The impact of the Car on Irish Architecture

i don’t know if it has affected us because usually buildings are taken in isolation and only make provisiion for what is needed by the current development plan for the region. i mean the roads haven’t changed that much to make us design for dependency.
besides the fact that it’s always been there and somewhat suprisingly people are still shocked at stat’s like that.
of course there is a dependency on cars. we live in cities that are urban sprawls without any fully developed mass transit systems(wether they being public or private) and so it is forced on us.

yea i have seen them before.
there is a car park ( i think it’s an audi show room now i think about it)somewhere in germany where it’s something like 14 storeys high and all cars are lifted into place. really classy stuff.
absolutely no doubt if there was a better transit system there would be higher developments.

i don’t know where they got those figures from cos i don’t see how those particular stats could be right but if they are then it is a start.they are trying to start this park and ride thing in galway with a big car park in oranmore and buses and trains in every 15 mins or so. this would reduce cars in town. i think the notion of reducing car depenency is a pie in the sky idea. it’s here lets just work around it. and these seem to be at least part of the key.

I think most people would be surprised with as many as 11% walking to work.

One extraordinary figure from last year was that 58% of children walking to primary school in 1997 had fallen to a mere 35% by 2002, just 5 years.
A commensurate rise in car use for the primary school run occured, increasing from 32% to 52%.

And the difference between girls and boys cycling to secondary school in Dublin is also extraordinary, with 8200 males cycling, compared with just 620 females. Clearly many unnecessary car or bus journeys being made.

Are new office buildings in the city centre being built with car parks now? Does Georges Quay have one?
What about around the country as well – are local authorities granting permission for them any more?

it is preferable to provide car parking alright but if not a contribution has to be paid. i can’t remember the exact figure but 2500 per space sounds familiar for some reason.
if you have the space then they will insist on you providing parking. some won’t even grant without providing them no matter if u have the space or not ( as happened to me in sligo recently)

Are new offices compelled to provide showers? If not they should be. A lot of people might cycle if they could shower at the other end. I’m working in Central Park, Leapordstown and whatever else about the development at least there are showers I can use after my 5 mile uphill cycle.

My brother in Galway works for a multinational which I’m sure has a few hundred parking spaces but no showers and it’s a new building too, surely the planners can force them to provide a few showers.

As for Central Park, it ludicrously turns its back to where pedestrians will enter after getting off the Luas in Sandyford compelling them to walk for another 10 mins, totally designed for cars and basement parking etc. Who do you blame, crappy architects or the planners who should be facilitaing pedistrians/public transport users. I won’t start on the cycle lane going up the leapordtown road like a roller coaster ride. Better than nothing I suppose!

Why are Dublin planners/architects not doing more for cyclists? The situation in the city centre is disgraceful, the cycle lanes hideously inadequate.

Its not the architects job to make the development plans or roads.

But the architects could still have designed pedestrian access to Central Park to accomadate Luas users.

As for the Explosion of Office Space in Leapardtown/Sandyford, Dun Laohaire/RD Coco wanted to expand their rates base and are basically competing with Fingal, Dublin South and the City Centre for this. The splitting up of Dublin then hardly facilitates stategic planning from this point of view.

Where would you have Dun Laoghire CoCo put this type of development, I imagine where people live facilitating walking/cycling Dart use etc. but getting planning for large office development in these places can be problematic as residents (esp. in Leafy DL) can be vocal in their opposition to what they see as traffic generating offices.

Originally posted by anto
But the architects could still have designed pedestrian access to Central Park to accomadate Luas users.

who will pay for it?
it’s up to the council to provide these. they can ask for it to be included in a development but if they don’t then the developer isn’t going to pay for it. and even if the architect puts it in, it will be removed by cost cutting measures. at the end of the day it’s the council’s problem. absolutely nothing to do with the architect.

