The failure of Ireland

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby paul h » Wed May 16, 2007 9:45 pm

[quote="Devin"]HAH :D The truth comes out!!! So the thread was about high-rise after all!!

Don’]

I think darkman was talking about dubai's ambition not the actual number of buildings Dubai have constructed
Are most (not all) high rises not born out of necessity?
When the land becomes so scarce/valuable that the only way to build is up?
I think that is what we are witnessing in dublin as our fair city grows

Same goes for those terrible roads, those are needed for our ever expanding population to hop around
then there is mass transit which is needed for those folks who choose to avoid the traffic jams
Roads of high quality and mass transit of high quality are badly needed
And i seriously dont think its one or the other

edit; carbon neutral is a noble pursuit we should all take serious
http://www.archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=6053
paul h
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:52 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Wed May 16, 2007 10:06 pm

Don't think high rise is born of necessity most of the time. Places like Shanghai, Singapore, Pudong perhaps - very constrained land availability. But the highest densities ever recorded were in the Lower East Side of Manhattan at the turn of the 20th C - 300,000 per sq mile I think, and that was managed with an average tenement height of 5 storeys.

High rise is not an economic necessity in Dublin - more an enormous profit making nice-to-have. It is certainly not a necessity in Dubai and seems to be born out a misplaced desire to live the American dream, except 60 years too late.
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Wed May 16, 2007 10:32 pm

On BBC news tonight

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6660000/newsid_6663800/6663809.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm

this is the C40 Large Cities Climate Summit

http://www.nycclimatesummit.com/

more general info at:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/15/tech/main2804711.shtml?source=RSSattr=U.S._2804711

I see Copenhagen is at the table. Why has Dublin not gate-crashed this if they weren't invited? Or does anyone know are they participating in any other such gatherings?
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby paul h » Wed May 16, 2007 11:28 pm

I think the lower east side achieved this with having an entire family per room or so
the upper east side now is pretty dense with a forest of 4 - 50 story buildings although most buildings on the ave's would be around the 12 story range
Isn't Dubai more of a resort than anyting else ? so it would not fall into the 'normal' city category

and since when did high rise become the 'american dream'?? because you see new york on tv?

the american dream would be more like a nice suburban house with the white picket fence
paul h
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:52 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Thu May 17, 2007 12:41 am

Is there a 'normal' category? You're right though, what I understand of the economics of Dubai just sounds bonkers to me and beyond comprehension.

Very good chapter about the development of high rise in NY in the book 'Cities in Civilisation' by Peter Hall. A very complex coming together of many factors at one time - interesting story, especially when talking about the differences between Chicago and New York skyscrapers.

http://www.amazon.com/Cities-Civilization-Peter-Hall/dp/0394587324

Even in the US though, outside Chicago and New York the skyscraper appeared to be more of a cultural phenomenon than economically driven. With NYC the entry point for the majority of immigrants, the skyscrapers they encountered were hugely influential, and spread as immigrants and ideas filtered across to other cities.

There are for the moment powerful reasons for large commercial high rises - New York and London have to build them in order to compete globally. But do companies want to occupy them for reasons solely of property economics? I think it is the value added by prestige which makes companies want icons. Enormous tracts of open floorspace could be built anywhere at much lower heights, but global businesses want to be high up, be seen and they want to be in the heart of cities, it seems.

In terms of the American Dream it is arguable that the most influential US invention (neck and neck with the mass-produced car) is the skyscraper. It still has a mesmerising mystique for people in far flung cities who want to announce their arrival as world players. I think it is amazing that people are still competing to build the highest skyscraper. Without a pwerful economic argument it looks like insecurity.
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby paul h » Thu May 17, 2007 2:26 am

They are fair points, oustside of chicago and new york and possibly boston and san fran
skyscrapers are a lot to do with image and not necessity
A city with a striking skyline can be packaged and sold easier,
corporations do want prestigous buildings for their hq's and why wouldnt they, but they also want to have a central location that will be close to the talent pool and transport links

But lets get back to ireland, we are not talking massive corporate hq's here but merely a few apartment buildings of relatively moderate height,
to be honest Dublin cannot take blockbuster office towers simply because the floorplate would be too great.
The only highrise that will work there are slender towers mostly suited for apartments

Tall structures when done right can actually be something to be proud of, if there is one thing missing from ordinary Dubs it is civic pride

I really do not understand how anybody can argue against building a top - i.e the best, quality road network, with a little bit of oversizing for future needs? (some earlier arguments against motorways)
-------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the link i'm sure an interesting read, but i'm still trying to find time to finish Friedmans "The world is flat" (damn you cable tv!!!)

