Ireland 2040 plan "will kill rural Ireland"

cgcsb

snotboogie wrote: »

Why would being close to Dublin give them no chance? All of the major cities in the UK have smaller cities in their urban area London-Reading, Birmingham-Wolverhampton, Manchester-Bolton, Leeds-Bradford, Liverpool-Warrington. The closest population centre (over 50k) to Dublin is Belfast....

It's comparative though, Compare the size of London and Reading. Reding urban area population is 320,000 or 3% of London's 9,800,000. Similarly Drogheda's 41,000 is 3% of Dublin's 1,200,000

cgcsb

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Most people (except a few extremists) agree there should be a healthy balance between the cities, towns and rural country life.
Thankfully we don't live in a Stalinist type state where people are forced to live somewhere they don't want to.
One off houses are not the cup of tea of most city folk and good luck to them.

The question isn't what people's 'cup of tea' is rather it's how Ireland should develop into the future in the general sense and every educated person would agree that the future is a larger population concentrated in smaller areas as the trend is globally.

Tell me how

cgcsb wrote: »

The question isn't what people's 'cup of tea' is rather it's how Ireland should develop into the future in the general sense and every educated person would agree that the future is a larger population concentrated in smaller areas as the trend is globally.

So what do we do with the vast swathes of the country that will have nobody living in them? Do we bother maintaining roads? Do we cut hedgerows and clear blocked drains?

My objection to the way society in Ireland has developed is the portrayal that the Dublin model is the pinnacle and everything else should support this.

I don't think all rural dwellers can expect houses with a shop, pub and post office across the road and a restaurant, hospital and concert venue within 3 miles but neither should they be packed in to matrix style impersonal boxes with "faux" community spirit that a lot of apartments really are.

As for the phrase "every educated person". That's just condescending.

cgcsb

wakka12 wrote: »

I don't get the idea of forcing tiny towns like athlone to develop into something important
It would be a lot more effective and beneficial to just build a new town at that stage with well planned zoning,road layout and everything else than pumping loads of money into some provincial town and trying to make its already established and small scale urban fabric something its not
Places like athlone have no infrastructure or anything remarkable about to warrant large investment in it that wouldn't be more beneficial than starting a new town which could easily and very quickly grow to same size as athlone, but it'd be a lot more efficient town

Athlone is already a natural centre for the midlands' massive rural population in terms of shopping employment and education. In Athlone the council is currently working on enhancing the pedestrian environment, a better town bus service and better cycling facilities and it'll be flying, perhaps designate an SDZ close to the town centre to allow for dense residential development. Building a new town is 60s claptrap. It costs too much and there are no benefits, our existing towns are fine they just need small improvements to make them livable.

Harry Palmr

snotboogie wrote: »

How are you going to convince people to move to this new town? How are you going to convince companies to set up there? If you look at purpose built cities that grew rapidly over the last two hundred years or so, there are two ways to do it; 1. Move the entire function of the capital city to the new town, like Brasilia, Canberra or Washington DC. I would class this as politically impossible in Ireland. 2. You give the city legal or economic exemptions, like Dubai, Shenzhen or Las Vegas. What rules are available to be loosened?

Milton Keynes which for all the jokes is a functioning and very successful large new town (250,000) shows the way. Find a location far enough away from the dominant population centre (London) to allow the town become it's own place while being close enough to major rail and road infrastructure to be viable economically from the start. Although it wasn't founded until 1967, MK was really still part of the post-war housing crisis solution for greater London.

A greater Athlone could be sprung with the same approach, albeit the old town would be just that - probably an adjunct to New Athlone.

cgcsb

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Because gradual or not, houses have a long life-span, this plan could take 100 years for a majority of houses to naturally end their life-cycle.
You want it in 20 years? OK, we're back at "buy my house and give me a new one in Dublin city center, nah only loking, I'm not fcuking moving"

I don't think it'd be that long before we achieve 80% urban living. Irish people are pretty flighty after all.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Point 2 - there is a septic tank charge and there are inspections. Ireland style. I.e. there are something like 2 inspectors for the entire country and it will take 64000 years for them to inspect even close to most of the houses.
The septic tank charge notice I binned and never heard from it again.

A bit like water charges that's a case of a government growing a pair and actually going through with policies it was elected to go through with.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Point 3 - Nah

In the end, as I said, this will effect mostly new builds, or there could be a new drive to depopulate and desolate the countryside, with a new generation of abandoned houses, they could sit scenically beside the ruins of the famine cottages. Since it is policy to devestate the countryside anyway, I'm sure it would be grand now. This is just the same anto countryside circle jerk that comes along every now and then.
You have a countryside, it is what it is and if you don't like it, Jesus, every country in the world has a countryside, you can't force people to live where YOU want, unless you're talking about China or Stalin's Russia.