QUOTE***
“It is a combination of the Legacy of the way roads were designed in the 1970’s and 1980’s. No thought whatsoever was given to the humble bike in these decades. Also the planners in the case of Sandyford got it wrong on a monumental scale. ” *** END QUOTE

To reverse these errors is simple; all it requires is the vision and political will. Architects should come out in favour of a car free Dublin Centre. Where there are existing bus lanes, these should be kerbed off, trees planted, cycle space painted red and turned into two- way cycle lanes.

Every single city centre street should have this basic provision for cyclists. In cases where streets are too narrow to cater for cyclists and cars, the cars should be banned. The only exception would be deliveries: these could only take place during 4am-6am.

Where there is conflict between car and bike, bike must win out. For the bike does not harm the environment; it is good for people, for the quality of life of the city, for a smog-free environment. If the government is serious about a ‘smoke-free’ environment the first thing to do is elimate the choking fumes of the cars that are turning our city into a smouldering traffic cesspit.

Another point: Outside beautiful buildings like the Leinster House Lawn and the Rotunda, sit these giant car parks. With this attitude, I won’t be holding my breath for a clean, car-less Dublin.

To reverse these errors is simple; all it requires is the vision and political will. Architects should come out in favour of a car free Dublin Centre. Where there are existing bus lanes, these should be kerbed off, trees planted, cycle space painted red and turned into two- way cycle lanes.

Every single city centre street should have this basic provision for cyclists. In cases where streets are too narrow to cater for cyclists and cars, the cars should be banned. The only exception would be deliveries: these could only take place during 4am-6am.

Where there is conflict between car and bike, bike must win out. For the bike does not harm the environment; it is good for people, for the quality of life of the city, for a smog-free environment. If the government is serious about a ‘smoke-free’ environment the first thing to do is elimate the choking fumes of the cars that are turning our city into a smouldering traffic cesspit.

Another point: Outside beautiful buildings like the Leinster House Lawn and the Rotunda, sit these giant car parks. With this attitude, I won’t be holding my breath for a clean, car-less Dublin. [/B][/QUOTE]

Dream on! I’d like to see the traders agreeing to that. For God’s sake the will to get the luas thro’ the centre of town wasn’t there. An underground option to link the two lines sometime off in the future was chosen instead.

Has the bit in the times been posted yet?

Cars passing canals at morning rush hour: 63,000.

A drop of 10% or something since 1997.

Taxis alone now form 5% almost, of all traffic in morning rush hour.

I think people are drving out to the pheriphery more and more to work etc, if this is the case.

I friend of mine who uses public transport going into town, has told me that the rush hour coming out in the evening can be much more severe than rush hour going in in mornings. Is that true?

Originally posted by garethace

I think people are drving out to the pheriphery more and more to work etc, if this is the case.

I friend of mine who uses public transport going into town, has told me that the rush hour coming out in the evening can be much more severe than rush hour going in in mornings. Is that true?

Yes. The problem regarding congestion is not caused by people living in Dublin as much as the ones coming in from outside the M50.

http://www.platform11.org/dublin_rail.html

There is fairly high public transport, walking, cycling usage within Dublin city itself. We can thank the British for designing a compact European city. We can thank the Irish developers, planners, county councillors, brown envelopes and endless free car give-a-ways on RTE for the rest. The public transport system in the GDR needs to be redeveloped from the outside in towards the centre and not from the centre out. Sure, higher density planning will make a huge difference but the real congestion is primairly manifested in these new housing developments on the outskirts of small towns in the midlands. Building an Metro to Dublin Airport for several billion will do nothing to solve this. Park n Rides and an extended DART will.

absolutely. but if there was higher densities then there wouldn’t be this push to live in the towns in the midlands. lot more people working and liuving in the city- more money for the centre and making it more vibrant with people being there all the time.

Originally posted by Diaspora
We are in financial trouble if this isn’t sorted out. Because the EU will collect Carbon taxes if more sustainable commuting options aren’t provided.

how much are we talking about? and what do u mean by sustainable transport???? electric buses comes into my mind when u say that…

yeah! gas works well.
i would be a subscriber for electricity still.
and a billion. jeez didn’t think it would be that much.

