why is high rise deemed to be bad

The high rise debate is always phrased in such polarized terms, terms that suit those who are dogmatically opposed or dogmatically in favour of tall buildings. In fact, the whole thing is much more complicated, New York is a beautiful city and has a vibrant street level urban enviroment, Chicago has a fabulous skyline but empty streets, London’s
skyline is a mess and it isn’t particularily high rise, but it is a great city to live in. Similarily, the original Spenser Dock plan was as wrong headed as its replacement is drab. It was too big, too homogenous, it had an unwelcoming street level street scape and it would have given the city an apparent core where there was none. On the other hand, I like the Smithfield chimney, but to rule against the proposed tower because it diminished the chimney’s impact was foolish
and craven. However, that doesn’t justify the vilification of An Taisce, An Taisce has saved many beautiful things and helped preserve the city’s depth and texture.

I think what I am trying to say is that the debate is quite complicated and there we shouldn’t make such a fuss about people having opinions, they shouldn’t anger us if we disagree with them and planners should listen to them but shouldn’t be obliged to act on them. Good planning, like good politics, balance differing desires by drawing from the extremes. The problem at the moment is planning which placates the middle by ignoring the extremes.

It comes down to high density and high quality of life. How do we achieve both?

Are there any good case studies or articles online that people can recommend?

Its kind of worrying that the RIAI and AAi cannot make themselves heard on this issue. There’s a feeling of preaching to the choir on this; how do we educate the people and more importantly the developers that this is the way to go?

I would be interested to know exactley what people would define as high-rise? I suppose for myself any buildings that are big and have gone beyond the 10 storey mark would look fairly high rise(ish) to me.
Didn’t Kevin Roche say that he didn’t consider his Spencer Dock to be high-rise? The two links below have some stuff (articles etc.) about urban living and researchh etc.
http://www2.rudi.net/rudi.html
http://www.udg.org.uk/

To original question,would it have anything to do with people’s perception of high rise and living conditions? For example, the two most famous “high rises” in Ireland are Ballymun in Dublin and Blackpool in Cork City, both were badly planned, hastily erected and short term solutions to a housing shortage. People, in Ireland automatically seem to associate height with negative social consequences. The argument often put forward is that new high rises will become the slums of the future, the usual scare tactics. In addition, high rise developments often mean apartment development, which many people object to on the basis that they do not correspond to the provisiontraditional, family oriented social structures. Although it is ludicrous to suggest that the destruction of the family unit is in any way associated with apartment life, people readily associate it with modernity and all things evil. I know this is only one of many factors, however I do believe that it influences some people’s opinio

I think an interesting point can be made about the saga on Tara/Marckievicz Street. The original plans for dark ten-storey towers are now almost built. But the developers had come back and offered to build 14-storey glass towers, which were extremely attractive. The smaller versions are actually more intrusive than the other plan, which was knocked back, by the conservationists.
Residents also complained about the changes to light, which would be more influenced by the materials used in the building than its height in this case.
I agree with contributors in the case of Spencer Dock. It was just too vast a space to fill with uniform buildings, that all looked very similar.
The way to deal with that area is to use high-rise. but it should be broken into quarters and developed with differences and for mixed uses. Spencer Dock would have ended up a vast glass wasteland, bereft of people. On the more general principle, I feel Dublin should adopt the Paris attitude to high-rise. I think it should be moved well away from the city centre and the Docks presents the perfect opportunity. Irish people are generally anti high-rise because every tall building in Ireland – Liberty Hall, O’Connell Bridge House, Ballymun, Hawkins House, City Hall in Cork – is dreadful. You can’t blame people for being wary. If we had even one good example of high-rise, I think attitudes would be very different.

high rise can’t work without proper transport infrastructure. Dublin has the demands for high rise – everything wants to be in the centre, but no transport infrastructure to support actual use of high rise. Ifrastructure is the first priority for Dublin before it becomes unlivable and turns into a classic American edge city surounding a small urban core. The historical context will always fight high rise. By the way Americans usually (varies by where you are) consider 10-15 stories mid-rise.

Why the hostility to Liberty Hall, against a grey sky it can be quite beautiful.

