Dublin councillors seek to restrict apartment heights

Pepe LeFrits

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-councillors-seek-to-restrict-apartment-heights-1.2665270

Seriously?

However, 11 motions from councillors, including two party motions from People Before Profit and the Green Party, propose reducing these heights. Several of the motions refer to low-rise heights being retained as the “traditional height of the city”, the “historic height of the city” or the height of “Georgian terraces”, which are approximately 14m tall.

Presumably the council meeting for this is on the 6th of June... wonder if I can get a pass.

cgcsb

Green Party: we favour urban sprawl which is environmentally the worst outcome for our environment. i.e. we are not a 'green' party at all.
PBP: we want more homelessness and more expensive homes for all.

This should be their election manifestos.

Chinasea

cgcsb wrote: »

Green Party: we favour urban sprawl which is environmentally the worst outcome for our environment. i.e. we are not a 'green' party at all.
PBP: we want more homelessness and more expensive homes for all.

This should be their election manifestos.

I vote 100% Green, not sure the Green party are favouring urban sprawl, would need to look at where you are getting that closer.

It is clear we need to build up. There are plenty of privately owned high block apartments. Strange that they don't turn into Ballymuners.

Build up and get on with it and enforce tenant agreements regardless of private or social.

cgcsb

Chinasea wrote: »

I vote 100% Green, not sure the Green party are favouring urban sprawl, would need to look at where you are getting that closer.

It is clear we need to build up. There are plenty of privately owned high block apartments. Strange that they don't turn into Ballymuners.

Build up and get on with it and enforce tenant agreements regardless of private or social.

The alternative to building higher on the scarce few available sites in central areas is urban sprawl. If you have a small site in Dublin City Centre and you are limited to 4 floors, or 4 apartments + you have to build underground parking. The construction costs mean that either you'll have 4 VERY expensive apartments or the development will just not be viable so the site will remain empty.

Where as if 8-10 storeys were the norm you'd have some chance of providing economies of scale.

Pepe LeFrits

Chinasea wrote: »

I vote 100% Green, not sure the Green party are favouring urban sprawl, would need to look at where you are getting that closer.

It is clear we need to build up. There are plenty of privately owned high block apartments. Strange that they don't turn into Ballymuners.

Build up and get on with it and enforce tenant agreements regardless of private or social.

Well they're resisting going up so...

Seems some Councillors oppose allowing the residential low-rise definition being brought up to 28m tall in line with the commercial height limits. It’s too high they reckon.

I’d point them to the plans for the the development being built at Creighton St/Windmill Lane/Hanover St. That building is going to be 28m and it should be taller, not shorter. That whole area from Tara St station down to the docklands should be built up. It wouldn’t get in the way of anything (it’s downhill from Merrion Square), and it’s as central as you can get.

Also, if I’m reading the plans right, it looks like this building is now going to be commercial/retail only – no residential. The original plans had residential but the latest ones don’t. I wonder if the height restrictions around residential had anything to do with it? Anyway another victory for Dublin, more city centre space wasted on a squat building that not only doesn’t alleviate the demand for residential, but actually increases it too. Super.

MrMorooka

I was in London at the weekend, my hotel room was on the 10th floor, and it occurred to me it was the highest I had ever been in a building in my life!

Dublin really is pathetically low rise, passing by the Samuel Beckett bridge it just struck me how low the buildings are, like the Telefonica/Three building. High rise doesn't mean "skyscrapers", it is just buildings with proper senses of scales.

Looking at two construction projects I pass every day, I can't help but think "where's the rest of it?"

the groutch

there seems to be an innate fear within DCC that building upwards will turn an area into a "Ballymun 2".

they need to stop living the past and realise that things have changed in the last 40 years.

Achasanai

Have to agree, no idea what the Green Party are doing opposing this. Walking past the IFSC every day and seeing some new building work, but you just know it's going to be another bland, five story office block.