“electric buses “

Electric vehicles are usually less energy efficient than diesel and just because the emissions dont happen in the tailpipe does not mean they do not exist at the power station. Ireland has a relatively dirty electricity generating mix. A billion windfarms, on sliding bogs, are still to come.

Despite claims to the contrary, I do not know of any comparable city to Dublin, with the same sprawl, that has managed the car.

PS Bergen is not comparable to Dublin

PPS Waited 30 minutes for the bus to work this morning, should have been three in that time.

gas electricity generating power stations produce bugger all emissions. i know ..am doing one at the moment.
but ok we don’t like electricity well what about hydrogen?

anyway back to the architecture. the car is certainly shaping the spread of these horrible, horrible housing estates. more and more people wanting this utopia of a house in the country and then moving into an estate in a small town to achieve something of this. how i don’t know but i’m not going to judge what average joe punter likes.

it is easier to travel( with the car but not the resultant traffic jams) so at the moment there is no real need for higher densities and therefore our backward looking people are stating that there is no need for it and would ruin the look of our “beautiful” low rise inner cities.

the new cities across the lake at welwyn amongst others i believe tried to cater for the advent of the car. but they tried to keep the cars out of the centre and have lots and lots of open space. i am interested to know if this is a general view held by all and is it sucessful to a degree. i know it’s not particularly good now as they didn’t think in the 50-100 years bracket where nearly everybody has a car.

the question i suppose i am angling towards is do we need a modern interpretation for this type of city and with the advent of a seemingly new space race will more technology reach us where if we do design a new welwyn will it be out of date in 50 years.

hmmm! quite long and a bit all over the place but i hope u get my meaning

more and more people wanting this utopia of a house in the country and then moving into an estate in a small town to achieve something of this.

I think its more the fact that housing is grotesquely overpriced in Dublin rather than actually wanting to live in one of the car friendly suburbs

If you are lucky in architectural school you can just drift through the years, doing no urban sites at all practically in fourth year, and even picking to do a nice ‘rural’ project for the thesis.

I think they have even dropped the town study from fifth year.

Presentation requirements are for 1:100 or 1:200 drawings mainly. In practice, employers like architects would ‘know’ something about 1:20 scale junctions and details, to get stuck built.

I mean, some architects have never ever set foot in the places like Rathfarnham – nor would they even bother to distinguish those places in terms of density from the Liberties for instance.

But it is interesting how quickly planners grab onto these concepts:

http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?p=124851#post124851

I like the RIAI housing book, which at least divided itself up into the various environments, inner city, inner suburban and outer suburban. And at least made the attempt to deal with those as separate design problems.

That is what is so nice about the Fluid Space publication by UCD too, which goes along LUAS, which would have stations, or junction points, in all kinds of spatial urban, suburban situations.

Or EU – Eastern Europe v. Western Europe at the moment too.

Yeah, but america have got a great TV series out of it, in the west wing. 🙂

Maybe this need to control vast sum of wealth appropriately is the very reason, why the planning profession in the USA seems to be a way different to what it is here in Europe?

I mean, I have talked to some of those guys at Cyburbia, and they all have gone to ‘dedicated planning school’ doing studio and all kinds of subjects just as architects would do here.

I was introduced to a lot of things concerning architects, over at cyburbia. I think Archiseek does it best…. but the planners in Ireland aren’t anywhere near as vocal or savy as some Cyburbia posters.

It shows in many ways not least their communication skills both print and verbal.

Architects and mental stimulation.

Speaking honestly, having studied and listened to a large number of experts in Economics, computing and IT over the past few years, (some of these people were in their 60s and 70s) I got used to stimulating my brain a lot and reading/listening to debates and arguments which were interesting, made by people who were interesting. Maybe, those people can all be classified as specialising in academics more – but I was just shocked by how dull, mahogony-like, ‘brain-dead’ and almost hollow by comparison some of the more notable architects here in Ireland sound when they try to speak in public.