Also all this will seem quite trivial when we reach peak oil, which is pretty soon by a lot af accounts
There is a real eye opening docu called 'A Crude Awakening' i watched it recently on sundance channel over here.
a link to another related thread
http://www.archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=5528&highlight=suburbia

We all think money makes the world go round but it is in fact the abundance of cheap oil
paul h
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:52 am
Location: Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Thu May 17, 2007 9:15 pm

The interesting bit about Chicago vs NY was that as most companies had headquarters in Manhattan but Chicago was more regional offices, the New York ones were a lot more sculptural. The Chicago buildings were more often built speculatively and were incredibly efficient space machines.

I am not at all against high rises, it's just that a) they are only one small part of the vocabulary that can make a great places and b) they do signify the worst and most embarrassing top-o-the-world-ma insecure small-willy tin-pot dicator aspirations to announce to the world that you've arrived. They can be good, but they are by far the most visible and easiest things to latch onto. Obssessing about height is to miss so much more that can be done to make cities great.

The other reason that I am not particularly keen on them to be used to signify a city is the nature of their use. Compare a skyscraper to say a public square. Whereas the square is public, open space offering amenity to all, a hgih rise is private, enclosed space which offers amenity only to leaseholders. The contribution to public space of a high rise is pretty limited in my opinion.

I would rather have a completed street, filled with activity, variety, characters, stories, hidden shops, places to hang out than a high-rise apartment building enclosed, as is frequently the case, within a private residential development.

I think that the leading edge of urban design is more at creating places where people love to be and researching and deploying the most innovative sustainable techniques and technologies.

Have to watch the end of suburbia - thanks!
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby Devin » Thu May 17, 2007 11:52 pm

Did you see the article posted by Walker, JL?

http://www.archiseek.com/content/showpost.php?p=64046&postcount=211

I like the odd high building myself. But apparently very few more will be built in the world as they are a huge drain on the environment. Susan Roaf has written much on this.
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Fri May 18, 2007 12:24 am

Thanks. It's interesting - porb says as much about the shock everyone was feeling after 9/11 as anything about the future of towers. Since the article was written it seems towers are booming as never before - in New York there's the rebuilding of the WTC site and a new high rise district planned for the West Midtown, in London height is only constrained by technical capabilities as far as the GLA is concerned. And as for China Shanghai or Beijing...

I remember there were also a lot of predictions that big companies would abandon city centres and decamp to dispersed suburbs - another prediction that was wide of the mark!

I don't think any of this ever affected Ireland though - towers are really beginning to happen now it appears.
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby Devin » Fri May 18, 2007 1:35 am

In a controlled way, thankfully!
Devin
Old Master
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:27 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby darkman » Fri May 18, 2007 2:28 am

FFS how many times do I have to point this out:


This thread is NOT about highrise


FFS:rolleyes:
darkman
Member
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Dublin North

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby mickletterfrack » Fri May 18, 2007 4:04 am

Posted by Darkman FFS how many times do I have to point this out: This thread is NOT about high-rise

I agree you have mentioned it a number of times... but everyone keeps harking back to discussing high-rises. Which in a kind of roundabout way gives you the answer to your question...

What has been built during the boom that is 'extraordinary'? Why has our failure occurred?
note everyone he didn’t say What high-rise has been built...

The naysayers on the thread who denied our abject failure in urban development pretty quickly fell away, leaving one to draw only one conclusion..that you were right, we have in fact failed . Then the question is why and given the underwhelming amount of vision, creative ideas, impetus and a myopic focus on those HRs, in response to your initial post, Id argue maybe we failed because we were never capable of succeeding in the first place given a numer of circumstances. Some within the control of the Irish design world some outside their control. Among other things I believe the talent existed, but I don’t believe it was ever nurtured properly, the pool of talent is too incestuous in Irl, too much from the same school of training (literally) bit like a madras in a way, add to that the corruption, a laziness born from a newly acquired 'nouveau riche' lifestyle, a general demise in breakthrough developments of vision worldwide..and that’s a recipe for the general crap you saw about you on that drive through Dublin

Question is what y'all going todo about it ? Hope your thread has stirred some momentum, theres been a lot of good input and a couple of great suggestions Id love to see get a chance but I wouldn’t call it overwhelming.

