Dublin councillors seek to restrict apartment heights

Hollister11

Idiots in DCC.

Dublin City should be like New York City. We could have some of the best infrastructure, office space and housing if we would just stop being so afraid of building high rise. Not 9 meteres, but real high rise.

Hannibal

Hollister11 wrote: »

Idiots in DCC.

Dublin City should be like New York City. We could have some of the best infrastructure, office space and housing if we would just stop being so afraid of building high rise. Not 9 meteres, but real high rise.

i don't think the extremes of NYC would work in Dublin. In certain areas of the city obviously away from the Georgian and historic building areas that we need to build up. There is a lot of space in the Dockland areas to build up while maintaining green space.

We allowed Dublin to expand upto Meath and Kildare with people commuting massive distances to work in Dublin which has resulted in urban sprawl and traffic chaos. We should have condensed the city and the suburbs within the M50 and improved services ie trams and metros.

Strangely they have given permission for 50m blocks to be built in areas like Ballymun after knocking seven towers there over the last number of years. The regeneration of Ballymun was a disaster that created a beauty circle but has resulted in the shopping centre and main pubs being derelict. Now the solution is to build more apartment blocks. The problem in Ballymun was moving massive amounts of people into the area without the infrastructure and jobs etc to support them.

ProudDUB

Hannibal wrote: »

i don't think the extremes of NYC would work in Dublin. In certain areas of the city obviously away from the Georgian and historic building areas that we need to build up. There is a lot of space in the Dockland areas to build up while maintaining green space.

We allowed Dublin to expand upto Meath and Kildare with people commuting massive distances to work in Dublin which has resulted in urban sprawl and traffic chaos. We should have condensed the city and the suburbs within the M50 and improved services ie trams and metros.

Strangely they have given permission for 50m blocks to be built in areas like Ballymun after knocking seven towers there over the last number of years. The regeneration of Ballymun was a disaster that created a beauty circle but has resulted in the shopping centre and main pubs being derelict. Now the solution is to build more apartment blocks. The problem in Ballymun was moving massive amounts of people into the area without the infrastructure and jobs etc to support them.

And building blocks of poorly maintained flats, that were not fit for purpose. Lifts that were constantly breaking down. Bleak concrete hallways smelling of urine. No proper lighting or footpaths. That godawful roundabout tunnel, that was good for nothing only heroin dealing. Zero help and support for the many decent people who were just trying to live their lives.

High rise living takes a lot of intelligence and thought in the design and planning stage, for it to work and work well, for its residents. That is doubly the case if it is social housing. That just didn't happen in 1960's Ireland. (And in fairness to the Corpo planners, it didn't happen in a lot of other countries either.) The end result was a cluster fcuk of epic proportions. It has such a bad reputation now, it's given high rise living a bad name everywhere else in the city and country. That is such a shame, as when it is done well, it can be fabulous.

Dyr

ProudDUB wrote: »

. That godawful roundabout tunnel that was good for nothing only heroin dealing. Zero help and support for the many decent people who were just trying to live their lives.

The roundabout was also good for sending inattentive drivers straight through the barriers and over the drop :eek:


The interesting thing is the council has approved building up to 16 floors as part of the ballymun plan which means after knocking the flats and towers they might just put taller ones up

Only in Ireland.

Hannibal

ProudDUB wrote: »

And building blocks of poorly maintained flats that were not fit for purpose. Lifts that were constantly breaking. Bleak concrete hallways smelling of urine. No proper lighting or footpaths. That godawful roundabout tunnel that was good for nothing only heroin dealing. Zero help and support for the many decent people who were just trying to live their lives.

High rise living takes a lot of intelligence and thought in the design and planning stage, for it to work and work well, for its residents. That is doubly the case if it is social housing. That just didn't happen in 1960's Ireland. (And in fairness to the Corpo planners, it didn't happen in a lot of other countries either.) The end result was a cluster fcuk of epic proportions. It has such a bad reputation now, it's given high rise living a bad name everywhere else in the city and country. That is such a shame, as when it is done well, it can be fabulous.

i fully agree and it's for that reason i'm worried planners will f- it up again.