Pepe LeFrits

Emailed one of my Cllrs about this, they said they don't disagree re: density but don't consider the proposed 28m height to be an appropriate figure for a so-called 'lowrise' development.

I don't particularly disagree, but I think the issue is that too much of the city is zoned as 'low rise'.

ProudDUB

the groutch wrote: »

there seems to be an innate fear within DCC that building upwards will turn an area into a "Ballymun 2".

they need to stop living the past and realise that things have changed in the last 40 years.

They'll only change if it can be clearly seen that you can have an excellent quality of life, if you live in a 20 or 30 story building. I've lived in 50 story apartment buildings in the US, that were intelligently designed and built. Real thought went into the lives and life styles of the people who would be living in them, be they owners or renters. I see zero thought and consideration going into the design of apartment living here. It's just throw them up as quickly and as cheaply as you can and, to hell with residents quality of life, or their guests having access to things like decent storage or parking spaces.

Until the mindset of the builders and planners change, I can see living in a 10 plus story building in Dublin being an absolute nightmare. I lived in a five story one in the IFSC for 2 years. I moved out to the suburbs, because I was tired of dealing with all the crap that I never had to put up with in my 40 story high rise in Atlanta.

syklops

I live in Cherrywood. The apartments we are in are all 4 storeys high. Whatever about Dublin 2 or Dublin 4 there is no rhyme or reason why our apartments arent 10 floors each at least. Its a 2 minute walk to the luas. There is underground parking, theres even a small onsite gym and the management company look after the buildings and the grounds very well.

Its just such a waste. In the area we are in we could accomodate 2.5 times as many people by allowing 10 stories, instead of a limit of 4.

Hollister11

I would love if the city turned into a new york style town. We don't need high rise buildings everywhere, just in the city.

syklops

Hollister11 wrote: »

I would love if the city turned into a new york style town. We don't need high rise buildings everywhere, just in the city.

Im on the 3rd floor of an office block in Dublin 4. If I look towards the docklands... well I can't see them. I cant see any obvious landmarks just all generic stubby shaped buildings. The docklands should have been built with a Chrysler building-esque tower in the middle. Something you can see from miles away. Something more attractive than the poolbeg incinerators.

ProudDUB

syklops wrote: »

I live in Cherrywood. The apartments we are in are all 4 storeys high. Whatever about Dublin 2 or Dublin 4 there is no rhyme or reason why our apartments arent 10 floors each at least. Its a 2 minute walk to the luas. There is underground parking, theres even a small onsite gym and the management company look after the buildings and the grounds very well.

Its just such a waste. In the area we are in we could accomodate 2.5 times as many people by allowing 10 stories, instead of a limit of 4.

Excellent post. The battle for/against high rise developments may wage on in Dublin 1,2,3 & 4, as well it should. But there is no reason whatsoever why the likes of Cherrywood, Blanchardstown, Clondalkin, Swords (airport permitting) Stillorgan, Bray (yes, I know its in Wickla, but it's on the Dart line) Balbriggan, Sandyford etc etc can not get their act together, and allow high rise developments.

It is utter madness that these surbuban areas that have wonderful public transport into the city centre, but do not have the same historical significance as the city centre, are held to the same planning rules, as the city centre itself.

Jamie2k9

Anyone know if a vote has taken place?

Handsome Brute

Well we will have no where to live or work and will have to pay more and more for limited housing but at least our skyline will be lovely and flat. Strange that.

Eoin247

I hope the supporters of PBP can see from this and future stances the true nature of PBP.

A populist movement that just spouts what people want to hear on social media all day. But when decision time comes around they'll always back the easy decision and forget about the people they claim to represent.

They're PBP alright, "Politics Before People".

Idbatterim

Regardless of this bloody high rise phobia. Why not go for even modest scale buildings. 4 floors isn't tall, either is bloody 9-10 floors in lots of locations around Dublin. We could have housed thousands more close to wherevtheybwirk in a very sustainable fashion, but no, for no reason, let's just have them commute across Dublin adding to the cities problems and theirs :rolleyes:

Chinasea

I vote Green, but I don't support them on this. We clearly need to get over our high-rise phobia.

