Welcome to Ireland’s ugly urban sprawl

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.

@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.

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.

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.

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?

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, 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.