athletes drug taking etc, Sinead De Brun, was created out of the cold war 1970/80's ideas of super human commies and Americans like Sylvester Stallone and that blonde Russian guy that the women always go wild after.

(Yeah the terrible actor too)

But the current thing now, where USA have no big contenders - doesn't make for the best Olympic games.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:47 pm

garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:12 pm

How to develop dockland areas capable of siting Cathedrals of Commerce with ease

First posted by GarethAce

http://www.economist.com/world/asia...tory_id=2352814

We have a lot to learn from both New York and Shanghai both in terms of architecture and infrastructure ;)
PVC King
 

Postby phil » Fri Jan 23, 2004 11:41 am

Garethace and Diaspora, you guys should go and see the film 'Lost in Translation'. Great views of the Tokyo Skyline and the urban imagery in general in it is great.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby garethace » Fri Jan 23, 2004 2:33 pm

Thanks, there is a book refered in that article too, which sounds like it is worth a read.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:24 pm

garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Sat Jan 24, 2004 8:22 pm

Info on Brooklyn

http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/landuse/20040119/12/841

Love the name of that paper, it is so super hero!

Check out the linked master plan too:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/dwnbklyn2/dwnbklynintro1.html
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Sat Jan 24, 2004 11:45 pm

A good Balance between the two articles.

Having read the cheerleaders first I was very sold on the picture, which looked the dogs.

But the second was just a little negative I thought, as it dealt with the denuding of retail core to accomodate office.

That is the beauty of the docklands, the lands are virtually all redundant use so with many areas it is really a case of a little planning gain and a lot of developer gain.

Plus a few singature buildings to put the city on the map. But in the absence of viable transit it could be a terrible mess.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:15 pm

excellent guide if you ever wish to visit Manhattan, and get to know the place a little bit better.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/priv/mndist1.html
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:39 pm

I'll bookmark that link for sure.

I think I'll pay the extra $50 in March and go Continental and take the free stopover via Newark en route. I need my holiday!!!!

Manhatten is very different to New York per se I think, that is why I don't think one can compare it with Brooklyn, A bit like comparing the Square Mile (on stilts) and Walford.

I think there is a bit of a Canary Wharf opportunity in the Dublin Docklands, but the architecture would need to be a lot better. Don't get me wrong One Canada place was OK in the Early 90's but architecture has moved on quite a bit since.

Shanghai is certainly a better model as is Taunusanlage in Frankfurt.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Mon Jan 26, 2004 6:51 pm

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000061;p=2#000017

What do you think?

Urban decay or poor urban regeneration - it seems to me that Dublin provided a very ideal set of conditions for very poor mass-scale urban regeneration in the past couple of years.

One of the things that I liked about the LUAS Fluid Spaces book by UCD students was that for once, it looked as if someone was thinking about the future of the city, rather than the quick turnover.

Not that all development isn't designed to make a turnover... I mean, I think of Dublin, Belfast, Limerick, Cork, Waterford and any big port cities - this change of land use thing is a very interesting urban debate - all over the world in fact, post industrial etc, etc, etc.

It would be interesting to think of how many small semi-industrial uses existed in areas around Smithfield and Temple Bar up until the eighties.

I mean, Guinness is just the very last tail end of that and perhaps the containerisation down below - what will happen when you take away all those uses, what has happened.... I think that really is a story about an east/west access and the river.

That unique character-enhancing factor that has shaped many cities.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Mon Jan 26, 2004 7:58 pm

I agree that rivers were the primary dictators of pre 1950 settlement patterns particularly industrial location and schools of Industrial location economics sprung up.

But since the mid 1970's only two transport modes have been important to industry have become road and more laterly air transport.

I noticed in the previous post to yours an appraiser talking about basic urban land rent theories, such as retailers moving to the suburbs.
He is right but this is only relevant to a point inso much as most of the businesses in the docklands were retail warehousing so the contribution to the city ratesbase was extremely limited as the RV's (rateable valuations) would have been minimal anyway.

It was made very clear by the EU commission that no favourable tax treatment may be given in the docklands post 2000, so any aspirent Trumps will have to find tenants to pay full charges.

The key to developing Dublin must be to develop high-density buildings within 2kms of the CBD.
Because as it stands companies are opting for the cheaper suburban market becuase in most cases the specs are identical.

Only a higher specification and design can put life back into the docklands. As it stands rents are higher than most competitor cities but design standards are lower.

It would also address the East-West Imbalence as in reality the docklands have not delivered much thus far. The city pretty much ends along an alignment of Grand Canal St- Pearse St- Amiens St -Fairview thus far. Admitedly with two blocks ending at guild St being the exception.

Much more is possible, much higher densities are definitely possible, and only with a rising rates base can DCC deliver the level of service that most other Europeans take for granted. The key is transit only a metro from the docklands to Heuston can integrate the docklands into Dublin properly, only higher density development can support a metro and only higher quality design can justify higher densities. No more Georges dock standard buildings it is time for a few Cathedrals of Commerce. :)
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Mon Jan 26, 2004 9:17 pm

Which makes the LUAS project the exact opposite of what you are talking about I guess - given the length of track they have built from Belgard to the Red Cow, and all that 'density of development' around the M50! ROFL! :-)

Yes, good post, puts a lot to do with LUAS project in a perspective for me at least. I have travelled along most of the LUAS line at this stage and I found it really difficult to finding anything very dense at all.

