Point Village
- This topic has 558 replies, 100 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
@alpha wrote:
@Rory W wrote:
Since Dublin now streches from Drogheda to Gorey and as far inland as Laois – yes it does need tall buildings in the centre if only to slow the sprawl
i totally agree. this sprawl has got to stop. Building up is the only logical step isn’t it?
No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.
Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.
One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.
@Frank Taylor wrote:
No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.
Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.
One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.
i thought paris had way taller buildings than that now. then again maybe you are refering to a certain area.
@Frank Taylor wrote:
No, it isn’t. Frank MacDonald was wrong to say we must build up or out. Paris is only 8-10 storeys but manages 100 people per acre density within the peripherique.
Medieval cities with narrow streets like Venice manage this density with only 5 storeys.
One answer could be to double or triple the maximum building height in housing estates of semi-ds near the centre city.
with densities like that in buildings that small, we are beginning to talk in terms of slums. Dublin once had densities like that – ah, the good old days.
If only Dublin had been one of the major capitals of world trade during the Renaissance period, we too could be slumming it like this. Oddly enough, if memory serves me correct, the population of Venice is decreasing dramatically because, quite simply, every day life there is hell. Indeed, the number of native Venetians living in Venice can now be counted in one gondola. The reality is that most ‘Venetians’ now live in Mestre across the bridge from the historic city. I couldn’t find any photos of Mestre to place a link here, but from personal experience it is not exactly pretty – plenty of non-descript apartment buildings with metal shutters and graffitti.
Dublin Densities Estimate
This is largey a gestimate but you’ll get my point.
% Land People Per Hectare
High Rise: .0001 600
Prime Dublin Retail 1 & 2: 2 250
Prime Dublin Hosuing 1 & 2: 2 400
Rest Dublin 1 & 2: 2 300
Victorian Suburbs: 8 300
Council Suburbs: 15 100
Private Suburbs: 30 150
New Ex-Urban Suburbs: 40 50Move forward ten years and allow for 30 towners at 40 floors high half of which are used for housing. This would still have negligible impact on the above figures and a huge and very dubious impact on our sense of dublin. Tackling suburban Dublin (excepting Victorian suburbs and some private and council estates) in terms of increasing densities – including for example slowly takig down council / private area such as in Crumlin and building to X4 the densities would make an enoromus difference to the above and sustainable and urban to boot. If anybody has correct figures they would good to see. Shane
The above formatted rather differently than I hoped. Read as:
High Rise – currently occuping .0001% of land in wider Dublin at a density of 600 people per hectare.
Prime Dublin Retail (postcodes 1 & 2): currently occupting 2% of land at 250 per hectare.
etc. etc. Hope that makes the point clearer!!!!!!!The densities are all in the last census data.
London tried to build its way into higher density with high rise council blocks and failed but did make a big impact on the visual environment. They can’t densify their suburbs now because so many of them are listed. If we don’t move fast the same will happen here with McInerney becoming a sacred name.
From my Desk in Sandyford I get a nice view of Dublin, particularly the sight of the two chimneys rising, er, chimney like, into the sky. The way they stand out and the distance from here that they are has just made be realise how much sky there is to build into, compared to the available land.
High Rise, as has been debated at length IS desirable, but in what scenario, debatable. The fact is though that they’re not the answer to our urban sprawl issues. Ireland is full of traditional, semi dwelling families who would never come round to the idea of apartment living. Even without High Rise, the choice exists currently for Dublin families to live in apartments but they don’t. They’d rather endure living in the Meath/Kildare estates. This may change if the High Rise developments mooted do actually include the promised services and amenities, but it probably won’t..
Frank – Exactly my point. I’m sure that there are plently of Dubliners, conservationists and architects that can point out manys the good feature of such areas as Crumlin but they’re not fit for purpose in the 21st century. This does not necessarily entail demolition. Plenty of options to increase densities and still retain the green space in such suburbs. Doesn’t even seem to be on the agenda at the present. In any case this would all be an expensive waste of time if it was allowed to be contradicted by continued virus that is ex-urban carchitecture. Shane
Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.
@sjpclarke wrote:
Dublin Densities Estimate
This is largey a gestimate but you’ll get my point.
% Land People Per Hectare
High Rise: .0001 600
Prime Dublin Retail 1 & 2: 2 250
Prime Dublin Hosuing 1 & 2: 2 400
Rest Dublin 1 & 2: 2 300
Victorian Suburbs: 8 300
Council Suburbs: 15 100
Private Suburbs: 30 150
New Ex-Urban Suburbs: 40 50Move forward ten years and allow for 30 towners at 40 floors high half of which are used for housing. This would still have negligible impact on the above figures and a huge and very dubious impact on our sense of dublin. Tackling suburban Dublin (excepting Victorian suburbs and some private and council estates) in terms of increasing densities – including for example slowly takig down council / private area such as in Crumlin and building to X4 the densities would make an enoromus difference to the above and sustainable and urban to boot. If anybody has correct figures they would good to see. Shane
Where are you getting these densities? They seem completely wrong to me. A quick look at the most recent census of Dublin shows a density of 41/hectare (16/acre) for the Dublin city area. (495,781 people in 11,761 hectares)
By comparison, Paris averages 245/hectare within the peripherique.
@Rjajc wrote:
ps this is a great site.
I know what you mean when one clicks the previous posts.
