Re: Re: who are the National Conservation and Heritage Group

It is probably true that many conservation types would be as likely to object to 7 – 8 storeys as readily as 35 storeys, but you can’t just write off that segment of opinion, you have to believe that if the arguement is strong enough, you can convince anyone, especially people with enough passion about their city to get off their asses once in a while and protest about something.

The problem with the high rise as a means of boosting density is that this arguement is quite weak.

I can’t remember how many apartments there are in the Heuston Gate tower, but it’s bugger all in terms of boosting the density of the city, and even if you had 10 or 15 Heuston gates, you’re not going to make much impression on the densification index. The slenderness that makes Heuston Gate acceptible defeates the goal of adding really significant numbers.

As far as I can see, the decision on high rise within the city core was made when they said no to the Smithfield tower and the digital hub towers and the one on the Player/Wills site. Right now it’s just a distraction from getting on with the real business of mending the city that we nearly destroyed with decades of neglect and daft road widening plans. There is so much scope for good urban scale densification without reaching for quick fixes that aren’t there. It would be nice if we learned to walk before we start to try to run. Maybe if you live in Arklow you might be happy to take the risk, but it looks like a reckless gamble to me.