Dublin - The Home Of Poor Design

imme · 05-10-2020 1:26pm #1

Why is it that design is of such poor quality in Dublin.

Two areas in particular stick out to me:

1) Apartment buildings.

A bit of faux brick face here, a bit of salmon paint finish there, a bit of timber that will or won't weather, a metal balcony that is guaranteed to discolour or need to be painted even though its not designed to be painted.

We'll throw in some cream paint finish there just to jumble it up a bit.

Then we will put in some unutilisable space, why not.

2) Public space.

New public spaces are nearly all uniformly bad, Grafton Street, Henry Street.

The price of works on both areas was unbelievable.

What are you left with, dark stone that chips.

The new squares that have been developed in recent years, Barnardo Square, next to City Hall; and Store Street, in front of Store Street Garda Station.

Both are cold, uncomfortable, not appealing to the eye, and sharp.

Thelonious Monk · 05-10-2020 2:20pm

Never mind endless drab semi D suburbs with no proper communal hubs or villages. The whole place is a bit of a mess.

Gaspode · 05-10-2020 2:44pm

And?

KevRossi · 05-10-2020 2:49pm

The apartments here are dire, there isn't one built in the last 20 years that I'd keep.

But when you have this model of drabness at the entrance to the port, it's obvious architecture has very little imagination here, or at least those with ideas are not allowed to express them. How much better would that look if they had a Hundertwasser building there.

But then again the planners said this piece of insignificant nonsense was good in front of Dublin Castle on a street with the potential of Dame St.

Strumms · 06-10-2020 2:21am

The local authorities who approve or not approve couldn’t give a rats ass. Probably take direction from the FG mob to go easy and facilitate ‘business’ ie. the builders and developers.

There is a monstrosity going up near my folks place to again facilitate students at the nearby college no doubt. A towering four bedroom structure no way in keeping with the houses surrounding it, either size or design, already blocking the evening light. There were four objections that I know of, none of which were upheld..

donvito99 · 06-10-2020 11:04am

Strumms wrote: »

The local authorities who approve or not approve couldn’t give a rats ass. Probably take direction from the FG mob to go easy and facilitate ‘business’ ie. the builders and developers.

There is a monstrosity going up near my folks place to again facilitate students at the nearby college no doubt. A towering four bedroom structure no way in keeping with the houses surrounding it, either size or design, already blocking the evening light. There were four objections that I know of, none of which were upheld..

wut

Also the 'FG mob' as you put it are quite prepared to kowtow to you, your parents and other NIMBYs, strangle development and drive up the costs of same. This has forced the city to sprawl and is likely one of the reasons why the public realm and the quality of certain accommodation in the city centre is so poor.

Strumms · 06-10-2020 3:00pm

donvito99 wrote: »

wut

Also the 'FG mob' as you put it are quite prepared to kowtow to you, your parents and other NIMBYs, strangle development and drive up the costs of same. This has forced the city to sprawl and is likely one of the reasons why the public realm and the quality of certain accommodation in the city centre is so poor.

Nobody is trying to strangle developers or development here. They are simply availing of their legal right to appeal planning for a development that there are several issues with. Their neighbors agree.

The ‘quality’ is so poor because developers and builders want maximum return for poor design and cheap build quality. No other reason... $£$£

My parents certainly wouldn’t be of a NIMBY attitude, the opposite in fact. It’s disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise on the basis of being told that they and others appealed a planning application but sure you know that.

06-10-2020 5:51pm

I was just talking to a friend about this last night. My apartment while relatively new really isn't fit for purpose.

Who ever designed it had never lived in an apartment before. A few annoyances:

- The bathroom is much bigger than the kitchen. I spend much longer daily in the kitchen.
- The kitchen has no door to it, so I can't run the washing machine during the day if working from home due to the noise, or in the evening as I then can't hear the TV.
- Storage is sparse.
- Severe lack of plug sockets.
- Its a two bed apartment but really, its a 1.5 bed apartment as the box room can just fit a single bed.
- The balcony is unusable 6+ months of the year. If instead of a balcony, it was somewhat enclosed you could use it as a sunroom/outside storage in winter.
- Also, the management company send letters regularly reminding us we are not to dry clothes on the balcony so again I have to ask, whats the point of it?
- considering space is so limited and the fact I very rarely take a bath, a walk in shower would save so much space.
- Finally, noise insulation is appalling. I can hear the mobile phone vibrations of my neighbour one floor above me.