I'm not actually sure what you mean here.

cgcsb

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

So let's import all the food along with all the fuel and anything else.
This kind of idiotic boxed-in thinking will ensure Ireland will never be Switzerland or Norway, both of which have very nice countryside BTW

Never said that. Merely pointing out one poster's delusion of Ireland's 40% rural population dishing out food to the starved 60% in a philanthropic act of epic magnitude. Never mind that the vast majority of rural population have nothing to do with farming.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

Again all stick, no carrot.

Our population is urbanising, has been for decades and will continue to do so.

Lots of people have been saying how great/terrible urban/rural living is but nobody is proposing practical ways to make the urban alternative more attractive.

I have detailed how I would issue 'carrots' in many previous posts but I'll reiterate them here:

1) implement a minimum density requirement for new development based on area. The poolbeg West SDZ which will accommodate 8,000 people in a centrally located location is a good start, more of the same, use Broombridge Industrial Estate and the massive area west of Inchicore. These developments cater for single people with small space requirements to 3 bed family requirements.

2)A defunding, by government, of The Irish Georgian society, David Norris and An Taisce, and other anti-progress organisations all of whom have fought tooth and nail to banish City workers to Kildare.

3) Rail, lots of it. Metro, DART underground and more luas lines.

cgcsb

Shurimgreat wrote: »

You are completely Dublin-centric in your opinions. Its like you can't look beyond the Pale or something.

How emotional of you. Anyway I suppose yes you could describe my opinions as 'Dublin-Centric' in the sense that I acknowledge Dublin's position as Ireland's only City, of international note, our largest market place for most things and services and our gateway to the rest of the world.
Dublin will continue to fulfill this role for the state as happens in all other small Countries, see Copenhagen in Denmark as a similar example.

However in terms of urbanization I don't see Dublin as being the only show in town. Cork will also be a major source of Growth going further. The other urban centres will also contribute.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Do you accept Dublin is experiencing a massive shortage of housing? You cannot just snap your fingers and houses appear. It will take decades to build the houses required and it simply isn't going to happen given the incompetence of Dublin planners. At the same time, the more demand for houses, the more the cost of building land in Dublin goes up, meaning the cost of houses and apartments going up, well beyond the ordinary person. Rents also go up.
Dublin is stuck in a vicious circle of limited/next to no supply and rapidly rising demand. I genuinely don't think the Dublin-centric brigade understand basic economic laws around supply and demand. I keep hearing the same wishy-washy nonsense about the need to build more houses, when clearly there is nowhere near enough being built. They don't understand the obstacles to more houses being built, the main obstacle being it takes years to build estates and apartment complexes, whereas it takes only a few months for new workers to move to Dublin, putting more pressure on limited supply.

Watching the growing chaotic development of Dublin is like watching a car-crash in slow motion.

You are describing Dublin's housing shortage, why? like what does that have to do with the discussion. The solution to Dublin's housing crisis is to put more SDZ type development plans in place, many of which are currently going to construction or being finalized. The solution to that certainly isn't more ribbon houses.

cgcsb

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Yes, the national broadband roll-out is the cause of Dublin's badly planned chaos. :rolleyes:

You really are clutching at straws.

Never said it's the cause, its merely another stumbling block to the solution.

Tell me how

cgcsb wrote: »

I have detailed how I would issue 'carrots' in many previous posts but I'll reiterate them here:

1) implement a minimum density requirement for new development based on area. The poolbeg West SDZ which will accommodate 8,000 people in a centrally located location is a good start, more of the same, use Broombridge Industrial Estate and the massive area west of Inchicore. These developments cater for single people with small space requirements to 3 bed family requirements.

This is beyond ridiculous. 8000 more people in to the busiest few Sq kilometres of the country.

cgcsb wrote: »

2)A defunding, by government, of The Irish Georgian society, David Norris and An Taisce, and other anti-progress organisations all of whom have fought tooth and nail to banish City workers to Kildare.

This is out of the Donald Trump playbook of national planning.

cgcsb wrote: »

3) Rail, lots of it. Metro, DART underground and more luas lines.

Around your Vatican sized country? Sure, why not. Or maybe a mono-rail or drone taxi service.


Did you see Enda Walsh's play, Arlington?