Muchos pisos muchas identidades
Frank – I’ve no doubt you’re right on the figures and I welcomed corrections. As I said in my post these were a back of the envelope GESTIMATES used to illustrate the point that towers don’t go that far to addressing the density issue while having very dubious urban consequences. The rations more important to this point. Again we categorically DO NO NEED towers of the type demanded (30 plus floors) by some on this thread. What is needed is a wholescale change in current suburban densities and entailing the need to retro fit existing suburbs. I’ve read a lot of your comments under a number of different themes and am for the most part in complete agreement to all you’ve said on density – scale – urban grain – livability etc. I have no objection to tall building per say but only in the right context. Dublin does not provide that context. (Maybe it will in 50 years). Shane
@d_d_dallas wrote:
Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.
You don’t need apartments to achieve high densities. Amsterdam’s model of high density terraced houses springs to mind.
Am I straying off the point? Village, what village? Walking around my native city it is quite apparent that the majority of, is it appropriate to say native population, are quite incapable of living in high density dwellings. Has anyone looked at the building next to Sunlight Chambers quays? Not a window washed since the first residents went in. I did notice though that a number of the ‘new’ Irish quite understood how to relate to cities. Washing window sills and the like. It’s probably a DNA thing, natives in flats (except local authority ones) usually don’t cosnsider it ‘home’,
Home has a garden, front and back. Look up. How many people keep attractive neat balconies? One per building if we’re lucky. The odd half-dead plant here and there. And yet Irish gardens, the envy of so many. And the windows, ugh!! Litter and debris accumulate between railing and ground floor windows. There might be an excuse though that the resident can’t see out!!
Maybe it’s time letting agencies held courses akin to pre-adoption or pre-marriage ones to get people used to the idea that a flat is actually a home.
Don’t get me wrong, I adore high-rise.@d_d_dallas wrote:
Where in Dublin does the possibility exist for families to live in apartments? If suitably sized well serviced schemes were available, prejudice would subside. Based on the crud that has historically been piled up, Dublin’s stock of apartments leaves little option for raising a family.
I agree – and the latest schemes don’t seem to mirror the ‘family based’ ideology either, prime example being the very recent Mark II Partnership’s plans for the Microsoft Campus in Sandyford, of the 847 or so residential units planned, over 600 are 2-bedroom. Now historically this may have made sense but times and markets are changing – space for families is lacking, I note this especially in Dublin. There is a potentially buoyant market for accommodating families with quality, decent sized apartment living space – with enough space for a young or growing family, plenty of living room space, individual bedrooms for a mid-sized family, 2 bathrooms, dining room, recreation space etc. Not trying to sound odd here, but in fairness to Cork City Council, their push for ‘family-sized high-density’ accommodation in the city centre is starting to bare some fruit – point in case, O’Flynn Construction’s Eglinton Street development offering 3-bedroom, 1,900sq ft apartments – it’s a start and more of the same is on the way, with hopefully some improvements. Developers are slowly coming round to this new angle – well for Ireland.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
So many posts over the past 48 hours have screamed little but ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’….there is little need for glittering skyscrapers in a country of four million people. Our nation is the UK equivalent of Birmingham. Our capital is a suburb in Birmingham.
…This is not contest.But isn’t there a case for saying good architecture arises from competetion? What about the implicit Kuala Lumpur vs Chicago…most of my lakeside friends say there was more than a little disquiet in the windy city when Asia pulled ahead. Now the new Chicago trade centre will be bigger.
What about Chrystler and Empire State?
Or Hong Kongs banks?
Competetion is good. Its what Ireland has lacked for years. ‘Lets be better’ not just ‘ara sure were different for being mediocre’.Also, Birmingham has a population of 1 million as far as I know. Not 4 million.
Why not think of Ireland as Greater NY and Dublin as Downtown NY? lol 😀 (I know NY has a pop of around 11 million)
I do know what you mean though Graham. But its not ‘oh but Mammy, Johnny down the road has one’ its lets be the best at this thing. Its not just because Johnny has one. I dont think of low and high rise as seperate their just different forms of building. Its a false dichtomy to seperate them. In some ways
@Graham Hickey wrote:
A medium-rise Docklands of 8-10 storeys punctuated by the odd ‘feature’ building of 30-40 storeys in the Docklands is much more suited to the scale of Dublin city.
thats just ‘ara sure were grand’ in a nutshell.
thats just ‘ara sure were grand’ in a nutshell.
Could we move away from this sneering type of argumentation? Graham hickey is not making any argument of the type “ara sure we’re grand” as he is asking for fairly large changes to Dublin : buildings 8 -10 stories with punctuated towers and features.
This is hardly the status quo – and although I would prefer taller heights – that particular sneer in uncalled for, and overplayed.
I don’t like the idea of punctuating an area with a high building for the sake of it. Why risk defining a city quarter by a single building? Even if the particular building is good (and most of the proposed “landmark” buildings are not, in my opinion), it is likely to be hated by a significant number of people.
I’d prefer a more organic approach by encouraging mixed height 12-20 story modern buildings for a distinct city quarter – the docklands would have been perfect but unfortunalely the potential has been destroyed by the DDDA with their communist-style planning model where entire blocks are devoted to boring monolithic developments. Why not allow a variety of buildings in each block, built by a variety of developers/architects? Provide basic stipulations regarding preserving the street scape and the provision of public access via retail facilities/restaurants/amenities/etc. at ground floors and encourage a mix of commercial/residential. You’ve a far better chance that some good stuff will be built than if your entire effort is invested in building a “landmark” trophy building which will probably be uneconomic in itself and will require a developer’s subsidy in the form of allowing cheap 6-story shit to be built around it. In this way no one building dominates so the flaws of a single building will not blight an entire area.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