Edit: Oh yeah no room for a dining table. Not even a two person one.

Strumms · 06-10-2020 8:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I was just talking to a friend about this last night. My apartment while relatively new really isn't fit for purpose.

Who ever designed it had never lived in an apartment before. A few annoyances:

- The bathroom is much bigger than the kitchen. I spend much longer daily in the kitchen.
- The kitchen has no door to it, so I can't run the washing machine during the day if working from home due to the noise, or in the evening as I then can't hear the TV.
- Storage is sparse.
- Severe lack of plug sockets.
- Its a two bed apartment but really, its a 1.5 bed apartment as the box room can just fit a single bed.
- The balcony is unusable 6+ months of the year. If instead of a balcony, it was somewhat enclosed you could use it as a sunroom/outside storage in winter.
- Also, the management company send letters regularly reminding us we are not to dry clothes on the balcony so again I have to ask, whats the point of it?
- considering space is so limited and the fact I very rarely take a bath, a walk in shower would save so much space.
- Finally, noise insulation is appalling. I can hear the mobile phone vibrations of my neighbour one floor above me.

Edit: Oh yeah no room for a dining table. Not even a two person one.

Simply built with the wellbeing, comforts and quality of the developers bank account in mind. Not you who ended up living there. There just doesn’t seem to be any effective cover or standards for the property purchaser.

Be nice and proper if after 3 months or whatever of living there and the problems were manifesting themselves you could go to a government agency and say “look, can you have a look at this build and issue A, B and C”... I presume planning department have no interest post build ? But if somebody ie. Government agency had, and they in turn could remove say the ability to build of a developer / builder for two years... that’s a pretty sizable deterrent for any and all cowboys. Just any planning they are attached to directly or otherwise, refused without consideration.

Chinasea · 09-10-2020 8:32am

Add to all this, no greenery and no both public and private tree planting. Filthy gray paths and public bins crying out for some regular power hosing.

AngryLips · 09-10-2020 9:15am

Deleted User wrote: »

- Storage is sparse.

It's either not that new or the storage isn't that sparse, because new apartments are required to maintain a ratio of storage space to living space.

09-10-2020 8:54pm

AngryLips wrote: »

It's either not that new or the storage isn't that sparse, because new apartments are required to maintain a ratio of storage space to living space.

It's relatively new compared to some of the Georgian era townhouses converted into apartments(read flats) some of my friends live in.

When did that legislation come in?

Muahahaha · 10-10-2020 8:06pm

imme wrote: »

Why is it that design is of such poor quality in Dublin.

Two areas in particular stick out to me:

1) Apartment buildings.

A bit of faux brick face here, a bit of salmon paint finish there, a bit of timber that will or won't weather, a metal balcony that is guaranteed to discolour or need to be painted even though its not designed to be painted.

Yeah would agree the standard of apartments is dire and its getting worse. To illustrate this take a look at Clancy Quay in Islandbridge. Back in 2010 it was bought by the American fund Kennedy Wilson and they began phase 1 by the river. Those first five or six blocks weren't great but they weren't bad either. Now roll on 10 years and the other phases and it is obvious that Kennedy Wilson have sussed out how to build cheap crap and maximise their returns. The apartment blocks in the latest phase next to the N4/Kilmainham junction are terrible, especially the balconies- they have cheaped out by installing this giant metal structure for all the balconies and then attaching it to the building. It looks totally out of place now when brand new and give it a few years and it will be dreadful.

KevRossi wrote: »

The apartments here are dire, there isn't one built in the last 20 years that I'd keep.

But when you have this model of drabness at the entrance to the port, it's obvious architecture has very little imagination here, or at least those with ideas are not allowed to express them. How much better would that look if they had a Hundertwasser building there.