The only cathedrals of commerce that I found were in Sandyford Ind. Estate, and that place is like something from the Simpson's - I was kicked out of dodge, for loitering around with a camera snapping picies of Microsoft HQ on a Saturday! :-)

"You know this is private property?" (Standing in a public road)

Insert strong inner city Dublin accent too btw, . . .

My own believe, it that if the Docklands was built as you describe with Cathedrals like in Ballymount, you wouldn't be able to use the public streets their either.

New urbanism thread
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Mon Jan 26, 2004 10:02 pm

Of course, while we can say that AMerican architecture is new compared to Europe sometimes, lets not forget the Louis Sullivan stuff way back, and its influence.

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=next_topic;f=5;t=000491;go=older

The idea of using Steel and building higher, in the picture one is covered in masonry, the other expressing its material - that must have been really cool in its day - when Mies first used steel as ornament.

Notice how the people are too tall in the image though and it ruins something that was very, very well rendered.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Mon Jan 26, 2004 10:16 pm

I agree with you totally about Sandyford.


The planners in DLR have a lot answer for, bigtime. The Theory according to Dr Brian Hughes is simple most local authorites are sanctioning large scale developments on the edge of their patch. The edge closest to Dublin, therebye other local authorities such as DCC in the Sandyford case have pressure put on their infrastructure. While DLR collect the rates. Before you point the finger at DLR remember that wicklow are doing to DLR in Bray and so on.

What is really needed is a co-ordinated planning strategy that is implemented by a new agency.

But back to the point, I trust the DDDA and DCC to a level I wouldn't trust any-other LA in Ireland. I mean look at Sligo, with Alan getting the support of Sinn Fein and a mad socialist independent turned old labour called Bree.

I think that high density in the docklands is vastly preferable to the current Sandyford medium density served by LUAS and a motorway. The new park development in leopardstown scares me, the hotel is ok but the clutter of retail warehousing will generate more traffic than Walmart.

What is required are a few Cathedrals and alot of tall 12-18 apartment buildings in the Docklands. As the river views should giver a lift in rental values making better designed buildings viable on the basis of additional marginal income.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Mon Jan 26, 2004 10:30 pm

Yeah, the whole Dundrum thing has to be seen to be believed too. Nice renders of business people walking around open public spaces, but really.... The Leopardstown thing is fairly strange I think. Your point about being on the edge of DCC is about right I think, from my experience of these places.

I guess the image here, of 'medium scale development' is something like the development in Sandymount,

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=next_topic;f=5;t=000450;go=older

the spaces between buildings in Sandymount dis-allowed people to use them, things happening etc - they are policed, camera security dead zones. spaces do not join up in a sequence or order of spaces like in Temple Bar, but on a grander scale.

Notice all the 'road' in that image too - very Sandymount.

As one Intel boss said years ago, Only the paranoid survive.

I think one thing that could work in the Docklands, is where spaces become amenities - this was my point about the Convention Centre, that because it brings in hordes of 'foreigners' who tend to wander around an awful lot - the open spaces would have to become 'public' right from the off.

The absolute worst solution for a Convention centre I could ever imagine, is someplace like Sandymount, where we could not even wander around in the summer evenings after their tour of the convention centre, to clear their heads, before returning to another round two of 'techno product launchs and geek speak'.

If you had a convention centre in Sandymount, people would be trapped in some glass bubble and not allowed out. So in this sense, the wider spatial strategy you were talking about it needed.

I think the few sucessful things I have seen in Dublin, like this, even though it is only a small thing is the liffey board walk and campshires, how it changed the way people use those spaces.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Mon Jan 26, 2004 10:38 pm

Null
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:37 pm

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040116/D8044GJ80.html

BEIJING (AP) - China has abandoned plans to build a high-speed magnetic-levitation railway between Beijing and Shanghai in favor of less expensive conventional trains, the government said Friday through its official media.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:59 pm

It seems like a pragmatic approach to use standardised track gauges that can accomodate all the rolling stock I think that TGV/ICE technology delivers sufficient speed.

As those really in a hurry will fly anyway, I don't know what internal flights cost these days in China but looking at both North and South america $60-100 would cover most 1000-2000kms flights.

I think Maglev is a great concept, but guys like ryanair (ignoring todays 30% plunge) make the viability of sufficiently high fares unrealistic for any great distances.

The cost of maintaining these systems must be astronomical.

I think a DART compatible metro from the docklands to the airport and Heuston would be enough.

It would certainly provide sufficient capacity for much higher densities along it's routing.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:13 pm

garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:15 pm

garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby PVC King » Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:22 pm

Great article on San Fran, it clearly displays the problems of attempting to directly import a model even if that model is as good as Vancouver.

The SOM drawings are good but they made the same error that Kevin Roche made in Spencer Dock by designing too high a podium. Which clutters the design entirely.

It really is a choice between slender and tall with plazas or much larger footprints at 7-8 stories.

That is the key error of the Heuston gate scheme, I had a good look at the model yesterday, the picture looked better.
PVC King
 

Postby garethace » Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:59 pm

Just came across this image of 'dense living' and thought I would post it.

I have listened to the arguments about sustainability, density and mass transit systems expressed here. Generally speaking though, when Architects tend to design a building, I think that movement factors are at their best, when integrated as part of the solution.

Here I have just tried to express some more of my thoughts

I am referring to the design of public buildings and/or spaces mostly. What architects try to do well.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland