Dublin skyline
- This topic has 644 replies, 86 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by
.
- Posts
Irish conservatism towards high rise is a very good thing. High rise creates just as many problems as it solves. They are not fantastic places to raise children (though they can be). They are also very very long lived, with almost no chance of being removed if they turn out badly. They are a big bet.
They are also not necessary. The you get diminishing returns the higher you go. Medium rise (5 -10 floors) does the trick a lot better than 10 -100 floors.
On an architectural level, i have visited San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, New York , Philedelphia, London , Paris , Stockholm, and Berlin. The high rise concept only , only looked nice in Chicago. Every other group of high rise buildings that i have seen, has been a collection of very very plain/ or ugly buildings peppered with some master pieces. Unlike a low rise setting , the masterpieces cannot overcome the ugliness/plainess over their surroundings. If you give the green light to high rise , you will enevitably have to contend with cheap efforts, just as you do with low rise development.
New York is particularly dull. Where it isn’t dull ,it’s horrid looking. It can be done however, Chicago is just beautiful.
They are also very very long lived, with almost no chance of being removed if they turn out badly.
I’ve heard this claim a few times and it puzzles me as it is almost the opposite of the reality. Low-rise sprawl, semi-D estates, etc. are far more permanent than any tall building. Some of the tallest buildings we had in Dublin – the Ballymun Towers are gone/going having lasted less than 45 years. I doubt Hawkins house will last another 10. It would be realitively trivial to get rid of Liberty Hall if SIPTU were so inclined. On the other hand, how long do you think the semi-D estates around Lucan will last for example?
@jimg wrote:
how long do you think the semi-D estates around Lucan will last for example?
Fair point. But with respect to ballymun the cost has been enormous. I don’t think the regeneration would have occured but for the unavoidable social problems.
I do think the rest of my argument stands up. One or two ugly highrises are so hard to mask.
.The sprawling housing estates of the suburbs make a different but interesting discussion. With the right faciliatory legislation , i could readily see the redevelopment of these estates happening. You would not need more than four houses in a row to create enough room for a dense 4/5 storey (no more) structure with room left over for a proper park. The land use in estates is just so bad that i think you can create big enough appartments for families , parking, communal garden , while the buildings required would not tower like monsters. Something will have to be done, just as ballymum had to be sorted out.
@a boyle wrote:
High rise creates just as many problems as it solves. They are not fantastic places to raise children (though they can be). They are also very very long lived, with almost no chance of being removed if they turn out badly. They are a big bet.
Super high-rise should never be needed in Ireland because of our size and population but there’s no way Dublin can continue to grow outwards that way it is at the moment. The cost of not building up, in terms of transport, utilities, ameneties and community spirit, are huge.
Raising a child in a high-rise block might not be ideal but raising one when you’re commuting up to two hours each way is equally bad, if not worse. Living in an area where everyone is isolated because everyone commutes, or where the nearst shop is a drive away because densitiy is so low are bigger problems IMHO than having a shortage of play areas.
Well built high rise apartments with decent floor space could mean better local facilties, better mass transport and less commuting. With enough children living in a block, there is added pressure on the developers or the LA to provide playground facilties nearby.
Was it Bertie who said recently that the population was expected to increase to 6million by 2030? ALthough I find this inflated, it is undoubtedly the case that we will have to consider the reality of high-rises in our towns and cities – as many of the people making up this increase will be immigrants they will almost definitely gravitate towards the cities rather than towards rural settlements. It will be an issue which we will have to confront sooner rather than later and will simply have to get over the low-level mentality. At the moment Ireland has the architectural profile of a stealth bomber – I am surprised that we even show up on GPS systems. Sadly the opportunity of Dublin’s Docklands has and is slipping away each day. Indeed, the only town in Ireland to really attempt to embrace medium rise buildings has been Limerick and for this it deserves recognition.
@markpb wrote:
Super high-rise should never be needed in Ireland because of our size and population but there’s no way Dublin can continue to grow outwards that way it is at the moment. The cost of not building up, in terms of transport, utilities, ameneties and community spirit, are huge.
Raising a child in a high-rise block might not be ideal but raising one when you’re commuting up to two hours each way is equally bad, if not worse. Living in an area where everyone is isolated because everyone commutes, or where the nearst shop is a drive away because densitiy is so low are bigger problems IMHO than having a shortage of play areas.
Well built high rise apartments with decent floor space could mean better local facilties, better mass transport and less commuting. With enough children living in a block, there is added pressure on the developers or the LA to provide playground facilties nearby.
I disagree, unless you have almost dictatorial control over the planning it is very hard to get it right. Witness the ifsc, sure it’s nice and all , but it is simply dead . gated communities of single people who don’t trust a soul . In order for high rise to work, the planning authority need to have a level of power where they can demand a school, a park, so many shops in this configuration. This can only eat at the money available for architecture. And it is not at all clear that any authority would divest such power in a good way.
Just one specific point if you live on floor thiry of x building and there is a nice park fifteen minutes away , you are going to spend 25/30 getting there with your small children, same with a shop. You simply replace driving with long walks. (environment improvement ok – but it is not nicer to live in). And any sense of community is flushed down the toilet.