I pass that building at the entrance to the port every couple of weeks and each and every time I do I shake my head on what was a massive missed opportunity to put a landmark building of architectural merit on that prime location. Instead what we are left with for the next 100 years is a completely featureless and non-descript building that serves only as a symbol of Dublins blandness. I dont know who the developer there was but they didnt care about leaving a legacy, it was all about getting a tall building for the cheapest cost possible. Its criminal that the planners let them away with it.

Its funny I was over in London in the summer and down on Lime Street to take a look at the Lloyds building. Its a superb piece of architecture and even though everything around it is now dwarfing it in height it still stands out as a great piece of work. And then you learn that it was constructed in 1978, 42 years ago. It really has stood the test of time and in another 50 years time it will still look great. All the tall builings in that part of London have architectural merit to them which doesnt happen by accident, it happens by design with the planners telling developers that if they want to build a skyscraper they better spend a few quid show some innovation and good design. Whereas here in Dublin the planners just let developers get away with building any old cheap sh1te, just chuck it up, be grand. There is no foresight whatsoever that these crap buildings are now with us for lifetimes ahead.

IngazZagni · 10-10-2020 8:36pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Yeah would agree the standard of apartments is dire and its getting worse. To illustrate this take a look at Clancy Quay in Islandbridge. Back in 2010 it was bought by the American fund Kennedy Wilson and they began phase 1 by the river. Those first five or six blocks weren't great but they weren't bad either. Now roll on 10 years and the other phases and it is obvious that Kennedy Wilson have sussed out how to build cheap crap and maximise their returns. The apartment blocks in the latest phase next to the N4/Kilmainham junction are terrible, especially the balconies- they have cheaped out by installing this giant metal structure for all the balconies and then attaching it to the building. It looks totally out of place now when brand new and give it a few years and it will be dreadful.

I agree with the apartment blocks facing the N4. They are a poor design and in particular the balconies make them look hideous. However you should really take a look around the rest of that development. It is superb. Such excellent design and quirky little features. It isn't a thoroughfare though and will not be seen by most. Perhaps a case of dont judge a book by its cover.

tampopo · 11-10-2020 12:16am

IngazZagni wrote: »

I agree with the apartment blocks facing the N4. They are a poor design and in particular the balconies make them look hideous. However you should really take a look around the rest of that development. It is superb. Such excellent design and quirky little features. It isn't a thoroughfare though and will not be seen by most. Perhaps a case of dont judge a book by its cover.

Looks like a prison, tbh

beauf · 11-10-2020 1:09am

imme wrote: »

Why is it that design is of such poor quality in Dublin.

...

Not just Dublin. Ireland.

I wonder is it because good design is expensive. Pretty much everything in Ireland is overpriced. So there isn't the budget for design.

I think as a society we've driven out any appreciation of design except in niche areas. Maybe that's also happened in architecture schools.

Muahahaha · 11-10-2020 1:46pm

IngazZagni wrote: »

I agree with the apartment blocks facing the N4. They are a poor design and in particular the balconies make them look hideous. However you should really take a look around the rest of that development. It is superb. Such excellent design and quirky little features. It isn't a thoroughfare though and will not be seen by most. Perhaps a case of dont judge a book by its cover.

Fair enough, I havent been inside the development itself. But I was making the point that the apartments built in phase 1 down by the river back in 2010-ish look decent enough whereas the ones built facing the N4 in the latest phase look hideous. My theory is Kennedy Wilson were putting a bit of effort in back in 2010 but now in 2020 they have figured out they can get away with any old sh1te from the planners. Those metal balconies on the ones facing the N4 look awful, as someone said it looks like a prison. I must take a walk in sometime though to see what the whole place looks like.

Either way I think the overall point of the OP is correct, in terms of apartment building there is loads of crap being thrown up everywhere. Many of them look dreadful when new so in 10 or 15 years time they're going to be eyesores.