Isla has been kept here since childhood – in a room, in a tower, in a city – like a princess in a dystopian fairy tale. She imparts stories down a microphone, or dreams, which her watcher records from a cluttered office and sometimes accompanies with music and visuals. These dreams, she is told, are being made for her beyond the towers. But that doesn’t explain why she has seen people jumping from them to their deaths

snotboogie

cgcsb wrote: »

snotboogie wrote: »

Why would being close to Dublin give them no chance? All of the major cities in the UK have smaller cities in their urban area London-Reading, Birmingham-Wolverhampton, Manchester-Bolton, Leeds-Bradford, Liverpool-Warrington. The closest population centre (over 50k) to Dublin is Belfast....

It's comparative though, Compare the size of London and Reading. Reding urban area population is 320,000 or 3% of London's 9,800,000. Similarly Drogheda's 41,000 is 3% of Dublin's 1,200,000

Why not compare Liverpool and Warrington, or Leeds and Bradford or Birmingham and Wolverhampton? London has a number of small cities in it's commuter belt.

cgcsb

Tell me how wrote: »

So what do we do with the vast swathes of the country that will have nobody living in them? Do we bother maintaining roads? Do we cut hedgerows and clear blocked drains?

Natural economics would take over in 99% of cases, large farms (or forestry companies nowadays) would take over small plots of land add them to their portfolios. This happened during the industrial revolution in the rest of Europe when people left subsidence farming for a more stable and prosperous lives working in industrial towns. Essentially the same thing would happen just 200 years later in Ireland.

Tell me how wrote: »

My objection to the way society in Ireland has developed is the portrayal that the Dublin model is the pinnacle and everything else should support this.

Far from it, Dublin from the 1950s to now was not 'planned' and the capital has a lot of problems as a result these can be corrected though through stricter rules.

Tell me how wrote: »

I don't think all rural dwellers can expect houses with a shop, pub and post office across the road and a restaurant, hospital and concert venue within 3 miles but neither should they be packed in to matrix style impersonal boxes with "faux" community spirit that a lot of apartments really are.

Well I imagine the majority of urban dwellers outside of Dublin will continue to live in houses, more so in a terraced format. But your negative opinion of apartments is just a case of ignorance mixed with personal taste. I would consider endless ribbons of bungalows each more tacky than the last as being impersonal. But sure that's a matter for interior designers really.

Tell me how wrote: »

As for the phrase "every educated person". That's just condescending.

Well it might be condescending but we had a dozen or so posters here who claimed either to not understand or to willfully ignore primary school geographic facts regarding urban areas and wealth generation.

snotboogie

Harry Palmr wrote: »

snotboogie wrote: »

How are you going to convince people to move to this new town? How are you going to convince companies to set up there? If you look at purpose built cities that grew rapidly over the last two hundred years or so, there are two ways to do it; 1. Move the entire function of the capital city to the new town, like Brasilia, Canberra or Washington DC. I would class this as politically impossible in Ireland. 2. You give the city legal or economic exemptions, like Dubai, Shenzhen or Las Vegas. What rules are available to be loosened?

Milton Keynes which for all the jokes is a functioning and very successful large new town (250,000) shows the way. Find a location far enough away from the dominant population centre (London) to allow the town become it's own place while being close enough to major rail and road infrastructure to be viable economically from the start. Although it wasn't founded until 1967, MK was really still part of the post-war housing crisis solution for greater London.

A greater Athlone could be sprung with the same approach, albeit the old town would be just that - probably an adjunct to New Athlone.

The area has grown by 200k in 60 years in country with a population of 55 million and a feeder city with a population of 14 million. A proportionately similar sized city in Ireland would have a population of between 32k and 35k. To get a town the size of Milton Keynes in Ireland we would need to have about 5% of the country move there. How do you get that to happen?

cgcsb

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Milton Keynes which for all the jokes is a functioning and very successful large new town (250,000) shows the way.

What year are you posting from? Milton is all roundabouts and car centric development.

salmocab

I’ve long since thought that politicians love the Dublin/rest of the country divide, it means that constantly they can announce some plans and then have it shot down and not having to do a thing. This thread shows how it works, people read urban and think Dublin and we get hundreds of posts of mickey waving by both sides. I’m happy for money to be spent where it is best used and if that’s a light rail in cork a huge industrial zone in Galway or a Dublin underground that’s fine with me. People should absolutely be entitled to live rurally but planning shouldn’t allow the current single housing miles from anything approach. Just like Dublin’s planning should try to halt the sprawl and go upwards.

cgcsb

Tell me how wrote: »

This is beyond ridiculous. 8000 more people in to the busiest few Sq kilometres of the country.