ProudDUB

Bambi wrote: »

The roundabout was also good for sending inattentive drivers straight through the barriers and over the drop :eek:


The interesting thing is the council has approved building up to 16 floors as part of the ballymun plan which means after knocking the flats and towers they might just put taller ones up

Only in Ireland.

God forgive me, but I burst out laughing at that !

cgcsb

The increase in max heights across Dublin is welcome of course, but it's still too modest. 10 storey resi in the centre should be the norm.

SantryRed

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

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.

Would it be wrong of me to assume that if the're approving 'mid rise' in a location that does not have good public transport, that they're probably aiming more towards social housing? Clonslaugh Industrial Estate/Oscar Traynor Road being my prime questioning....

andekwarhola

Dunno if I'd be in favour of going totally mad with high-rise building in more historical parts of the city where I think you have to strike a balance between functionality and historical aesthetics. It's not a divine right to live right in the city centre.

Obviously, I'm definitely in favour of well-planned high-rise building though, especially in the central and outer suburbs.

Dog Man Star

The focus should be on decentralising, not on building high rises all over the city centre. In 2016 there is no rhyme nor reason to drag hundreds of thousands of people into one small location every working day.

Having business areas distributed throughout the major suburbs is far better. Dedicated office space with fibre broadband and top spec office fitouts. Workers can travel to their local hub and work from there.

This is the future and Dublin can set the standard with a small bit of vision.

Idbatterim

Dunno if I'd be in favour of going totally mad with high-rise building in more historical parts of the city where I think you have to strike a balance between functionality and historical aesthetics. It's not a divine right to live right in the city centre.

I agree with this. but what I dont get is why not have 10 floors or so in the docklands for a general height, the buildings front the liffey at the wide points, just look like a joke aesthetically, so inconsequential... thats not even getting into the crap architecturally that the area is and how many more residents and workers it could have accommodated...

The IGBS better not be some 5-6 floor joke, by going from 5 to 10 floors neither is high rise, you can accommodate twice the number of residents... the arguing has started over how much social housing there should be! if its 10% and you build double the units, you have 10% more, with no cons...

cgcsb

Dog Man Star wrote: »

The focus should be on decentralising, not on building high rises all over the city centre. In 2016 there is no rhyme nor reason to drag hundreds of thousands of people into one small location every working day.

Having business areas distributed throughout the major suburbs is far better. Dedicated office space with fibre broadband and top spec office fitouts. Workers can travel to their local hub and work from there.

This is the future and Dublin can set the standard with a small bit of vision.

remote working has been hailed as the future since about 1970, it hasn't taken off.

Dog Man Star

cgcsb wrote: »

remote working has been hailed as the future since about 1970, it hasn't taken off.

It's not remote working, you would be working with colleagues. It is no different to a regional office.

bassey

Not everyone works in an office though, thankfully

Dog Man Star

bassey wrote: »

Not everyone works in an office though, thankfully

Vast majority of commuters into Dublin city centre on a typical working day are office workers, most of which do not need to be there. Like I said, with a little vision, Dublin could lead the way.


Major business centres in Blanchardstown, Swords, Dundrum, etc. would take a massive load of the commuter routes into the city centre.

Dyr

Dog Man Star wrote: »

Vast majority of commuters into Dublin city centre on a typical working day are office workers, most of which do not need to be there. Like I said, with a little vision, Dublin could lead the way.


Major business centres in Blanchardstown, Swords, Dundrum, etc. would take a massive load of the commuter routes into the city centre.

Most of the commutes to those places on dublin bus would involve having to go into the city centre...

Dog Man Star

Bambi wrote: »

Most of the commutes to those places on dublin bus would involve having to go into the city centre...

. . . . .????

.........Annnnyway, it's worth considering before we make College Green the promised land.

Pepe LeFrits

Dog Man Star wrote: »

The focus should be on decentralising, not on building high rises all over the city centre. In 2016 there is no rhyme nor reason to drag hundreds of thousands of people into one small location every working day.

Plenty of studies show otherwise. High density residential in city centres has major economic, health and infrastructural benefits.

Dog Man Star

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Plenty of studies show otherwise. High density residential in city centres has major economic, health and infrastructural benefits.

Total crap. Again, the main problem Dublin faces is this ancient fossilised thinking.

