Minister Noonan talks about building heights in Dublin

CatInABox

Minister Noonan has stated that Dublin needs high rise buildings. Hopefully the people in charge of these things will start paying attention to this issue, as it's a major contributor to the urban sprawl that's currently blighting Dublin and the surrounding counties.

They're predicting an extra million people living in Dublin city by 2040, personally I think it'll hit that sooner. Even so, an extra million people by 2040 will cause the current infrastructure in Dublin to collapse completely. The M50 is near useless at times already, and without significant investment in public transport, people better get used to working from a car park.

The Independent has more here.

murphaph

"another 5 or 6 storeys" how dreadfully unambitious we are.

fionnsci

In fairness, the situation would be enormously different if every 5/6 storey appartment development, of which there are dreadfully too many, was 10/12 storeys.

Sam Russell

Could any currently constructed building be increased in height by a worthwhile amount?

hi5

We have street like this less than a mile from O' Connell Street with one/two bed single story cottages.
Even though they are someones pride and joy and may even have some historical and architectural merit, but they have surely served there time in the centre of a capital city.
https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3559393,-6.2426013,3a,75y,58.85h,84.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1segIzby0vxWPByYjC8XrDeQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

cgcsb

What's annoying is the terraced houses with front and back gardens built on Dorset St, Pearse St, Cathal Brugha St etc. as late as the 1990s, a time when people were already forced to drive from Kildare. The 4 storey limit needs to end.

murphaph

fionnsci wrote: »

In fairness, the situation would be enormously different if every 5/6 storey appartment development, of which there are dreadfully too many, was 10/12 storeys.

Of course you're right but still. The Docklands should be designated a la defense type area at least.

Victor

Sam Russell wrote: »

Could any currently constructed building be increased in height by a worthwhile amount?

Generally, no. Buildings tend to be designed for their expected use, adjusted for a safety factor to cover eccentric loading, construction loads, etc.

However, when buildings are established and/or repurposed (change mill to apartments or offices), then there may be scope to add 1-2 storeys.

But, no, you can't add 6 storeys to a modern apartment block.

Peregrine

Sam Russell wrote: »

Could any currently constructed building be increased in height by a worthwhile amount?

Not really. Maybe a storey or two onto some buildings but nothing significant.

Sam Russell

Victor wrote: »

Generally, no. Buildings tend to be designed for their expected use, adjusted for a safety factor to cover eccentric loading, construction loads, etc.

However, when buildings are established and/or repurposed (change mill to apartments or offices), then there may be scope to add 1-2 storeys.

But, no, you can't add 6 storeys to a modern apartment block.

Peregrine wrote: »

Not really. Maybe a storey or two onto some buildings but nothing significant.

I've noticed a few old apartment buildings have had an extra floor added. There is one on the Merrion Road near the Merrion Gates, backing onto Caritas. There is another on Appian Way, and another in Newgrove Ave Sandymount.

Only one extra floor though.

Peregrine

Sam Russell wrote: »

I've noticed a few old apartment buildings have had an extra floor added. There is one on the Merrion Road near the Merrion Gates, backing onto Caritas. There is another on Appian Way, and another in Newgrove Ave Sandymount.

Only one extra floor though.

I think The Marker Hotel is adding an extra floor too.

Avada

Peregrine wrote: »

I think The Marker Hotel is adding an extra floor too.

2 stories as far as I know. Aren't they adding extra height to the Hilton on the quays?

Victor

Oh, some buildings will have been designed for the possibility of upward extension, although it would be rare.

In the case of the hotels, it would mean shutting down the whole hotel and likely doubling up on some foundations and columns.

Also greater possibilities with a good-quality, mature building, than with a still settling-in newer building. A few factors - concrete gets stronger as it gets older, any settlement issues with the foundations and quality control issues with the rest of the structure will have become obvious (or not).

markpb

The Beacon Renal building in Sandyford is going from one floor to eight floors. I'm fairly sure that was planned before initial construction, I'd be surprised if a single floor building could normally be extended like that.

myshirt

Baldy would be better to speak about the M20 Cork to Limerick and investment in the Midwest region to act as a counterbalance to Dublin. Dublin is a beautiful city, perhaps 30M high should be the cap possibly, but I would rather see this urban sprawl push our hand on facing up to the need for balanced regional development.

Maybe Dublin could stop stealing Limerick's water then aswell.

Sam Russell

myshirt wrote: »

Maybe Dublin could stop stealing Limerick's water then aswell.

I know it rains a lot in Limerick, but if water is taken from the Shannon in Limerick and moved to Dublin, most of it will have fallen as rain further north. It rains a lot in the West as well.

Yourself isit

myshirt wrote: »

Baldy would be better to speak about the M20 Cork to Limerick and investment in the Midwest region to act as a counterbalance to Dublin. Dublin is a beautiful city, perhaps 30M high should be the cap possibly, but I would rather see this urban sprawl push our hand on facing up to the need for balanced regional development.

Maybe Dublin could stop stealing Limerick's water then aswell.

What we're you going to do with the shannon water since you already have a surplus?

myshirt

Yourself isit wrote: »

What we're you going to do with the shannon water since you already have a surplus?

Let's not divert the thread, it was only a passing comment, but you don't have to be a genius to see something unsettling in the earmarking of €1BN for piping Limerick water to Dublin by 2024, and only a single €1M to get the M20 project going.

The correct response to this urban sprawl is not higher and higher buildings, it is balanced regional development. Get the M20 built and start feeding a pipeline of workers and consumers into Cork, Galway and Limerick.

MJohnston

Advocating moving things to Cork or Limerick belies a misunderstanding of why the companies locating themselves in Dublin do so.

Dublin has a significant housing shortage even without additional commercial expansion in the city, so significant amounts of new units of housing are required *now*. There's no way to relocate that problem elsewhere, we have to build more in Dublin, and it needs to be higher density to reduce sprawl.

fionnsci

myshirt wrote: »

The correct response to this urban sprawl is not higher and higher buildings, it is balanced regional development. Get the M20 built and start feeding a pipeline of workers and consumers into Cork, Galway and Limerick.

It's both, actually.

Geuze

Every 1 and 2 storey house inside the canals should be knocked.

Replace with 5-8 storey blocks.

This will require a lot of imagination, legally, financially, and politically.

Victor

Geuze wrote: »

Every 1 and 2 storey house inside the canals should be knocked.

This isn't necessary when there are large amounts of vacant land available.

Additionally, much of that 1 and 2 storey housing is actually quite dense, especially older properties, as they don't have large gardens. Compare the different property types here: https://binged.it/2onPEdE - and the vacant land.

Bray Head

Victor wrote: »

Geuze wrote: »

Every 1 and 2 storey house inside the canals should be knocked.

This isn't necessary when there are large amounts of vacant land available.

Additionally, much of that 1 and 2 storey housing is actually quite dense, especially older properties, as they don't have large gardens. Compare the different property types here: https://binged.it/2onPEdE - and the vacant land.

Exactly. A lot of property inside the canals dates from before the era of mass car ownership.

They were built for people to walked or cycled to work and amenities.

The footprint is much more efficient than say a 1950s suburb like Clontarf or Mount Merrion.

People who think of large-scale CPO-ing of individually owned residences for demolition can stop dreaming.

man98

Buildings don't necessarily need to be big, but that's not to say that they can't be made more efficient in their use of space. Definitely agree with the minister on this matter as it's doing untold damage along the commuter belt. Plenty of brown field sites in Dublin city centre which are ideal for a considerably taller building.

Idbatterim

The glass bottle site has buildings of four floors proposed! The councillors are the problem. They won't do anything about the issue. National government needs to sort this issue...

MayoSalmon

Just back from Chicago...Dublin City counselors should all be ashamed of themselves

cgcsb

Proposals for 4 storeys at the proposed glass bottle site should result in firings. We can't waste anymore central land. Also more SDZs, the abandoned industrial area north of broom bride station is screaming for an sdz

Geuze

Victor wrote: »

This isn't necessary when there are large amounts of vacant land available.

Additionally, much of that 1 and 2 storey housing is actually quite dense, especially older properties, as they don't have large gardens. Compare the different property types here: https://binged.it/2onPEdE - and the vacant land.

Okay, I'm open to be convinced.

But 1-storey housing off Dorset, surely it should be knocked?