Why is that ridiculous? it means more people can live centrally, have better services and walk to work easily.

Tell me how wrote: »

Around your Vatican sized country? Sure, why not. Or maybe a mono-rail or drone taxi service.

Greater Dublin is significantly larger than the Vatican

Harry Palmr

snotboogie wrote: »

The area has grown by 200k in 60 years in country with a population of 55 million and a feeder city with a population of 14 million. A proportionately similar sized city in Ireland would have a population of between 32k and 35k. To get a town the size of Milton Keynes in Ireland we would need to have about 5% of the country move there. How do you get that to happen?

Did I suggest Athlone would be the same size? Clearly any new population centre would grow over time be it "organically" through the birth rate or through enticements like work and education. A population of 50,000 really should be the absolute minimum for any "new town" in the Midlands with policies designed to reach that sooner rather than later, from the current base of 21,000

cgcsb wrote: »

What year are you posting from? Milton is all roundabouts and car centric development.

Sure at the time the car was the future inside large urban areas but not now, I think even Irish planners could work their way round that - you know light rail/trams and buses.

Shurimgreat

cgcsb wrote: »

Why is that ridiculous? it means more people can live centrally, have better services and walk to work easily.




Greater Dublin is significantly larger than the Vatican

If Dublin had the housing accommodation for more people, by all means put more people there.
But piling tens of thousands more people into Dublin over the next few years, into a situation where there is already a critical shortage of accommodation is beyond insanity and can only make the current property crisis worse.

Our politicians up to and including Varadkar are short sighted in the extreme. On the one hand they've been told of a massive housing shortage in Dublin. On the other they are planning to encourage more people to live in Dublin knowing well these people can't be accommodated. But as long as it sounds good and gets votes that's the important thing.

Sam Russell

Building new towns sounds like a good idea. Adamstown - anyone?

Shurimgreat

Sam Russell wrote: »

Building new towns sounds like a good idea. Adamstown - anyone?

That is just another commuter town for Dublin and encouraged further urban sprawl.

Any new urban counter balance in Leinster to Dublin would need to be a minimum of 50 miles away, aim to have it own university in the long run as this is often crucial to attracting FDI and hi tech companies, large industrial parks, a financial centre and so on. Government should encourage Dublin based companies to move much of their operations and HQs to this urban centre, through tax incentives or similar. Once this urban centre grows it should become self sufficient and not become yet another commuter base for Dublin.

Most of all there should be further discouragement of new jobs or businesses setting up in the centre of Dublin, otherwise the vicious circle continues and gets worse.

cgcsb

Shurimgreat wrote: »

If Dublin had the housing accommodation for more people, by all means put more people there.
But piling tens of thousands more people into Dublin over the next few years, into a situation where there is already a critical shortage of accommodation is beyond insanity and can only make the current property crisis worse.

We were discussing the Poolbeg West SDZ which will provide apartments for 8,000 people on a site that is currently vacant.

Sam Russell

Shurimgreat wrote: »

That is just another commuter town for Dublin and encouraged further urban sprawl.

Any new urban counter balance in Leinster to Dublin would need to be a minimum of 50 miles away, aim to have it own university in the long run as this is often crucial to attracting FDI and hi tech companies, large industrial parks, a financial centre and so on. Government should encourage Dublin based companies to move much of their operations and HQs to this urban centre, through tax incentives or similar. Once this urban centre grows it should become self sufficient and not become yet another commuter base for Dublin.

Most of all there should be further discouragement of new jobs or businesses setting up in the centre of Dublin, otherwise the vicious circle continues and gets worse.

Waterford would fit that requirement. Cork/Limerick axis would also be a useful area for expansion. Athlone is too small to be a base for anything.

Shurimgreat

cgcsb wrote: »

We were discussing the Poolbeg West SDZ which will provide apartments for 8,000 people on a site that is currently vacant.

How many years before planning and building is completed? 5? 10?

Unfortunately Dublin needs new accommodation now. 8000 units in 5 or 10 years won't cut it.

The current building of residential units is something like 1000 a year in Dublin. But many times that move to Dublin every year, eg students for college.
If half of students remain in Dublin after they qualify, which is likely what is happening given most new jobs appear to be in Dublin, then its a real problem.
The whole thing is unsustainable.

