Reply To: Decentralisation – the end…?

I think it’s better it be decentralised a bit more than that, but still in concentrated chunks. The current ‘plans’ are ridiculous, fundamentally it is a proposal that hasn’t been thought through, both in terms of the will of the workforces to move, and the framework it should be executed within, i.e. the Spacial Strategy.
The principal is a good one, put planning of a nature other than that for political gain is required.
The plan is nonetheless exciting in terms of the opportunity it brings for some decent modern architecture around the country, and for the progression of the practices of sustainability in development here. Will/would the OPW be acting as architects or are they just involved in the practicalities of the project?

It’s interesting that there’s almost no flats or mansion blocks in Dublin at all from the 19th century, Iveagh Trust aside. Suppose there was never the tradition of flat or apartment living in the city that there was on the Continent, esp in Paris, or to the small degree there was in Britain. Land values or a sufficient concentration of then lower-middle class people in Dublin never prevailed to require such structures. And coming into the Edwardian period, the small Victorian streets off the larger suburban ones had firmly set the trend for the 20th century for terraces of houses in favour of blocks, the type of later blocks that dominate so many UK streets.

I dunno Diaspora about the early 19th century, I’m facinated but unsure about this time – esp that people so often make the point that it’s often said that Dublin came to a halt in residential building after 1801, and that really it did continue to develop, eg Fitzwillian Sq etc. But that’s about it! It’s really only Fitwilliam Sq and St and a scattering other developments that went up!
And considering over the course of the next 30 years the northside emptied of the affluent with virtually no new housing compensating on the southside (except the likes of some of the Synge St area) I think indicates a strong residential depression – something that largely didn’t change till 1830, when a lot started to happen – albeit mostly beyond the canals! Of course this then contributed to a big decline in the city centre, with the abscence of the prosperous concentrated residential development that so benefited the small Georgian city.
Suppose there’s two aspects to it, the commercial health of the city, and the residential aspect, both of which offer kind of conflicting signals. In the housing stakes at least, the suburbs could have done with a bit of decentralisaton to the city!