Lack of tall buildings in Dublin

Goat Paddock

What can be done to combat the adversity to tall buildings in Dublin? Planning permission was given to the watchtower at the point village, which would have been about 35 stories (which is a start)..construction commenced but stopped when the recession hit in full force.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-09/design-chosen-for-the-largest-residential-tower-in-nsw/7233954



People in Dublin would object to 9 storeys being too high, let alone 90!!!

Look at our cousins in Australia, planning a 90 storey residential tower in Sydney (above image) , with plenty of skyscrapers around the country. Granted the population is higher, but look at cities with similar population to Dublin e.g brisbane, Perth, Auckland:



Point is Dublin can do better to contain urban sprawl.

stampydmonkey

Capital dock will be 24 stories or something like that

bricky06

I pass by the capitol dock site regularly, it is a large investment for the economic climate as it stands but, really, we need to be doing better.

One of the two residential buildings there will be 19 stories, the other being smaller.

DCC and the government (when we finally get one) really need to invest in and incentive high density residential construction.

I have read that the country needs to be producing 25000 residential units per year to meet demand with 60% of these required in Dublin. We are currently producing about 10000 nationally.

The introduction of some sort of vacant site tax or similar would go a long way to aid construction in general. Too many developers sitting on sites right now, watching the value tucking up before they bother investing.

jayjay2010

I've always been amazed at the lack of tall buildings in Ireland.

I think they help to shape a city's skyline and give them some focal point.

And a few tall residential buildings would mean great views of the city/mountains!

I can't wait for Ireland to get its first skyscraper. I don't count the Elysian in Cork as one....

MarkAnthony

There's absolutely no need for them for a start. Moving on from that there's not the infrastructure to support them. Let's stick 1000 apartments in D1 and watch the already gridlocked Quays get even worse. Thirdly it's almost impossible to get any sun in Dublin as it is let alone in there were a load of 'Skyscrapers' thrown up.

Dublin is very small city with just over 500K people in the actual city, why is there a need for tall buildings?

rebel.ranter

MarkAnthony wrote: »

There's absolutely no need for them for a start. Moving on from that there's not the infrastructure to support them. Let's stick 1000 apartments in D1 and watch the already gridlocked Quays get even worse. Thirdly it's almost impossible to get any sun in Dublin as it is let alone in there were a load of 'Skyscrapers' thrown up.

Dublin is very small city with just over 500K people in the actual city, why is there a need for tall buildings?

You have answered your own question. Grid locked quays are the result of people having to commute from a oversized catchment area precisely because we do not have the right type of accommodation in the city where the people go about their working lives. If they lived within the city then public transport would be used, would attract more investment and the gridlock could be eased.

The city is stagnant at 500k people because of the lack of accommodation. Cities need to grow, growth attracts investment and jobs.
We need a good mix of 1,200-1,500sq ft apartments and smaller stater homes to grow the city, like most other modern cities. The other choice is more urban sprawl in to Louth, Meath and Kildare with monstrous commute times and inadequate infrastructure.

4068ac1elhodqr

Belfast with about half the population of Dublin, has 8 out of 17 of the tallest on the island, and the top 3 of the leaderboard.
One of the tallest is about to get a bit of a refurb job across 24 floors and £30m.

Build them high, just make them shinny to reflect the sun,
or better still place another (artificial) sun up in the sky.

MarkAnthony

rebel.ranter wrote: »

You have answered your own question. Grid locked quays are the result of people having to commute from a oversized catchment area precisely because we do not have the right type of accommodation in the city where the people go about their working lives. If they lived within the city then public transport would be used, would attract more investment and the gridlock could be eased.

The city is stagnant at 500k people because of the lack of accommodation. Cities need to grow, growth attracts investment and jobs.
We need a good mix of 1,200-1,500sq ft apartments and smaller stater homes to grow the city, like most other modern cities. The other choice is more urban sprawl in to Louth, Meath and Kildare with monstrous commute times and inadequate infrastructure.

Well let's build them as soon as we move people away from wanting to live in houses. I'd say 2 - 3 generations at most.