Hi there – Well designed highrises can be attractive additions to any city, even a low-rise city like Dublin. The problem with O’Connell Bridge House and Liberty Hall is that they stand alone and visually obstruct key streetscapes. The suggestion of developing a ‘La Defense’ type quarter out of the ciore city centre is much more appealing.
On the residential side…Singapore is a great example of how highrise living can work. Spacious, well managed buildings – although some of the designs leave alot to be desired. Mind you the same can be said for any large scale residential project.

Shouldn’t we see the high of the buildings in two different scales always concerning an definition of the extruded optimisation? One defines the sky line and the site enviroment in a city scale. Other being the interior scale looking for the establishment of the ideal spaces from the ground floor until the roof! Meaning with this that a tall building is touching an extreme of the classic paradigms.

WHY IS HIGHRISE DEEMED SO BAD?…………..cause we are a nation of runts.

tis true…no future for so long we still don’t want to accept change or prepare properly for it

Gosh

And there was I thinking it was all about scale, context, urbanism, overdevelopment, overshadowing, overlooking, blocking of views, and the generally banal business of planning!!

Context!…Urbanism!……Overdevelopment!….Overshadowing!…..Overlooking!…….Blocking of views!……
In the case of the Dublin docks……What views?…..the Dublin mountains!…What context!….a mass derelict area!….Overdevelopment! ….more like gross underdevelopment!….Overshadowing…..overshadowing of what!….it is a bloody city….buildings do cause shadows…..maybe go and live in the countryside…where you will have no problem with all of the above.

I do not understand this seemingly innate conservative constraint that exists in the Irish public today (including our Taoiseach…’Man of Culture’) with regards to modern architecture and indeed such views that are applied across the board to everything. More especially too if it is evident in our young architectural students who should be fired up with over active imaginations ready to create….instead of an urge for carpet slippers and the TV mag. Maybe it’s just a fashionable fad…..as set by Prince Charles and ‘The Divine Right of Kings’….(his housing estate is so lovely…Ugh!) If we could just loosen up a bit and shake off the shackles we would benefit ourselves a lot more…..as can be seen in the music and entertainment business…..there are a few good Irish architectural practices that are breaking the mould …..but we need to change public opinion too.
What’s more we desperately need to stem the continuing Dublin urban sprawl.

[This message has been edited by GregF (edited 25 July 2001).]

James, could you add some content to the above catchphrases you have used?
When answering, please keep in mind that Dublin is a municipality and also the deperate problem we have with the suburban sprawl.

High rise, to be effective in stopping the suburban sprawl, can only succeed if well-planned. What’s the chances of any Irish developer building playgrounds and other facilities. Also the lack of decent schooling, medical care etc in city centre is another issue. The only way apartment living is sustainable is if it is a credible option for families. The present situation, whereby young couples living in town and then moving out as soon as they fancy starting a family is disastrous. When Frank McDonald talks about the Temple Bar community, I think he is exaggerating. As a resident there for two years now, I haven’t seen anything but a transient population just waiting to be able to afford a house. We now have the perfect opportunity to put together real communities down in the Docklands in a high-rise apartment-type environment. I just doubt we will.

James, do you write speaches for Tony Blair – so many soundbites, so little time.

Seriously folks, what is wrong with our psyche as a nation – the Georgian Houses were seen as a sign of British Repression and yet we want all our new buildings to look like that. Anything modern or tall is shot down. People say that we should have a city like Paris, nobody knows or cares who was overshadowed by the new buildings that were developed by Haussmann. We have a begrudgery attitude in this town that means developments are held up for years by Nimbys, bananas, and greedy sods who will allow nothing to be build until they get money. Why the hell does it take so long for any infrastructure to be built in this town? Because everyone wants their 30 pieces of silver before they allow anything to be done (plus the useless corrupt government that we have).

It makes me sick of this town!

Greg, I’m with ya.

What’s so great about the status quo that we need to protect it?

Kefu hit the nail on the head – what we need is decent sized apartments suitable for family living (at normal pricing). I mean who wouldnt like to live in an Apartment like Fraiser’s or the purple one in Friends (I know its fictional but aspirational too).

Oh and incentives for owner occupiers of these large size apartments (that should kick start the apartment market again).