Of course, some of these architects were greatly helped by their shere level of charisma and one-to-one personal charm. By their excellent command over the English Language and enormous capacities for drinking beer. But the almost non-existent content of academic stimulation was mostly too apparent. I happen to know personally some of these individuals and like them a lot as people, I do greatly value their talent and experience in working as designers. But one thing is certain – that architects brains are allowed to go ‘out to grass’ far too early in life. By the time you are mid-20s, it seems in a lot of ways, your learning and mental stimulation days are over – and it is just one big sea of Guinness and hang overs stretching in front of you, for miles in all directions.

Which is why I wonder about making the AAI part of the colleges of architecture here in Dublin, and having exhibition space, not in the basement of 8 Merrion Square, but perhaps in the entrance route to an architectural school, or someplace. I wonder why planning and geography etc, could not all be part of the one campus with architecture. Probably a complete and absolute pipe dream of mine, but still. . . we need those dreams too I think.

I mean, Bolton Street or Richview Institutes of architecture, couldn’t possibly be more ‘cut-off’ from daily life in many ways. I.e. No young architect is ever going to bother dropping back in there to look at a book or to read a thesis ever again. Yet courses like Law, economics, business, computing – all the things driving the celtic tiger – they all depended upon older experienced people constantly updating their knowledge and bringing things constantly up to a next level. You simply cannot do that stuck in a pub of a Friday evening talking about Corb. The initial education in college is very challenging and intense, very educational and stimulating, but after that…. ? I mean, places like Angier Street, specialising in all kinds of Law, business and computing subjects seems to be as much geared for the older student coming back, as it is for the new one starting out.

On the topic of development in America – these are interesting: http://www.openrangeimaging.com/images/

Very once off, very remote, very car oriented. Lots of different ‘Americas’ me thinks.

Products can sometimes be introduced into the market place from the top down, while other times, introduced from the bottom up. Education is no different. The top down, is where you release a product say at €4,000 and watch it get more competitive in price as time goes on – clothes and fashions are a bit like that. As next season approaches, it tends to reduce in price. Only to become replaced by something totally new, hip and trendy.

Then with the bottom up policy – you introduce a simpler product at the bottom and watch it grow in sophistication, as more improvements and additions are contributed over time. Eventually the difference between the low-end product, and the ‘high-end’ product might be so small, as to catipult the low-end product into the high end market. I am worried that too ideas and concepts in planning, architecture and the built environment, are just being introduced from the top-down. With very little new coming in at the bottom.

I would love to see an R&D project, part in college with a masters program or something, part out of college with existing experts done into ‘architectural space’ or something. Like the way geographers seem to grab so much R&D money to do GIS, population surveys and census analysis. Architects don’t have any R&D output at all. Except in the building materials end of it, where Duncan Stewart tests glulam beams to destruction etc, etc.

The said finding from such an R&D project into ‘architectural space’ could indeed form the basis for a lecture course to undergraduates or something. So the value of the work gets recycled back into the system over and over again – instead of just sitting on a shelf in Bolton Street Library in the form of a 5th Year thesis report, never again to be used or opened. I imagine, there is probably even enough material in those said 5th year thesis reports, to mine into and actually compile an R&D project on architectural space here in Ireland or something.

But it is this whole point of recycling and churning the knowledge and learning, back into the system at various points, which I am trying to discuss. I have never heard of any year head etc, in architecture school ever heading up such an R&D project or anything. What we have in Ireland is loads of money – but money just sitting there doing nothing is of no value – not in the building industry, not in any industry either. Convert it into knowledge, expertise and ways to go forward.

Just one case, where I am familar.

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2664

I hate the way that computers were introduced into architecture from the top down in this country. Normally by some old guy at the top, about 10 years away from retirement. Instead of from the bottom up. Ironically the old guy is probably more worried about what will last for the next 12 months and just do enough ‘to get him/her by’. Indeed, the older guy might introduce something, and replace it at great expense and hassle, loss of productivity etc, every 12 months.

Whereas the younger person, might actually be more worried about how it could evolve and grow over a much longer period. Using computers as design tools was clearly a situation, in which a bit of help for R&D, masters working in college and a bit of outside help etc, that the young raw recruits could actually be the ones to bring computing into the design of architecture in this country. But it was all down by big ‘grey beards’ from the top down, who could only see a few yards in front of their own face.

A good example of introducing talent from the bottom up, is possibly in the case of soccer and other sports. You do not find managers as such, going around telling very young players how to play better soccer.

course u do. how do u think they improve their games. learn tactics etc.

just spent ten minutes writing a reply and went to post = told i wasnt logged in = lost message and back to square one!!!
hence pain in the ass…..is this just me or is there a way to prevent this from happening…or am i just a gobshite :confused:

Originally posted by Diaspora

Thats exactly why Irish soccer is in a mess, too much coaching at a very young age prevents kids from developing their creativity vs the local coaches idea as to what creativity may be.

Similarly in Architecture or any academic field if too much theory is crammed in we lose the message. Which as in soccer comes from yourself or doesn’t exist.

Diamonds in the rough.

I was watching a very good programme about diamonds last night, that is a classic example of where the market is heavily regulated by De Beers, and the programme was all to do with artificial diamonds coming in at the bottom end of the market for around €4000 compared to the high end diamonds worth many more thousands.

That eventually the artificial diamonds may equal in terms of quality and may even surpass that of the real thing.

I think that the Architectural profession is a bit like De Beer’s in this country, sure, they are entrusted with the care of the ‘concept’ of architecture, but do not think for even one second they are always, in every possible situation and in every individual case, going to be the best ‘parents’ of architecture.

De Beer’s put mega bucks into science to allow them to ‘verify a real diamond’. So as not to ‘flood’ the market with fake diamonds.

In the same way, that most of the resources for architectural education in this country are mainly devoted towards ‘verifying’ the existence of a ‘real architect’. As if you could just throw the average early 20 something into a litmus solution and watch the colour turn either oranage or blue.

That is what De Beer’s are reduced to doing now, and so is the architectural education system here in Ireland. Yes diamonds that occur in nature are amazing, and the natural real thing will always be more sought after. Coming about through an amazing process of time and pressure and all sorts of conditions.

But the market for cheaper, artificial diamonds is there waiting to be exploiting, a different market to the market for real diamonds. As yet, no one in this country has shown any interest in this new market, for cheaper architects.

Architecture itself is not ‘owned’ by any profession at all. The concept itself is independent, while it did seem for a while that Man U owned soccer, that is simple not the case, when you get to the core of it.

In fact, the modern game of soccer as we know it today was something born out of the slums in places like Rio De Janiero.

On the subject of cars and Irish Architecture.

One of the best places I know, which explains this and you can experience it physically is Stillorgan centre and junction. It is just off the main Stillorgan dual carriageway and Kilmacud Road Upper comes into the junction, along with a couple of ‘overflows’ from the Stillorglan dual carriageway.

There is a couple of pubs, restaurants, banks, shops, cinema, shopping mall, surface car parking, Omni PLEX and so on. But the place is entirely useless because pedestrian were not anywhere considered in the whole equation. It is ALL 100 car in that case, how to drive your car, get out of it and shop.

It is easy to talk about density and ‘mothers walking’ to shops etc, but, it still doesn’t work when you have a mess of traffic like that. It is one of the few places I know in Dublin city, where the cars literally ‘keep driving’ even though the ‘green man’ is turned on!!!!! and old ladies are tried to cross the road.

It is just so much hassle to get from the Omni PLEX to the cinema, to the shopping mall!!! Across all the lanes and traffic going in all directions.

Courtesy of the Albuquerque Tribune…..

Pocket guide to urban sprawl slang….

http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news04/032304_news_sprawl.shtml