You're also assuming sticking all the Jobs in central Dublin is a good idea, it isn't. I work for a company in D4 and our limiting factor at the moment is getting power into the building. It's not just a case of whacking up a load of buildings, the entire infrastructure would need to change.

The other issue is what's the problem with Dublin stagnating? Well firstly it isn't, it's growing faster than can comfortably be coped with* but putting that aside the next biggest 'city' is Cork, after that we've a collection of small towns. In short the rest of the country is bloody empty, there's no need to be Dublin centric.

*Tall building aren't the solution to that either, it's building houses people want to live in affordably.

JohnnyChimpo

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Well let's build them as soon as we move people away from wanting to live in houses. I'd say 2 - 3 generations at most.

Why can't this be led by governmental foresight and planning in the construction industry? People talk like the Irish are genetically predetermined to hate apartment living, but if you build a lot of high-quality apartments which are fit for long-term habitation then people will go where market forces lead them

You're also assuming sticking all the Jobs in central Dublin is a good idea, it isn't. I work for a company in D4 and our limiting factor at the moment is getting power into the building. It's not just a case of whacking up a load of buildings, the entire infrastructure would need to change.

Nobody is suggesting that new builds will not also necessitate investment in local infrastructure. That is obvious.

The other issue is what's the problem with Dublin stagnating? Well firstly it isn't, it's growing faster than can comfortably be coped with* but putting that aside the next biggest 'city' is Cork, after that we've a collection of small towns. In short the rest of the country is bloody empty, there's no need to be Dublin centric.

The reason high-density cities exist all around the world is because they offer advantages of scale and organisation which facilitate certain kinds of commercial activity that don't work in low-density areas.

*Tall building aren't the solution to that either, it's building houses people want to live in affordably.

These are not mutually exclusive goals

MarkAnthony

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Well let's build them as soon as we move people away from wanting to live in houses. I'd say 2 - 3 generations at most.

*Tall building aren't the solution to that either, it's building houses people want to live in affordably.

Me and a few friends were talking about this recently. We all said we would love to live in an apartment close to the city centre.
We are in our 30's & 40's.
My mam recently said the same, she would feel a lot safer in an apartment complex.
The only stipulation would be that they were decent sized apartments, if they had separate utility areas, maybe storage areas in the basements for bulky items. Sounds perfect to me.

Goat Paddock

Goat Paddock wrote: »

People in Dublin would object to 9 storeys being too high, let alone 90!!!

I don't think the people in Dublin would have any problems with this. Its very much in the interests of making the city a better place to live (improved transport infrastructure etc).

However, the planners seen to have a problem with height, seemingly believing that Dublin being a flat city is a 'good thing'. I suspect this attitude might be a legacy of the decades of corruption which focused on expanding the city westward as much as possible so that lands could be re-zoned...

the_syco

Generally speaking, "high" seems to be 16 floors in Dublin, and I think there's only a few of them. And even then, they tend to be shoeboxes.

We need 40 floor apartment blocks which are wide, as opposed to 16 floor apartment blocks which are the bare minimum size.

So instead of 30 shoeboxes squashed into 3 floors, they are built up, so that the 30 apartments are built over 15 floors. This way the apartments are built so that families can live in them, and not just couple who have a child in the storage room.

MarkAnthony

JohnnyChimpo wrote: »

Why can't this be led by governmental foresight and planning in the construction industry? People talk like the Irish are genetically predetermined to hate apartment living, but if you build a lot of high-quality apartments which are fit for long-term habitation then people will go where market forces lead them



Nobody is suggesting that new builds will not also necessitate investment in local infrastructure. That is obvious.



The reason high-density cities exist all around the world is because they offer advantages of scale and organisation which facilitate certain kinds of commercial activity that don't work in low-density areas.



These are not mutually exclusive goals

Dublin has enough office space to facilitate the business that is here, or that wants to be here. Now maybe over the next 100 years that might change, who knows?

The issue with your solution is spending hugely more per sqm than simply building houses that people prefer living in. Granted some nice City Centre apartments would be nice, they don't need to be 40 stories. All that needs to happen is current buildings, say the huge amount of old houses around central Dublin need to be converted to nice flats rather than bed sits.