Important thing in Ireland is, if we are to build up, we need to enforce 100% tenancy agreements regardless of social or private. We don't do rules in Ireland unless we are hit by our pockets, i.e. noise controls, respect for communal areas, personal responsibility........

syklops

ProudDUB wrote: »

Excellent post. The battle for/against high rise developments may wage on in Dublin 1,2,3 & 4, as well it should. But there is no reason whatsoever why the likes of Cherrywood, Blanchardstown, Clondalkin, Swords (airport permitting) Stillorgan, Bray (yes, I know its in Wickla, but it's on the Dart line) Balbriggan, Sandyford etc etc can not get their act together, and allow high rise developments.

It is utter madness that these surbuban areas that have wonderful public transport into the city centre, but do not have the same historical significance as the city centre, are held to the same planning rules, as the city centre itself.

Whats the opposite of aptly? Well there is the in-aptly named Central park next to Sandyford. Aside from the absence of a decent pub it looks like a fabulous place to live. Literally on the Luas line, shops, creche and business around. Its a crying shame there aren't another 1000 or so people living there. The M50 and brewery road would look a lot better in the morning if the people living there were working there. Or at least were living there but leaving Sandyford in the morning as quickly as people were arriving.

Anytime I pass Centralpark on the luas, sometimes during the middle of the day the people I see getting off are all foreign mums with buggies. The obvious explanation is they are stay at home mums and wives of high paid engineers who can afford to live there. If that is the case then best of luck to them, but I have a horrible suspicion that part if not most of Central Park is used for social housing. I used to work in Sandyford. I worked with over 150 people, not one lived in Central Park, and only one actually lived in Sandyford.

The reason I dont like the idea of central park being used for social housing should be clear to everyone.

cgcsb

10 storey apartment blocks in the IFSC should have been the standard on the 1990s. The 9 storey blocks around Mayor Square are the 'high' blocks amongst 4 floor squat. The landmark high blocks should be 15 or more.

ongarboy

MrMorooka wrote: »

I was in London at the weekend, my hotel room was on the 10th floor, and it occurred to me it was the highest I had ever been in a building in my life!

Dublin really is pathetically low rise, passing by the Samuel Beckett bridge it just struck me how low the buildings are, like the Telefonica/Three building. High rise doesn't mean "skyscrapers", it is just buildings with proper senses of scales.

Looking at two construction projects I pass every day, I can't help but think "where's the rest of it?"

In fairness, the two image examples you showed were from Stephens Green and Hatch Street. I view that area as part of the Georgian or historical core of the city and I don't believe high rises are suitable there and would stick out like sore thumbs. I think those 2 new buildings are very attractive and blend in very well.

However, I am a strong advocate of high rise buildings outside such Georgian and/or historical cores. Areas such as the north and south Docklands, around Heuston and Tara/Hawkins Street and numerous gateway/transport nodes in the suburbs or along key artery corridors into the city. It would be crazy if new builds for residents were restricted to 4 storeys in those areas also. The problem of the existing Dublin City Councillors are that they represent existing city centre residents who for the most part are wholly against high rise (they believe high rise as being greater than 4 storeys!! ) and will then vote against such developments. It's classic NIMBYism as the overall progression of the city stalls as young blood and new workers can not afford live in the city and this in turn kills the vibrancy of neighbourhoods as they become increasingly populated solely by long established elderly and welfare populations in 2/3 storey houses ( Sean McDermott Street 100ms from O'Connell St has 3 storey corporation houses with private front gardens!:eek:) . No problem with such existing residents living there but other demographics should also be given the affordable opportunity to live there in higher density accommodation that only then will allow expensive public transport options to be come more viable.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3528493,-6.2568987,3a,75y,228.13h,88.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy0l9lfLblKD5Epf7RVDmBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Gavin "shels"

Eoin247 wrote: »

I hope the supporters of PBP can see from this and future stances the true nature of PBP.