11-10-2020 2:43pm

I live in an apartment in an award-winning mixed leafy estate of housing/apartment blocks, on a former religious order site. The architects office is on the estate so they have to look at their work every day, which helped with the design. Pet ownership is an accepted part of living in the apartments, with dog waste disposal unit in the parkland. The kitchen was open plan and useless before I got it walked off and fitted with useful shelving. Both bedrooms are ample and I have a decent sized living room where my large dining table fits in nicely. There is a small storage room within the apartment, but the underground car park was not well designed, and for family/active living storage units ought to have been provided at the outset for sports items, outdoorsy stuff etc. They are trying to figure out a way retrospectively provide locker units now. They did get a lot right in my estate and I'm very lucky to be living here, but way more such living spaces are needed in Dublin and with more forethought for all the practical needs of folk living in them. They need to be places you can call home, not just lodge in for a few years. Goodness knows these times we are getting to know our dwelling environment all too well.

11-10-2020 2:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I live in an apartment in an award-winning mixed leafy estate of housing/apartment blocks, on a former religious order site. The architects office is on the estate so they have to look at their work every day, which helped with the design. Pet ownership is an accepted part of living in the apartments, with dog waste disposal unit in the parkland. The kitchen was open plan and useless before I got it walked off and fitted with useful shelving. Both bedrooms are ample and I have a decent sized living room where my large dining table fits in nicely. There is a small storage room within the apartment, but the underground car park was not well designed, and for family/active living storage units ought to have been provided at the outset for sports items, outdoorsy stuff etc. They are trying to figure out a way retrospectively provide locker units now. They did get a lot right in my estate and I'm very lucky to be living here, but way more such living spaces are needed in Dublin and with more forethought for all the practical needs of folk living in them. They need to be places you can call home, not just lodge in for a few years. Goodness knows these times we are getting to know our dwelling environment all too well.

Where is this Shangri La?

Andrewf20 · 11-10-2020 3:07pm

I think the quays in dublin generally look pretty class. Lots of interesting architecture as a whole.

Appartments a pain all right. No kitchen door a pain. A bath is not space efficient but easier if you have kids I find.

11-10-2020 3:21pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Where is this Shangri La?

Google OMP who have their HQ on the estate

imme · 11-10-2020 5:05pm

beauf wrote: »

Not just Dublin. Ireland.

I wonder is it because good design is expensive. Pretty much everything in Ireland is overpriced. So there isn't the budget for design.

I think as a society we've driven out any appreciation of design except in niche areas. Maybe that's also happened in architecture schools.

Everything has to be designed.

Even badly designed buildings have to be designed.

Architecture is a computer program these days. That is also part of the problem.

I think people, where ever they live want and need good design.

imme · 11-10-2020 5:09pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Google OMP who have their HQ on the estate

I think this development is an exception because of the location, cost of the development, reputation of the architects.

11-10-2020 5:13pm

This is my estate, with its nice parkland design. Doggy waste bin visible. My window overlooks a pond with fountains. When I arrived towards the end of the Celtic Tiger there were 5 fountains, but since the recession that was cut-back to 3. The ducks have long since abandoned the pond too, but the huge prevalence of foxes on the estate may account for that.

11-10-2020 5:48pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is my estate, with its nice parkland design. Doggy waste bin visible. My window overlooks a pond with fountains. When I arrived towards the end of the Celtic Tiger there were 5 fountains, but since the recession that was cut-back to 3. The ducks have long since abandoned the pond too, but the huge prevalence of foxes on the estate may account for that.

Looks lovely!

Muahahaha · 11-10-2020 7:22pm

Looks gorgeous Cat. The southside does have some really nice apartment developments, I suppose because prices are a fair bit higher the developers have to put in more effort. But aside from that it sounds (and looks) like you've a good management company to keep the landscaping well. That isnt always the case in apartment developments, especially when a majority of apartments are owned by investors.

beauf · 11-10-2020 7:23pm

imme wrote: »

Everything has to be designed.

Even badly designed buildings have to be designed.

Architecture is a computer program these days. That is also part of the problem.

I think people, where ever they live want and need good design.

You can't design something if you are tone deaf to design.