You point on market forces is well taken - market forces are dictating our current building patterns.

MarkAnthony

bubblypop wrote: »

Me and a few friends were talking about this recently. We all said we would love to live in an apartment close to the city centre.
We are in our 30's & 40's.
My mam recently said the same, she would feel a lot safer in an apartment complex.
The only stipulation would be that they were decent sized apartments, if they had separate utility areas, maybe storage areas in the basements for bulky items. Sounds perfect to me.

There are near to 100sqm apartments all over the vicinity of the CC.

Tabnabs

What could have been...

intheclouds

MarkAnthony wrote: »

There are near to 100sqm apartments all over the vicinity of the CC.

Where?

MarkAnthony

intheclouds wrote: »

Where?

This is just D1

http://www.myhome.ie/residential/dublin/apartment-for-sale-in-dublin-1?minsize=80

intheclouds

MarkAnthony wrote: »

This is just D1

http://www.myhome.ie/residential/dublin/apartment-for-sale-in-dublin-1?minsize=80

There is only one on that list that is 100sqm.

The rest are mostly in the 83sqm range. I live in an 82sqm apartment and there is not enough room for storage, certainly not enough room to raise children.

Personally I think 100sqm is far too small for an apartment that should be a family home and we should be looking at larger than that. Although if there was storage and laundry facilities available elsewhere in the building then perhaps 100 sqm would be more reasonable.

MarkAnthony

intheclouds wrote: »

There is only one on that list that is 100sqm.

The rest are mostly in the 83sqm range. I live in an 82sqm apartment and there is not enough room for storage, certainly not enough room to raise children.

Personally I think 100sqm is far too small for an apartment that should be a family home and we should be looking at larger than that. Although if there was storage and laundry facilities available elsewhere in the building then perhaps 100 sqm would be more reasonable.

This is frequently brought up and is rubbish to be honest.

My house, a 4 bed semi is just over 100Sqm and has loads of room for me, the wife and a lodger and eventually kids, a dog and all the ****e we've accumilated over the years. I was brought up in a much smaller house.

An apartment becuase it doesn't have a stairwell is even bigger than a 100Sqm house. There are plenty of 100Sq m apartments in Dublin, granted there isn;t huge availability and I'd happily see a few more built but there's no need to go higher than Spencer Dock.

intheclouds

MarkAnthony wrote: »

This is frequently brought up and is rubbish to be honest.

My house, a 4 bed semi is just over 100Sqm and has loads of room for me, the wife and a lodger and eventually kids, a dog and all the ****e we've accumilated over the years. I was brought up in a much smaller house.

An apartment becuase it doesn't have a stairwell is even bigger than a 100Sqm house.

Eh, Im no really sure how to respond to that. Im sorry that you feel that my experience of living in 82sqm is "rubbish" but that is my experience. Its too small.

Perhaps you need less space than others?

MarkAnthony

intheclouds wrote: »

Eh, Im no really sure how to respond to that. Im sorry that you feel that my experience of living in 82sqm is "rubbish" but that is my experience. Its too small.

Perhaps you need less space than others?

Perhaps you need more. Everyone's experiance is different, but if you take the average household in Dublin, I expect it's under 100Sqm. If you've kids sqm floor space isn't generally the issue, it's having access to a garden and other amenities better suited to living in a house.

As for wanting more space, I'm not disagreeing that the option should not be there for people, I'm simply saying it's possible with the current building patterns. The issue is the market for €750K+ apartments is always going to be small. Building 9+ Stories is not going to cut that cost when infastructre and the advanced building techniques needed are taken into account.

intheclouds

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Perhaps you need more. Everyone's experiance is different, but if you take the average household in Dublin, I expect it's under 100Sqm. If you've kids sqm floor space isn't generally the issue, it's having access to a garden and other amenities better suited to living in a house.

As for wanting more space, I'm not disagreeing that the option should not be there for people, I'm simply saying it's possible with the current building patterns. The issue is the market for €750K+ apartments is always going to be small. Building 9+ Stories is not going to cut that cost when infastructre and the advanced building techniques needed are taken into account.