I lived in high rise for a time , and although i am single , i could see many issues. In a semid your car is just outside , on the thirtieth floor you car is ten minutes away. Trying to do basic things is just as annoying as in an estate.
In any event there is just so much space with the city limits that is not being used that there isn’t a need for high rise. A dramatic change in the organisation of planning yes.
Amsterdam pursued a very successfull medium rise system. 4/5s storey lets you pack em in and yet if cleverly done give every one plenty of space.
probably what is wrong here is that the discussion isn’t differentiating between high-rise residential buildings and high-rise commerical/office developments. I agree with the anti-social element of high-rise living, although I am not convinced that living in a mono-design estate of 400 mono-tone houses on the outskirts of Dublin is any more socially desireable than living in one of 400 apartments in a high-rise. At least you get to chat to people in the lifts!! As regards car usage – simply put, if you have the critical mass of population to necessitate going up, then you have it to necessitate going down (ie with a good metro you won’t need your car so much). A proper-functioning city of 1.2 million doesn’t need such a level of car dependency – the problem is Dublin is not functioning as it should or could. It requires a change in mentality – public transport is not for the poor, its for those who see alternatives to unregulated car usage and ownership. High-rise commercial/office buildings clustered appropriately would not have any immediate consequences on such social units as the family or the local pub. High-rise residential buildings would have an impact on such social units as the family, but such developments are very often aimed at non-family aged couples or singles as is already the case in most of the 3,4,5 and 6 storey apartment buildings currently being built in and around Dublin.
So have I got this right. The same way as waiting for a bus…….weve been waiting decades for a skyscraper and now 3 are coming along at once (2 of which unfortunately look questionable in their design). About time. U2 tower will look great though:cool:
For those who haven’t seen it, here are some pics of Belguard Square in Tallaght I took this evening.
You know that would look at lot better if it wasnt for the silly change of angle in the glass 3 floors from the top.
@darkman wrote:
So have I got this right. The same way as waiting for a bus…….weve been waiting decades for a skyscraper and now 3 are coming along at once (2 of which unfortunately look questionable in their design). About time. U2 tower will look great though:cool:
hi im new im not an architect or anything ive just got a passion for architecture unfortuatly coming from Galway i dont get to see much of it.
but anyway you said three buildings the u2 tower and hueston gate….but whats the third?That’s an horrendous looking building. Not innovative at all. Typical of most Irish dabblings into modern architecture since the 1960s and will be an eyesore in years to come.
@rob mc wrote:
hi im new im not an architect or anything ive just got a passion for architecture unfortuatly coming from Galway i dont get to see much of it.
but anyway you said three buildings the u2 tower and hueston gate….but whats the third?The third is the point village tower: http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2006/000266.html
Is there any work actually started on heuston gate? when is it due to be complete?
Also alto/monto vetro? whats the status, any pictures?!@annagassan wrote:
That’s an horrendous looking building. Not innovative at all. Typical of most Irish dabblings into modern architecture since the 1960s and will be an eyesore in years to come.
To sum it up, I think it’s architecture designed by sociopaths (for sociopaths) like most of the architecture in Ireland since the 1960’s.
Sociopath = Antisocial personality disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis recognizable by the disordered individual’s impulsive behavior, disregard for social norms, and indifference to the rights and feelings of others. The closely related concept psychopathy, which should not be confused with psychosis, covers a generally more severe personality disorder.
List of Common Sociopathic Traits = Callousness; Impulsivity; Conscience defect; Exaggerated sexuality; Excessive boasting; Risk taking; Inability to resist temptation; Antagonistic, deprecating attitude toward the opposite sex; Lack of interest in bonding with a mate; Egocentricity;
As a matter of interest, would you list 5 or 6 features of the above design that you would describe as ‘sociopathic’ in nature. I’m interested to know what elements of the above photographed building are so problematic to the public and architectural eye.
1. How about the the overall appearance of the thing …somewhat stuck awkwardly in among the other squat blocks. As already mentioned it’s tilt at the top suggests its trying to do or be something, but it amounts to nothing. How about It’s fussy outword appearance. No doubt its designed by numbers. Move the elements around a bit and viola another block etc..
2.How about the chasm effect of the buildings created side by side.
3. No doubt the space of each appartment inside amounts to that of a prison cell …..with kitchen cum living room and awkward galley kitchen.
4 And all for the princely sum of 300,000 plus no doubt.
5. And imagine how it will be viewed in 10 years time.A fucking crime overall, like generally all the shite that it flung up around.
@paul h wrote:
very true thomond park especially with the huge negative attitude towards high rise
this one should have been of a very high standard like the U2 building
as it could have been a showcase to what high rise living could be in ireland
what we have is an apartment building which can be found in almost every city in the world, no imagination.this was just granted pp in london, its mixed use hotel, office, apartments etc so maybe unfair to compare
[ATTACH]2316[/ATTACH]Is this London’s answer to the Transamerica Pyramid?
Has the stairwell/building core gone up in the U2 Tower yet? Its already shooting up in the Eglinton St. development in Cork as I’m reliably informed by the ‘Developments in Cork’ Thread. These things go up fairly quickly as I saw myself with the HSQ development, it’d be greatly appreciated if there were any photos. It would, if anything, give us a scale of the development going up(And up!)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
