[Article] Dublin sprawl 'could damage health'

tba

The Government has been warned that Dublin's suburban sprawl could lead to health problems for many people and dangerously skewed development.

The Urban Forum, which is made up of five planning groups, has called for the creation of a second urban centre in the west to rival the capital and for the National Spatial Strategy to be redrawn.

The Urban Forum is made up of Engineers Ireland, the Irish Landscape Institute, the Irish Planning Institute, the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and the Society of Chartered Surveyors.

It has warned that Dublin is expanding so quickly it will soon occupy the same surface area as Los Angeles, but with less than a quarter of its population. As a consequence, the average car in Ireland travels 70% more each year than France, 50% more than Britain - and even 30% more than the US.

The Forum says there is substantial evidence to suggest this will lead to obesity, cardiovascular disease, asthma and increased rates of social isolation.

It is demanding that sprawl be arrested by revising the National Spatial Strategy, creating a second urban centre in the west to rival Dublin, by increasing staffing of planning bodies and a greater emphasis on high speed rail.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2007/0213/dublin.html

bico

I agree with the sentiments of the urban forum and the need to densify development , however I think they're dillusional about the size of greater Dublin. This statement of Dublin having the footprint of Los Angeleshas been quoted for years

Did a quick experiment and looked at the urban sprawl of both LA and Dublin on Google Earth and it meausured as such

LA - North to South from Santa Monica to Newport = 72km and East to West from Long Beach to Ontario = 59.24 km

Dublin -Bray to Sutton = 22km in a direct line across the bay
docklands to Maynooth -26 km

tba

I suppose measuring the max distance people commute would be a better application, for example people coming from drogheda, portlaoise, gorey, might be what they are getting at.

spacetweek

tba wrote:

I suppose measuring the max distance people commute would be a better application, for example people coming from drogheda, portlaoise, gorey, might be what they are getting at.

Yes but this doesn't give you the area of the city. Just because people commute to Dublin from Dundalk and Gorey doesn't mean that the city is 150 k's long. :rolleyes:

tba

I don't want to get bogged down in definitions. The fact remains that we trabel 30% more than american cars ( a country renowned for driving for anything) That in itself is a dogged indication of what some people consider the city to be.

fricatus

tba wrote:

I don't want to get bogged down in definitions. The fact remains that we trabel 30% more than american cars ( a country renowned for driving for anything) That in itself is a dogged indication of what some people consider the city to be.

There's a clear distinction between a city's footprint and its commuter belt, and not understanding (or wanting to understand) the difference in this forum is akin to not knowing the difference between a goal and a point in the GAA forum!

Bico was right in pointing this out. The argument that Dublin's footprint extends from Gorey to Dundalk is ridiculous, although of course people commute from both centres to the capital.

If we extend the argument to my home city of Waterford, the distinction is more glaringly obvious. I know one person (and he's not alone) who commutes from near Bansha in Tipp, and someone else who commutes from Adamstown in Wexford. However I'd be laughed off this board if I said that Waterford's footprint is 100 km across (it's more like 7x4).

The problem in the Dublin area is that housing costs are too high to allow people to set up home in the city and its suburbs, so new families have to move farther and farther out to have a reasonable standard of accommodation that they can afford. Meanwhile the established suburbs are full of empty-nesters. This leads to huge pressure being put on schools in places like Kilcock and Ratoath, and school closures (in Celtic Tiger Ireland!) such as the recent one in Kilbarrack.

bico

Many of these issues that people in Dublin are dealing with have been the reality for millions living in large cities all over the world.
There are people who commute to London daily from places like Wales and the midlands.
Los Angeles is infamous for being one of the most sprawled cities on earth and is claimed to have more cars than people.
I don't disagree with the arguments made by the urban forum , but think they loose credibility by propelling Dublin and it's problems into this sphere of the uber city , which it's not.

tba

I believe they actually said (and correct me if I'm wrong)

Dublin is expanding so quickly it will soon occupy the same surface area as Los Angeles

Ok thats fair enough, maybe we should hold off discussing this until it is actually the same size, my bad.

Christ, I feel like such a fool for discussing the increasing size of commuter belts and its direct effects on health when in fact I should have been nitpicking over the correct definition of where Dublin city ends.

Slice

Dublin is expanding so quickly it will soon occupy the same surface area as Los Angeles

tba: Ok thats fair enough, maybe we should hold off discussing this until it is actually the same size, my bad.

Isn't that the same type of Irish attitude towards planning that's resulted in some pretty stupid planning in the city so far such as the junctions on the M50 or two disconnected Luas lines?

tba

You make an interesting point.

I can't believe I didn't see the connection before.

Calina

Slice,

I realise it was subtle but I do believe that was the point tba was making...