I think I probably do need more. I have a lot of "stuff".

I disagree on your last point. There is an economy of scale in building tall buildings so large apartments need not be 750k+. Other countries seem to manage it? Why cant we?

MarkAnthony

intheclouds wrote: »

I think I probably do need more. I have a lot of "stuff".

I disagree on your last point. There is an economy of scale in building tall buildings so large apartments need not be 750k+. Other countries seem to manage it? Why cant we?

There are economies of scale to standard apartment buildings. People here seem to think that a New York style Skyline would do something to solve our current issues. I'm not a civil engineer so I'll defer to one, but given the costs of putting in very large buildings I can't imagine it would.

MarkAnthony

I was going to use Beetham Tower as an example of OMG look how expensive but to be fair €2200 per month does get you a 2 bed corner apartment. Link Doesn't seem an over big apartment though.

intheclouds

MarkAnthony wrote: »

There are economies of scale to standard apartment buildings. People here seem to think that a New York style Skyline would do something to solve our current issues. I'm not a civil engineer so I'll defer to one, but given the costs of putting in very large buildings I can't imagine it would.

Well it would immediately allow people to live in the city and cut out loads of the traffic and public transport congestion we currently suffer.

Perhaps it would also improve the look of certain areas of the city which are old and run down and could do with some developing.

Im not really too pushed what the skyline looks like although I have to say that I have admired plenty of city skylines in my travels so perhaps it is worth considering.

The biggest plus imo would be the eradication of this constant pushing of the suburbs out and out and out with no infrastructure in place, no character, just miles and miles of anonymous housing estates, with no access to proper public transport, shops, pubs, restaurants etc.....

MarkAnthony

I'm not sure it would help with congestion to be frank, quite the oppisite I would imagine but that can be argued from both sides.

Personally I think we'd be much better off making sure land was properly developed in the City and it's surrounds, and that investment went into dealing with the social problems in the rougher areas of Dublin City. My wife and I are a couple of relatively limited means, c. €70-80K a year between us, pretty average IMO. We've been able to afford living 20 minutes by DART from the City, I don't think it's beyond the means of most to do the same.

I'm not sure I agree with this sprawl argument. London has loads of tall buildings and loads of sprawl. TBH I think the sprawl comes first then the high rises becuase they're needed. Frankly moving some of Dublin's innercity population around might not be a bad idea. Getting back to the sprawl though, Blanch is my idea of hell but it has decent public transport. Sword is relatively well linked. I'm struggling to think of somewhere that's really a pain in the rear other than the boom moves to mental places like Wexford. Meath and Kildare, meh, you'll always have people living in commuter towns.

Anyway it's been an interesting back and forth, I actually don't think we completely disagree, I think we certainly have the same ideal in mind, better living and more options. I actually don't disagree that one or two well done High rises might not be a bad idea. Anyone whough who thinks we're going to solve the current squeeze by just building up though is, in my opinion, just not thinking it through - I'm not suggesting that's you.

MarkAnthony

OSI wrote: »

This is very far from the truth. Trying to find adequate office space in Dublin is a massive issue at the moment.

Adequate being the opperative word. There's plenty of actual space.

We're in a six story, realtively new build and as I say the issue is we can't draw anymore power. You need to solve those sort of issues before you start building up.

FalconGirl

MarkAnthony wrote: »

There's absolutely no need for them for a start. Moving on from that there's not the infrastructure to support them. Let's stick 1000 apartments in D1 and watch the already gridlocked Quays get even worse. Thirdly it's almost impossible to get any sun in Dublin as it is let alone in there were a load of 'Skyscrapers' thrown up.

Dublin is very small city with just over 500K people in the actual city, why is there a need for tall buildings?

No logic in this post. There's every need for them. If there were high rise buildings then less people would be forced into their cars in order to commute out of the city just to find somewhere affordable.

NiallBoo

MarkAnthony wrote: »

We're in a six story, realtively new build and as I say the issue is we can't draw anymore power. You need to solve those sort of issues before you start building up.

you can see that the problem there is too much demand for current infrastructure but not enough to justify the upgrade? Committing to higher density helps greatly in solving this kind of problem.

MarkAnthony

FalconGirl wrote: »

No logic in this post. There's every need for them. If there were high rise buildings then less people would be forced into their cars in order to commute out of the city just to find somewhere affordable.

See below. Although I reject the premis that there isn't affordable accomadation in Dublin. I did a thread a few months back about how a couple on minimum wage could service a mortgage in Balbriggan. An average couple can afford a 3/4 bed semi in D5; 20 minutes out of the centre.

The issue is actually affordable single person accomadation, that isn't solved by anything put forward in this thread.

NiallBoo wrote: »

you can see that the problem there is too much demand for current infrastructure but not enough to justify the upgrade? Committing to higher density helps greatly in solving this kind of problem.

Upgrading the infastructure would render any potential saving moot. Also building costs sky rocket (no pun intended) once you start adding floors. You're talking about massively increasing the electricity supply, telecoms, and sewers, something that would take years and create huge disruption. To cope with the transit demands, think spokes on a wheel at the moment, you'd have to invest in a proper metro system. Of course we'll eventually need this anyway, but it will happen gradually - trying to put even one or two 40+ story buildings in Dublin would create massive local issues.

NiallBoo

Infrastructure upgrades need to happen anyway and still wouldn't be cancelled out, especially when you take into account other life benefits.

You're also overstating the added added construction costs -especially when land costs are such a big factor.

An added benefit is that it would help reduce the unsustainable growth of house prices across the whole city and surrounding areas.

You really seem to think that developing infrastructure is a bad thing and ignore all of the city-living benefits that go along with it.

MarkAnthony

NiallBoo wrote: »

Infrastructure upgrades need to happen anyway and still wouldn't be cancelled out, especially when you take into account other life benefits.

You're also overstating the added added construction costs -especially when land costs are such a big factor.

An added benefit is that it would help reduce the unsustainable growth of house prices across the whole city and surrounding areas.

You really seem to think that developing infrastructure is a bad thing and ignore all of the city-living benefits that go along with it.

I lived in the inner city all through my twenties and loved it. When I hit my thirties I wanted something different as do many people. Developing infastructure is a great thing, unless you need to get down Dawson street anytime in the last 18 months. I don;t know why you think I think it's a bad thing, its brilliant but isn't going to happen over night.

You're vastly underestimating the engineering issues of 9 stories vs 40.

House prices in Dublin are not overpriced generally. In some areas they are, building loads of apartments will do absolutely nothing to change that, generally people want to live in houses. That's not going to change in the short-medium term.

maninasia

The engineering issues? Building medium to high rise apartment blocks isn't difficult in reality, it's bog standard around most urban areas worldwide! I know for a fact profit margins can be very juicy in such buildings, stands to reason as you get more accommodation for given plot of land and the materials can be purchased in bulk.

newacc2015

MarkAnthony wrote: »

See below. Although I reject the premis that there isn't affordable accomadation in Dublin. I did a thread a few months back about how a couple on minimum wage could service a mortgage in Balbriggan. An average couple can afford a 3/4 bed semi in D5; 20 minutes out of the centre.

The issue is actually affordable single person accomadation, that isn't solved by anything put forward in this thread.



Upgrading the infastructure would render any potential saving moot. Also building costs sky rocket (no pun intended) once you start adding floors. You're talking about massively increasing the electricity supply, telecoms, and sewers, something that would take years and create huge disruption. To cope with the transit demands, think spokes on a wheel at the moment, you'd have to invest in a proper metro system. Of course we'll eventually need this anyway, but it will happen gradually - trying to put even one or two 40+ story buildings in Dublin would create massive local issues.

So in a generation when have moved Dublin another 5/10 km into the suburbs. I imagine the house prices in Balbriggin will be unaffordable again. How you address that?

That might be an issue if power for Dublin City wasnt generated right in the city at Bullwall. Likewise the sewage might be a problem,if wasnt treated right beside the power station. This is even a smaller issue since most of the free land in Dublin City is and currently has nothing on it. Happens to be right beside the sewage plant and power station. There will be minimal disruption and it will be cheap to put these services in. Do you know what isnt cheap? Having to build Luas lines out into the middle of nowhere, as housing is being built there instead of the city.

The wheel works when a city is like a wheel. But Dublin is shaped like a semi-circle. The Irish sea stops the city spreading east.

What local issues will high rises create? You dont seem to realise that NYC has gone from having 4 storey buildings/ warehouses to 40/70 storey buildings in places like Willamsburg with minimal issues. It can be done.

What has created massive issues is building swords, Balbriggan, Lush etc. They have completely destroyed the inner suburbs. Drumcondra is a glorified passageway to the city. Most residents in Drumcondra dont own a car, as they are so close to the city. Most residents in a high rise would not own a car either.

Victor

MarkAnthony wrote: »

*Tall building aren't the solution to that either, it's building houses people want to live in affordably.

We need accommodation, not necessarily houses. Not everyone needs, wants or has the skills or finances to maintain a house.

the_syco wrote: »

So instead of 30 shoeboxes squashed into 3 floors, they are built up, so that the 30 apartments are built over 15 floors. This way the apartments are built so that families can live in them, and not just couple who have a child in the storage room.

Having two apartments per floor means a huge amount of your footprint is given over to lifts, stairs and lobbies. I take it that at 15 storeys, you would like there to be a second lift, in case the first broken down and a second stairs in case the first is compromised by fire. Having two 15-storey lifts is a huge financial and maintenance burden for 30 apartments.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Dublin has enough office space to facilitate the business that is here, or that wants to be here.

The office vacancy level is about 3%. Given that you want to do a major refurbishment every 15-30 years, that leaves not a lot of space between old tenant moving out and new tenant moving in. It leaves no room for expansion.

Clive

newacc2015 wrote: »

Most residents in Drumcondra dont own a car, as they are so close to the city. Most residents in a high rise would not own a car either.

I can't agree with this. Whilst I'm in favour of high rise if practical, the height of an apartment block won't change the prevailing culture.

To use your example, most people in Drumcondra do own a car, often two or three per house. Look at any road in Drumcondra in the evening, and by and large every parking space is full.

Existing apartment blocks in the city centre (in my experience) also have full car parks. While I'm sure there is a drop in car ownership and use for residents of the city centre, high rise won't make Dublin into New York.

Even with high rise, the city would still be congested as government doesn't want to grasp that nettle.

Victor

Clive wrote: »

I can't agree with this. Whilst I'm in favour of high rise if practical, the height of an apartment block won't change the prevailing culture.

It can. Restrict parking spaces and you restrict car ownership and usage.

To use your example, most people in Drumcondra do own a car, often two or three per house. Look at any road in Drumcondra in the evening, and by and large every parking space is full.

I think it will depend on the part of Drumcondra. Where do they store the cars with streets like these?

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3615529,-6.2551696,3a,75y,110.71h,85.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRzAh8C0cL84FxF97USpiOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DRzAh8C0cL84FxF97USpiOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D20.019085%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3639679,-6.2602729,3a,75y,29.47h,83.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slYAGv_hrTDwqMRbv74RbXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3660715,-6.2584635,3a,75y,112.56h,85.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBeyHcni4jIemDj9Ccf_guw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DBeyHcni4jIemDj9Ccf_guw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D303.89709%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.368483,-6.2563873,3a,75y,218.24h,87.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sv5qveeNX3CMuCQoJ72ygkA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dv5qveeNX3CMuCQoJ72ygkA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D326.60229%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

Existing apartment blocks in the city centre (in my experience) also have full car parks.

Many of them only have 0.5 parking spaces per apartment.

While I'm sure there is a drop in car ownership and use for residents of the city centre, high rise won't make Dublin into New York.

Only about 20% of people living in D1, D2, D7, D8 drive to work.

newacc2015

Clive wrote: »

I can't agree with this. Whilst I'm in favour of high rise if practical, the height of an apartment block won't change the prevailing culture.