Did someone mention Dubai here... we are discussing sound ecological contemporary developments here arent we .....2005 data
The five nations with the largest per capita ecological deficits (negative ecological balances) are the United Arab Emirates (-213), Kuwait (-146), the United States (-89), Belgium & Luxembourg (-62) and Netherlands (-56).

Schuhart you plonk...
Originally Posted by mickletterfrack
Schuhart , what are you babbling on about.... what do you mean I stole your lines...
Reply by Schuhart
For some reason, I feel you know.

No I don’t know please give me an example and I will accept your point otherwise stop implying I plagarised.
I could handle it if it was only that but your insinuation is also implying I plagiarised from a moron which I can’t stand for.
mickletterfrack
Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:14 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby Peter Fitz » Fri May 18, 2007 11:59 am

Darkman are you trying to take the piss ? practically every contribution of yours references high rise.

Darkman's posts on this thread

The Docklands is a failure - a failure of enlightenment of highrise development - a sympthom of failure of Irish attitude to change. Our tallest building after the Celtic Tiger is 70m high

***************

This is exactly the attitude im talking about. Its always why should we do this or why should we do that. Never why we can do that and we will. This is the problem.

Its not your fault of course. Its an Irish thing. Whatever we do - make sure we build it too friggin small - thats the mentality.

***************

Its not about whether Dublin has tall buildings or not - well actually it is in a way because it's a sympthom of a strange attitude we have of thinking too small.


Im not arguing for Skyscrapers or to turn Dublin into Shanghai or anything like that. What im saying is we build too small. Even the most rose tinted spectacles of some contributers would see this is the case.

***************

Go to Dubai (a city in a small country) and look at their ambition. It puts us to shame. Ive every right to be angry at our failure to create a capital to be proud of and dont go on with the bullsh*t that small is beautiful- its not. Its pahtetic and shows us in a bad light. Where is the ambition and the intent to make a statement in Dublin architectularly? Yet again another 32 storey spectacular building rejected in Ballsbridge. Im sorry but we are being f**ked over of opportunity by stupid people in DCC.

Peter Fitz
 

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby schuhart » Fri May 18, 2007 12:42 pm

mickletterfrack wrote:Schuhart you plonk...

No I don’t know please give me an example and I will accept your point otherwise stop implying I plagarised.
I could handle it if it was only that but your insinuation is also implying I plagiarised from a moron which I can’t stand for.
Just to save your psychiatrist a difficult phone call before the weekend, I’ll explain my passing comments – even if its really not so big a deal.

What I was getting at was your comment in post 85
I didnt get any of the counter-points you were trying to make earlier they were so poorly presented
suggests to me that you were smarting over my remark in post 77 to the effect that your comments lack coherence and, hence, felt a need to make much the same comment to me without, tbh, the same actual cause.

Always a bad sign when it gets into citing posts by number.
schuhart
Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby CasaNova » Fri May 18, 2007 5:53 pm

The first skyscapers were buit in Chicago I understood. They represent male phallic supremacy and were built to flaunt the endowment of their builders. Every city in the US looks so alike and although I'm a keen admirer of a lot of the thrusting monuments to wealth, I feel a more feminine approach to architecture would be more apposite to the 21st century.

Are all you architects in here men? Ever heard of Eileen Gray? If not, why not?
CasaNova
Member
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:18 pm

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Fri May 18, 2007 5:56 pm

Sometimes a skyscraper is just a skyscraper....
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby CasaNova » Fri May 18, 2007 5:59 pm

JL.- surely not in the postmodern era.
CasaNova
Member
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:18 pm

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby schuhart » Fri May 18, 2007 7:11 pm

CasaNova wrote:They represent male phallic supremacy and were built to flaunt the endowment of their builders. .... I feel a more feminine approach to architecture would be more apposite to the 21st century.
You mean live in a hole in the ground?
schuhart
Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:24 pm

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Fri May 18, 2007 8:03 pm

Darkman I am not talking about high-rises per se, but signifiers of progress or success. You brought up high-rise in the context of judging Ireland a success or failure - as was pretty eloquently pointed out above.