A populist movement that just spouts what people want to hear on social media all day. But when decision time comes around they'll always back the easy decision and forget about the people they claim to represent.

They're PBP alright, "Politics Before People".

Nail on the head, I read an article yesterday by one of my locals - Councillor Tina MacVeigh from PBP. She calls for more social housing in D8 but 3 prime plots of green land (Bridgefoot St being one, can't remember the other two) she doesn't want touched. It's absolute madness, there's a happy medium but demanding two things when realistically only one can be achieved without a compromise somewhere along the time.

The whole left wing ideology in Ireland is a flawed concept of pure populist opinions and do-goer attitudes.

Idbatterim

I totally agree ongarboy. Those buildings are fine for that area of Dublin. It's primarily the docklands I have an issue with... Sympathetic buildings are fine in lots of Dublin. The docklands is where the extra few floors should have gone... It's not surprising that the I'm alright brigade, Which is effectively anyone who isn't renting or paying an extortionate mortgage, wants to maintain the status quo..

I can't wait to see the crap they will come up with for Irish glass bottle site, will be another riot no doubt. No doubt amazing 6-7 floor blocks with a "tower" or two 60m Max ... The vision and diversity is so breathtaking!

newacc2015

ongarboy wrote: »

In fairness, the two image examples you showed were from Stephens Green and Hatch Street. I view that area as part of the Georgian or historical core of the city and I don't believe high rises are suitable there and would stick out like sore thumbs. I think those 2 new buildings are very attractive and blend in very well.

However, I am a strong advocate of high rise buildings outside such Georgian and/or historical cores. Areas such as the north and south Docklands, around Heuston and Tara/Hawkins Street and numerous gateway/transport nodes in the suburbs or along key artery corridors into the city. It would be crazy if new builds for residents were restricted to 4 storeys in those areas also. The problem of the existing Dublin City Councillors are that they represent existing city centre residents who for the most part are wholly against high rise (they believe high rise as being greater than 4 storeys!! ) and will then vote against such developments. It's classic NIMBYism as the overall progression of the city stalls as young blood and new workers can not afford live in the city and this in turn kills the vibrancy of neighbourhoods as they become increasingly populated solely by long established elderly and welfare populations in 2/3 storey houses ( Sean McDermott Street 100ms from O'Connell St has 3 storey corporation houses with private front gardens!:eek:) . No problem with such existing residents living there but other demographics should also be given the affordable opportunity to live there in higher density accommodation that only then will allow expensive public transport options to be come more viable.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3528493,-6.2568987,3a,75y,228.13h,88.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy0l9lfLblKD5Epf7RVDmBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Height is not really an issue in Dublin 2. All the office blocks are going underground. Trinity has a ton of building 3/4 storeys underground. RCSI is going 4 storeys underground with their new school just off Stephens Green AFAIK. Another 2/3 office blocks around Dawson St are going underground. Underground is fine for offices and maybe certain parts of the city should have low rise ie under 6 storeys with several storeys under the ground. Tanking is so good now, that basements are as decent to work in as above ground offices

IMO DCC councillors are representing the views of residents who have seen higher rise housing fail ie Ballymun, the Fatima Mansions. The issues in those areas were far more complex than the height of the buildings. It is just easier to blame the height of the buildings rather than Government failures at the time

DCC councillors are so short sighted that they cant get their head around that in other countries that high rise living is in the norm and works amazingly. Look at how tens of thousands of New Yorkers can live in high density housing with little or no crime in places like the Upper East Side. DCC messed up in the 1960s with Ballymun and future generations will pay for it for generations