Shurimgreat

Sam Russell wrote: »

Waterford would fit that requirement. Cork/Limerick axis would also be a useful area for expansion. Athlone is too small to be a base for anything.

I think the University thing is a big factor in the success of an urban area. Galway relies heavily on the university for employment but also from the economic gains of thousands of students staying there.
There probably is a case for a university in Waterford and to grow it in the long run. Certainly the focus needs to be taken off Dublin.

Nermal

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

According to Sean Orourke on RTE radio, Athlone is to be announced as the capital of the midlands.

Never mind Dublin.....Mullingar, Longford, Tullamore etc are not going to stand for that.

Mayor of Mullingar on the radio to fight it now

Who cares - what are the practical consequences? Surely what matters is the amount spent on various projects. If calling them all capitals keeps them happy, do it, so long as they don't get in the way of Dublin projects.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Most of all there should be further discouragement of new jobs or businesses setting up in the centre of Dublin, otherwise the vicious circle continues and gets worse.

It's only a vicious cycle when you refuse to spend on infrastructure. When you do spend it's a positive feedback loop.

Sam Russell

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I think the University thing is a big factor in the success of an urban area. Galway relies heavily on the university for employment but also from the economic gains of thousands of students staying there.
There probably is a case for a university in Waterford and to grow it in the long run. Certainly the focus needs to be taken off Dublin.

Waterford has the Waterford Institute of Technology, which is a proto-University. It has a port that could be useful if there is a hard Brexit. It used to have Waterford Glass so has skilled workers. It has a Motorway to Dublin. It even has a greenway.

What more could you want?

marno21

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

According to Sean Orourke on RTE radio, Athlone is to be announced as the capital of the midlands.

Never mind Dublin.....Mullingar, Longford, Tullamore etc are not going to stand for that.

Mayor of Mullingar on the radio to fight it now :pac:
"Absolutely does not stand up to scrutiny"


This will turn into a copy of the crap plan from 15 years ago.

Exactly why this is going to fail. The last plan had Mullingar/Athlone/Tullamore as a midlands hub. That's not a hub in any sense.

Make Athlone a hub and vastly improve the connections to Athlone:

* There is a plan to build a new N55 from Athlone to Ballymahon in the works which will greatly improve access to Longford from Athlone.
* The N52-M6 link to Tullamore is under consideration for the Capital Plan.
* The M4 Mulingar-Longford is likely to be in the Capital Plan.

Athlone and Tullamore are rail connected, Mullingar and Longford are rail connected. There is a disused rail line between Mullingar and Athlone that can be reopened meaning that all towns would be connected to Athlone.

There is a right way and a wrong way of doing this. The experts and Government seem to want to do it the right way until Robert Troy and the others starts shouting and we get left with this ****e.

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

Waterford has the Waterford Institute of Technology, which is a proto-University. It has a port that could be useful if there is a hard Brexit. It used to have Waterford Glass so has skilled workers. It has a Motorway to Dublin. It even has a greenway.

What more could you want?

The port is in Kilkenny as anyone who mentions it keeps being told. :P

Son;t forget the expansion of Waterford City was put on the back burner because of bizarre objections from KK residents (mostly from north of the county) who were against this "land grab". As long as things as simple as allowing Waterford Cty to expand north of the river and Ferrybank can't proceed, then what hope have we for large scale plans such as 2040.

I remember being involved in initial consultations with this plan about 18 months ago and the big takeaway was:

1. Dart Underground has to happen. No ifs or buts.

2. Disincentivize HARSHLY one off building in rural areas. Make it prohibitively expensive for services, unless there are genuine reasons for the build (there never are) like agriculture etc.

3. Disincentivize people moving to Dublin and start concentrating on making Cork a proper counterweight. Not piecemeal; plan for it to be a real 500k city over the next 50 years.

---

The Dáil rows today just show that no one seems to see the benefits of these sorts of strategies at all. It's beyond parody.

Harry Palmr

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I think the University thing is a big factor in the success of an urban area. Galway relies heavily on the university for employment but also from the economic gains of thousands of students staying there.
There probably is a case for a university in Waterford and to grow it in the long run. Certainly the focus needs to be taken off Dublin.

The idiot gubberment thinks Waterford cannot justify a standalone university so we're saddled with the prospect of a University of the South East in conjunction with Carlow IT. Words fail me.

Someone mentioned the Glass and skilled labour, you may as well be talking about boiler making. Most of the jobs lost were 20-30 years ago, what skills remain are now scattered across some small boutique glass makers and the "faux" Waterford Crystal factory at their showroom on the Mall.