Geuze

Victor wrote: »

This isn't necessary when there are large amounts of vacant land available.

Is there?

Where, exactly?

murphaph

Geuze wrote: »

Okay, I'm open to be convinced.

But 1-storey housing off Dorset, surely it should be knocked?

With proper planning control (ie prevention of sprawl) the market value of the land would see to it that it would be knocked but not compulsorily.

At the moment however there is still plenty of brown field land in the city and this should see significantly higher building than at present.

Victor

Geuze wrote: »

Is there?

Where, exactly?

South and North Docklands, Connoly, Summerhill, Grangeorman, Broadstone, O'Devaney Gardens, Cabra, Heuston, Newmarket, Charlemont Street and a bunch of other sites.

Idbatterim

cgcsb wrote: »

Proposals for 4 storeys at the proposed glass bottle site should result in firings. We can't waste anymore central land. Also more SDZs, the abandoned industrial area north of broom bride station is screaming for an sdz

The sdz are a farce though. Look at what they are getting built. Even worse, abp would likely allow taller than the bloody council!

Sam Russell

Idbatterim wrote: »

The sdz are a farce though. Look at what they are getting built. Even worse, abp would likely allow taller than the bloody council!

ABP always had higher standards the DCC.

Elemonator

myshirt wrote: »

Maybe Dublin could stop stealing Limerick's water then aswell.

Maybe Dublin should stop subsidising the rest of the country, including Limerick? Seeing as we're all digging up tired childish squabbles?

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Elemonator wrote: »

Maybe Dublin should stop subsidising the rest of the country, including Limerick? Seeing as we're all digging up tired childish squabbles?

And shoot anyone who applies for planning permission for a one-off house

Bastards.

BonnieSituation

Limerick's water is it?

Does the Shannon start at Parteen so?

---

Dublin needs to go high-rise in certain areas. But there is architectural merit to keep certain aspects of the city low-rise and as they are and gradually increase size over the coming decades.

The IFSC and Docklands N and S should have very little height restrictions.

namloc1980

Proposed 40 storey development in Cork.

cgcsb

namloc1980 wrote: »

Proposed 40 storey development in Cork.

Cool proposal. Unfortunately such a development wouldn't even have a hope of getting planning in Dublin, never mind Cork.

patrickbrophy18

For those of you who mightn't know or may have forgotten, there was a proposal put forward by the Progressive Democrats back in 2006 to transform the area around Dublin Port and Poolbeg into a Manhattan style mecca as per the artists impression below:



It's worth noting that the Progressive Democrats are now a discontinued political party. Still, the above picture shows what would be a more iconic version of Dublin with a more metropolitan appeal.

Throw in The Eastern Bypass and Dublin would look very like New York. I say that because the The Eastern Bypass would be to Dublin what the Manhattan Bridge is to New York:



Imagine skyscrapers in lieu of the cranes and warehouses.

patrickbrophy18

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Throw in The Eastern Bypass and Dublin would look very like New York. I say that because the The Eastern Bypass would be to Dublin what the Manhattan Bridge is to New York:

Now, given that this roadway crisscrosses the DART line and Rock Road QBC, it would only be fitting that it doubles as a rail and cycle route so that it benefits other uses besides the private car.

MJohnston

I've never been more glad of Irish infrastructure planning failures than with the loss of the Eastern bypass, personally.

zetalambda

cgcsb wrote: »

Cool proposal. Unfortunately such a development wouldn't even have a hope of getting planning in Dublin, never mind Cork.

A development like this would be more likely to get planning in Cork.

Peregrine

cgcsb wrote: »

Cool proposal. Unfortunately such a development wouldn't even have a hope of getting planning in Dublin, never mind Cork.

There's a much higher chance of that being built in Cork than Dublin. We're severely held back at every turn by DCC, An Taisce, ABP and residents. Cork, not so much.

Between Cork County Hall and The Elysian, Cork has actually been home to the tallest buildings in the Republic for the last 50 years.

zetalambda

Peregrine wrote: »

There's a much higher chance of that being built in Cork than Dublin. We're severely held back at every turn by DCC, An Taisce, ABP and residents. Cork, not so much.

Between Cork County Hall and The Elysian, Cork has actually been home to the tallest buildings in the Republic for the last 50 years.

Anything over 6 or 7 storeys in Dublin and you run into problems with this crowd above. Interestingly, The Elysian didn't receive a single objection when it was going through planning. This 40 storey tower will definately receive objections but worse case scenario, they'll knock 5 or 10 floors off.

yoke

I'm not sure building high rise buildings in Dublin City centre is as good an idea as it seems at first glance.

Lived in a city not that much bigger than Dublin for a short time in the USA, and a car journey that would take 5 minutes at 10pm would take 50 minutes at 5:30pm, every single weekday pretty much.

Looked to me like it had a negative effect on the city centre there, as no one went there to do anything if they could avoid it.

A better idea might be to just build bigger roads/car parks if required, and just try to incentivise businesses to change their working hours and/or allow working from home if possible (while continuing the urban sprawl I guess), content in the knowledge that even if the city's land requirement doubles, the radius of the city would only need to increase by a small amount to facilitate it

MJohnston

Building bigger roads is both a poor idea, and doesn't actually work. It's been shown that increasing traffic capacity doesn't reduce congestion because more people drive and fill the extra capacity. We need fewer drivers, more public transport users, pedestrians, and cyclists.

New Goat

zetalambda wrote: »

Anything over 6 or 7 storeys in Dublin and you run into problems with this crowd above. Interestingly, The Elysian didn't receive a single objection when it was going through planning. This 40 storey tower will definately receive objections but worse case scenario, they'll knock 5 or 10 floors off.

There were a few reasonable buildings given permission during the boom, like the 36 storey watchtower in the point village (construction actually started and the developer lost funding from the bank I think).

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/skyscrapers-scaling-new-heights-to-beat-council-cutoff-point-26421000.html

L1011

The sometimes open nightclub under the point square is in the basements of the Watchtower.

knipex

MJohnston wrote: »

Advocating moving things to Cork or Limerick belies a misunderstanding of why the companies locating themselves in Dublin do so.

Not so.

He was arguing for something to give companies a reason to look at the mid-west as an alternative.

If the M20 was completed you could travel Cork to Limerick as faster than you could drive the M50 at rush hour. Add the M18 to Galway and you link the 2nd 3rd and 4th cities into what could be a realistic economic and social entity to counterbalance the Dublin region.. It would benefit both areas, relieve pressure eon Dublin and open up real growth along a Cork, Limerick, Galway corridor.

astrofool

yoke wrote: »

I'm not sure building high rise buildings in Dublin City centre is as good an idea as it seems at first glance.

Lived in a city not that much bigger than Dublin for a short time in the USA, and a car journey that would take 5 minutes at 10pm would take 50 minutes at 5:30pm, every single weekday pretty much.

Looked to me like it had a negative effect on the city centre there, as no one went there to do anything if they could avoid it.

A better idea might be to just build bigger roads/car parks if required, and just try to incentivise businesses to change their working hours and/or allow working from home if possible (while continuing the urban sprawl I guess), content in the knowledge that even if the city's land requirement doubles, the radius of the city would only need to increase by a small amount to facilitate it

If people can already live in the city, less will have to drive there.

Peregrine

yoke wrote: »

I'm not sure building high rise buildings in Dublin City centre is as good an idea as it seems at first glance.

Lived in a city not that much bigger than Dublin for a short time in the USA, and a car journey that would take 5 minutes at 10pm would take 50 minutes at 5:30pm, every single weekday pretty much.

Looked to me like it had a negative effect on the city centre there, as no one went there to do anything if they could avoid it.

A better idea might be to just build bigger roads/car parks if required, and just try to incentivise businesses to change their working hours and/or allow working from home if possible (while continuing the urban sprawl I guess), content in the knowledge that even if the city's land requirement doubles, the radius of the city would only need to increase by a small amount to facilitate it

The traffic you saw wasn't caused people living in tall buildings driving to work 1km away. It was people in sprawling suburbs trying to get in and out of the city. It's the same problem we have in Dublin.

A good mix of high-density residential, commercial and retail in the city centre will reduce the number of people who has to commute. Supplement it with modern public transport ideas that involve more than just buses running on daysul driving up and down O'Connell Street and College Green.