Dublin is a tiny city on the fringe of Europe. It has no need for a CBD, yet that seems to be the main focus.

Set up suburban intergrated business centres, lead the way.

No commute, no urban sprawl, no stress.

Dog Man Star

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Plenty of studies show otherwise. High density residential in city centres has major economic, health and infrastructural benefits.

Total ****e. I live in Perth, Australia. Same reluctance to decentralise the CBD. Healthcare is sorted, regional A&E clinics and free on-call home doctors, but yet the CBD rules all.

400,000 commuters every morning, everyone knows it is ridiculuous and things are changing: business incentives to relocated north and south.

I am behind most of these.

We will get there, attitudes are changing slowly, it is quite exciting to embrace the totally mobile office. We are laying off immobile staff all over the place, all workplace performance based on output rather than hours.

An Irishman behind it all.

Pepe LeFrits

Nope neither ****e nor crap, but the topic is residential and you keep going about CBDs. Sure, decentralisation of business can have benefits, although businesses are generally reluctant to leave the centre for much the same reasons people often are. At any rate, whether you decentralise business or not, a residential city centre is the way to go, which is what the whole thread is about.

odyssey06

People are wondering why companies - who aren't dealing with walkin customers - base themselves in the city centre and not say, City West.
It's because potential employees don't want to have these kinds of commutes - this thread is happening right now on the Dublin City forum:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057604315

tricky D

Mod note: Troll removed and 2 quoted posts. Please use the Report Post thing instead of responding to trolls. txbye

Ben D Bus

I believe one of the main reasons the likes of Facebook, Google etc locate in the centre of Dublin is because that's where the people they want to employ want to be, both to work and to live. Not in soulless suburban office parks.

odyssey06

If you're based in Dublin City Centre, right now your recruitment pool is all of Dublin and the Greater Dublin area, commuter belt etc.
If you base yourself in Blanchardstown, or City West, or East Point, or Swords, you're immediately cutting out at least a third of your potential employee base.

That's not to denigrate any of the above places... I mean East Point has a soul, if you look out at Dublin Bay and the Hill of Howth looming over Clontarf seafront, or scan the Tolka estuary for herons and egrets at hunt ... anything but look in at its rather bland buildings... but try commuting to it from Tallaght

We need a residential city centre. Higher apartments support that. +1 to that...

Eoin247

Dog Man Star wrote: »

Total ****e. I live in Perth, Australia. Same reluctance to decentralise the CBD. Healthcare is sorted, regional A&E clinics and free on-call home doctors, but yet the CBD rules all.

400,000 commuters every morning, everyone knows it is ridiculuous and things are changing: business incentives to relocated north and south.

I am behind most of these.

We will get there, attitudes are changing slowly, it is quite exciting to embrace the totally mobile office. We are laying off immobile staff all over the place, all workplace performance based on output rather than hours.

An Irishman behind it all.

Decentralization has been shown time and time again to be uneconomical, ineffective and to cause a reduction in living standards both in Ireland and around the entire world.

Can you point to many(if any) examples where decentralisation has actualy worked well?

Amirani

I work in Dublin City at the moment and had previously worked in Sandyford. There's not a hope I'd work in a non-CBD location again, for many reasons. And Sandyford is about half the distance to my house as Dublin City.

Unless you spend all your time in either work or home, there's huge benefits to living and/or working in a dense urban centre.

cgcsb

Dog Man Star wrote: »

Dublin is a tiny city on the fringe of Europe. It has no need for a CBD, yet that seems to be the main focus.

Dublin has one of Europe's largest and most expensive office markets.

cgcsb

Dog Man Star wrote: »

Total ****e. I live in Perth, Australia. Same reluctance to decentralise the CBD. Healthcare is sorted, regional A&E clinics and free on-call home doctors, but yet the CBD rules all.

400,000 commuters every morning, everyone knows it is ridiculuous and things are changing: business incentives to relocated north and south.

I am behind most of these.

We will get there, attitudes are changing slowly, it is quite exciting to embrace the totally mobile office. We are laying off immobile staff all over the place, all workplace performance based on output rather than hours.

An Irishman behind it all.

Australian cities are barely a hundred years old.