Forum Replies Created
“But, now look at Temple Bar, modern architecture, new materials that don’t match with the rest of the area….”
“South Georges street, a modern building constructed of up to date materials popping up in the middle of street full of red georgian/victorian buildings….. What is happening?”
“Tall buildings such as skyscrapers are not allowed because it destroys our skyline???? What about the five to six story apartment developements on the docks… call me crazy but Dublin architecture is taking a turning point.”
Jas_83: I’ve included the above quotes as they indicate to me that you don’t have a very firm starting point for this dissertation. Just to take the above contradictory quotes as illustration :
– Temple Bar is actually – for the most part – a very good example of moulding the new and the old. The urban fabric, grain and scale have all largely been retained. The majority of the complete new builds are of a very high quality.
– What do Victorian and Georgian buildings have to do with one another? The Victorian era was itself an example of style gone mad.
– Your excessive use of ????? suggests that you think skyscrappers (your word) would not disrupt our skyline and disturb the scale of Dublin.
Anyway – what is causing the rash of cranes across the city: MONEY – MONEY – MONEY!!!!!!! and a renewed faith (from circa late 80s) in Dublin city centre! As to the architecture … too much bland, faceless, unimaginative, unsustainable, corporate rubbish!
Perhaps this is unfair, but what argument are you actually making. You say you are not from Ireland – I take it you are at pleast based here.October 26, 2005 at 3:50 pm in reply to: I’m A Confused Leaving Cert Student!…Get Me Out Of Here! #762585
Confused – Good luck with the exams. I’d say the best tact is to phone up the course directors and speak directly to them. If they can’t be bother I’d strike them off the list. Also, given they are design courses I would be somewhat swayed by the quality of the prospectus and web-site pages. If they can’t put these together again one would have concerns. WIT = Waterford? Is this the new course. If so the directos – lectures – tutors sound very impressive and with loads of energy. The latter you cab never have enough of in getting the best from students. Also, Waterford is a pretty nice place …. follow the heart but listen to the head!
Graham – I’m not suggesting that my proposal for a house I might build should be adopted as any sort of standard. That said there is a logic to this building type in this context. The vernacular – happy to be corrected – is a single story stone built cottgae. Would this have been tatched anyone? And the water wash? On these two points I’m in the dark. Anyway, the buildings nestled – often together – into the landscape; a landscape de-nuded of tress of woods thus exposing all buildings in all directions for miles around. Imposing suburban building types in this context gives you a low density suburb that actually looks rather crowded at times – achne scared. One off buildings have their place but the vernacular dominates and the current vogue dominates in all bnegative sences of the word. My proposal – nothing particualrly original – would have a much softer impact upon the environment in all sences of the word.
Again, does anybody have examples of how similar environments have adapted to 21st century demands. The Danes and the Scots certainly have similar landscapes and climates. Any ideas? Shane
Signle Farmer – How do! G/F is from West Clare and the blight caused by the new builds you reference depresses me every summer and winter when we travel down to see her family. I’m not an architect but I’ve often though that if we bought land down there I’d aim to make the house almost invisible from the road by building into the land and providing a green roof and using local stone on all exposed surfaces. Does anybody have examples of inovative West Coast housing to stir the imagination?
Graham – Very well argued. This street has fasinated me since I was a kid. My Dad used to park down there beofre taking me down Grafton Street. Even then I felt the street has a ‘real’ urban Dublin quality about it: a sense of place, history, relatedness to the surrounding area …. What are we to get in its place? Yet another faceless modern building / apartment block with a very poor relation to the street pavement environment. Certainly something needs doing and that something is certainly not Bacholers Walk pastiche. How about a modern interpretation of the town house: http://www.ivarhagendoorn.com/photos/architecture/borneo_sporenburg.html – some imagination please! Shane
AndrewP – Your comment that the addition of one extra floor rather to the standard 4-6 story block would have a vastly more signmificant impact than peppering of isolated point blocks across the city is right on the money.
The development looks interesting. Certainly of more considerable density and retaining a more traditional street scape that is normally found this far from ‘town’ (certainly on that side). The landscaping on the canal ceratinly looks promising and starts to further bring together a linear park of considerable quality strectching from Spencer Dock West. I am a little concerned at the anoubt of open / plaza space. Generally to be supported of course but I would wonder does the street layout and density support such a large space. Look Smithfiled for example.
Anyway, must walk the Canal next time I’m home.
We seem to be going around in circles here with the tall building lobby on these pages (with exceptions) just not understanding the arguements re density. Couple of points:
– Devin, you said the most consice and sensible thing in the whole thread: There is no connection between sprawl and high buildings. A choice between sprawl or high buildings is a false choice.
– Tall buildings will not replace Lucan – Tallaght – Clondalkin – Blanschardtown etc etc. Our problem with density lies not in the city centre which is now beginning to attain a reasonable European urban model of density but with our enless ex-urban sprawl. We do all seem to agree on this most important of points but continue fiddling about arguing on the wrong subject while Dublin grows further obese.
– The dockland should have – to my mind – been built to a 8 (-12 on the river front) story mixed use block design. This would have provided an ambitious extension to the current context existing within D1&2.