Niallof9 · 12-10-2020 9:08am

Strumms wrote: »

The local authorities who approve or not approve couldn’t give a rats ass. Probably take direction from the FG mob to go easy and facilitate ‘business’ ie. the builders and developers.

There is a monstrosity going up near my folks place to again facilitate students at the nearby college no doubt. A towering four bedroom structure no way in keeping with the houses surrounding it, either size or design, already blocking the evening light. There were four objections that I know of, none of which were upheld..

people like yourself are the exact reason people like the OP can have these complaints. why would anybody build anything remarkable when there's people giving out about four storey buildings. People really need to actively walk the whole city and take it all in and then judge. I'm talking about seeing it from Swords to Sandyford, some of the worst stuff isn't modern. Most of the crappy architecture comes about because of nimbysim and the outrageous delays planning can have. Look up the history of the Ulster bank building in town. The Cosgraves had another beautiful 25 storey glass building refused, but they had old planning permission for the darker one that stands today much to DCC's dismay. Nimbys, an taisce, DCC, the Gerogian society, ABP, have this city ruined. Much of the Docklands will need to be rebuilt at some stage. and it wasn't FG who did this. the ringsend protests in 1999 against de high rise were facilitated by the same people of the ringsend protests last month. Your left leaning politicans and people scared of change. People complained about the reconstruction of 19th century Paris and the Dublin wide street comission. GO figure.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/docklands-high-rise-schemes-threatened-by-ruling-1.207940?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fdocklands-high-rise-schemes-threatened-by-ruling-1.207940

https://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-ringsend-york-road-development-5167429-Aug2020/

bocaman · 12-10-2020 9:17am

Lets face facts, compared to other European capitals Dublin is actually a very ugly city. Whose fault is that? The politicians, the city councillors, the planning authority, Dublin City Council itself. Dublin just isn't fit for purpose. Most apartments are an utter disgrace with little or no regard for the people who live in them or the space around them.

Niallof9 · 12-10-2020 9:50am

bocaman wrote: »

Lets face facts, compared to other European capitals Dublin is actually a very ugly city. Whose fault is that? The politicians, the city councillors, the planning authority, Dublin City Council itself. Dublin just isn't fit for purpose. Most apartments are an utter disgrace with little or no regard for the people who live in them or the space around them.

it is and isn't. Some of the constraints are the fact that the city is built on medieval and 18th century infrastructure. and any big picture thinking is refused outright. Look at the eastern bypass for example. If you don't want that then you have packed quays and a antiquated city road network. If you don't want highrise then you have to settle for blocky square apartment buildings and offices. IF you want to preserve every old thing because of posterity then be prepared to live with them when they are rack and ruin due to upkeep costs. Dublin infuriates me at times.

For me some simple and not so simple ideas, and perhaps costly measures. A city market in the Iveagh or fruit markets. metro. Liffey cycle way even on the bloody side of it if possible. A liffey water taxi service. A bridge, tunnel over the tolka estuary. A remapping of the docks and how its organised, some of it such wasted space and potential. A complete break with the idea of North and South Dublin as two seprate identities. An Eastern bypass. High rise where appropriate. Eastpoint leveled and rebuilt. Some more reclamation of the sea like in the past. An honest appraisal of our city and civic spaces and what we want and need for them. An appreciation that Dublin is a city with sea and mountains and the benefits of that. An appreciation of our history but realising that no city can afford to become a museum. Better marketing and connection with under appreciated towns outside the city - Chapilizod, skerries, rush, lusk, malahide.

the reality of Dublin is that it has improved beyond measure. Its glory years were the 18th century, we aren't going back to that. Its fallen years were possibly after the regeneration of the 60's. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0p8e1MUC0E

Its got back to being a very liveable mid sized European capital city. Its no longer some sort of provincial hub.

I mean here is an example from one of our most famous architects dealing with this sort of provincial ****e -

Kevin Roche, a winner of the Pritzker Prize and the man behind Dublin's Convention Centre, said: "It is certainly possible to build taller buildings and still maintain the integrity of a city.