If we can't get off the topic of morbidly discussing Ireland and (in my opinion simplistically) declaring it a success or failure, then perhaps let's talk about success/failure in respect of other countries. Which countries are 'successful' and which are 'failures'. Come on, don't be shy, name names!
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby JL » Sat May 26, 2007 2:17 pm

Thought so.
JL
Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:00 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby tfarmer » Tue May 29, 2007 2:04 am

anyone who has travelled extensively in the world knows always says oh things are better over there than here and sure there are bad things about every country in the world whether it be in social terms or architecture.

But theres something about ireland i know what darkman is saying its the laziness of the people the couldn't give a sh*t attitude about things. Heres an example. walking down the road in a middle to upper class area yesterday all i see is dogsh8T and litter thrown all over the place .... not just small amounts of it large quantites of it the type youd see in the news in iraq where they have no sanitation facilities and im thinking myself jesus why dont they just clean the place once a week.... but then its the lazy irish attitude of ahhh couldn't give a sh't if it doesnt affect me why should i bother.

thats the difference right there and it permutates to every aspect of irish life unfortunately including building large scale projects ahhh sure why would we do that i dont see the point in that...you just want large builidings coz reason A B C ...
tfarmer
Member
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 2:44 am

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby mhenness » Tue May 29, 2007 9:37 am

tfarmer wrote:anyone who has travelled extensively in the world knows always says oh things are better over there than here and sure there are bad things about every country in the world whether it be in social terms or architecture.

But theres something about ireland i know what darkman is saying its the laziness of the people the couldn't give a sh*t attitude about things. Heres an example. walking down the road in a middle to upper class area yesterday all i see is dogsh8T and litter thrown all over the place .... not just small amounts of it large quantites of it the type youd see in the news in iraq where they have no sanitation facilities and im thinking myself jesus why dont they just clean the place once a week.... but then its the lazy irish attitude of ahhh couldn't give a sh't if it doesnt affect me why should i bother.

thats the difference right there and it permutates to every aspect of irish life unfortunately including building large scale projects ahhh sure why would we do that i dont see the point in that...you just want large builidings coz reason A B C ...


I'd have to agree tfarmer but not everyone here is like that ;-) In general you are right though. Should the appreciation of these things be taught starting in primary school? What do people think?
mhenness
Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Cork

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby Jem Von Tirpitz » Tue May 29, 2007 10:20 am

I can't believe that (after someone cited it as a good example for Dublin to follow), the only objections to Dubai have been on environmental grounds. I haven't seen one mention of the fact that Dubai is built by what amounts to slave labour. It is a victory for cruelty and exploitation and to visit it on holiday is a base act.
Jem Von Tirpitz
Member
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby AndrewP » Wed May 30, 2007 8:58 am

True, if Ireland wanted to take a leaf from Dubai's book, we'd have to start by banning unions, allowing a minimum wage of €1 per hour and giving employers virtual ownership of their foreign workers. That's not to take away from the environmental unsustainability of the development there. Apparently, we are "put to shame" by a tiny country that feels the need to diversify its economy away from crude oil and towards tourism by building hundreds of miles of new coast on giant man-made islands shaped like palm trees and maps of the world visible from space. And by throwing up kilometre-high skyscrapers just to stay in a pissing contest.
AndrewP
Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 2:56 pm
Location: Whitehall, Dublin

Re: The failure of Ireland

Postby KerryBog2 » Wed May 30, 2007 10:40 am

AndrewP wrote:True, if Ireland wanted to take a leaf from Dubai's book, we'd have to start by banning unions, allowing a minimum wage of €1 per hour and giving employers virtual ownership of their foreign workers. ....


Dubai imports its cheap labor from Pakistan/India; Singapore brings in Philippinos and makes the contractors provide immigration bonds (called on should the worker abscond). Ireland uses cheap labor from Turkey and the government turns a blind eye ..... and allows a fudge on the paperwork viz. reports on Gamma in today's IT.
KB
KerryBog2
Member
 
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:56 pm
Location: trilocated and often lost

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland