Welcome to Ireland’s ugly urban sprawl

Long article.. well researched … coming from a particular camp though.. good mix of figures and opinion. I think some people get hysterical however about keeping the landscape wild… it’s obvoius we need a good organisation at the helm of development work .. taking roads and housing industry etc.. under its wing… some hope at the moment anyway when the govt pays no attention to its spatial strategy with the decentalisation proccess.
Anyway… with compliance with EU pollution laws etc I don’t see why we can’t develop substantially taking care as we go… problem seems to be that the agenda of the “anti-current way of working” bodies seem to be a bit extreme… I don’t have a problem with Soutwarks (Dallas?) dotted around .. they’re quite funny… you get them a lot in Cavan.

Its always good to have an outside opinion of whats happening here. It helps you keep things in prespective. An execllent article and all too true I think. Makes for very unsettling reading.

It was a little full on I thought, and it is generally better not to wash your dirty laundry in your most important tourist market. But they are in essence correct in the points they made, it was all avoidable.

I personally blame Martin Cullen for the whole sorry mess, it is worth remembering Cullens stance on e-voting, Bertie made two critical errors at the reshuffle he didn’t fire Cullen and he didn’t promote Liz O’Donnell at Tom Parlons expense, they (Cullen & Parlon) are both walking liabilities.

There are plenty more articles like this being written all over Europe and the States which will in time destroy our tourist industry as well as the environment, all the tax breaks in the World can’t make empty hotels profitable.

Maybe it is a little full on but then its coming to this with a fresh perspective whereas we can become immune to whats going on to a large degree because it is happening so much. Seems as if the article agrees with you as well Diaspora – Martin Cullen is the scourge of environmentalist in Ireland today.

Martin Cullen is the scourge of the taxpayer,

he keeps chucking buckets of money at schemes of questionable merit, go over to the M50 thread on http://www.platform11.org

807m for the M50 upgrade, this comes after wasting a million for every week of the year on e-voting.

So should we not have motorway / dual carriage way linking major urban centres ? it is the standard in all other european countries. I just drove back from Cork, It took 3 hours and ten minutes, the last time it took well over four … are we suggesting that a two lane road passing through several towns is an acceptable way to link the countries two largest cities ?

Sure roads aren’t the answer but to my mind motorway linking dublin with cork limerick galway & waterford is a standard that should be met …

Aside from faster journey times, from a safety view point, its essential … night time visibility is dreadful with on coming headlights in your face … there’s no mystery behind our road death figures … the two lane national raods are dreadful.

We absolutely should have a motorway linking Belfast with Cork via Dublin and another going to Cork, a spur off it going to Limerick and an upgrade of the the Route to Waterford.

But the 807m has nothing to do with the routes connecting our major centres. This project had an estimate of 316m 15 months ago according to platform11’s website apparently from the Sunday Business Post.

What I want to know is why a project cost can go from 316m to 807m in 15 months? Something is seriously wrong with that.

So there was a route around the Hill of Tara after all. You really do get numbed living in this country, really you do

Very disturbing article – it’s certainly true the truth really hurts. We’re literally on the ROAD to nowhere. 2020 what a vision / vista awaits us and is taking place all around us due to no vision and greed in abundance. Posterity is bound to ask (as we do now) who shaped our landscape and what was going on in Leinster House and the schools of architecture and planning !!

what is the acceptable loss for the advancment of our country? the reality is not the oh” this is bad, and that is bad so we shouldn’t do it, what does the country need.i would however never support anything that destroys tara, but as i believe it doesn’t go through the hill but 3 miles away or something. i could be wrong however. the article is a good one and points out some interesting things but we are not a little isolated island anymore who’s reliance on toursim is overwhelming everyother aspect. we need these roads and it’s as simple as that, and to be honest, no-one can tell us what to do with our own country.

The M50 was designed as a by-pass of Dublin, but it has turned into something completely different.
I agree that some of the junctions need to be upgraded as they were badly and cheaply designed. I remember about a month after the M50 first opened, there was people pointing out that the Red Cow Jtn was badly designed. The Government at the time said that it would cost £4million to fix. So of course they did nothing. But later when traffic increased they installed a quick fix of traffic lights on roundabouts, which leads to the mess we see today.

The biggest fault with the M50 is it does absolutely nothing to get commuters to the heart of the city without having major congestion. Now rail on the other had has proven itself time after time to be a superior form of transportation for getting commuters in and out of a cities heart.

If the government put the same investment into rail as they do with roads, well to put it simply, half the roads projects would not be needed like the widening of the M50 and the Naas Road or even the proposed M3.

An embarrassing article, very comprehensive. All true and lots of it quite disturbing.

Saying that, reading it one would get the impression Ireland is a brash, crass, mini-America, across the board.
We’re not that bad by a long shot, but certainly in certain areas we’re well on our way if not there already.

We have to get a grip on planning in this country, our core problem.

When I was a kid in the 1970’s and 80’s I can recall loads of overseas media portraits of Ireland as a backward, church-run, myopic land where modern civil liberties taken for granted in other Western democracies such as divorce, contraception, etc were banned, while women’s equality was archaic and gay’s right were unthinkable. At the time, Ireland was divided between one section of the society who were embarrassed to be living in this country and agreed with this negative portrayal of us, and the other half who claimed there was nothing wrong with Ireland and this was just anti-Irish bigotry and nothing else.

I think in 21st Century the likes of this excellent and accurate article are present day equivalent of the “Land of Gombeenmen and Priests” of the 1970’s and 80’s. We need to be shamed and embarrassed on this island for the mess we are in. Hopefully enough Irish people will be embarrassed by the state of “planning” and development in this country they will change the culture. This sadly is the only way to get most things done in this country. I welcome such brutally frank portrayal of the mess this country is in as we need this mirror held up to eventually expose the culprits and shake the apathetic masses out of their slumber.

There was nothing in the Guardian article I would consider over the top – we need to be told what a joke we are by outsiders. And we are most certainly are a joke. The Celtic Tiger has resulted in a “Trailer Trash Wins the Lotto” mentality among our politicians. We are blowing money on expensive showcasing rather than what we actually require.

I read once that a survey carried out by a student at Waterford NIT discovered that Waterford City has the lowest public transport usage of any city in Europe and less that most US cities – roughly 1% use the bus. Tonight Waterford Council outlined a plan for a new town of 12,000 people based entirely on a new ring road as the only transport access. Some fear Minister Cullen has now taken his local transport “success” onto the National Stage and we should be very concerned about this development – in effect putting him in charge of motorways is like letting a junkie loose in a pharmacy. We need articles like this if he is to change his ways via international criticism and embarrassment.

@P11 Comms wrote:

Tonight Waterford Council outlined a plan for a new town of 12,000 people based entirely on a new ring road as the only transport access.

To be fair to the council, I’m not sure that there is any rail in the city boundaries: I think it’s all just North of the river in Kilkenny. The planned town is to be fairly high density, allowing for most local journeys to be completed on foot. As regards public transport, they just need a good link into Waterford city. Maybe the council could reserve some of the land going into the city for a right-of-way bus corridor to be upgraded to LRT once the demand is there.

As for the article, I guess that sprawl has been the result of well intentioned but mistaken planning policy rather than anything else. Presumably developers would have been happy to continue building additions to old towns at the existing densities, had it not been for 4-to-the acre planning rules.

Sprawl puts a massive gulf between the city residents and the countryside. Bring back walled towns! City or country and nothing in between- certainly not 8 miles of ulta boredom.

Oh my god – I am only 25 and I do remember the M50 being built as a by-pass around Dublin – its effectively Dublin’s new circular road, with everything within could be called the new Inner City!!!!!

That article is more akin to something you would see on Indymedia than in a proper newspaper. It’s more a polemic than it is a report. He talks about windfarms as some kind of panacea for all our problems yet it is conservationists who have opposed most of the wind farm plans. A lot of the points he makes are accurate, I just think the tone is a little rash.
Also, just on a point of interest regarding the M50 – the original plan for the junction at the Red Cow was for a single-level signal-controlled roundabout. It was only after a lot of lobbying that this was changed to a grade-separated junction.
When in reality what we needed all along was three-level junctions at all the major intersections of the M50. I read on Platform 11 that only the junctions between the Airport and the Red Cow should be made into spaghetti junctions.
But thas is exactly the thought process that will leave Tallaght, Dundrum and Sandyford gridlocked in years to come.
Saying that the redeveloped M50 won’t meet capacity, so therefore we should just leave it alone, is just moronic.

Kefu is right – this isn’t journalism, it’s a rant. One example from many possible – Toyota in Tralee isn’t just selling cars, it’s “doing its bit to inflate the car economy”. Imagine coming to Ireland and depending on Ian Lumley, Eamonn Ryan and Tony Lowes to tell you what’s happening? It’s like going to Britain and speaking to Screaming Lord Sutch, Arthur Scargill and Billy Bragg.

A lot of these liberal Brits want Ireland to stay a backward “pleasant” country where they can shoot and fish during the summer. We’re not allowed to have roads, Tralee isn’t to have Toyotas, and bogs are to be left alone and just looked at. What a lot of twaddle. Amazed that a serious newspaper could publish such a one-sided view. 😡

True, it can be seen as insulting, but you can’t deny the place is being swallowed up in housing estates and retail parks. there’s no big plan and the place is turning into a suburban wasteland. As said in the article you’d think we’d learn from the mistakes made in the UK but we just follow along.

@Mob79 wrote:

True, it can be seen as insulting, but you can’t deny the place is being swallowed up in housing estates and retail parks. there’s no big plan and the place is turning into a suburban wasteland. As said in the article you’d think we’d learn from the mistakes made in the UK but we just follow along.

I think there are three Schools of thought in play here, those who read the hype of the article and have written its authors off as the looney left without examining the facts they had assembled. And with that writing style it wasn’t too difficult to do.

The second school of thought has looked at the facts and not really considered the prose style which is quite frankly terrible and destroys a good piece of research.

Mob79 has hit it for me, there is no grand plan like there is in most developed nations, the three major points that are made are correct. Firstly you can expect that same chance of a planning permission for a one off house whether it has been designed by DeBlacham & Maher into context or whether you have downloaded one the of ‘Irish House Design’ packages and had an engineer sign it off.

Secondly the M3 cutting through the SKreen Valley close to the Hill of Tara an archaelogical area of World significance, there are two points on this firstly the EIS flagged another possible route on the other side of the Hill of Skreen which would have had significantly less impact. The cost benefit analysis of the M3 in relation to other transport projects is also highly questionable, the M3 does not serve any major population centres, but will in reality service hundreds of acres of low density sprawl along its route.

Thirdly the Carrickmines fiasco, the reality about carrickmines is simple, an important national monument was leveled not because it was obstructing a Motorway but because the DOE refused to move a roundabout by 400 metres, this roundabout was not moved because its present position suited the entrance of Dublins biggest retail warehousing park.

To dismiss all of these points as not true and not relevant would be an error and to present them in style adopted was also a mistake. Ireland needs to start adopting some real central planning and stop granting ad-hoc planning decisions to low density development of poor design quality.

This article is a load of Blarney, basically anything outside of Dublin is a farm, endless countryside, I mean it just goes on and on and on……where else could one hide shiploads of illegal arms without being detected.

The one-off bungalows are just in keeping with the low standard of house design in Ireland as a whole over the last 40 years.

As for the motorway debacle, I hope it’s finished soon because I have to say it’s the most beautiful stretch of road I’ve ever had the pleasure to drive on.

Id agree with the previous post, anything outside of Dublin is a farm! Its insane the picture they are trying to paint of Ireland. I would agree with the motorway programme, the building ok IKEA ect..

Stira Youre a muppet as per Liffey Valley highrise in fact I have my suspisiosions onto your normal profile,

Shaun ur rant is well known,

Three points to be adressed

I would welome some constructive demolition

I agree entirely with Diaspora.

It was oddly difficult to type that.

What im saying is Diaspora, once you get outside of Dublin there is almost nothing except countryside. I think the picture the article tries to portray is a very different and almost sensationolist one as opposed to the one that exists.

Possibly the two stupidest posts i’ve ever seen stira and shaun. Did you read the article from the irish times shown here a few weeks ago regarding the shock induced from the extent of suburban sprawl in rural ireland seen from satellite images. Or sorry, is the Irish times a D4 mouthpiece to.
Villages are being swallowed up in duplicate red brick/ mock tudor/georgian blah blah housing estates that strangle any further development of the actual village, souless retail parks popping up on every roundabout on the new bypass, bye bye town centre, hello BnQ, toy city, homebase, M&S, Sterile business parks 2 miles out of town, lets get the cars out, or maybe we could build a bungalow nearer to work, maybe they’ll build a housing estate out by the business park, mock tudor maybe, that’ll fit in. We can drive the kids to school, they’ll have to upgrade this road soon anyway.
Progress hurray, spread out the blanket of Service stations, warehouses, new roundabouts, maybe a “3-storey” apartment block with ample parking, hotels, travel taverns, out of town shopping centre…………………………
………………………………………..etc etc etc etc.
The place is being churned up, Last time i went home from westport to sligo i couldn’t help but notice the hedgerows were grey from the constant muck churning of passing lorries loaded with the spoils of another fantastic new out of town development.
I’m all for progress, but at it’s been left it in the hands of clueless tasteless fools who couldn’t give a shite about anything but there own return, sly deals and more money for the boys, throw up anything anywhere, to hell with the consequences.

@alan d wrote:

Developers are’nt daft….the give the punters what they want.

You make it very hard to reply to that without sounding like a snob but i don’t think what joe punter wants is whats best in the long run and he most likely doesn’t know the alternative. There are alternatives so why should we accept those without any vision or imagination be let create our environment. (i’m not expecting a detailed answer on why.)
Also on your point of its what happens everywhere else, it happened everywhere else, leessons were learned, but no, we’ll go ahead and see how it works out ourselves thanks.
Stiras last point,…. to quote someone elses take on De Veleras dream of “a chicken in every pot”, well now its “a house in every field”.

@Mob79 wrote:

You make it very hard to reply to that without sounding like a snob but i don’t think what joe punter wants is whats best in the long run and he most likely doesn’t know the alternative. There are alternatives so why should we accept those without any vision or imagination be let create our environment. (i’m not expecting a detailed answer on why.)
.

why would a developer pay for something better when the same shit they have been doing and building cheaply will sell anyway. the profit margin decreases…doesn’t make economic sense. while i agree that they should be better it’s a simple matter of sums…

The article had it right. Planning in this country is a shambles. The path of development we are on signifies a crass, ignorant and selfish society with no ideals left to aspire to.

Recently I was on a flight over Germany and was (as always) fascinated at the landscape, with rural towns and villages composed of clusters of buildings and the surrounding fields almost entirely unbroken until the next town. Down on the ground the high quality local roads that run between villages do not have houses along them and are all the better for that. Driving is a pleasure, driving through beautiful farmland scenery unspoilt by mcmansion after mcmansion and the associated gates and entrances.

At night the roads are not all floodlight the way they are here as the cars have headlights on them and people use these to see the way. So even though a motorway may be not far away you can still see the night sky. Which is nice. Something that we don’t have anymore in the city of Dublin, but something you should be able to expect if you are in the countryside.

The German use of land just seems so much more intelligent – and of course this is not limited to Germany. I noticed the same thing flying over the Netherlands – and this an area that we learnt of in school as being nearly all one big “conurbation” (and I remember thinking as we learnt this that god the dutch ruined their country!)

On a slightly positive point I’ve also noted that Ireland when seen from the air is not a total write off and there are very large areas that can of course be seen as rural. This may be what stira has in mind when saying that outside of Dublin there is nothing but countryside. The problem that you will see however is that every road in Ireland is a ribbon of development on both sides. And anywhere there’s a view it is spoilt by one off housing or holiday ‘vilages’. The result is that as you travel through Ireland outside of Dublin you find it increasingly difficult to experience the countryside. All the places that are accessible have been spoilt (not developed – spoilt). This did not need to be so and we could have looked to other countrys for example and plan development towards what we want or at the very least avoided the many obvious mistakes.

FIN – developer may well be driven by profit, but the market is not the only factor he needs to consider – he needs to address the regulatory framework he operates in and the law of the land. The sums are indeed skewed towards building crap inthe wrong place. This is where planning fits in and is where we are being let down with permanent damage to our counrty.

@FIN wrote:

why would a developer pay for something better when the same shit they have been doing and building cheaply will sell anyway. the profit margin decreases…doesn’t make economic sense. while i agree that they should be better it’s a simple matter of sums…

Lets all lie down and die then and let some ignoramus build a car park over us.
While on the matter of sums could someone please explain to me why on the one hand you’ve got shoe box apartments built for investors to cram in money making human units, then on the other you’ve got low density housing estates completely underusing the land to its full potntial if its money they’re after.
Can no one with a brain see a middle ground. Are spacious 3-4 storey apartments with large balconies/outside areas/ roof gardens really that crazy a vision of what’s possible with a much larger return than a wasteful housing estate.
Boggles me.

i’m not defending it, i am just stating a fact. if the law changes then fine but until then quit whinging about it and do something. an taisce are toothless in this regard, as they are viewed as interfereing busy bodies from jackland, who know nothing about ireland. we ” in the country” are a nation of small farms when at the time it was cheaper ( and still is) to build on ur family’s farm then buy either another site or a house in town,surburb or city. why would we want some gobshite telling us, no it’s better for us here in dublin ( and from the article, in england) to think of oirland as quaint and everyone surviving on patato’s and for our children when we go out on a sunday for a drive to see some farms from the car. f**k that. if u really want to stop this encroachment then increase the plot ratio within cities and build high rise.now rant over,

yes it is down to planning issues, but until these change then we are stuck with them.

and he’s off again…….

Having presribed body status and having 80 to 90 per cent of its appeals overturned makes An Taisce rather un-toothless. The thing is you would need about 50 An Taisces (or An T to be 50 times bigger) to combat the level of environmental degradation and bad development in Ireland (you would also need more enviromental awareness on the part of the government, developers & the general public)

The Guardian article was all too true, but it lost impact because it just went through the issues one after another – at the end you’re left thinking ‘who would want to do anything about all of that?’ Then again, you have to consider it was written for a UK audience – we are yused to being drip fed these issues by Treacy Hogan and Frank McD, so it may be a good thing for the Brits tio hear about it this way.

@FIN wrote:

why would we want some gobshite telling us, no it’s better for us here in dublin ( and from the article, in england) to think of oirland as quaint and everyone surviving on patato’s and for our children when we go out on a sunday for a drive to see some farms from the car.
yes it is down to planning issues, but until these change then we are stuck with them.

The primary focus of the article was not whether homes could be built outside town boundaries. The primary focus was the Hill of Tara and an analysis of the Carrickmines fiasco, the article raised the point that basically anyone can build what they like where they like as the authorities at local level do little to enforce the regulations.

It is down to planning as you say Fin, and the point made is that planning appears to exist at development plan level, but the development plans are rarely implemented as written.

If people are in breach of the development plan and are refused permission by An Bord Pleanala they should ask their professional advisors why they were refused and address the reasons for refusal. To blame An Taisce gets nobody anywhere as they (An Taisce) would have no grounds for objection if the applications were complient.

The article was entirely unbalanced. It was the kind of paddy bashing that the Guardian specializes in, knowing that there is an “ah shure yea, yar honour constituency for it here” mostly in Dublin 4.

The articles points were ok ( although I disagree with the bromides against once off housing). However

1) It is not true that Dublin is an doughnut city ( with a hole) . It has a vibrant city center. Most people on this board will shop in that center this weekend , or before Christmas, and will probably socialize there every week before christmas.
2) it is low rise sprawling. So is London, for most of it’s inhabitants. and sprawls more. And has no real center where people go every weekend.
3) We are trying to build higher density in the center. Some of the people opposed to that are also opposed to sprawl. One wonders where they expect people to live.
4) We are infrastructurally deficient in motorways. It makes sense to build more, lest we get another paddywhackery article from the Guardian ( always the worst for that, by the way) about the State of Irish roads – which would have everybody here pulling the cloth cap about how “backward we are”. Yes we should spend more money on public transport, but we are playing catchup. All high population growth areas do.
5) The real imbalance was the lack of mention of the migration flow into Ireland. There is at least a positive net migration of 50K a year into Ireland – and I think that is too low. We are building 80,000 units a year and still prices rise, so real migration may be higher. The 50K a year is equal to half a million extra new migrants per year in London. It is hard to imagine an article on London’s sprawl which would not mention that, if that were the case.

So it was horrendously unbalanced.
Ireland is underpopulated compared to the UK, or England. Our own population is not increasing that much, but immigration is increasing it. not mentioned.

I grow tired of the “everywhere is better than Ireland” crap. Germany sprawls, for chrissakes, Dusseldorf used to be a fishing village. I am sure during Germanys population boom of the last century it had problems, and massive sprawl ( which seems incorrpurated into the Ruhr now” , and we know that London had massive problems in Dickens’ time, and later, during it’s major period of growth.

the article in the guardian was spot on in that it told the truth. I dont like british papers paddy bashing either but I still have the intelligence to recognise the truth when I see it, there is no point in saying it’s not true because it has been written by a british paper. Anyone who has travelled throughout Ireland over the last ten years especially can see that the architecture and planning are purely profit driven full stop, end off.

I didn’t deny that it told the truth, in some repects. I denied that it was balanced. It was typical Guardian, come to Ireland and talk to curmudgeons and get soundbites, adn return to England to give the Guardian “liberals” what they want to hear. The article would have been a bit more nuanced if it had mentioned the massive rise in inward migration, the obvious building sites in the centre of town, the new proposals for an Itnerconnector for Public transport from IE, the debate over high rise building. It presented a litany of woes without context, and with no regard to the actual debated going on, not least on these boards, and elsewhere.

In fact it would be fair to write the same article , with the same facts and start something like this: “Dulbin, a city which has traditionally sprawled, at least since the foundation of the Irish State – when slums were cleared and large suburbs created on the outskirts of town – continues to sprawl, but there is a genuine attempt to move people back to the city centre which is obvious in the large building projects in the Docklands area, which have any number of cranes. It looks llike London in the Eighties”

Seems he missed the cranes in the Grand Canal, and Spencer dock pre-development, the entire plan for the city centre, the new housing density regulations. And so on.

The problem with architects is that they think more in terms of individual projects than the environment as a whole – as reflected in roskav’s and other posts so far – they look on shite engineer-draftsman designed stuff as funny or ironic, like the Mc Mansion bungalows, without getting particularly annoyed or feeling ‘it can’t go on like this’.

Alan if your drive in Ireland has only been from Belfast to Sligo as you have indicated before, and you think the article was just ‘polemic’, I think you need to drive from Dublin to Galway taking care to pass through Athlone. I’d like to hear what you think on this thread topic then.

@asdasd wrote:

[Dublin] is low rise sprawling. So is London, for most of it’s inhabitants. and sprawls more. And has no real center where people go every weekend.

Eh, it’s a city of 10 million people & takes up not a huge amount more space than Dublin. If you know south London, all those centres like Brixton, Streatham, Balham, Wandsworth, Thornton Heath…once you step off the High Streets, you’re into a dense network of 3-storey terraced streets – the density of much of London actually very high.
What about the west end? – their temple bar!!

@asdasd wrote:

We are trying to build higher density in the center. Some of the people opposed to that are also opposed to sprawl.

There are two issues there. To quote garetace there is a need to ‘separate the issues’ (sprawl & high density). It doesn’t follow that if you are against sprawl you are pro any high density.

Devin wrote: ‘Eh, it’s a city of 10 million people & takes up not a huge amount more space than Dublin.’
That’s just not true, Devin.
If we consider the M25 as the equivalent of the M50 (even though both London and Dublin sprawl out even further) – the M25 is 150 miles long while the M50 by my very rough calculations (and including the non-existent Eastern Bypass) would be about 50 miles long if completed.
That’s only three times as much in distance terms but in area, using my very basic sums London works out at 1,786 sq miles,
Dublin by the same token even though it isn’t circular and thus loses area in Dublin Bay would be less than 290 sq miles,
You can say that Dublin now extends as far as Drogheda, Kildare, Wicklow Town etc if you want.
But remember, an awful lot of the people who live in Guildford, Milton Keynes, and so on also commute to London for work.

I’m not disputing any of your points and agree with almost all of them. But suggesting that Dublin’s land area is comparable to London’s is just plain wrong.
London may not be ten times the land mass that Dublin is but it’s certainly four times as big.
I just find it hard to believe that we’re using London as an example when it’s exactly the one we’ve been following and should have avoided.
It has a dysfunctional ring road that doens’t work. It’s also the lowest density large city I’ve ever been in.
If Devin had used the example of Manhattan (two miles wide by thirteen miles long) – population 1.5 million or Paris – around the same population contained inside the Peripherique (which is a bit more like on the scale of the M50), fair enough.
But the original statement was wrong.

@kefu wrote:

I’m not disputing any of your points and agree with almost all of them. But suggesting that Dublin’s land area is comparable to London’s is just plain wrong.
London may not be ten times the land mass that Dublin is but it’s certainly four times as big.
I just find it hard to believe that we’re using London as an example when it’s exactly the one we’ve been following and should have avoided.
It has a dysfunctional ring road that doens’t work. It’s also the lowest density large city I’ve ever been in.
If Devin had used the example of Manhattan (two miles wide by thirteen miles long) – population 1.5 million or Paris – around the same population contained inside the Peripherique (which is a bit more like on the scale of the M50), fair enough.
But the original statement was wrong.

So true comparisons between London & Dublin are not valid at all, what needs to be done here is that models need to be selected that actually are relevant. I do however feel in general that a continental model would and still could serve us so much better, London is flawed although when people think of London I think they are often trying to describe the portion inside the North/South circular roads which are quite dense, it is only the 1950’s- 1970’s sprawl beyond these that extends to the M25 that destroys it. When you look at the density of areas such as Phibsboro or Rathmines you are hitting the levels required to function efficiently.

Regarding London, it is not a compact city in the way Amsterdam or Cophenhagen are, and has some terrible sprawl in the outer parts – no thanks to Thatcher & her mindless promotion of a car-borne society in the 80s – but most of it is still a helluva lot more compact than Dublin is now.

I think the most awful thing about Ireland is the way we gone for – much moreso than the British – American values, not just in the environment but in everything – just look at that new ryan turbidy chat show…the opening & sets are straight from Letterman or Leno! I think it’s outrageous that we feel we have to do this.

@alan d wrote:

Diaspora, your bit about planners directing developers is a real laugh.

I never said that planners direct developers although many ex-Council planners are doing so in private practice, what I did say was that it is ultimately the decision of the local authorities planners whether or not development applications are granted permission or refused because they do or do not comply with the statutory development plans.

It is a sad reality of life that it is more profitable to buy the cheapest land at the edge of a town and erect the ugliest pile of S***e and sell it on to punters who are buying purely on the basis of price than to acquire a good site and commission a decent architect to design a good building that fits in well to its surrounding.

The impression I get from what you have written on this thread is that you feel that the planners should grant permission whether a proposed development is up to scratch or not.

I think the most awful thing about Ireland is the way we gone for – much moreso than the British – American values, not just in the environment but in everything – just look at that new ryan turbidy chat show…the opening & sets are straight from Letterman or Leno! I think it’s outrageous that we feel we have to do this.

WE don’t. Turbidy is copying The Live Mike. ( Of course the real American ideology that both Ireland and Britain are copying is multi-culturalism and the politics of mass immigration – which is seemingly, the elephant in the dining room which no one wants to mention, and is the primary cause for the pull on resources we are seeing, and prob. house prices rises as well).

Devoid of mentioning the fact that mass migration is the reason we have this issue ( and doesn’t help the environemnt either). we fall back on the Paddy attitude of blaming Paddy. Paddy bashing galore. Aren’t we crap? British paper said, so it must be true.

The only sensible defence against this ridiculously unballanced article is to point out that we have a very centralized state in direct copy of the UK model ( and unlike the US whom – unfortunately we don’t copy on this issue) , and to relieve the pressure on the major city, due to mass migration, we need a properly defined spatial strategy, which means good roads and good train services. And some eggs will be broken in the making of that omelette.

The Tara road seems necessary, is following the route of an already existing road, and is nowhere near Tara, and – for fucks sake, most Irish castles are in Towns or right beside them. This fetishisation of empty space is anti-humanist, it considers culture to be empty grasslands, and dead stone, rather than the people who live in the area, and have historically done so ( and who may want once off housing too , so sod off Dublin 4).

Dublin is not like an American city. I worked in a job which took me to those “hole in the center” American cities, and I have been to about 30 american cities, and the comparison is absurd. Beyond absurd. totally crap.

Dublin is crowded with people who do most of their shopping in the centre, and socialize there too.

We have a few, very minor shopping centres on the outskirts of town, which is good for the people living there. However, even in Blanch they shop, and socialize in town as much, or more, than the Blancherdstown centre. And frankly, I have never been to any other “edge city” which had one, or two malls, but dozens to hundreds depending on what you called a mall. Rubbish. You cold drop blanchardstown into the Bay Area and they wouldn’t notice.

Here in Raheny I have to go miles to shop, and the easiest place is town.

And London is a sprawl, which has bog all to do with Thatcher, it’s been sprawling since the 19th century.

That’s about the dumbest post I’ve read on this message-board.

To blame immigrants for poor planning and urban sprawl in Ireland would be almost funny in its stupidity except that it suggests a nasty xenophobic attitude.

This attitude is confirmed by you trying to present the issue as simply British sourced anti-Irish propaganda and suggesting that there is something reprehensible about Irish people daring to criticise Ireland.

To suggest that we should support building the M3 as a gesture towards humanism takes the fucking biscuit.

Ah stop talking shite. “Nasty xenophobic attitude” my ass. My mom is foreign. It is a typical debate stopper, you can’t say that it is racist, or xenophobic. blah Blah blah….

The reson we have problems in Dublin with “sprawl” can hardly be divorced form the number of people living in the city, and the increase in the population.. The main reason for population increase is mass migration into the city. Planners could hardly have planned for the number of people who are now coming to live here since it is unprecedented.

( I am also opposed to mass migration for the effect it has on lower income workers and the house price rises which make Dublin 4 snobs richer – I wonder if the reverse were trun would you luvvies be so in favour of mass migration). Your class hatreds make me sick.

My mistake; I was actually giving you credit of being xenophobic instead of just being stupid. What the hell has racism got to do anything and why did you bring it up?

You actually believe that immigration is the reason we have urban sprawl and causes damage to the environment? You really believe that nobody noticed Irish urban sprawl before the Guardian printed that article or that it hasn’t been an issue in Irish planning for years? You really believe that supporting the M3 is an expression of humanism? These are your claims and I’m saying they’re rubbish.

( I am also opposed to mass migration for the effect it has on lower income workers and the house price rises which make Dublin 4 snobs richer – I wonder if the reverse were trun would you luvvies be so in favour of mass migration). Your class hatreds make me sick.

When I read this, it was like looking over a horribly gristley piece of meat on my dinner plate wondering which end to start from before thinking, fuck it, I’m not even going to bother.

I cleary said “racist or zenophobic” as a way to curtail debate on the issue.

Another way to curtail debate on the issue is to be “funny”, and to not deal with the issue at hand, but to see gristle of meat on you plate. HaHa.

There is hardly any doubt that immigration benefits the elites of Irish society ( the Capitalist classes and Dublin 4, for instance) at the benefit of the poor. That is why the Boss classes and their representatives in IBEC are in favour, as are the organs of elite opinion – the Irish Times and the indo, and third level institutionsm and even the Unions who represent State workers ( whose jobsa re not at risk) . And you, of course. Please disclose your class background, by the way. I am from the inner city, although my parents were lower middle class, my extened family is working class.

It is quite easy to do a thought experiment on this. Lets say that 300,000 people come to Dublin next year ( this is a thought experiment. I agree it is unlikely to happen at that level )

who benefits?

1) Capitalists can employ more labour cheaper. Supply and Demand.They already admit this happens, a recent IBEC whinge was that they could not employ Irish people at the rates they emply foreigners. Part time female workers in the Inner city are getting screwed as it is.So wages fall as labour supply increases. Economics 101.
2) Housing prices goes through the roof as demand for beds accelerate. Rent too. Supply and demand again. This advances the class interests of the rich, property owning Middle class, rentier classes, and speculators. It is not the only reason why prices go up, but is a major factor. Immigration works against the interests of everyone hoping to buy a home, and is a major reason prices are now rising – since we are building plenty of houses.
3) Beyond that everyone who drives to work, or who takes public transport suffers,as the resources ( roads and rail) remain static and the demand increases.

Feel free to answer that argument rationally.

You may also want to ponder why you expect working class communities to work in your class interests, it is in their class interests to have controlled immigration (and I certainly do not support none), and your class interests to have unlimited migration, since whatever class you belong too probably has barriers to entry not available to the under skilled working class ( and if your answer here is that you do not believe in unlimited migration then name the figure you are happy with, and the issue between us is one of numbers.)

The present rise in Dublin city houses prices is 10% a year. Houses are built at the rate of 80,000 a year, yet that does not meet demand. Immigration must be a factor.

The price increase means anyone with more than 300K in equity ( and there are people with far more than that ) sees a net worth gain greater than the average industrial wage, and, of course, no one on that wage, and more, can expect to buy a house. That screws half the population, and more.

If we are to have mass migration, then we should immediately impose a massive property tax on people with 400K, or more, equity in their houses, to fund the resources needed to rezone land, and to fund public transport.

Now tell me why you think the elites are not the main beneficiaries of mass immigration, looking at gristle on your plate will not do.

(And while we are at it, name a property speculator opposed to mass immigration)

@asdasd wrote:

The reson we have problems in Dublin with “sprawl” can hardly be divorced form the number of people living in the city, and the increase in the population.. The main reason for population increase is mass migration into the city. Planners could hardly have planned for the number of people who are now coming to live here since it is unprecedented.

Immigrants are one factor leading to extra demand for new housing but there is also: lowest mortgage rates ever, huge increase in average earnings, huge reductions in income tax, collapse in equity markets and interest rates making property a more attractive investment, demographic bulge in the 20-35 section due to higher birth rates in the 70s, a reduction in average household sizes due to Irish social changes, availability of buy-to-let mortgage products … But increased demand doesn’t have to mean sprawl. It’s not as if the planners had great sustainable plans for new housing that were knocked out of kilter by the arrival of immigrants. We had already built dismal, low density, sprawling housing for 300,000 in Clondalkin, Tallaght and Blanchardstown by the time the first immigrants were arriving in the 90’s. Whose idea was it to build car-dependent housing for people who couldn’t afford cars? Was this some kind of a joke?

Why are you so adament to bring class into it. Is the real problem not some shly whore with a peasant mentality who’ll do whatever they want to get their hands on the money and to hell with everyone else.
The impression i get is if the Guardian called it Eire you’d call it Ireland, if they called it Ireland you’d call it Saorstat na hEireann.

This is such a broad topic that it is impossible not to generalise and get up someone’s nose – which is the problem everytime planning is raised on this site, everyone starts bickerng despite the fact that most people broadly agree with each other.
The article was clearly tongue in cheek from the perspective of putting an arguement across, rather than a detailed and balanced attempt to reflect reality in every regard. As Sue mentioned, car garages are hardly a crime, likewise gasp shock horror, Dublin having out of town shopping centres is not exactly a revelation for any major city.
On a closer level, we do have problems in specific areas, notably building bypasses to towns and then constructing retail parks around them to choke em up again.

Regardless of what people think of the article, it is still always useful to get an outside opinion which I got recently on the train sitting next to an American couple on holiday. They were looking out the window for about and hour before eventually commenting on ‘how very strange’ it is to come across clusters of housing in the middle of nowhere – having just passed an estate of low-grade day-glo pebbledashed two-storey houses replete with feature soil pipes, stranded in a field somewhere.
I just felt like saying saying, YES IT’S VERY STRANGE ISN’T IT – bet you didn’t see this in your glossy brochures.

Saying that, there are large tracts of unspoiled countryside, and most of what is built is not it not Georgiana, but none the less is of a decidedly rude variety of design. It’s only when the problem areas get so bad in so many places that it seems the country is being destroyed. The problem is of course is that what has happened thus far will soon invade unspoiled areas if the current planning continues. Then we’ll have a real problem. I think that’s the concern most people have – if things don’t change.

@asdasd wrote:

I cleary said “racist or zenophobic” as a way to curtail debate on the issue.

Another way to curtail debate on the issue is to be “funny”, and to not deal with the issue at hand, but to see gristle of meat on you plate. HaHa.

There is hardly any doubt that immigration benefits the elites of Irish society ( the Capitalist classes and Dublin 4, for instance) at the benefit of the poor. That is why the Boss classes and their representatives in IBEC are in favour, as are the organs of elite opinion – the Irish Times and the indo, and third level institutionsm and even the Unions who represent State workers ( whose jobsa re not at risk) . And you, of course. Please disclose your class background, by the way. I am from the inner city, although my parents were lower middle class, my extened family is working class.

It is quite easy to do a thought experiment on this. Lets say that 300,000 people come to Dublin next year ( this is a thought experiment. I agree it is unlikely to happen at that level )

who benefits?

1) Capitalists can employ more labour cheaper. Supply and Demand.They already admit this happens, a recent IBEC whinge was that they could not employ Irish people at the rates they emply foreigners. Part time female workers in the Inner city are getting screwed as it is.So wages fall as labour supply increases. Economics 101.
2) Housing prices goes through the roof as demand for beds accelerate. Rent too. Supply and demand again. This advances the class interests of the rich, property owning Middle class, rentier classes, and speculators. It is not the only reason why prices go up, but is a major factor. Immigration works against the interests of everyone hoping to buy a home, and is a major reason prices are now rising – since we are building plenty of houses.
3) Beyond that everyone who drives to work, or who takes public transport suffers,as the resources ( roads and rail) remain static and the demand increases.

Feel free to answer that argument rationally.

You may also want to ponder why you expect working class communities to work in your class interests, it is in their class interests to have controlled immigration (and I certainly do not support none), and your class interests to have unlimited migration, since whatever class you belong too probably has barriers to entry not available to the under skilled working class ( and if your answer here is that you do not believe in unlimited migration then name the figure you are happy with, and the issue between us is one of numbers.)

The present rise in Dublin city houses prices is 10% a year. Houses are built at the rate of 80,000 a year, yet that does not meet demand. Immigration must be a factor.

The price increase means anyone with more than 300K in equity ( and there are people with far more than that ) sees a net worth gain greater than the average industrial wage, and, of course, no one on that wage, and more, can expect to buy a house. That screws half the population, and more.

If we are to have mass migration, then we should immediately impose a massive property tax on people with 400K, or more, equity in their houses, to fund the resources needed to rezone land, and to fund public transport.

Now tell me why you think the elites are not the main beneficiaries of mass immigration, looking at gristle on your plate will not do.

(And while we are at it, name a property speculator opposed to mass immigration)

take your national socialist viewpoints off to stormfront.org herr asdasd. Equating class politics with immigrant phobia will get a much better reception there. :rolleyes:

Asdasd, maybe I didn’t make myself clear with my gristle analogy. I wasn’t going to bite at your attempt to bring racism into the debate and I certainly don’t find the prospect of discussing “the class struggle” with you any more appetising; in fact I’m not going to argue with you at all since you seem to have fuck-all to say about planning or urban sprawl. You haven’t a clue what my background is and your assumptions about me are the product of some odd fantasy. I pointed out three dumb things you claimed about planning – that’s it.

Reasons for sprawl
1) people in this country want houses with front and back gardens detatched if possible because they have been conditioned to believe that this is the most desirable thing to have. And lets face it when you see the shit quality of apartment dwelling in this country its no wonder people have fear of “the new Ballymun” (TM all newspapers (local and national) ever). Hence people want their bit of land fron (park the car) and back (pen the kids in).

2) it’s fuck all to do with class – we’re all better off now hence we want bigger houses on bigger bits of land

3) its rural to urban migration not immigration that is an issue (ps most so called immigration to this country since the boom are returned migrants not ‘johnny foreigner’)

Separate points) Could you imagine if out of town shopping had not been built – Dublin city centre would be impossible to move in on a Saturday. Blanchardstown may not be architecturally pretty but in retail terms these things are necessary evils because they act as safety valves.

If this is a doughnut city tell me why is Grafton Street one of the most expensive per square foot on earth – ddoesn’t sound like ‘the projects’ to me!

“Aren’t people terrible – something really should be done about it” is all thats missing from the article.

Just as a by the way. Here’s an extract from the biography of Mark Lynas (http://www.marklynas.org), the guy who wrote the article: ‘He was also active in the flourishing environmental direct action scene during the late 1990s, joining road protests and helping mount “decontamination” exercises against genetically-modified crops, as well as participating in Reclaim the Streets protests in London and Oxford.’
And a few select points from this campaigner’s – not journalist’s – so-called report: ‘A rising star in the Irish cabinet, [Martin] Cullen seemed to delight in his defeat of the conservationists.’ – shows a fairly basic lack of knowledge of matters as diverse as e-voting and Monica Leech Public Relations.
He writes: ‘The government’s solution is to add an extra lane to the M50 orbital motorway and upgrade its junctions to remove traffic lights. The famous Red Cow roundabout will become a mass of concrete flyovers.’ – implies that the Red Cow roundabout is famous for a good reason and that a flyover will somehow be damaging to the environment.
He writes: ‘Ireland is one of the most car-dependent countries in the world. Irish motorists drive on average 24,000km a year, far above the UK’s average of 16,000 and even topping the US’s 19,000.’ He uses this little-used statistic because car ownership rates are still low by international standards and it doesn’t suit his argument.
He writes: ‘The numbers of people commuting by car to Dublin in the morning rush hour increased by 149% between 1991 and 2001.’ But since then – the numbers of cars entering the inner ring has actually fallen.
He writes: ‘Ian Lumley, knows he is losing the battle over Ireland’s future. “You have to look at this as an American country,” – What does that even mean?
He writes: ‘Giving Dublin the classic US-style “doughnut” shape’ – this has already been sufficiently debunked.
He writes: ‘A huge McMansion there with big Georgian pillars, huge flying buttresses and greenhouses.’ – Has anybody ever seen a house in Ireland with flying buttresses because I haven’t.
He writes: ‘A Tesco is opening next door, “bringing better quality shopping and more jobs to your area”. On the far side of the road an Aldi superstore is nearly complete, and a Toyota showroom is doing its bit to inflate the car economy.’ – This is just contemptible nonsense.
As Ian Lumley puts it: “The Irish mentality is inherently antiregulation and anti-officialdom. One of the theories is that this goes back to British occupation, to dodging the constabulary, dodging the revenue, getting away from the landlord, hiding pigs under the bed, hiding chickens in the roof and so on.” – this is just hackneyed embarrassing shite.
He writes: ‘Having recently visited Stonehenge, Clancy says she was “appalled” by how close the road runs to it.’ – the road at Stonehenge runs within fifty metres of the monument. The new M3 and I’m not defending it is 2400 metres away.
He writes: ‘[Martin] Cullen left his job at arts, heritage and environment not to spend more time with his family, but to spend more time with his beloved roads – as minister for transport.’ – shows more astonishing understanding of the Irish political system and ministerial appointments.

He writes: ‘Ireland is one of the most car-dependent countries in the world. Irish motorists drive on average 24,000km a year, far above the UK’s average of 16,000 and even topping the US’s 19,000.’ He uses this little-used statistic because car ownership rates are still low by international standards and it doesn’t suit his argument.
He writes: ‘The numbers of people commuting by car to Dublin in the morning rush hour increased by 149% between 1991 and 2001.’ But since then – the numbers of cars entering the inner ring has actually fallen.
He writes: ‘Ian Lumley, knows he is losing the battle over Ireland’s future. “You have to look at this as an American country,” – What does that even mean?
He writes: ‘Giving Dublin the classic US-style “doughnut” shape’ – this has already been sufficiently debunked.
He writes: ‘A huge McMansion there with big Georgian pillars, huge flying buttresses and greenhouses.’ – Has anybody ever seen a house in Ireland with flying buttresses because I haven’t.
He writes: ‘A Tesco is opening next door, “bringing better quality shopping and more jobs to your area”. On the far side of the road an Aldi superstore is nearly complete, and a Toyota showroom is doing its bit to inflate the car economy.’ – This is just contemptible nonsense.
As Ian Lumley puts it: “The Irish mentality is inherently antiregulation and anti-officialdom. One of the theories is that this goes back to British occupation, to dodging the constabulary, dodging the revenue, getting away from the landlord, hiding pigs under the bed, hiding chickens in the roof and so on.” – this is just hackneyed embarrassing shite.
He writes: ‘Having recently visited Stonehenge, Clancy says she was “appalled” by how close the road runs to it.’ – the road at Stonehenge runs within fifty metres of the monument. The new M3 and I’m not defending it is 2400 metres away.
He writes: ‘[Martin] Cullen left his job at arts, heritage and environment not to spend more time with his family, but to spend more time with his beloved roads – as minister for transport.’ – shows more astonishing understanding of the Irish political system and ministerial appointments.[/QUOTE]

@Papworth wrote:

He writes: ‘Ireland is one of the most car-dependent countries in the world. Irish motorists drive on average 24,000km a year, far above the UK’s average of 16,000 and even topping the US’s 19,000.’ He uses this little-used statistic because car ownership rates are still low by international standards and it doesn’t suit his argument.

Ireland is a car dependent society because there is little public transport on offer in comparison to the European model.

@Papworth wrote:

He writes: ‘The numbers of people commuting by car to Dublin in the morning rush hour increased by 149% between 1991 and 2001.’ But since then – the numbers of cars entering the inner ring has actually fallen.

I’d be interested to see the source of this quote

@Papworth wrote:

He writes: ‘Ian Lumley, knows he is losing the battle over Ireland’s future. “You have to look at this as an American country,” – What does that even mean?

It means that unlike most European economies this one is being developed on a model that is not really that sustainable or doesn’t yield a great quality of life for its army of commuters.

@Papworth wrote:

As Ian Lumley puts it: “The Irish mentality is inherently antiregulation and anti-officialdom. One of the theories is that this goes back to British occupation, to dodging the constabulary, dodging the revenue, getting away from the landlord, hiding pigs under the bed, hiding chickens in the roof and so on.” – this is just hackneyed embarrassing shite.

I disagree, there is a culture in many parts of this Country that regards those that seek planning enforcement as ‘rats or grasses’ with a sense that an individual has broken the community by reporting unauthorised development to the ‘outside authorities’.

@Papworth wrote:

He writes: ‘Having recently visited Stonehenge, Clancy says she was “appalled” by how close the road runs to it.’ – the road at Stonehenge runs within fifty metres of the monument. The new M3 and I’m not defending it is 2400 metres away.

So if your not defending it why do you object to those that do complaining about it?

@Papworth wrote:

He writes: ‘[Martin] Cullen left his job at arts, heritage and environment not to spend more time with his family, but to spend more time with his beloved roads – as minister for transport.’ – shows more astonishing understanding of the Irish political system and ministerial appointments.

In fairness Martin Cullen is a disgrace, from e-voting to Carrickmines to the latest story running in the Independent, he has no regard to anyone but instead steamrolls everything through. The latest spend of €120k by the NRA on publishing advertising to attempt to distract attention from its own misdeeds is beyond belief.

The NRA executive should be replaced by a new team that is capable of delivering projects in a manner that doesn’t end up with most projects coming in significantly over budget and others years late because they didn’t sidestep the ‘professional road objectors’.

Cullen should be stripped of his ministerial seal for mismanagement of the public finances,

Diaspora, it’s actually my post you’re querying.
I am challenging the Guardian article as a piece of journalism, not the general sentiment behind it.
In 1997, 73,561 cars travelled past Dublin City Council traffic monitors on the Royal and Grand Canals. By November 2002, the number of cars had fallen to 64,721. May have changed since but it’s a remarkable and little remarked-upon statistic.
I just personally feel these quotes by Ian Lumley are an embarrassment: ‘You have to look at this as an American country.’ But then again in a country where Michael Moore’s books top the bestseller charts, this kind of insulting meaningless nonsense is to be expected.
This one is nonsense: ‘The Irish mentality is inherently antiregulation and anti-officialdom. One of the theories is that this goes back to British occupation, to dodging the constabulary, dodging the revenue, getting away from the landlord, hiding pigs under the bed, hiding chickens in the roof and so on.’
I’ve been listening to that crap for years and I don’t buy it. It’s the lazy man’s way of excusing the fact that the regulations have not been enforced by officialdom. Eg Penalty Points, which worked when people believed they would get caught. When they realised, they had f**k all chance of getting caught, they began ignoring them.
Re Stonehenge – fifty metres versus 2400 metres. You are not comparing like with like. The situation in Wiltshire is the equivalent of having the main road running so close to Newgrange that the visitor centre has to be connected by a tunnel.
I don’t what Independent story you mean about Cullen – is it the Ireland on Sunday stories about Monica Leech?

Kefu,

It is difficult to argue with what you are saying on the lack of enforcement as being the problem, speaking personnaly I do believe that a certain ‘Cumman’ mentality prevails in this regard, this cumman mentality has much of its origin in expelling the brit.

Regarding Cullen it is the PR adviser I was referring to and that one looks set to run for a while I think.

Regarding the style of Journalism these guys certainly did themselves no favours and have definitely acheived a lot less with it than if they had stuck to the impressive list of facts they assembled.

It was a little known fact that it would have cost 10m more to protect the Skreen Valley or about 3% of the overall cost, but I suppose down at NRA they probably reckoned that as projects such as the M50 were going up from c300m to c800m they’d better keep costs down. Regardless of the cost to heritage.

Diasporas prediction: Professional road objectors will add 50m to the cost of this project, will eventually lose and 40 important archaeological sites will be destroyed, the road will be delivered in 2009.

That’s the thing about the Tara plan I just can’t believe. The government is, with full knowledge, walking in to a legal and financial quagmire, which will put the Carrickmines and Glen of the Downs (GOTD) episodes in the shade.
Glen of the Downs was held up for years and ended up being the most expensive piece of road ever built because of a widening project, which most everybody wanted. The M50 project has been held up for years for an unremarkable heritage site and for a road that had full support as well.
Tara, which symbolically puts the other two in the shade, will be a long fight and the anti-campaign have already rallied an incredible selection of experts, conservationists, archaeologists, historians for a necessary road, but one that really won’t have the impact that GOTD or M50 completion had.
I think your prediction is absolutely correct.

@kefu wrote:

Tara, which symbolically puts the other two in the shade, will be a long fight and the anti-campaign have already rallied an incredible selection of experts, conservationists, archaeologists, historians for a necessary road, but one that really won’t have the impact that GOTD or M50 completion had.

I agree that a coalition of very high calibre academics from both sides of the Atlantic and specific industry professionals are deeply opposed to this routing, I wouldn’t however give Vicent Salafia and Ruan Mac the credit for this, in fact I’d almost say that more support would have been forthcoming if a more moderate element were leading the campaign.

To spend 120,000 on newspaper ads when the arena that really matters is the Four courts was some waste by the NRA, and I heard tonight that the e-voting system has further revelations to come. Aparently the password to open the system could have been accessed through the help menu i.e. any of us could have voted a million times.

@kefu wrote:

He writes: ‘The government’s solution is to add an extra lane to the M50 orbital motorway and upgrade its junctions to remove traffic lights. The famous Red Cow roundabout will become a mass of concrete flyovers.’ – implies that the Red Cow roundabout is famous for a good reason and that a flyover will somehow be damaging to the environment.
He writes: ‘Ireland is one of the most car-dependent countries in the world. Irish motorists drive on average 24,000km a year, far above the UK’s average of 16,000 and even topping the US’s 19,000.’ He uses this little-used statistic because car ownership rates are still low by international standards and it doesn’t suit his argument.
He writes: ‘The numbers of people commuting by car to Dublin in the morning rush hour increased by 149% between 1991 and 2001.’ But since then – the numbers of cars entering the inner ring has actually fallen.

I can sort of understand alan d refuting the contents of the Guardian article, as he is not here to see it and experience it on a daily basis, but somebody who apparently lives and travels around here every day also refuting it is surprising (?).

I think this Irish Independent article posted by anto back in July is worth a look again:

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=3262

And I wouldn’t even be as pessimistic as Colm McCarthy at the end of the article!

When I was a kid in the 1970’s and 80’s I can recall loads of overseas media portraits of Ireland as a backward, church-run, myopic land where modern civil liberties taken for granted in other Western democracies such as divorce, contraception, etc were banned, while women’s equality was archaic and gay’s right were unthinkable. At the time, Ireland was divided between one section of the society who were embarrassed to be living in this country and agreed with this negative portrayal of us, and the other half who claimed there was nothing wrong with Ireland and this was just anti-Irish bigotry and nothing else.

This is a thread I am going to spend some time reading in the following weeks, but just to put down a specific marker, of what I wish to highlight, I will say the following. I was around enjoying the fine weather today and couldn’t help but notice, the amount of washed-up natives we seem to have around our city. I mean, people who obviously have seen some very hard times, and basically submitted themselves to much, much abuse down through the years… some of them barely able not to conduct themselves in a normal way, kind of wandering around, scared of the ghosts around the place, that nobody can see but themselves. It is sometimes like a time warp, where you are back in 1840s Ireland at the height of the Famine, where people were just simply desperate. I would just like to talk about the way people do get this way, and what we can do to prevent it. I mean, starting with a decent roof over one’s head must be the first thing, and then connecting that place of dwelling up with some suitable sense of community and well-being. I mean, the investment the city of Dublin does in preventing these problems is good I have no doubt,… but it struck me, how important it is to deal with the problem, before it goes too far. Once you find masses of urban inhabitants wandering around the place, with only a fragments of basic consciousness to navigate through their lives with, the problem has already gotten far too expensive to sustain. Take even recent projects such as ‘The Temple Bar’ area, how does any city ever allow that kind of an abomination to happen? Or worse, hope that anything useful can come from making such a place? I mean, it begins to weigh heavily upon all sorts of other things like our health services. We do love spending a lot of time in Ireland discussing our health service, when I just wonder, is more and more spending on the health service, just drawing the attention away from the other problems, at the opposite end – the ground level – the awful lack of afforadable and social housing and therefore, healthy and sustainable communities,… is just all the spending at one end of the social equation aggravating a problem at the other end? I am sure there are very good formulae and mathematics to calculate this – and furthermore, to calculate how much more you could save, by spending the money you do have appropriately, before the problem becomes far too expensive to even look at – and you have what we currently have now – a whole lot of buerocrats squabbling over ‘who started it’. None of them do seem to remark the obvious, of where I really think the problem is stemming from.

None of our politians seem to be capable of looking at the whole wider debate in its entirity – of realising that all things – the health service included – is linked up with everything else. Of looking at the problems as a system or issues rather than just isolated situations where some ‘fire-fighting’ is required. I hope that one thing that we can all learn from architecture and urban design – is that everything, education, employment, transport, health care, housing, energy, communications, industry, the whole lot…. are all part of something by itself – some huge social network of interacting relationships. It is like the politians are sometimes, like blind men with a huge elephant, every individual politian having a handle on his/her own part of the bigger picture. I mean, why do we pay the salaries of our public servants, just to be myopic? It is no longer a matter of how will we do social housing for Dublin, but how much is it costing us all, every moment that passes and we do not take the initiative. What costs are our grandchildren going to pay later, for our lack of ability to see something and do something now? When you have a large proportion of the urban population in Dublin, in as much trouble and difficulty, as I seem to see, a lot these days, I wonder what it is currently costing, and moreso, what it will cost as time goes on, to leave this situation, without doing that much about it. I am talking about a strong positive approach towards social housing and dealing with problems before they sprial out of control altogether. I would think, that with this kind of problem, your money is worth an awful lot more now, than it will be worth in five, ten, fifteen or twenty years time. Because when you get into second and third or more generations of problematic urban inhabitants, the cost seriously mounts up I would think. Not alone, is this problem costing the state, it is also affecting large areas of the city, which could work much better,… and furthermore, as generations continue to multiply, the problem obviously begins to engulf an entire urban area. The money spent on trying to solve problems, which we create in the first place,… is taken away from doing projects that really should help this city and country for generations to come. Then you have a bald attempt such as LUAS, which does very, very little in my humble opinion to get to the heart of the matter – yet it amounts to a gigantic expenditure for a small nation. I would wish that future projects are considered in a much more broad context, as I have described above – it is certainly not good enough, just to leave expenditure of that scale, only to the transport department. That is just too much like something Ireland would do. It is noticeable these days, during the nice weather, as the more respectable affluent members of the community, take it upon themselves to enjoy the fine weather, and suddenly come straight into contact, with problems on the street, which normally just go unnoticed. I think, it is one of those problems, where a little money invested at the right time, in the right way, in the right place, could save millions and even billions later. I do not have the expertise, analysis or experience to fully understand this phenomena, but would be greatful for any feed-back this board here has to offer. In short, I am just wondering how good, bad or indifferent has this cities track record been, with regard to the social housing design problem? What do we need to do to improve the cities performance in regards to this and many other matters? Thanks.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

quite an interesting thread which i must print out to read for the bus trip home.

my 2 cents. its easy for some people here to see what is and what has happened to the irish landscape and irish standard of living since the celtic tiger consumed all our lives and conversation. i still remember the days when property prices and its associated greed didn’t enter the conversation.
i never actually noticed before the mcmansions been built, the exposed houses on hilltops, the dvd roundabout 3 bed estates, the polished pvc windows on cottages and terraces until i went abroad for a number of years and returned this year to this country. its only when you are exposed to other cultures do you really see that like a flash gold encrusted necklace hanging around a pimps neck sometimes its too easy to spend money.

the article as written in the guardian is very true. unfortunatly too much harm has been done to the countryside to rectify it now. once you build a house it is there to stay for at least 100 years. and thats that. the one change that i can see (just because i am fammilar with the area) happening is a rediscovery of northside dublin therefore transforming this forgotten area into a old world treasure. by that time, taste and common sense will have prevailed thereby retaining its existing character of redbrick terraces.

i hate being a pessimist but i sure hope that the boom does not bust but if is does those travelling 2/3 hours commutes from soul-less negative equity estates will realise what a mess we have built. the only worthwile memento from the years of consumerism will be a simple spike on connell street.

@Lotts wrote:

The article had it right. Planning in this country is a shambles. The path of development we are on signifies a crass, ignorant and selfish society with no ideals left to aspire to.

Recently I was on a flight over Germany and was (as always) fascinated at the landscape, with rural towns and villages composed of clusters of buildings and the surrounding fields almost entirely unbroken until the next town. Down on the ground the high quality local roads that run between villages do not have houses along them and are all the better for that. Driving is a pleasure, driving through beautiful farmland scenery unspoilt by mcmansion after mcmansion and the associated gates and entrances.

At night the roads are not all floodlight the way they are here as the cars have headlights on them and people use these to see the way. So even though a motorway may be not far away you can still see the night sky. Which is nice. Something that we don’t have anymore in the city of Dublin, but something you should be able to expect if you are in the countryside.

The German use of land just seems so much more intelligent – and of course this is not limited to Germany. I noticed the same thing flying over the Netherlands – and this an area that we learnt of in school as being nearly all one big “conurbation” (and I remember thinking as we learnt this that god the dutch ruined their country!)

On a slightly positive point I’ve also noted that Ireland when seen from the air is not a total write off and there are very large areas that can of course be seen as rural. This may be what stira has in mind when saying that outside of Dublin there is nothing but countryside. The problem that you will see however is that every road in Ireland is a ribbon of development on both sides. And anywhere there’s a view it is spoilt by one off housing or holiday ‘vilages’. The result is that as you travel through Ireland outside of Dublin you find it increasingly difficult to experience the countryside. All the places that are accessible have been spoilt (not developed – spoilt). This did not need to be so and we could have looked to other countrys for example and plan development towards what we want or at the very least avoided the many obvious mistakes.

FIN – developer may well be driven by profit, but the market is not the only factor he needs to consider – he needs to address the regulatory framework he operates in and the law of the land. The sums are indeed skewed towards building crap inthe wrong place. This is where planning fits in and is where we are being let down with permanent damage to our counrty.

Call for ‘tourism spatial strategy’

http://www.rte.ie/business/2005/0620/tourism.html

June 20, 2005 13:12
The Irish Tourist Industry Confederation says research it has commissioned shows a fundamental change in the composition and spread of visitors to Ireland over the last five years.

The study, which looked at the regional distribution of tourism, shows that while Dublin has increased in popularity, areas outside of the capital have suffered serious losses.

As a result, the ITIC says that a ‘tourism spatial strategy’ is needed to identify the barriers to exploiting potential in the regions.

It is calling for the establishment of a Leisure Tourism Forum under the auspices of Failte Ireland, with representatives from Tourism Ireland, the Regional Tourism Authorities and the industry.

This new body would be charged with developing a new integrated programme to reverse the decline in bednights from tourists, through a national strategy ‘which exploits the complementary potential of tourism to Dublin and the rest of the country’.

The Irish Tourist Industry Confederation says it wants a more focussed marketing campaign to attract car ferry and coach tour passengers. It also wants improvements to the transport system, more access for walkers and restriction on drift netting.

The research shows that the number of nights spent by holidaymakers outside the capital in 2003 was 2.7 million fewer than in 1999 – a 14% drop in demand in four years. Dublin, during the same period, attracted almost two million more bednights. Increases were reported also in the South East and Midlands East regions – 16% and 3% respectively.

The net result was a decline of 3% overall in the number of bednights by overseas holidaymakers to Ireland, despite the fact that overall numbers of visitors increased. The ITIC says this shows the impact of the trend towards shorter trips.

The report argues that Ireland has lost its positioning in key segments of the British and European markets – with two million fewer bednights spent by British visitors in the western regions. It says the loss in visitors to rural Ireland is due to the changing profile of visitors attracted from Britain, and a sharp fall-off in activity holidays from Britain, especially following the foot and mouth scare in 2001.

The ITIC says the growth in Dublin highlights that Ireland is now attracting two distinct markets – those attracted to short breaks in Dublin and urban centres, and visitors motivated by the traditional appeals of scenery and people. It adds that this is a reflection of fundamental changes in the international pattern of holidaymaking.

The foreign tourists must be responding to the lack of once-off housing, section 48 suburban housing estates and cheap PVC windows in the scenic rural areas of Ireland.

It was interesting to read in todays IT that an ESRI consultant, Edgar Morgenroth has blamed urban sprawl on not having an attractive urban environment in cities. He gose further to state that is costing the Irish economy big time in terms of hours wasted by the average two hour daily commute. He estimates that E116.42 Million is lost a year before you look at environmnetal, community or family damage.

Apparetly the GAA is worryed by large housing estates being plonked beside rural vilages. Needless to say one off housing is looked on with favour either.

So do we believe its too late ? After all we are to spread out a city sustain metros or Dart exstentions and the City Manager has all ready stated how he dos’nt want to interfere in things, and even if he did, he would be limited by the parish pump politics of county councils outside Dublin.

Bertie Ahern proposed a Greater Dublin Athority (GDA) but that was four years ago and nothing has happend since. Sorry to sound pessimestic but dose anyone believe there is a way out of this mess ?

What do the members of this site believe are the essential chages that must happen soon. 🙁

@crestfield wrote:

Apparetly the GAA is worryed be large housing estates being plonked beside rural vilages. Needless to say one off housing is looked on with favour either.

Except when those estates are built on former GAA pitchs rezoned for housing before the GAA sell out, as in Kinnegad.

I completely agree with the paper quoted. Suburban and ex-urban sprawl, particularly at the farcically low densities at which they are built, are the direct cause of increased reliance on the car, increased commuting times, consequent pollution, polarised mono-cultural communities, reduced cultural opportunity, a degraded rural environment, a missed opportunity re our towns and cities …… Ranting a bit but I could go on. That a country of 5 million people (inc. the North) (basically the size of South London) cannot plan its physical environment (which we all claim as so precious) in a sustainable fashion is a sorry indictment of politicians, local councillors, voters, planners, money grabbing gombeen men and the apathetic public at large. Contrary to the above I don’t think that the Irish have any real feel for nor commitment to a sustainable urban and rural future.

I have friends they have bought starter houses out in Kildare and to a certain extent I can sympathise given the cost in Dublin. But what are young working childless couples doing in a three bed houses with front and back gardens (they never use or concrete over) which they basically occupy from 7pm to 7am. A complete waste of space. The demographic of Ireland is such that two parent three odd child families are very very much in the minority yet we keep building and buying such inflexible space.

And as for the architecture don’t get me started.

Happy to flag a positive alternative.

but i think it goes deeper than that. it is a reflection of our society where amassing wealth is more important than our living conditions. spending 4 hours in traffic a day, living in anti-social housing estates, watching dvds and ordering pizzas is not really what life should be about. there is a great book called ‘how to be idle’ 🙂 that i am reading at the moment and casts light on the absurb lives we live today. its not so much about changing housing schemes, reducing the dependence of cars but more about changing peoples attitudes.

The population of south London is less than 5 million! the total of London is about 8 million. it has been declining since 1950!due to migration to places like Nottingham etc.

Northern Ireland is 1.7million
Republic of Ireland 4.04million(2004)(expected to reach 5 million 2025)
I’m not defending the planning system etc. But ireland is growing faster than critics and planner ever thought and is growing ever faster , so it hard to get the balance when there is explosive population and when demand is greater than supply which is probaly one of the reason to why the sprawl is continuing to the extent.
The Celtic tiger is stlil in full swing so i don’t thin the sprawl will slow down either, well not this genration anyway !I think its totally inadequete and way out of proportion to allow so much suburban devlepment around little villages that totally destroy the charachter and the local community.

Apart from the current plans for future development of Ireland and the National spatial strategy , I wonder what will be the result of all this sprawl and to what extent will it change Ireland of the present day?
good and bad..

Dublin really needs to get a grip with it, If Dublin is now the third top tourist city destination in Europe after London and Paris , well they really need to sort out the mess before the city get totally choked and loses its status, because Dublin desrves to have all these tourist with the current problems,
Its getting to expensive to live in the city, which is forcing people out of the city which created a negative impact on the traffic as Dublin now depends so heavilly on commuters.therefore triggering more sprawl then more traffic, so its a no win situation!
Dublin is now one of the most car dependant cities in Europe. This is just crazy.
As a result of the Urban sprawl we now live a quarter of our day commuting in our cars, utter madness.
Ia there Any real Fecking plan for a decent intergrated public transport system.
I’m sick and tired of all these fancy plans on it etc..
and on the papers every few weeks and saying how much the government are going to spend and spend on , dates etc..
It took 20 years to get the Port tunnel started
M50 since 1990
the Metro is still high in the sky, and cost 2 billion to build!, when a large chunk of the metro system in Copenhagen didn’t cost much???
(even though Copenhagen is more diificult build underground and a more expnsive city )

@dave123 wrote:

M50 since 1990
the Metro is still high in the sky, and cost 2 billion to build!,

The M50 was first cleared in 1974
A Metro (DRTS) was first cleared in 1976

The cost of the airport Metro is likely to exceed €4.6bn

Dictators (architecturally enlightened) and Bulldozers would be good.

quote sjpclarke “But what are young working childless couples doing in a three bed houses with front and back gardens (they never use or concrete over)…”

This touches on a very valid point. The problems are recognised, but there is a very real perception problem with “apartment living” in this country. A drive towards greater densities can only succeed if people are willing to live in such communities. Past apartment developments in our urban areas have certainly not helped people’s perception. An overhaul of D.O.E. guidelines on minimum apartment sizes?

Forget even apartments, why cant people live in terance house the likes of which you find Rathmines, Drumcondra, Ranaleigh etc. Most of these victorian houses are still considered high status homes yet living in a new built terrance is looked down upon, people would commute an extra hour so they can aford a semi-d as opposed to a terrance house. Meduim rise, high density terrance houses would be a big improvment on detacthed houses with big front and back gardens.

Most certainly – it is interesting to note the difference in attitudes towards terraced housing in the UK and in Ireland.
Whereas in the major cities in the UK that are jam-packed with Victorian terraces for then considered lower middle class and middle middle class, here terraces are still considered to be the lowest of the low in the housing heirarchy.

Yet even the most exclusive housing in the capital on Palmerstown Road or Morehampton Rd etc are all terraced!
Fair enough we can do without their prairie back gardens today, but they’re good examples of how housing can still be built to a high density and can be very commodious with three storey over-basement, without having to go the apartment route.
It never fails to astonish how vast the seemingly modest Edwardian semis/terraces of Glasnevin etc are – most have five bedrooms and 3 recs.

The problem with terraces is that they’re very much so associated with major urban centres, and the very notion of building them in a field in Mullingar is not even on the radar of developers in this country.
Nor even is the idea of mixed developments – with a multitude of units to cater for different needs, from tall family terraces and/or semis, to apartments for younger/older/single persons etc.
Just row upon row upon row of yellow semis with three bedrooms and often a single person clattering about inside.

It’s partially the developers/planners fault, but also the mindset of young people wanting to grab hold of a 3-bed semi for future security.

@d_d_dallas wrote:

This touches on a very valid point. The problems are recognised, but there is a very real perception problem with “apartment living” in this country. A drive towards greater densities can only succeed if people are willing to live in such communities. Past apartment developments in our urban areas have certainly not helped people’s perception. An overhaul of D.O.E. guidelines on minimum apartment sizes?

I’d certainly welcome that – I’m a first time buyer looking for an abode and am seeing far too many (new) 2 bedroom apartments under (in some cases, well under) 500 sq. feet. Perhaps it’s worthwhile having such properties if they’re priced such as to be affordable to low-income earners, but they’re not especially cheap and you’d have to wonder about the quality of life living in boxes like those.

That a country of 5 million people (inc. the North) (basically the size of South London) cannot plan its physical environment (which we all claim as so precious) in a sustainable fashion is a sorry indictment of politicians, local councillors, voters, planners, money grabbing gombeen men and the apathetic public at large. Contrary to the above I don’t think that the Irish have any real feel for nor commitment to a sustainable urban and rural future.

Good point, needs to be said more often I feel. These ideas are good, but often forgotten at crucial times, when big decisions are being made with regard to future planning. I need to constant repeat and repeat, the most basic steps in regard to designing good architecture to myself, every day – you think that they stick, but really they need to be refreshed all of the time – so I don’t expect many planners remember the basics either, without a constant refreshing on regular basis. Very true, but unfortunately rarely observed, in either architecture or in planning.

I have friends they have bought starter houses out in Kildare and to a certain extent I can sympathise given the cost in Dublin. But what are young working childless couples doing in a three bed houses with front and back gardens (they never use or concrete over) which they basically occupy from 7pm to 7am. A complete waste of space. The demographic of Ireland is such that two parent three odd child families are very very much in the minority yet we keep building and buying such inflexible space.

Again, what I like a lot about your post, and often when guys like Frank McDonald from the Times talks on radio etc, is you are just issuing very obvious (what should be obvious) statements or guides to proper approachs to design. You aren’t saying much out of the ordinary – but sometimes, I guess in the attempt to create stuff which is ‘extraordinary’ (trumpets and big drums) we can just forget the ordinary stuff, which is far, far better for design and planning in general. And, you know, if you take a lot of the quoted points, in this post, on board at all – we here in Ireland could be contributing to problems in the future – problems this country is going to have to deal with at some stage or other.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

Historical experts are aghast at the proposals. One group of 21 British archaeologists wrote to the Irish Times, reminding the Irish authorities that “driving a four-lane motorway through the valley will destroy the integrity of this ancient landscape for ever.”

I guess three and four dimensional perception of these problems is still quite a ways beyond our reach as spatial strategists and spatial designers. Compared perhaps to other nations such as Britain, with centuries of tradition in building up large industrial centres, navigating the world via shipping, air and land, and building much social, political and economic infrastructure along the way. Lets remember, Britain managed to build up countries as far away as India. I mean, they have been doing for centuries, what we are just beginning to do for the first time now. Except, we never had any colonies to expand into either – I guess the ‘Irishman’ was always the guy who followed the Empire, with his faithful pick and shovel. It is a pretty large jump going from that, to transforming a whole landscape. Just because you have the means to do something, doesn’t imply that you are ready to go and do it well.

Which just serves to make me even more aghast, that in our spatial design educational programmes in this country, we are mostly still concerned with a kind of competition format of education – a merit system – where you encourage students to ‘beat one another’ in the design studio. Rather than just admitting to ourselves first of all, our complete lack of any discussion and tradition in these kinds of issues – and just start from a very basic point of view – the first principles, which are obviously going to be new to every one who calls themselves an Irish man or woman. It is one of the crucial things about the Archiseek project endeavour – it began with discussion – not as the AAI awards sort of idea, where you begin with a competition. Where a nice group of middle class individuals gather together to try and decide who has just built the coolest rear garden extension. Discussion is quite useful, and should be the first step,… as many of the people who ‘might’ have anything important to contribute, may not have grown up in any environment of discussion to do with spatial issues.

Really the gap now, between politians on one end, with absolutely no spatial training whatsoever, carving up actual landscapes. And ‘Architects’ on the other end, altering a rear garden extension, in a pleasant middle class suburb – and entering it for an award, in competition with other rear garden extensions – that gap has just grown far too wide today. And to be quite honest, it is justs a laugh.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

Large industrial centres like Birmingham, Manchester , Liverpool Bradford, etc, etc?
I would not live there if you paid me!

You are not comparing like with like ( Ireland vis a vis London), though your selection of comparisons indicates a rather geographically ( and perhaps culturally ) restricted knowledge – why not compare us to Copenhagan, Helsinki etc, with roughly the same population and economic development..

Conceptually comparing us with cities that have really got their act together as against South London which is only a bit of a mess would just be too depressing.

I agree Thomand Park – it’s an urban wasteland.
I wish we had a thread in support of low density suburbia. People lke and need space. Ask anyone who lives in an apartment!

I know people like space but the costs of providing decent public services such transport and public open spaces to developments at 16 to the acre is prohibitively expensive. I have no problem with apartment living as a concept, I lived in a great apartment with three freinds on Georges St for a couple of years during College which had 75 sq metres of internal space as well as a courtyard to the back. The problem is that very few apartments are as well done as this place was and when the rent went up from 600 to 1100 pounds in one review that was it.

A freind recently bought an apartment at Santry Demense which I think was a very good move at 275k for a 2 bed of 75 sq m, it has much better recreational amentiy than your typical semi with a postage stamp garden as you get both a private balcony and large communal gardens.

@crestfield wrote:

Forget even apartments, why cant people live in terance house the likes of which you find Rathmines, Drumcondra, Ranaleigh etc. Most of these victorian houses are still considered high status homes yet living in a new built terrance is looked down upon, people would commute an extra hour so they can aford a semi-d as opposed to a terrance house. Meduim rise, high density terrance houses would be a big improvment on detacthed houses with big front and back gardens.

i think that may have been the case but not so now. unfortunately though, those areas are now too expensive. i got a shock when a two bed terrace on the wrong side of drumcondra (shadows of croke park) was on the market for 450. indeed besides summerhill the terraces houses around drumcondra/phibs are the fastest rising properties at the moment.

Themond Park – I’m sure we’re pretty much of a similar mind here though I take issue with both yourself and DublinLimrick with regard to South London. I’ve lived in London nearly ten years now with the last four or so in South London. Its certainly a bit messy but in no way an urban wasteland. I actullay live in Brixton which is one of the most vibrant, culturally mixed, cultural, fun, well-connected, green and leafy inner suburbs one could wish to live in. Similar could be said of ten’s of other such urban villages that South Londoners call home. I’m not suggesting that Ireland and London are equivalent just that it is possible to house considerable populations in relative urban luxury at medium densities – London is in no way a high density city like Paris or Barcellona.

DublinLimrick – You do not seem to have read my submission above. I make no comparions in my piece at all – just the singular observation that we’ve got a lot of space and not very many people who collectively live in a disjointed and unsustainable manner. How this suggests a “rather geographically ( and perhaps culturally ) restricted knowledge” I do not know. To date I have lived in Dublin, London, Sydney, Melbourne and Boston for extensive periods of time. I do agree that London is not, cannot and should not be a model for Dublin in the round but there are valuable lessons that can be learnt from this city. (Dave – London’s population is increasing and has been for about a decade. While the official population is about 7.5 million this does not take into consideration the green belt which artifically – but positively – confines the popluation figures). Certainly there are much more appropriate models as you noted.

This is both a cultural (manstein) and infrastructural issue (dave123) in addition to the architecture or not of the developments in question. Leaving this to the market is proving a disaster.

Sipclarke,

I wasn’t holding South London up as being an example of bad planning, it is a bit of a mess in that other models such as those you mentioned like Paris and Barcelona have acheived a much more coherent urban form. To compare Dublin with Copenhagan, Helsinki or Amsterdam would be genuinely depressing and comparison with Paris or Barcelona is not so relevant when one considers population scale. On cultural facility South London is strong a lot stronger than we expect here

Apologies sipclarke if I misinterpreted your points.
I just like leafy suburbs and houses with gardens in well-kept streets. I like communities who take an active interest in their local areas. Medium-density housing is fine for central Dublin but not further out (we need choice).
One problem with high-density housing – particularly some apartment developments – is that management of apartment blocks tends to become dysfunctional, probably due to absentee landlords who take the rent but do not participate in the day to day management of these developments. Relatively new apartment blocks can thus become degraded and are seen
as less desirable to live in.
I believe the Dublin City Manager spoke of this problem recently and perhaps we need a look (in legal terms) at the rights
and responsiblities associated with estate management.

Dublin has a lot in common with London and it might make more sense to look at London for comparison than the likes of Copenhagen (I haven’t been to Helsinki) or other “mainland” European cities when trying to figure out what is wrong (or even right) with planning and development in Dublin. Modern Dublin is a conurbation containing a city, a couple of towns and numerous villages. Most European cities I’ve been do not feel like they are conurbations; maybe as they grew they absorbed surrounding towns and villages but if they did, they didn’t leave much trace of absorbed towns or maybe it happened so long ago that the traces of these previous settlement patterns have been obliterated by time. London still feels like a collection of cities and towns. Actually it’s more than just a “feeling”; it’s a very noticable aspect of life in London. Like, sjpclarke, I’ve spent time in Brixton (I loved it too) and after a while it becomes the centre of your world; going into the West End felt like taking a day trip to a different city. You did nearly all of your shopping and socializing locally. Living in the Ranelagh/Rathmines area of Dublin now, there are similar forces at play but obvioulsy not to the same extent – it is more obvious when you visit places like Dun Laoghaire.

This is a fundamental difference I think between Dublin and other European cities which have similar populations. I suspect that this means that the planning models which are suitable for the compact European cities we all love may not be particularly suitable for Dublin. I don’t know enough about planning but it is often suggested that we should aspire to developing Dublin along the lines of some or other European city which has histroically grown in a completely different way. I’m not sure that this is a realistic proposition.

@David McWilliams wrote:

One-off housing is simply a response to pester power

17 April 2005 By David McWilliams
“Mummy, mummy, mummy, I want a Kit Kat.” “No, darling, you can’t have a Kit Kat, have an apple instead.” “Why can’t I have chocolate?” “Well, because too much chocolate will rot your teeth, make you fat, possibly leading to obesity, heart problems and diabetes.” “What’s diabetes?” “Diabetes is one of the fastest growing ailments in Ireland and doctors say it is related to bad diet and specifically too much sugar.

“Diabetes can weaken your immune system, making you more susceptible to other illnesses and it affects your circulation. Obesity will have an emotional and psychological element to it. For example, in your early teens you will be slagged at school and possibly bullied.

“This might make life more difficult for you than it already is.

“Carrying too much fat might prevent you from playing sport or just running around with your friends. Although you don’t realise it now, its better for you in the long term if Mummy does not give you chocolate and sweets every time.”

“OK Mum.”

If only dealing with pester power was so easy. It is incessant and parents can – in one split second – go from dealing with a sweet, loveable little darling to being faced by a tantrum-throwing creature resembling Damien from The Omen, all triggered by a Barbie Magazine, a hair clip or even face paints. Yet, all adults can see the logic of adult supervision in the above encounter between mother and child.

In many ways, running a country is similar. It is a fine balancing act – a bit like exercising adult supervision – between the squabbling and conflicting demands of every lobby group, vested interest, voter or even parishioner.

In an ideal world, politicians would act like concerned parents, always looking to the longer-term implications of today’s decisions and understanding the basic premise of pester power, which is that today’s path of least resistance might lead to serious problems tomorrow.

The economy displays similar characteristics. Like the human body, it is a fragile ecosystem with sensitive and interrelated functions. Nothing works in isolation. This is why the government’s decision on one-off housing last week is so misguided and is the ultimate expression of political irresponsibility.

Minister Dick Roche has been bullied and he has bowed to political pester power in the same way as a jaded mother buys peace at home with a Kit Kat, knowing well that the rapid ingestion of sugar will only lead to a short-term kick that will soon wear off.

The decision on one-off housing will cost us a fortune in the years ahead. A lot of the coverage has focused on the possibility that some of our natural beauty spots will be tarnished by bungalows. For this column, bungalow blight is not the issue.

The main reasons for opposing this retrograde move are political, economic, and environmental or resource-based.

On the political front, Napoleon once stated accurately that “to govern is to choose’‘. It is crucial that a government is not seen to be continually compromising.

It needs to make hard choices and to stick to its convictions. A government without conviction is a government without credibility. It has to stand for something.

If it changes the planning laws and guidelines too frequently and in response to pestering from lobby groups, the credibility of all directives, laws and decrees will be tarnished. In short, no system can work without a set of rules and if the rules are bent too often the entire system is undermined.

Farmers, developers and individual owners of land will interpret Roche’s latest move as a green light to chance their arms, leading to a further blurring of planning regulation. Of itself, extending development may not be a big deal, but the related economic ramifications certainly are. Let us be very clear: if we have one-off housing, we cannot have a functioning public transport system, public health service, public education system or postal system, never mind universal access to broadband or cable.

Think five years hence, with thousands of houses dotted willy-nilly around the country, neither in villages nor towns. A rural movement starts complaining, in marginal constituencies, about the lack of buses or other public transport infrastructure.

You then get the airwaves blocked by the rather innocent-sounding “rural bus coalition’‘ that is running a candidate in the local elections on the rural isolation ticket. Suddenly you have local TDs promising hourly bus services to the back end of nowhere to facilitate the people that built their one-off houses at the end of the valley in 2006.

The success of the rural bus coalition spawns the “isolated ambulance platform’‘, which is running another candidate for “immediate ambulance access for the dark-side-of-the-mountain’‘. This flamboyant candidate is threatening the goofy scion of an interbred fourth generation local political dynasty.

Within weeks the local TD is in the Dáil demanding ambulances for all and within a month or so you get the “remote school access project’‘ calling for school buses to travel the 30-mile round trip to pick up little Saoirse from halfway up Errigal and drop her to school for nine o’clock.

It’s the same story with postal services as well as water, sewage, telecom and roads infrastructure. The more you spread the population, the higher the cost of providing all these services.

But do you think a variation of the “polluter pays’‘ concept would be applied to price these extra services – where the more remote you are, the more you pay for basic utilities because it costs more to get the services to you? No way.

There would be uproar, constitutional challenges and entire Liveline programmes devoted to the “constitutional right’‘ to be bussed to the local “educate together’‘ preschool.

So who pays? The worker who has abided by the laws, who has bought a place in a town or a village and who is not lucky enough to inherit land. You pay.

Your bills and taxes will be increased to pay for the lobby group that shouts the loudest.

The combination of a weak political system, opportunistic land owners and pushy local candidates means that the silent suburban majority – the backbone of this country – gets shafted again.

Looking forward, there is another argument for centralised, high density living, as opposed to a sporadic, scattered, one-off pattern – the price, supply and availability of oil. Ireland is one of the most oil-dependent countries in the world and suburban sprawl and one-off housing depend on cheap petrol.

However, we may have passed the period of cheap fuel. Global oil production is set to peak in 2011 and we are unlikely to find anymore of it. Demand from China and India is set to sky-rocket and this week we have seen tension over fuel between China, the second-largest oil importer in the world, and Japan, the third-largest.

Switching back home, the cost of one-off housing will be equally badly exposed if oil prices remain where they are or begin to creep upwards. One-off housing means commuting because, as far as I am aware, we are not talking about one-off offices, one-off supermarkets, one-off schools, one-off shopping centres, one-off restaurants, one-off cinemas or one-off factories.

The houses are designed for people to commute from. If the price of petrol goes through the roof, these people will be looking for subsidies to get from their one-off bungalows to work.

Like doling out sweets in response to pester power, the government’s move is short-term, ill-conceived and will only do damage in the long run. When we suffer the economic equivalent of hardened arteries, liver failure and diabetes, just remember none of these ailments are one-off.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie

Any thoughts?

Jimg – Very good point. London developed about its previous outlying towns and villages. I’m writing this in Streatham which is a case in point. Much of Dublin – particularly <WW11 developed in a similar fashion. As was mentioned previously there is a great deal of horrible sprawl around East and South East London that developed between the wars and then again in the 60s. Much as Dublin ex-urban explosion today. Unfortunatley we never learned the lessons.

DublinLimerick – You make an excellent point re the management of flats / estate complexes. A combination of off site management, absentee landlords, high proportion of leaseholder to rented accomadation (in UK / Ireland), weak or non-exisitent residents associations and arcitecture (poor quality and choice of inflexible space) results in such complexes deteriorating at depressingly quick rate. This is as true of private complexes as it has traditionally been of social housing in both the UK and Ireland. The continent does offer mangement models that need adaption. Perhaps this is teething problems on our part. We’ve been on a very steep learning curve here. I speak from some experience here in that I am a residnet of a high density housing estate in Brixton Hill. Until recently all of the above problems have been in place and the estate was in a very poor state. In the past 4-5 years the residents management committee has completely turned this around – to the extent that we ambitions of buying the freehold. If you’re in London for Architectural Open Week the estate is well worth a look – Grade 2* modernist classic: http://www.pullmancourt.org.uk/

@Cori wrote:

Cori calls for sustainable development model
From:ireland.com
Monday, 25th July, 2005

The Conference of Religious of Ireland (Cori) has called for Ireland to adopt a development model that has sustainability at its core.

In its latest report, the body argues there is a growing demand worldwide to find new models “that will conserve the planet and its resources and empower people to meet their own needs and the needs of others”.

Central to this should be a move away from “money-measured growth” as the principal economic target and measure of success, and an emphasis on sustainability in terms of real-life social, environmental and economic variables, Cori said.

Fr Healy of Cori warned that the scale of Ireland’s poverty problem is “sometimes easy to overlook”. According to figures from Cori, there were over 900,000 people technically living in poverty in Ireland in 2003 out of a population of nearly four million.

He said sustainability was the key to tackling poverty, not just in Ireland but globally. “There is a growing awareness that sustainability must be a constant factor in all development, whether social, economic or environmental,” he said.

Fr Healy also welcomed Ireland’s commitment to reaching the emissions targets of the Kyoto treaty. “These emissions are a major cause of climate change, and it is in all our interests to ensure that the limits agreed in the Kyoto protocol are met,” he said.

However, he warned that “major changes” are required if we are to reduce our emissions towards this target.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/5971448?view=Eircomnet

This is one I didn’t see coming

Can anyone give a good recent example of high density housing/aparments by a private developer that can be found in Dublin.
I say private developer because most of the best housing schemes past and present are generally by local authorities. Take the work of Herbert Simms for example or the public housing in Cabra or the Bord na Mona dwellingsin the Midlands.
Before anyone quotes me and lectures me for half a page, yes Ballymun, Darndale and many inner city flat complexs are disasters but pre 60s and post 80s homes are designed and built well.

Large industrial centres like Birmingham, Manchester , Liverpool, Bradford, etc, etc?
I would not live there if you paid me!

No maybe, by our early 21 century aesthetic standards, and cultural biases. But any of the cities mentioned above, have played a huge part in the formation of the world we now live in. Just as Florence, Venice and Rome played in the 1500s. All of the technological gadgetry, computers, internets, practically as much as you can think of had origins in the heartland of the industrial revolution. Maybe architectural enthuasiasts aren’t so turned on by that, but many engineers and scientists, historians, thinkers and philosophers would be. If you are looking for short sighted, I think you can look at Ireland. I heard the architect responsible for O’ Connell St. re-development express his excitment in a talk a while back, that Dublin had just surpassed London city’s attempts to re-develop Tranfalgar Square. It is like, I am listened to his moment of pathetic little triumphalism, while in my mind thinking, the British built O’Connell St., and hundreds like it all over the world. All we did really, was to put down a pleasant looking patio… and after the abuse O’Connell Street received over the past few decades, the least it really deserved was a decent make over.

But in relation to blaming politians about lack of spatial planning abilities – it just isn’t good enough. I often sat in a design studio in Architectural School, wondering where I would begin to design my Olympic Swimming Pool project, or how I was going to design my Docklands master plan project, or whatever. How did I feel having spent years of all kinds of artistic and spatial/drawing training under my belt? To be honest with you – I was stone cold – I was frozen by even the contemplation of making anything of that size. So how is the average politian, who understands opinion polls, surveys and publicity campaigns suddenly expected to ‘have all the goods’ required to understand complex spatial problems like building roads? I mean, when you listen and watch politians on TV, trying to grapple with spatial tasks like the Red Cow roundabout and such,… and bearing in mind, these guys could not draw a box on paper, nevermind visualise anything more complex than that…. it really makes you wonder what they are doing involved in these projects at all – but still they are, and in much too close a way I believe.

As Architects, the ones with the real heavy duty minds and capabilities to deal with these spatial problems, are doing bar interiors, house extensions and the like – harmless stuff. It reminds me of Navy Germany, when the politians would decide how many bombers would be made, and actually approve the designs. Despite having no idea about aeronautics. Or how politians would be given the latest Panzer Tiger blueprints to look over, and design what would become the latest grade, military hardware for the front line offensives – despite never having fought in a battle some of them. I just want to highlight the shere ridiculous practice of trying to blame some guy in a pin-stripe suit, who goes to Dail Eireann each day and talks all day – for having lack of perception when it comes to problems which demand all kinds of talents – a million and one miles away from those of any polititian. We shouldn’t blame politians – what are our design professionals doing? While being very content to monopolise all of the brownie points that come from being a design professional – they still don’t want to be a part of the overall attempt to modernise and build the country.

Our design vocations have been restricted far too much, to doing polite, harmless and financially safe small stuff – while people who have no clue what they are doing whatsoever – are flying around in helicopters, and deciding the future of the country in 3 and 4 dimensions. You have to understand Britain and the cities mentioned above, in the whole context of the British Empire and it’s history. The industrial and port cities mentioned about, were converted into large scale industrial power houses, to feed the expansion of the British Empire all over the world. Nowadays the British are in the mood for re-developing those same cities as living environments anew – and they present a massive opportunity for designers in the future. As do similar urban centres throughout industrial Europe. But, we hear in Ireland have to get over our current petty triumphalism phase, and realise that we are entirely fresh and new to this whole building and urban planning racket – and just start right from the basics.

And if you really wish to get back to the very basics of the problems – just look at the kinds of people trying to build the country nowadays. Then compare this, to our design colleges and their lack of ability to even pay staff to tutor and guide the coming generations of young designers, who someday might work us out of this fiasco. Maybe if the country spared itself the odd road project here and there, and spent less money on helicopter rides for guff-faws to ride around in the sky – then there might be just a little money to throw at educating a young army of spatially minded technicians and designers. But there is just too much denial going on – in the design professions – if you aren’t an award winning young architect for doing cool house extensions – then you are nothing, period. This often happens, when you have a crisis situation – rather than facing up squarely to the task and attacking it – you often try to pretend, it isn’t even there.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

“the British built O’Connell St.,”

The Wide Street commision was a Dublin corporation initiative.

I know it is a very hard egg for an oppressed country to swallow, to admit that a conquering nation, built most of our infrastructure and left very little of that expertise lying around, for when we need it nowadays – but that is much closer to the truth – than trying to imagine, that we have some submerged Celtic ‘spirally’ River-Lord-of-the-Dance, kind of magic with spatial problem solving. As if, we can just conjure up this magic, or pull it out of our arse, after 700 hundred years, making potato ridges. To attempt to brush right over that historical legacy, is simply the worse form of hypocracy – and you tend to encounter it all the time – in our design professions. So to try and push the blame off on a politian, for a lack of any tradition we have in building things – is just another saddenly reflection on our whole culture today. What is more – it is going to be extremely damaging to the young Irish people growing up now – who might help us out in this situation.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

Dude I was giving the facts. O’Connell street was built by Dublin Corporation and taxed from Dublin corporation’s revenue. It is not like Trinity College which was Elizabeth’s idea and financed from London, initially. These corporation members may have considered themselve loyal subjects of Empire but were born here, and Irish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Streets_Commission

As if, we can just conjure up this magic, or pull it out of our arse, after 700 hundred years, making potato ridges

“

Sleveen cant. A similar statement about an African nation would be flagged as racist.

I would argue that it is such forelock tugging ideologies that holds the coiuntry back – the attitude that we should leave the country as the “British” left it to us, for why would a Paddy be building stuff. The general opposition to taller buildings is part of that, for instance.

Well just take a small, poor, African nation as a good example – one that recently recovered from a Famine perhaps – what if one such small, poor African nation, suddenly had everything it needed – to just build itselves a brand new country?

Just suppose a consortium of billionaires and foreign banks, in the morning, decided to give a small, poor African nation a huge lump of investment – what do you think would happen?

I dunno, maybe, these rich Westerns thought it would be a funny experiment to try out – having gotten drunk in the bar last night.

Well, you can almost imagine it, if you try hard enough.

Some of those African leaders, or chieftains, and the usual few movers n’ shakers in the tribes, would fly around in brand new helicopters mapping out the future.

Then they would fly in loads of designers and planners from Europe or someplace civilised and well-to-do, to come and ‘draw it all up’.

I know, it sounds like a bad recall from a 1960s James Bond movie.

‘Goldfinger’, or ‘Moonraker’, or some similar abomination.

Of course, not a single cent would be spent, on the young Africans and trying to train them up as sufficiently skillful Architects and designers.

Does this sound like the Irish situation – because it really does to me.

Well, maybe not.

But I find it useful just to examine this idea – try to see things from that vantage point perhaps.

I mean, it contrasts with the sorts of viewpoints already presented here on this thread.

I do understand your argument for the ‘existing’ design tradition we have here in Ireland, and I really do respect that.

But, I also think it has strained a bit too much, for what it was, under the current pressure – I feel we could have anticipated that pressure – and acted to deal with it.

It is just too easy now to take the ‘Frank McDonald’ route out, and blame it all on politians without any spatial perception, background or even the most basic training – like these hypothetical tribal leaders riding around in new helicopters.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

Garethase, you are either being ironic, provocative, self deprecating, self-hating, fundamentalist, or a combination of all
of the above.
We live in an imperfect world with much that is good some that is bad. This is life. The contribution we make to our society
can only be measured in our deeds (not our words) but by our words we can often bludgen those who seek to do good, quietly and without bluster. Fundamentalists silence people into submission.
Let us do what is possible, leaving to future generations what is to be done. It is ever thus, for all of humanity.

jimq, I have lived in Amsterdam and Brussels and they are also conurbations but if one visits these cities for a weekend or so
then one cannot see beyond the geography of their ‘city centre and touristic’ areas. Major cities are economic powerhouses
driving economic activity. They have sprawl, often of a depressing drabness and uniformity.

@DublinLimerick wrote:

Garethase, you are either being ironic, provocative, self deprecating, self-hating, fundamentalist, or a combination of all
of the above.
We live in an imperfect world with much that is good some that is bad. This is life. The contribution we make to our society
can only be measured in our deeds (not our words) but by our words we can often bludgen those who seek to do good, quietly and without bluster. Fundamentalists silence people into submission.
Let us do what is possible, leaving to future generations what is to be done. It is ever thus, for all of humanity.

DL,

Could you not debate or demolish his points as opposed to his level of belief?

Re the articles posted I am encouraged that I had the ability to post two new articles in one day from sources as disperate as David McWilliams (Pure Ken Drinking taxpayer who is pissed off with the Metzogiorno state) and Cori (who contend it isn’t southern enough) to both agree that very valid economic arguments exist against me fein planning.

Is it not down to a governments level of enlightenment on issues of the built environment. You don’t have to have a historical legacy of spatial planning to know that allowing urban sprawl to continue is wrong. It’s lack of vision, spatial awareness and imagination on the governments part to see the alternatives to create healthy vibrant communities. As much as i want to, i have no architectural training but i can see what i don’t like in our current development and i can imagine exciting alternatives, just as someone has a knack for cooking or woodwork some may have a better grasp on visualising and creating living environments. It doesn’t flow in the blood of a nation, maybe it’s just facilitated better in some nations by governments who are made more aware of the environments they are creating.

Or possibly by governments that know that profesional bodies such as the IPI and RIAI should be listentened to over the incessent whining of the IRDA and edgy backbench TD’s

@garethace wrote:

The British built O’Connell Street.

I find this view very untrue, as the great architectural gems of Ireland eg. the Custom House, City Hall, Castletown House, were built not by the British but by the Anglo-Irish. Grattan’s Parliment was composed of Irish men, although they gave their legance to the British Monarch who was also King/Queen of Ireland, they were the patrons of our architectural legacy.

Garethace’s statement smacks of the Kevin Boland ethos of, lets assert our indopendance by knocking down Hume St. or blowing up Nelson’s Pillar. Although I know garethace is not taking that view personally, the very fact that it is written shows how unthankfull and unacknowledgeing Irish nationlists are towards the Anglo-Irish for giving us such fine architecrture.

So always remember, the great eighteenth century architecture of Ireland is not British, but Anglo-Irish.

Two guys are running away from a bear, but you don’t need to run faster than the bear, you just need to run faster than the other guy.

This is basically how we run our spatial design courses here in Ireland. Look people, back in 1994, when I was a young student doing a course in architectural design in this country,… for the four months between September and Xmas, I had no guidance in my efforts to do a couple of projects,… why was this? Well basically because, one of my tutors was too busy building the competitions they had just won, and my other appointed tutor had just began a very popular TV programme on RTE about houses and architecture. When my xmas assessment came around, I presented the work I had managed to too, without any form of guidance from my course, and was bluntly accused of being lazy and not trying hard enough. In other words, it was all put on my lap – that I was in effect responsible for my own lack of guidance in a degree course. Of course, when a young man of c. 19/20 is told that by a person in authority – they tend to just take it on the chin, and think, well this person is older and wiser than I am. What you don’t see at 19 or 20 is how you are being ‘measured’ on the scale that the design course sets for itself – not on the scale that would relate to the specific individual’s progress. The amount of progress the individual has made over a set length of time – related to where they are coming from, and potentially where they could go some day. It is very possible, for two students to make exactly the same progress in a design course, to do precisely the same amount of work and effort, but because one may have started off much better than the other, the guy who started off worse, is penalised because of not meeting some bullshit standards.

It is just as important for a design course to produce students, with ‘Grade D’ as it is to produce those with grade ‘A’s. Who knows, maybe the ‘D’ guy worked twice as hard for it, and may therefore go much further than anyone ever thought. Many years down the road, I can now see how wrong my acceptance of my conditions were. After xmas, the only excuse ventured by the faculty, was that both of those tutors, had decided to take extended leave from teaching in the course, at which stage of course, my game was up for that year,… and for ever afterwards, I was branded in that institution a bit of a waster, a goofer and of no merit or ability design or spatially wise. Indeed, that is how I began to view myself – after all, the ‘experts’ had just come to that conclusion. This was really the conclusion come to by several trained professionals, not by myself – who was I to argue with them? As I said, at 19/20 you tend to take these things at face value, rather than question the authority. When I talk about a ‘lack’ of a well established and healthy spatial design tradition, this is mainly what I getting at – a lack of ability to teach aswell as to practice. A kind of ‘contempt’ for the youth and the potential contained within that youthful talent – as if it posed some sort of ‘threat’ to the establishment or something. Well, maybe it does, but that is precisely what one must do, keep re-building, re-training, changing what went before when something better comes along. Our spatial design professionals, as basic human beings, lack ability to see something that is grossly under-valued at the moment – the youth. To invest the time and effort into that project, and watch your investment grow into something over the years. Something that will persist and survive long after all of the roads are built. It seems their best solution is to import talent en masse from abroad, if and when you need it – than to grow your own naturally. It is the educational equivalent, to getting Chinesse Take-Out instead of making your own dinner.

This is what I mean, the country is choc-full of half-baked (or even raw, un-cooked) talents in design of space – that is our failure as a country – as educators. That is the strength of the British and Anglo-Irish tradition – the ability to see a something worth investing time and effort into – and later on, seeing the rewards of your investment. We tend to give up way too easy in Ireland, throw in the towel before we have even got as far as the ring. The fact is, that in an area like spatial design – which is already weighed in favour of those of whom have access to mature people in that field,… well, I will just let you use your own imaginations in that sense,… to what it means to be hung out to dry,… without tutors, while you watch others speed past. That is why I keep on refering to the teaching of basic fundamentals to do with design and space in our courses. Because given how un-level the playing pitch already is, the young people who really could make a difference, need those fundamentals badly,… but are not provided with them,… just a system that spits you out, like a discarded bit of McDonald’s packaging or similar. In other words, the real wealth of this country, not the roads, not the helicopters, the peach jobs or the money – the young talent that has the ability to make everyones’ living conditions much better,… is now being flushed down the toilet. Money just serves to raise the conditions of a very few people,… and to provide a society which is even more out of balance, than the one we already live in. That is basically all that any politian needs to know or should ever know about spatial design, and that is the simple lesson that needs to be driven home. I don’t accept the ‘standards’ that the Irish spatial planning and design tradition sets itself – it sets the bar too low for what this country could achieve – and it just doesn’t serve the community as a whole as we progress into our future. I am referring precisely to stories like my own as represented above, and stories of many more young individuals like me. If we just can stay focussed on this issue, for the next few years, instead of being side-tracked and going down all kinds of cul-de-sacs, then the future is very bright. On the other hand, if we just do our usual half-arsed attempt, then expect the worse.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

@RTE Interactive wrote:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0810/tourism.html

Tourist boards restructuring announced

10 August 2005 13:04
A radical restructuring of tourism promotion in Ireland is to be undertaken in an effort to tackle falling numbers of visitors outside Dublin.

The marketing and promotion of tourism destinations outside Dublin is to be centrally integrated, while cutbacks are expected in up to 68 of the country’s tourist offices.

However, a spokesman for the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, John O’Donoghue, stressed that no job cuts were likely and said the regional tourist authorities supported the plans.

The move comes against a background of falling visitor numbers outside Dublin. The number of tourists travelling to the regions was down 14% between 1999 and 2003.

Under the new plan recommended by consultants PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the marketing activities of regional tourist authorities, with the exception of Dublin, will be overseen in future by Failte Ireland.

Up to 68 of the country’s tourist offices could face cutbacks or downsizing.

Dublin Tourism, which will continue to operate independently, has welcomed the implementation of the report.

A spokesman for the Irish Tourism Industry Confederation said that Ireland needed to respond to changes in visitor profiles and the challenges presented by budget airlines.

While Dublin has performed well, he added, it cannot afford to rest on its laurels.

I was talking to an angler in the UK last week who hasn’t been here since 2002; the reason he said was that there is nothing to catch any more.

@An un-named development plan wrote:

The (Subject) area is characterised by monotonous residential development created by illegible, poorly connected and convoluted layouts where the car is dominant, the houses add little to the surrounding environment and the standard design solutions are in the ascendancy. The housing areas are usually segregated from schools, shops,community facilities and are usually only accessed by private car. There has been limited commercial development over the life of the existing (Subject) Development Plan but it is expected that in the coming years, this will follow on from the scale of residential development. The urban centres at present are formless, uninteresting and badly arranged places from an urban design perspective. There is no dramatic sense of arrival at any of the urban centres and the urban centres of the northern LAP seem to merge into each other.

I couldn’t have described much of the hinterland better myself : 😀

That reads worse than the article in the first post

good article. however what annoyed me was the inaccuracy of his info so early on. The danes didn’t invade Irteland. the vikings were mostly Norwegian. Ask any Dane…

As Garrethace loves to say Null

@Irish Examiner wrote:

Read between lines on land prices

LIES, damn lies and statistics – this week’s agricultural land sale figures for the first quarter of 2005 might give credence to that old saying. And the low per acre figure given nationally might well have more to do with loading of value onto residences, rather than land in an attempt to avoid the onerous stamp duty rate of 9%. The tight parameters, which would exclude land sales over a €14,000, is also a main reason for the overall low figure, and the exclusion of younger, qualified farmers from the stamp duty levy may also be part of the reason for the low average figure of €6,568 per acre. While the average price per acre was up on the first quarter of 2004, prices were down 11% in comparison to 2004, say the CSO.

The average per acre figure was derived from a total of 668 transactions over the year. The number of excluded transactions was 151, and these covered land sales under €500 per hectare or over €35,000 per hectare. The lower exclusion figure works out at €202 per acre and is deemed to be a non-market value representing sales to family and friends. The higher figure works out at just over €14,164 per acre which, many auctioneering practitioners will contend, is the average price paid for land in the southern half of the country. The average price given by the CSO might hold water when you take a mean between poor land in say, Roscommon, and the best of Golden Vale pasture, but when you look at the breakdown, there is still a large anomaly between the listed figures and those given as sale prices every day of the week.

Last year’s average for the South-West region, given as €6,825 per acre, is way below the average that most auctioneering practitioners quote as their rule-of-thumb average. And sales in a large number of cases have been consistently higher than the exclusion level, which would lead one to assume that they don’t register in the figures presented to the CEO. However, they haven’t ruled out raising that threshold in future releases, says Kevin Keady of the Agriculture section of the CSO, adding that their reluctance to do so was because of the damage to comparability with previous years statistics. And there are may be other factors at work behind this low mean figure, in particular the land valuation process.

Of the 151 sales excluded for the overall sales figure in 2004, that proportion was less than 20% of the total sales figures, which would not alter the final per acre figure significantly, say the CSO. The CSO figures are extrapolated from the Particulars Delivered (PD) form sent by solicitors to the Revenue Commissioners as part of the assessment of stamp duty. This in turn is sent to the Valuation Office, who in turn send the computed figures to the CSO. This figure only includes public sales and doesn’t cover inter-family transfer, which means that overall the number of transactions is just 0.1% of the overall land held in the country.

To be fair, the CSO are the first to say their results are based on voluntary processing of the Particulars Delivered form used by solicitors in a transaction, and that private sales slip through their net. But it still doesn’t get away from the fact that real life valuations for land have increased substantially, especially post-CAP as the agricultural market adjusts, and the exclusion figures should reflect that inflation. Likewise, the actual price paid for development land is now so far away from the baseline figure of €14,164 that it’s irrelevant, except in the published figures of farm sales. Any future assessment of farming in Ireland will be to some extent based on this tabulations, so their accuracy is of paramount importance.

Rose Martin © Irish Examiner

Any thoughts?

The French economist and journalist, Jean-Baptiste Say, who lived at the time of the French Revolution, invented the term ‘entrepreneur’ to describe someone who unlocks capital tied up in land and redirects it to ‘change the future’. He was one of the first economists to introduce the idea of change and uncertainty as something normal and even positive. Whereas Adam Smith, David Ricardo and others wanted to improve the efficiency of existing manufacturing processes by identifying the point at which demand, supply and price were in stable equilibrium, Say wanted to start new ventures. He was interested in the moments of disequilibrium and risk. The Austrian economist, Joseph Schumpeter, writing in the first half of the twentieth century, said the entrepreneur exploits innnovation to create a monopoly (or tries to), which is then challenged by another entrepreneur, who creates a new monopoly, and so on. In the words of economist Andrew Shonfield, who wrote Modern Capitalism, Schumpeter ‘believed the nature of traditional capitalism to be violent, to move forward by fits and starts, and that the reason for its uneven progress lies in the discontinuous process of innovation’. Compared with Adam Smith’s search for the more efficient use of existing resources, Say wanted to see how an investment in one resource could be taken and reused to exploit a completely different resource. It was an early version of what economists describe as ‘unlocking value’.

From ‘The Creative Economy’, by John Howkins.

If you think of Ireland in recent years, ‘change as something normal and even positive’, reminds me of Fianna Fail policies. But Fianna Fail are now afraid the pandora’s box they have opened, is spiralling out of their control. They assumed they could manage this impulse to unlock the capital contained in land. The innovation being exercised nowadays, is how to re-use the monopoly of land, for something else. What we are witnessing here in Ireland nowadays is the ‘violent capitalism’ of Joseph Schumpeter. Nowadays, Fianna Fail are deeply worried. They want to ‘retro-fit’ their policies with some elements that come from the ‘Left Wing’ side of the debate. Because all of the good ideas about sustainability and development, about stability of price, supply and demand, seem to exist on the left side.

Unlocking the value that is tied up in land ownership, that is what is going on, that is all. The Fianna Fail administration has organised itself firmly around that task – that is the main reason for its overwhelming popularity. Where other parties talk about ‘more efficient use of existing resources’ – Fianna Fail is more interesting in ‘change as something normal and even positive’. The results are visible these days, in every city, road and town in the country – whether it be once-off rural housing, or post industrial land banks. The only mystery to me, is how this process can continue without the input of anyone with spatial design capabilities – and how it exposes the very inefficient monopoly that is spatial and environmental design here in Ireland. The only justification that Fianna Fail could claim for unlocking the value in land, would be to put it straight back into the knowledge economy.

Brian O’ Hanlon.

The Creative Economy and the Architecture:

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=4237

Piece about Schumpeter’s ‘Creative Destruction’ here:

http://transcriptions.english.ucsb.edu/archive/courses/liu/english25/materials/schumpeter.html

Jean-Baptiste Say

http://www.mises.org/content/jean-baptiste.asp

Adam Smith

http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Philosophy/Smith.htm#

David Ricardo

http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/profiles/ricardo.htm

@garethace wrote:

CWU votes for strike action at An Post

21 October 2005 15:16
The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Noel Dempsey, has said that strike action at An Post could mean an earlier than intended end to its monopoly on the distribution of letters.

Earlier this afternoon it emerged that the Communications Workers Union has voted overwhelmingly to take industrial action.

As yet, the union has not specified what form the industrial action will take so it is impossible to assess the potential level of disruption.

Speaking earlier on RTÉ Radio’s News At One, Mr Dempsey said the CWU’s decision is a disappointing one and very bad news to the company’s customers.

90% of CWU members those polled voted in favour of industrial action. The turn out was also 90%.

The union will serve two weeks’ notice of industrial action later today.

The row arises from both An Post’s plea of inability to pay national wage increases because of its dire financial situation and the company’s bid in separate negotiations to secure major work practice and cost cutting reforms in its collection and delivery service.

Unions had argued that the two issues were unrelated.

However, after a major company review by a team of experts, the Labour Court recommended that the pay and change issues be linked, with full payment of national wage rises for all staff conditional on significant cost cutting concessions by postal workers.

An Post accepted the recommendation, but the CWU argued that the changes demanded placed an excessive burden on its members.

Smaller unions apply for LC hearing

Meanwhile, RTÉ News has learned that two smaller unions at An Post will formally apply to the Labour Court for an early hearing to secure payment of overdue National Wage increases.

In a significant development, leaders of the CPSU, which represents 400 lower grade administrative staff, and the AHCPS, which represents 200 senior managers, attended an informal meeting at the Labour Court this morning.

The unions argue that despite agreeing work practice reforms in their sectors up to two years ago, they are being refused overdue Sustaining Progress increases until postal workers deliver significant cost cutting reforms in the collection and delivery service.

It is understood that the two unions feel their members at An Post are effectively being held to ransom by the Communications Workers Union’s rejection of a Labour Court recommendation on change in the collection and delivery service.

Well if they didn’t have to deliver to such an ever more dispersed customer base they wouldn’t be losing so much money and would be able to honour national wage agreements and wouldn’t suffer strikes.

Major changes have occured within the operations of An Post (our impoverished version of a postal service)

Mail now only gets collected five times a week from Urban post boxes where there were 18 collections for most boxes only a few short months ago. Main Post Offices i.e. Urban ones other than the GPO were open 0900-1800 Monday to Saturday not these hours have been slashed and Mail is not collected from Post Offices on Saturdays.

What I don’t understand is that An Post is delivering more mail than ever and has the full benefit of wage moderation under the national wage agreements but yet is losing 92m per year.

The only possible cause is the continued expansion of Ireland’s ugly urban sprawl

Read this report if you want to be depressed about the sprawl. The population of county Dublin is actually falling at this stage – all the growth is in the rest of Leinster.

Depressing indeed. You’d have to wonder if Dublin will eventually consume even the current commuter towns of Leinster, in the way it devoured the ancient villages and communities surrounding the city in the 19th century. What’s to stop it? Or rather who is going to stop it?
Whereas it’s unlikely to happen on anything like that scale, certainly a form of it is possible with one-offs and small isolated housing estates bridging the gaps between towns.

The growth in the population of ‘inner Leinster’ in the stats there from 287,000 to 413,000 compared with a substantial decline in Dublin City is shocking, even if improving painfully in recent times. What a mess.

u live in Drogheda Graham? and I take it u get the train to dublin, where’s the problem?

Dundalk in fact.

<— says it here 🙂

Good point – not to get into it, but I’m not living there because I’ve been ‘driven’ from Dublin, or a desire to live in a rural area.
I’d like to move back soon.

@anto wrote:

u live in Drogheda Graham? and I take it u get the train to dublin, where’s the problem?

I live in Drogheda and get the train – the problem is getting up at 6:30 am, leaving the house at 7:15 am and not getting home until almost 8pm. By the time you eat you have about an hour to wind down and come 10pm you’re fit for bed. I see my wife for an hour a day and when we have kids I probably will only see them at the weekend – And as for a social life – forget it. If I could get back to living close to my place of work I most certainly would jump at the chance.

Such is the life of the long distance commuter

Consider yourself one of the lucky ones being able to rely on a rail service as opposed to being car dependent such as those in Navan who must spend an hour plus to get from the Blancharstown S.C. to their work places in either the City Centre or Southside/Westside office parks.

Precisely why I chose Drogheda as my “destination”

While that article does indeed raise a few points, it is the intellectual, ecological media equivilant of a sun frontpage. It’s not only completely unbalanced, but it’s also totally unfair and inaccurate in its portrail of Ireland and is effectively a well put together rant.

Dublin is a relatively small urban area and does not remotely represent the rest of the Irish landscape. Yes, it does have major transport and urban sprwal problems, but they are not at all representative of the other 90%+ of the Irish landscape.

There are still plenty of beautifully painted multicoloured little towns dotted around the countryside that arn’t suffering from urban sprwal and 30 lane motorways.

I don’t know what the author suggest we do about Ireland’s extremely poor road infrastructure. We are at least 30 years behind the UK and the rest of Western Europe in that regard. We’re not building roads in any great quantities than any other western country ever has and we’re certainly not building anything like superhighways across the countryside.

If anything, our current road infrastructure is causing more CO2 output because it’s conjested but, more pressingly the existing infrastructure is causing thousands of unnecessary deaths. Irish main arterial routes are still largely single carriageway, dangerous and twisty and are killing/maming innocent people every year. Yes, the Gardai and others rant on about speed and drink driving but the reality is that most road deaths in Ireland are head on collisions on single carriageways and have relatively little to do with unusually bad driver behaviour. In fact, I’d argue that Irish drivers in general behave very well on our roads.

So, is the author suggesting that we simply stop moving around the country completely and take up cottage industries?

These roads have to be built, they’re minimal infrastructural requirements.

I would agree however, that some more money does need to go into public transport and I would completely agree that Dublin planning has been allowed to go out of control.

I completely agree with the point about Bord na Mona and peat exploitation. I have never been able to comprehend why this industry has been allowed to continue in operation. Peat production may have been necessary in the days of energy crisies in the 1940s when we had no access to alternatives, but it’s is insane to suggest that peat provides any sort of serious contribution to the Irish energy production. Why ESB went ahead with new peat plants is beyond comprehension.
Bord na Mona should simply be wound up.

The author needs to get some sense of perspective however. I get the impression he was brought on a tour of construction sites by environmental campaigners and then did a quick tour of a bleak Bord na Mona destroyed bog and based the entire article on it.

There is clearly a suggestion that Ireland should simply stop doing anything and be an ecological theme park / bird sanctuary.

And we are *NOT* one of the world’s worst polluters. Once you factor out growth rates (in CO2 emissions) our output of CO2, energy consumption rates etc are in the lower half of the European average. I do think we need to do more, but you can interpret statistics to prove any point.

I also think that article is horrendously unfair to the Irish tourism industry and the claim that photos were “stock photos” taken years ago is practically slanderous.

MrX, I think the point that struck me was that the population of Dublin is declining and that the rest of Leinster is taking up the slack with huge population growth based on a unsustainable pattern – in particular by building large suburban housing estates in rural or semi-rural areas of Leinster. So the damage isn’t confined to the urban space of Dublin – the whole of Leinster is slowly being wrecked.

I travelled quite a bit over the Christmas period: Dublin to Limerick, then Tralee, then Galway and then to the west of Mayo before driving back to Dublin. I was genuinely depressed by the destruction of the countryside and the poor quality of the planning and development which is going on all over the country. The fact that I was reading the Frank McDonald/James Nix book at the time may have made me hypersensitive this year. But your claim that 90%+ of the country is being developed properly does not tally at all with my experience.

I once heard that if Dublin keeps growing at the rate it has been, by 2010 it will be bigger than Los Angeles. I wonder whether this is true or not?

@Pepsi wrote:

I once heard that if Dublin keeps growing at the rate it has been, by 2010 it will be bigger than Los Angeles. I wonder whether this is true or not?

I am not surprised. This government has failed Ireland and the rain belt (like the sun belt cities) development in this island is nothing short of an international disgrace.

Someone has to stem this ugly flow and start putting in green belts

Pepsi, you cannot compare Dublin to Los Angeles. L.A. is many times bigger than Dublin.

Mashadov, there’s plenty of “green belts” just a few miles from the centre of Dublin. This is where most housing should be built, rather than places like Mullingar etc. But because of the high cost of housing in Dublin, people are being forced out to these areas.

The ‘green belt’ is a flawed and outdated planning concept; the inherent implication is that sprawl can carry on again outside the green belt (and that’s exactly what’s happened in Ireland).

Holton, there certainly aren’t plenty of “green belts” left within a few miles from Dublin.
The Phoenix Park racecourse site, to give just one example, is quickly disappearing beneath one of the worst modern developments of recent times.
Unless you propose building over the public parks, which are not the same as green belts, I really don’t see where this space you are talking about is.

Yes it is good in a way – in that there is a clearer distinction between city and countryside in Cork than in other cities – but the downside of it is, as you say, the satellite town concept & its associated commuting/car dependency.

Which is more damaging I wonder, one-off housing or estates tacked into the edges of urban centres?
Taking everything into account…

One-off housing I’d say, because most modern one-off houses are intrusive and they remove the commonality of the land.

One -off housing I’d go for myself, the edges of towns are always a no-mans land of light industrial / retail / housing units… but ruining the countryside is a different kettle of fish…

Unless you propose building over the public parks, which are not the same as green belts, I really don’t see where this space you are talking about is.

drive to Blancherdstown.

http://forum.platform11.org/showthread.php?p=1103#post1103

05/01/2006 – 5:18:50 PM

Councillor wants ‘special understanding’ for rural drink-drivers

A Co Clare councillor has said rural dwellers should be excused from drink-driving.

Fianna Fáil Councillor Flan Garvey said people who visit pubs as their only social outlet are familiar with local roads and drive more carefully and slowly, especially when they have had a few drinks.

The elected local authority member has appealed for a “special understanding” to be shown.

He insists he does not condone drink-driving, but wants allowances made for certain people, such as those who live alone, and who would travel just a few miles to the pub once or twice a week.

Does he have a valid point?

@asdasd wrote:

drive to Blancherdstown.

I do regularly. Where’s the green belt. On the left-hand side of the N3 is the Phoenix Park racecourse, which is as we speak being completely covered in apartments.
On the right-hand side, there is a narrow strip of land between the road and the canal/railway. Apart from a couple of already existing developments, it is to be home to a new overbridge road interchange, a new railway station and a park and ride facility.
The River Road, that is the back road between Blanchardstown and Finglas, is the site for Pelletstown and Rathborne already with more developments to come.

@Thomond Park wrote:

Does he have a valid point?

No.

Regarding Councillor Garvey’s amazing point above, if incitement to riot is a crime, so too should incitement to self-destruction and stupidity. What sort of moron would come out with a comment that people who know the local back roads should enjoy greater leniency when drunk. Should we first measure their ‘knowledge’ of the local road network? Surely then bus drivers who drive the same route everyday should be allowed to inject heroin when pulled over to pick up the school kids. Christ, the country is populated by grade A gobshites.

@Pepsi wrote:

I once heard that if Dublin keeps growing at the rate it has been, by 2010 it will be bigger than Los Angeles. I wonder whether this is true or not?

Fortunately not as LA is the size of Belgium

@holton wrote:

Pepsi, you cannot compare Dublin to Los Angeles. L.A. is many times bigger than Dublin.

Mashadov, there’s plenty of “green belts” just a few miles from the centre of Dublin. This is where most housing should be built, rather than places like Mullingar etc. But because of the high cost of housing in Dublin, people are being forced out to these areas.

I was only saying what I heard. It was somone else who made this comparison a while back.

Holton, there certainly aren’t plenty of “green belts” left within a few miles from Dublin.
The Phoenix Park racecourse site, to give just one example, is quickly disappearing beneath one of the worst modern developments of recent times.
Unless you propose building over the public parks, which are not the same as green belts, I really don’t see where this space you are talking about is.

Kefu

There is a huge amount of land particulary on the northern fringes of Dublin, which haven’t been built on. And these are all within a few miles of the city centre. Just look at the amount of “green belt” you see when you fly in and out of Dublin airport!

Council proposes ‘heritage payments’ for farmers From:ireland.com
Monday, 9th January, 2006

The Heritage Council has announced of a series of proposals aimed at encouraging farmers to conserve Ireland’s archaeological history and provide greater protection for the countryside.

According to the council, changes in farming methods over recent decades have resulted in Ireland’s flora and fauna facing new dangers with an estimated 29 species of bird and 120 species of flowering plants currently in serious decline.

In addition to these figures, over 34% of the State’s archaeological monuments have been lost since 1840 with much of this happening on farms.

Under changes proposed today by the Heritage Council, the new Rural Environment Protection Scheme 4 (Reps4) would contain measures under which farmers would receive payments in exchange for managing and protecting Ireland’s heritage, environment and landscape.

Reps is an income support scheme for farmers run by the Department of Agriculture. It provides a basic payment to participants and under the Heritage Council’s proposals, additional payments would be made to farmers who take measurable actions to protect habitats and archaeological sites on their lands.

Mr Michael Starrett, Chief Executive of the Heritage Council, said farmers and landowners who protect Ireland’s heritage perform “a unique public service that benefits everyone in Ireland.”

There is a great opportunity for farmers and landowners to play a more significant role in managing our national heritage and this would lead to many benefits for the wider community and could help provide new recreational and tourism enterprises,” he added.

The Council’s proposals have been submitted to Government for consideration.

Any Thoughts?

THe farmers will only go for this if there’s a few quid in it.

Some of our Regional Towns such as Dundalk have developed with a Ring Road First Approach.
This has lead to a more ideal town centre and people actually can walk around and enjoy shopping
and of course the pubs

Holton, I suppose the issue is whether you consider the eight miles to Dublin Airport a “few miles” or not.
And even still, you would be amazed at how much of this Northern Fringe land you are talking of is currently zoned for housing.
Anything further out than Dublin Airport is only contributing to the sprawl as far as I’m concerrned, particularly when it is not near a rail line, ie most everywhere.
I don’t mean to be pedantic but in terms of a “few miles” from Dublin City, ie three or four – there is very little green space bar the public parks.

Kefu

Dublin has a population of over 1 million people so you wouldn’t expect to see much empty green spaces within 3 or 4 miles of the city centre. I’m aware that some of this Northern Fringe is zoned for housing, but it will probably take another 10 years before it’s all built on.

Once you go north of Baldoyle, you hit open countryside either side of the rail line. Better to build here than some far off commuter town in my opinion.

And Dublin airport is only about 6.5 miles from the city centre!!!

If Dublin has a built-up area with a radius in the region of 8-10 miles maximum stretching out on three sides, can this really be called ‘sprawl’? Is this an exaggeration? Even taking the satelite towns of Maynooth, Celbridge, Swords etc into account, it is still a very small portion of Leinster. It certainly still has a very low population density in comparison to the regions surrounding other European capital cities.

@Heritage Council wrote:

A New Road to Travel or
Landscape, Bloody Landscape
PART ONE: Thinking about it
This is not about motorways. 2,4,6,8 or any other variety.

This is not a rebel song – it is about landscape, bloody landscape.

This is about something so blindingly obvious that I really have to ask the question why it hasn’t happened already. Ireland needs a Landscape (Ireland) Act. Not an Act to stifle development, not an Act to fossilise our environment but an Act which focuses directly on what is Ireland’s most important asset i.e. where all of us live, work and play and which contains all our natural and cultural resources i.e. OUR LANDSCAPE. Why we don’t have such legislation already is hard to comprehend. Providing it would be good for everyone who lives on or visits this Island.

The signposts have been pointing us in this legislative direction for a long time. As far as the future well being of our landscape is concerned we are now most definitely at a major cross-roads and have to make a major choice. Experience dictates that the choice should be the route marked LEGISLATION and that if we take it everyone will benefit.

Why? Because it would give us a focus and structure in which we can work to resolve all those current issues which today seem to make such graphic headlines. These include loss of farm incomes, decline in rural tourism, decline in quality of life and many others too numerous to mention.

Why? Because it will bring us in to line with every other European Country and it will allow us to live up to the commitments we undertook when Ireland ratified the European Landscape Convention.

PART TWO: Realising it
Recent articles in the media have highlighted the concerns about our landscape. You really must have had your head in a fertiliser bag if you are not aware of the coverage on our agricultural landscape. The decline in farmers, the decline in farm incomes, the age profile, the nitrate directive, the Common Agricultural Policy, the World Trade Talks have all loomed and doomed large. Similarly the urbanisation of our tourism industry and the impact on rural economies, the loss of the traditional bed and breakfast accommodation, difficulties of access to the hills, and a lack of provision for countryside recreation have all been cited as contributory factors in our difficulties of keeping rural economies diverse, healthy and dynamic. In short a healthy and dynamic rural economy equates to a diverse, healthy and dynamic landscape.

That bag over your head would need to be particularly thick to have you unaware of the impact of new infra-structure on our landscape (Tara), to say nothing of the debate on rural housing (everywhere), village design and heaven forbid sustainable development.

Well let’s face it, landscape is very relevant to our everyday lives. We all live, work and play in a landscape. Surely something so significant deserves to be looked after in the best way possible and be the subject of a particular focus. Our democracies work through legislation, and legislation is what our leaders use to focus, to provide finance and structures to make the democracy work. It all sounds so simple.

PART THREE: Doing it

If I look at the last 10 years the case for new legislation for our landscapes has been carefully constructed to a point where the blindingly obvious decision now needs to be taken. This is not to criticise any existing systems or legislative provisions, such as our Planning Acts. Heaven forbid. They are for different purposes. It is just to say that if we are to resolve current issues new approaches and new legislation are needed.

The work of the Heritage Council whether on]

Any Thoughts?

Thomondpark,

Any thoughts?

Well yes actually.

Firstly it’s great to be reminded that there are many people out there, in senior positions, who are still idealistic and engaged.

Secondly – and something I discovered many years ago – if ‘we’ wish to preserve something which ‘we’ consider to be of aesthetic value (or any other value which is not immediately obvious to the majority of people) then we need to be prepared to buy that thing or else make adequate compensation available to the owner of the thing – who may not share our enthusiasm for its preservation.

This will never happen in this country – for lots of reasons – nor will we even resource areas such as heritage officers within planning authorities. Certainly we will write the plans – we have some of the best – the NSS is a smasher – but seriously – you didn’t think we meant it??

We can only muddle on and hope that the core of committed planners will not give up.

The National Spatical Strategy must surely be dead in the water by now thanks to the builder led Fianna F

@Thomond Park wrote:

Councillor wants ‘special understanding’ for rural drink-drivers

A Co Clare councillor has said rural dwellers should be excused from drink-driving.

Fianna Fáil Councillor Flan Garvey said people who visit pubs as their only social outlet are familiar with local roads and drive more carefully and slowly, especially when they have had a few drinks.

It appears that Councillor Garvey is out of step with his constituents

Call for anti drink-drive message in pubs

30 January 2006 13:07
The Macra Na Feirme organisation in Co Clare is calling for the introduction of a ‘don’t drink and drive’ message to be printed on drinking glasses in pubs.

Group Chairman Joe Carrig is asking brewery companies to become more proactive in their response to drink driving.

He said Macra represents young people from all walks of life that live in rural areas and are dependent on cars.

Advertisement

Young people are not immune to the relentless advertising by drinks’ manufacturers, he added.

‘Couple the vibrant youth of our membership with the pressure to consume alcohol and a car dependence because of a lack of rural transport and we are a vulnerable group,’ he added.

Commuter belts expand
From The Irish IndependentFriday, 27th April, 2007
POPULATION growth has shot through the roof in the ever-widening commuter belts of Ireland’s biggest cities.

New Census 2006 figures show that people are moving out of cities and into smaller towns.

And these are groaning under the pressure of seeing their numbers double or even treble in just a few years.

The five cities of Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford have lost population share compared to the rest of the country.

No leadership

Listened to a conversation between two non-exercising young males recently. One of them admitted to the other, that he would consider doing some swimming as exercise, if they ever invented Ipods for under water.

I never realised the task of medical and health officials in this country is so difficult, when that is what you are up against. I was wondering does anyone have links to current stats? How fat has this country really become during the good times?

On another note, I notice for the first time in about fifteen years the ‘scare campaigns’ in student lavatories has changed from the usual ‘don’t pick up aids’ message, to ‘drinking is bad’ message. I don’t quite know how to respond to this except to say, I must be getting old, having outlived a whole ‘fatal illness’ ad campaign.

So what will really get us first? Global warming, AIDs, obesity or alcohol? For further reference, do check out writing like that of Naomi Klein and John Thackara, to understand the background to a lot of these health and well being campaigns.

Brian O’ Hanlon.