– Against this background tall buildings would be decided on sustainable, aesthetic and contextual grounds. They would be clustered in areas agreed by policy – rather than London’s unfortunate miss mash approach.
– Sustainable: Environmentally of course and near public transport interchanges etc.
– Aesthetically: Of the highest architectural quality – the standards being far higher than for noraml buildings given their exponential impact.
– Contextual: Outside of Georgian Dublin and outside important vista and sightlines etc.
As I said previously I’d pitch for NY Soho circa 1890 as an ideal model. Perhaps we should all call it a day on this one. Still, would recommend that people look at the this tread for an actual tall buildings proposal at Heuston Gate: https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=4281
Frank – I’ve no doubt you’re right on the figures and I welcomed corrections. As I said in my post these were a back of the envelope GESTIMATES used to illustrate the point that towers don’t go that far to addressing the density issue while having very dubious urban consequences. The rations more important to this point. Again we categorically DO NO NEED towers of the type demanded (30 plus floors) by some on this thread. What is needed is a wholescale change in current suburban densities and entailing the need to retro fit existing suburbs. I’ve read a lot of your comments under a number of different themes and am for the most part in complete agreement to all you’ve said on density – scale – urban grain – livability etc. I have no objection to tall building per say but only in the right context. Dublin does not provide that context. (Maybe it will in 50 years). Shane
Frank – Exactly my point. I’m sure that there are plently of Dubliners, conservationists and architects that can point out manys the good feature of such areas as Crumlin but they’re not fit for purpose in the 21st century. This does not necessarily entail demolition. Plenty of options to increase densities and still retain the green space in such suburbs. Doesn’t even seem to be on the agenda at the present. In any case this would all be an expensive waste of time if it was allowed to be contradicted by continued virus that is ex-urban carchitecture. Shane
Of course! Sorry I mean that green pepper canister like building within the Guniness complex – looks slightly Byzantium!
Not bad – Comments:
i) If this is a student crit presentation I thought they might have been more ambitious. Nothing is articulated re the connection between the Royal Hospital Grounds and the Pheonix Park. Heuston forms a wall at the present time that could easily (although expensively) be (green) bridged.
ii) It would seem that the main avenue into Dublin (with the station on your left as you approach) crashes straight into a building thus disturbing the natural flow of traffic – pedestrians – vision – spatial aesthetics (a big fan of Space Syntax for those who know it). I may be reading the graphic incorrectly here though.
iii) Why the bloody big building infront of the station – surely that would be opened up to the Liffey. From where would you appreciate this gateway (with the building on the other side).
iv) Personally I’d rather a park fronting the Liffey on the South side – god knows Dublin needs some new green space in the centre. On the same point I think that Phoneix is vaslty underused by the citizens of the city which could be ammended by suggestions such as (i) above.
v) What was the software?
vi) Is the new bridge a footbridge? Should this perhaps be moved to the axis of the Museum.
vii) The tree lined avenue routing from the Hospital (lovely idea to open up) is great but I can’t see it generating requisit traffic.
viii) Where’s the Pepper Canister?
viii) How about knowing down almost every new build appartment within the drawing. As somebody noted in the forum the other day following a report in the Indo I think they are lego land potential slums. Thank god they’re so badly build that they have such a short shelf life. Sure developers would gladly cooperate if densities and floor heights could be achieved to Parisian levels.
The above formatted rather differently than I hoped. Read as:
High Rise – currently occuping .0001% of land in wider Dublin at a density of 600 people per hectare.
Prime Dublin Retail (postcodes 1 & 2): currently occupting 2% of land at 250 per hectare.
etc. etc. Hope that makes the point clearer!!!!!!!
Dublin Densities Estimate
This is largey a gestimate but you’ll get my point.
% Land People Per Hectare
High Rise: .0001 600
Prime Dublin Retail 1 & 2: 2 250
Prime Dublin Hosuing 1 & 2: 2 400
Rest Dublin 1 & 2: 2 300
Victorian Suburbs: 8 300
Council Suburbs: 15 100
Private Suburbs: 30 150
New Ex-Urban Suburbs: 40 50
Move forward ten years and allow for 30 towners at 40 floors high half of which are used for housing. This would still have negligible impact on the above figures and a huge and very dubious impact on our sense of dublin. Tackling suburban Dublin (excepting Victorian suburbs and some private and council estates) in terms of increasing densities – including for example slowly takig down council / private area such as in Crumlin and building to X4 the densities would make an enoromus difference to the above and sustainable and urban to boot. If anybody has correct figures they would good to see. Shane
“wow, couldnt agree more, there is no good reason for resisting high rise yet there are countless reasons for embracing it. dublin is extremely backward when it comes to building tall, the mentality is crap! ideas like everywhere is the wrong area and one more floor is the destruction of our skyline are really hindering progress, this is a laughable example of a “21st century city”
I take this to be the extreem point in this argument. For all its faults Dublin is an increasingly progressive city and has come a long way – with further to go – from the city nearly destroyed by planner, politicians and developers from the 60s onwards. All well intentioned I’m sure (well a large number certianly intended to line their own pockets) but their mistakes are largely a result of not understanding the urban context of the city. The new rage for skyscrappers threatens the same in the absence of a sensible policy covering the whole city.