To use your example, most people in Drumcondra do own a car, often two or three per house. Look at any road in Drumcondra in the evening, and by and large every parking space is full.

Existing apartment blocks in the city centre (in my experience) also have full car parks. While I'm sure there is a drop in car ownership and use for residents of the city centre, high rise won't make Dublin into New York.

Even with high rise, the city would still be congested as government doesn't want to grasp that nettle.

Do you regularly drive in Dublin City? Is it quicker to walk than drive in most of the city from pretty 8am to 8pm. You have also ignored that 20% of non-nationals make up the cities population and I imagine a majority of them dont own a car. It is too expensive to own a car if you live/work in the city. Car ownership is falling rapidly for under 30s. I know more people under 30 without a licence than with a licence in Dublin.

Apartment car parks are full of people letting their spaces to offices. I know landlords who have dozens apartments with car spaces in the city and not one of them lets it to their tenant. No tenant is going to spend €80-100 per month for the use of a car space when they work/live in the city. There are hundreds of apartment blocks in the city with no car spaces and none of the residents care. If you provide car spaces with apartments, people will use them. The same way when a public sector worker is given a free car space in the middle of D2, they drive to work instead of taking the bus. Yet Trinity provides practically no spaces to students or workers. Guess what, students and workers still get to Trinity on public transport each morning

Facilitating car ownership with more car spaces in the city and banning high rise in the city, which makes people commute only makes the problem worse. Allowing people to live in high rises in Dublin 1/2 wont deal with existing congestion, but it wont worsen it in the long run.

The car culture wouldnt exist if you could live/work in the city. Ask any residents of the IFSC would they spend €4k a year for the luxury of driving for 30 mins to work instead of walking 10 mins.

Idbatterim

What could have been...

in terms of that pd plan, I wouldnt be surprised if a long way down the road, that comes to fruition. a huge amount of sites around the docklands which werent developed because of the crash, work is either currently in progress or will be shortly. When all of these low hanging fruit sites go and if we become uncompetitive again and it is already starting. It may simply force the issue...

Builders wont start building again until it makes sense. Who can blame them! I read a good article in the independent the other day, a developer put down a good few figures and building a house is a good bit cheaper than an apartment. So its not surprising to see quite a lot of houses being built, but little in the way of apartments...

I live with 2 other professionals. Who in their late twenties early thirties wants to share anymore. Give me a nice if even compact place in the city centre, even better if "high rise" with views... Who in gods name wants to be sharing at this age?! But short of paying E1300 min for a 1 bed on your own in any decent area of dublin. They way I see it, they need family friendly apartments, but also give professionals the option to get out of family homes and into their own place...

The car culture wouldnt exist if you could live/work in the city. Ask any residents of the IFSC would they spend €4k a year for the luxury of driving for 30 mins to work instead of walking 10 mins.

exactly if you look at the IFSC and take a 1km radius, look at all the companies that are there and even all the new buildings being built, that will house tens of thousands of workers. How many of them would way prefer to have their own space within walking distance of work and the "city centre"? walking being the key word here given the joke that is the transport "system"...

defrule

Apartments can be really good, I was in a mall in Hong Kong a few months ago and I discovered right on top of it was an apartment complex and I found the website for it.

http://www.pacificplaceapartments.com.hk/en/hong-kong-apartment.shtml#

I've live in these rather than a house any day.

pwurple

jayjay2010 wrote: »

I've always been amazed at the lack of tall buildings in Ireland.

I think they help to shape a city's skyline and give them some focal point.

And a few tall residential buildings would mean great views of the city/mountains!

I can't wait for Ireland to get its first skyscraper. I don't count the Elysian in Cork as one....

The elysian in cork may not be a skyscraper at only 17 stories above ground level but it is a good example of a well designed residential inner city complex fit for long term living. Built at the wrong time to get the appreciation it deserves imho.

Mixed units of apartments and bigger living spaces over both two and three floors. High ceilings, good internal layout. Residential parking, over two floors of basement. Storage units available in basements. Inner 1 acre of gardens hidden within the block which include thundering waterfalls to drown out city noises.

More elysian style buildings would be most welcome to me.