"If it is built with care so that it complements the lower plane you can create beautiful buildings and achieve good results," said Roche, who is about to celebrate his 95th birthday. "The only way to do it is to find locations along the river where you can build high rise so that they wouldn't infringe on the city around it."

The Dubliner recalled the difficulty he had when he wanted to build 12-storey buildings with housing in the Docklands (later built by another architect) and described how local authorities were cautious about the final result.

"When I was building the Convention Centre there was a housing component to it.

"I was trying to build 12 storeys high and I made a presentation in Dublin and at the time they were all yelling at me saying 'We're not going that high', 'we're not gonna let this fella build skyscrapers in Dublin'. As if a 12-storey building was a skyscraper.

"So I said 'the hell with that!' and I worked on the Convention Centre which turned out great." The only major destination convention centre in the World that has no hotel attached. Because as you guessed, it was rejected. So now people attending the convention centre use Air BNB or push up other hotel prices by having to book rooms in smaller hotels spread around Dublin.

12-10-2020 12:06pm

Niallof9 wrote: »

it is and isn't. Some of the constraints are the fact that the city is built on medieval and 18th century infrastructure. and any big picture thinking is refused outright. Look at the eastern bypass for example. If you don't want that then you have packed quays and a antiquated city road network. If you don't want highrise then you have to settle for blocky square apartment buildings and offices. IF you want to preserve every old thing because of posterity then be prepared to live with them when they are rack and ruin due to upkeep costs. Dublin infuriates me at times.

For me some simple and not so simple ideas, and perhaps costly measures. A city market in the Iveagh or fruit markets. metro. Liffey cycle way even on the bloody side of it if possible. A liffey water taxi service. A bridge, tunnel over the tolka estuary. A remapping of the docks and how its organised, some of it such wasted space and potential. A complete break with the idea of North and South Dublin as two seprate identities. An Eastern bypass. High rise where appropriate. Eastpoint leveled and rebuilt. Some more reclamation of the sea like in the past. An honest appraisal of our city and civic spaces and what we want and need for them. An appreciation that Dublin is a city with sea and mountains and the benefits of that. An appreciation of our history but realising that no city can afford to become a museum. Better marketing and connection with under appreciated towns outside the city - Chapilizod, skerries, rush, lusk, malahide.

the reality of Dublin is that it has improved beyond measure. Its glory years were the 18th century, we aren't going back to that. Its fallen years were possibly after the regeneration of the 60's. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0p8e1MUC0E

Its got back to being a very liveable mid sized European capital city. Its no longer some sort of provincial hub.

I mean here is an example from one of our most famous architects dealing with this sort of provincial ****e -

Kevin Roche, a winner of the Pritzker Prize and the man behind Dublin's Convention Centre, said: "It is certainly possible to build taller buildings and still maintain the integrity of a city.

"If it is built with care so that it complements the lower plane you can create beautiful buildings and achieve good results," said Roche, who is about to celebrate his 95th birthday. "The only way to do it is to find locations along the river where you can build high rise so that they wouldn't infringe on the city around it."

The Dubliner recalled the difficulty he had when he wanted to build 12-storey buildings with housing in the Docklands (later built by another architect) and described how local authorities were cautious about the final result.

"When I was building the Convention Centre there was a housing component to it.

"I was trying to build 12 storeys high and I made a presentation in Dublin and at the time they were all yelling at me saying 'We're not going that high', 'we're not gonna let this fella build skyscrapers in Dublin'. As if a 12-storey building was a skyscraper.

"So I said 'the hell with that!' and I worked on the Convention Centre which turned out great." The only major destination convention centre in the World that has no hotel attached. Because as you guessed, it was rejected. So now people attending the convention centre use Air BNB or push up other hotel prices by having to book rooms in smaller hotels spread around Dublin.

Thats an excellent analysis. The convention centre is very impressive looking but I always think, it would look truly incredible if it was a bit bigger.

Can you imagine the architect behind the Sydney Opera House being told his design is nice, but it has to be smaller than 10 storeys?

Dublin - The Home Of Poor Design

Comments