Dublin doesn’t need tall buildings. I undersatnd that there is an increasing need for office space but this will be best cattered for by increased densities. Here the docklands have missed a trick. While I don’t agree with skyscrappers for Dublin I do think the massing and density are far to low – especially in relation to the weight of the Liffey down there. Also the carchitecture is corporate bland and of dubious worth on the long term – 50 years plus. A much better model to my mind would have been Soho NYC turn of the century. Long life – loose fit tough yet elegant buildings that will last a couple of hundred years if taken care of – as per Georgian Dublin thus explaining its importance as partly defining Dublin’s urban character.
Lets get away from this fetish for glass and steel and look to something weighier and more urban! Shane
jmkennedyie – The exposition of my idea was perhaps a little to gimmicy – your development of that idea would be a much more sophisticted interpretation. As you note the benefits in terms of pollution reduction, noise reduction, increased beauty, reduction of negative visual aesthetic, reduced flooding, improved wildlife habitates, sustainable etc. etc. Still like my idea of cherry blossems for the M50 though. Imagine the picture in Spring.
Apparently there was a documentary (might have involved Iain Sinclair) made about the planting of the M25 around London which touched on this subject. Lagest planting exercise in English history or some such – and one man in charge of delivery – what a great job! Landscape gardening / art on the epic scale. Does anybody know of it?
Every time I travel the motorways, dual-carriage ways and N roads of Ireland I always badger the driver (not one myself) and fellow travellers with the following idea:
Why doesn’t every such route – or route through each county – have a distinctive planting scheme e.g:
M50: Cherry Blossoms
Dublin to Waterford: Palm trees
Dublin to Cork: Beech trees
Dublin to Limerick: Exotic tall grasses
Dublin to Galway: Golden Acers
Dublin to Belfast: Gorse bushes
I understand there will be issues around leaf fall and the danger of high trees and high winds and also that locally appropriate species should be prioritised but in principal what do you think? (And sod the cost for the moment). Personally, I think it’d look fantastic.
garethace – If thats rude and obnoxious you must be the nicest fella in Dublin! You don’t seem to have taken issue with any of my points. As it happens I completey agree that urban design is at least a 4D practice and one that should be based on both aesthetic considertions but MORE importantly on practical, pragmatic, and inductive considerations and grounded in research. No arguement there. If a space doesn’t work – wether through original design flaws, a change in the context or via poor managment, then tackle it intelligently. The approach you suggest sounds very sensible in principal – in practice? Also, you mention the new shopping centres that the the city centre has to compete with. You can be assurded that the developers and their consultants are extreemly practical in their design decision and that research plays a very large part in those decisions – look at how supermarkets organise their items lanes as a simple example. Public space needs to counter with a similar approach but one based on civic principals rather than profit. Shane
garethace – I’m very much in agreement. Urban design is not about buildings in space but about space in the context of buildings and the way that space facilitates use and movement. In my experience too much urban design is a sort of landscape architecture design – not URBAN design – and those who practice it – whilst perhaps being very proficient architects – are not up to speed on urban management issues etc. Temple Bar is a case in point. A marvellous collage like European model of urban space but one that did not – or perhaps did not anticipate – the use to which that space would be put: acres of standing drinking space and resultant chaos. Much of these problems should be tackled through rigorous public space management – thats a given. Its not cheap and its not sexy but it underpins civic space. On the design side the life cycle review and management – preferably involving the original designers so as to educate and also make explicitly responsibile those whom originally envisged (and commissioned) the space. Shane
garethace – I wnat to take issue with a number of your above points:
Cow Lane: I’m unsure as to where you stand on Cow Lane. You seem to like it beacuse it has no linkages and is something of an oasis (“Cow’s Lane is a good example of a beautiful pedestrian space”) but berate the business community for not seizing on this (“people avoid the place whenever possible”). Cow Lane is a nice piece of urban interior design but fails as a pedestrain space and there fore a business space because it does not work in the larger urban context / network. Its a road to nowhere and people don’t walk down roads to nowhere. No linkages as you rightly point out. My friend had a shop down there for a year or so and to watch the dearth of footfall was depressing – sometimes there would be nobody on the street at all. Space Syntax research backs this up: http://www.spacesyntax.com/
Curved Street: Following the above line the linkage of this street is far better but less than ideal. The real problem here is to my mind in the architecture of the two cultural buildings having almost zero effective street frontage – and a history of poor programming and managment. The issue of street drinking is the job of the Guarda.
Meeting House Sq: Not the success (apart from the great street market and the ourdoor films) that Meeting House Sq is again for reasons of connectiveity.
Urban design / management: A fluid area certainly. You quote the problems with the North Quays / Millenuim Bridge junction. Surely Dublin Corpo have powers with regard to pavement trading which can and should be enforced.
Wesmorland Street: Would love to see the LUAS routed down here and would favour perhaps taxi provision. A public space of this size requires life – movement etc. Further study needed.
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/