I think the fact most DCC councillors having never lived in an apartment is an issue. Look at DCC and their dual aspect apartment. I have been in plenty of apartments, that weren't dual aspect and it wasn't an issue. It is hard to imagine living on the 45 floor of an apartment unless you have lived in one. I stayed in a high rise for a few weeks ago a few years ago. It was amazing. There was a gym and swimming pool in the building. There was a 7/11 on the ground floor. There was also an amazing doorman/receptionist. The higher the apartment block, the better the services are.

cgcsb

Gavin shels wrote: »

Nail on the head, I read an article yesterday by one of my locals - Councillor Tina MacVeigh from PBP. She calls for more social housing in D8 but 3 prime plots of green land (Bridgefoot St being one, can't remember the other two) she doesn't want touched. It's absolute madness, there's a happy medium but demanding two things when realistically only one can be achieved without a compromise somewhere along the time.

The whole left wing ideology in Ireland is a flawed concept of pure populist opinions and do-goer attitudes.

Ireland's left wing parties are just pure populists who know they never have any real hope of having their conflicting policies implemented. The campaign for a bridgefoot st park is championed by PBP but ask them where they would like new social housing to go and they'd be silent.

cgcsb

Idbatterim wrote: »

I totally agree ongarboy. Those buildings are fine for that area of Dublin. It's primarily the docklands I have an issue with... Sympathetic buildings are fine in lots of Dublin. The docklands is where the extra few floors should have gone... It's not surprising that the I'm alright brigade, Which is effectively anyone who isn't renting or paying an extortionate mortgage, wants to maintain the status quo..

I can't wait to see the crap they will come up with for Irish glass bottle site, will be another riot no doubt. No doubt amazing 6-7 floor blocks with a "tower" or two 60m Max ... The vision and diversity is so breathtaking

They did say 3,000 new homes + commercial space and a large film studio. It's the perfect place for high rise because the shadows would be cast on an industrial area and the river to the north and in the afternoons the shadow would be in Dublin Bay so no residential properties are in danger of loosing light. 10 floors should be the minimum for the glass bottle site

Pepe LeFrits

cgcsb wrote: »

They did say 3,000 new homes + commercial space and a large film studio. It's the perfect place for high rise because the shadows would be cast on an industrial area and the river to the north and in the afternoons the shadow would be in Dublin Bay so no residential properties are in danger of loosing light. 10 floors should be the minimum for the glass bottle site

Mostly capped at 6 storeys with 'some' buildings going up to 9 or 10, according to this:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/plans-for-3-000-homes-on-former-irish-glass-bottle-site-in-dublin-1.2654065

Pepe LeFrits

Ok, ****ing hell, just saw this:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/ringsend-locals-seek-100-council-housing-on-glass-bottle-site-1.2659409

Boyd Barrett calling for 100% council houses at the above site, and a Ringsend local complaining that there are too many people in their houses because they don't want to move somewhere else. So the rest of the country who sacrifice and move to where they can afford should subsidise you even more. Yeah.

cgcsb

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Mostly capped at 6 storeys with 'some' buildings going up to 9 or 10, according to this:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/plans-for-3-000-homes-on-former-irish-glass-bottle-site-in-dublin-1.2654065

Well that's because we are a backward people who refuse to tackle our self-made problems but if you're going to build a cluster of real high rise, the glass bottle site is the real place.

Jamie2k9

1 - Inside canals (24m), 8 floor apartmnets approved
2 - Outside canals (13m) 4 floor apartments unchanged, but within 500m of Luas, DART, Other Rail or New Metro, 24m, 8 floor allowed
3 - 28m, 7 floor office buildings unchanged
4 - 9 more areas of city cleared for 50m, 16 story apartment blocks, 12 office blocks. Some area's including Digital Hub on Thomas St and St Teresa’s Gardens, Clongriffin/Belmayne, Clonshaugh Industrial Estate, Oscar Traynor Rd and Ballymun, Ashtown/Pelletstown, Park West/Cherry Orchard and Naas Rd

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0601/792679-dcc-housing/

It's a start but it will take a generational change in political circles before anything higher happens I expect.